Forgetting how we ate: personalised nutrition and the strategic uses of history.

IF 1.6 3区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Christopher Mayes, Maurizio Meloni
{"title":"Forgetting how we ate: personalised nutrition and the strategic uses of history.","authors":"Christopher Mayes, Maurizio Meloni","doi":"10.1007/s40656-024-00613-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Personalised nutrition (PN) has emerged over the past twenty years as a promising area of research in the postgenomic era and has been popularized as the new big thing out of molecular biology. Advocates of PN claim that previous approaches to nutrition sought general and universal guidance that applied to all people. In contrast, they contend that PN operates with the principle that \"one size does not fit all\" when it comes to dietary guidance. While the molecular mechanisms studied within PN are new, the notion of a personal dietary regime guided by medical advice has a much longer history that can be traced back to Galen's \"On Food and Diet\" or Ibn Sina's (westernized as Avicenna) \"Canon of Medicine\". Yet this history is either wholly ignored or misleadingly appropriated by PN proponents. This (mis)use of history, we argue helps to sustain the hype of the novelty of the proposed field and potential commodification of molecular advice that undermines longer histories of food management in premodern and non-Western cultures. Moreover, it elides how the longer history of nutritional advice always happened in a heavily moralized, gendered, and racialized context deeply entwined with collective technologies of power, not just individual advice. This article aims at offering a wider appreciation of this longer history to nuance the hype and exceptionalism surrounding contemporary claims.</p>","PeriodicalId":56308,"journal":{"name":"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences","volume":"46 1","pages":"14"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10920492/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-024-00613-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Personalised nutrition (PN) has emerged over the past twenty years as a promising area of research in the postgenomic era and has been popularized as the new big thing out of molecular biology. Advocates of PN claim that previous approaches to nutrition sought general and universal guidance that applied to all people. In contrast, they contend that PN operates with the principle that "one size does not fit all" when it comes to dietary guidance. While the molecular mechanisms studied within PN are new, the notion of a personal dietary regime guided by medical advice has a much longer history that can be traced back to Galen's "On Food and Diet" or Ibn Sina's (westernized as Avicenna) "Canon of Medicine". Yet this history is either wholly ignored or misleadingly appropriated by PN proponents. This (mis)use of history, we argue helps to sustain the hype of the novelty of the proposed field and potential commodification of molecular advice that undermines longer histories of food management in premodern and non-Western cultures. Moreover, it elides how the longer history of nutritional advice always happened in a heavily moralized, gendered, and racialized context deeply entwined with collective technologies of power, not just individual advice. This article aims at offering a wider appreciation of this longer history to nuance the hype and exceptionalism surrounding contemporary claims.

忘记我们的饮食习惯:个性化营养与历史的战略利用。
过去二十年来,个性化营养(PN)作为后基因组时代一个前景广阔的研究领域崭露头角,并作为分子生物学的新生事物广受欢迎。个性化营养的倡导者声称,以往的营养方法寻求的是适用于所有人的普遍性指导。相比之下,他们认为营养营养学在膳食指导方面遵循 "一刀切 "的原则。虽然在营养营养学中研究的分子机制是新的,但以医学建议为指导的个人饮食制度的概念却有更长的历史,可以追溯到盖伦的《论食物与饮食》或伊本-西纳(西化为阿维森纳)的《医学大全》。然而,PN 的支持者要么完全忽视了这段历史,要么误导性地挪用了这段历史。我们认为,这种对历史的(误)利用有助于维持对拟议领域的新颖性和分子建议的潜在商品化的炒作,从而破坏了前现代和非西方文化中更悠久的食物管理历史。此外,它还忽略了营养建议的悠久历史是如何在道德化、性别化和种族化严重的背景下发生的,这种背景与集体权力技术而不仅仅是个人建议深深纠缠在一起。本文旨在对这一悠久的历史提供更广泛的认识,以淡化围绕当代主张的炒作和例外论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences
History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 综合性期刊-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences is an interdisciplinary journal committed to providing an integrative approach to understanding the life sciences. It welcomes submissions from historians, philosophers, biologists, physicians, ethicists and scholars in the social studies of science. Contributors are expected to offer broad and interdisciplinary perspectives on the development of biology, biomedicine and related fields, especially as these perspectives illuminate the foundations, development, and/or implications of scientific practices and related developments. Submissions which are collaborative and feature different disciplinary approaches are especially encouraged, as are submissions written by senior and junior scholars (including graduate students).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信