The concept of disease in the time of COVID-19.

IF 1.1 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics Pub Date : 2020-12-01 Epub Date: 2021-02-16 DOI:10.1007/s11017-021-09540-5
Maria Cristina Amoretti, Elisabetta Lalumera
{"title":"The concept of disease in the time of COVID-19.","authors":"Maria Cristina Amoretti,&nbsp;Elisabetta Lalumera","doi":"10.1007/s11017-021-09540-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Philosophers of medicine have formulated different accounts of the concept of disease. Which concept of disease one assumes has implications for what conditions count as diseases and, by extension, who may be regarded as having a disease (disease judgements) and for who may be accorded the social privileges and personal responsibilities associated with being sick (sickness judgements). In this article, we consider an ideal diagnostic test for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection with respect to four groups of people-positive and asymptomatic; positive and symptomatic; negative; and untested-and show how different concepts of disease impact on the disease and sickness judgements for these groups. The suggestion is that sickness judgements and social measures akin to those experienced during the current COVID-19 outbreak presuppose a concept of disease containing social (risk of) harm as a component. We indicate the problems that arise when adopting this kind of disease concept beyond a state of emergency.</p>","PeriodicalId":46703,"journal":{"name":"Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics","volume":"41 5-6","pages":"203-221"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11017-021-09540-5","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-021-09540-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/2/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Philosophers of medicine have formulated different accounts of the concept of disease. Which concept of disease one assumes has implications for what conditions count as diseases and, by extension, who may be regarded as having a disease (disease judgements) and for who may be accorded the social privileges and personal responsibilities associated with being sick (sickness judgements). In this article, we consider an ideal diagnostic test for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection with respect to four groups of people-positive and asymptomatic; positive and symptomatic; negative; and untested-and show how different concepts of disease impact on the disease and sickness judgements for these groups. The suggestion is that sickness judgements and social measures akin to those experienced during the current COVID-19 outbreak presuppose a concept of disease containing social (risk of) harm as a component. We indicate the problems that arise when adopting this kind of disease concept beyond a state of emergency.

COVID-19时代的疾病概念。
医学哲学家对疾病的概念有不同的解释。人们所假定的疾病概念会影响到什么情况可算作疾病,进而影响到谁可被视为患病(疾病判断),以及谁可享有与患病相关的社会特权和个人责任(疾病判断)。在这篇文章中,我们考虑了一种理想的2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)感染的诊断测试,针对四组人:阳性和无症状;阳性且有症状;消极的;这是未经测试的,并展示了不同的疾病概念如何影响这些群体的疾病和疾病判断。这表明,类似于当前COVID-19疫情期间所经历的疾病判断和社会措施,以一种包含社会(风险)伤害的疾病概念为前提。我们指出在采用这种疾病概念超出紧急状态时所产生的问题。
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
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
14.30%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: AIMS & SCOPE Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics examines clinical judgment and reasoning, medical concepts such as health and disease, the philosophical basis of medical science, and the philosophical ethics of health care and biomedical research Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics is an international forum for interdisciplinary studies in the ethics of health care and in the philosophy and methodology of medical practice and biomedical research. Coverage in the philosophy of medicine includes the theoretical examination of clinical judgment and decision making; theories of health promotion and preventive care; the problems of medical language and knowledge acquisition; theory formation in medicine; analysis of the structure and dynamics of medical hypotheses and theories; discussion and clarification of basic medical concepts and issues; medical application of advanced methods in the philosophy of science, and the interplay between medicine and other scientific or social institutions. Coverage of ethics includes both clinical and research ethics, with an emphasis on underlying ethical theory rather than institutional or governmental policy analysis. All philosophical methods and orientations receive equal consideration. The journal pays particular attention to developing new methods and tools for analysis and understanding of the conceptual and ethical presuppositions of the medical sciences and health care processes. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics publishes original scholarly articles, occasional special issues on important topics, and book reviews. Related subjects » Applied Ethics & Social Responsibility – Bioethics – Ethics – Epistemology & Philosophy of Science – Medical Ethics – Medicine – Philosophy – Philosophy of Medicine – Surgery
×
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