Between 1983 and 2006 there were two distinct sorts of historical writings on Southeast Asian medical history, with quite different emphases. Some historians focused on the history of medicine in national contexts—a practice that resulted in the neglect of larger socioeconomic factors such as migration—that affected the trajectory of pandemics. At the same time, pursuing a different line of thinking, another group of historians focused on the history of specific diseases from a demographic perspective. These two approaches led to very (...) different conclusions about the nature of epidemic disease and pandemics that have beset the region since the nineteenth century. Nevertheless, regional histories of health are neglected in Southeast Asian medical history in favor of either local, national, or global histories. In this essay, I argue that if historians of global health have forsaken the region in favor of the wider world, Southeast Asian historians have neglected the region in favor of the nation. What is missing in Southeast Asian medical history is a regional perspective that would help understand the ways in which pandemic responses are shaped by colonial, Cold War, or national concerns. Beginning 2019, some historians and political analysts trying to understand global pandemics have adopted a regional approach by treating, as a monolithic group, the ASEAN—the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, which is a regional grouping of Southeast Asian member states, established in 1967. By contrast, others explore specific geographic, political, or economic issues that have contributed to either the spread or containment of disease. In this regard, the COVID-19 crisis in Southeast Asia merits historical attention to comprehend the strengths and weaknesses of a regional approach. (shrink)

This paper provides an introduction to the history of the concept of “emerging infectious diseases” (EID) and reflects on how humanities and social science scholars have interacted with it. It starts with a chronological outline of the coinage of the concept in the early 1990s in the wake of the shocks provoked by Ebola and HIV/AIDS, which disrupted the idea that the West was transitioning from a period of infectious diseases to one of chronic diseases. We argue that humanities and (...) social science scholars in disciplines such as history, anthropology, STS, and literature studies have critically explored the concept, showing how entrenched it was in the perceptions of the US and Europe about threats posed by the rest of the globe. Moreover, we explore how scholars in the humanities have used the EID concept to comment on contemporary realities and mobilized it to create dialogues with scientists, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Subsequently, we explore how the growing contemporary interest in EID has pushed historians to research the ontological and epistemological factors that enabled the “emergence” of diseases long before the invention of the EID concept, such as plague, Chagas disease, and sleeping sickness, as well as the factors that transformed these and other emerging diseases into pandemics. We conclude by outlining a few neglected factors in the EID literature that could be addressed: the circulation and reception of the concept outside of the West, the examination of EID as a problem for wild animals and not just for humans, and global histories of disease emergence as an epistemological and social process. (shrink)

The coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is the latest but not the first deadly pathogen to jump from animals to humans. The history of pandemics is replete with such events. The convergence of animal health, human health, and ecosystem health is a twenty-first century reality, as human activities that drive climate change also contribute to pandemic risk. Understanding the past and future of zoonotic diseases requires new models in the way we research human-animal-environment interconnections. This bibliographic essay discusses the historical development of these (...) zoonotic diseases and incorporates sources from the history of science and medicine, environmental science, animal science, disease ecology, politics, and anthropology. Contributing to deeper understandings of zoonotic diseases, historians and anthropologists have viewed pandemics as social and biological phenomena. However, viewpoints differ whether scholars routinely examine disease links between animals and humans. These links include the ecological aspects of infectious diseases' history and the role of wildlife as vectors of zoonotic disease. In addition, challenges persist in integrating social sciences and humanities, the environmental sector, and scientific research. Ideally, historiographies of zoonotic diseases would include societies’ responses and the social, cultural, political, economic, and ecological contexts. This bibliographic essay assembles resources that would benefit such an integrated approach. (shrink)

This essay revisits the scholarly production around three major pandemics in the region: (a) the Third Plague Pandemic; (b) HIV/AIDS in the 1980s; and (c) COVID-19. The essay aims to provide a comprehensive set of resources (both printed and digital) in four languages (Portuguese, Spanish, English, and French) to examine how scholars have approached these phenomena and how their scope and interpretations have changed over time. Historians of health paid particular attention to sociocultural aspects of the disease, which enabled them (...) to consider usually-neglected actors, such as patients of Indigenous and African descent with their own medical traditions. This added more complexity to our understanding of how these pandemics were fought and received. In addition, the essay suggests that COVID-19 prompted the emergence of historians of health as public scholars. They actively used social networks and other digital tools not only to communicate about the long history of diseases and pandemics in the region, but also to provide an authorized or informed perspective amid misinformation and fake news. In addition, the internet was crucial to the development of helpful databases and virtual conferences beyond academic campuses and paywalls. (shrink)

This paper is part of the Forum COVID-19: Perspectives in the Humanities and Social Sciences. The history of medicine is mostly written as a history of human medicine. COVID-19 and other zoonotic infectious diseases, however, demand a reconsideration of medical history in terms of ecology and the inclusion of non-human actors and diverse environments. This contribution discusses possible approaches for an ecological history of medicine which satisfies the needs of several current and overlapping crises.