The "Controversial Cundurango Cure": Medical professionalization and the global circulation of drugs.

IF 0.3 4区 哲学 Q2 Arts and Humanities
Elisa Sevilla, Ana Sevilla
{"title":"The \"Controversial Cundurango Cure\": Medical professionalization and the global circulation of drugs.","authors":"Elisa Sevilla,&nbsp;Ana Sevilla","doi":"10.1017/S0269889721000144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article examines the medical and political discussions regarding a controversial medicinal bark from Ecuador - cundurango - that was actively sponsored by the Ecuadorian government as a new botanical cure for cancer in the late nineteenth century United States and elsewhere. The article focuses on the commercial and diplomatic interests behind the public discussion and advertising techniques of this drug. It argues that diverse elements - including the struggle for positioning scientific societies and the disapproval of the capacities of Ecuadorian doctors, US abolitionist history, regional and local political struggles - played a role in the quackery accusations against cundurango and its promoters. The development and international trade of this remedy offer interesting insights into the global history of drugs, particularly how medical knowledge was challenged during a period when scientific medicine was struggling for hegemony. It explores how newspapers expanded \"the public interest\" in a possible cancer cure.</p>","PeriodicalId":49562,"journal":{"name":"Science in Context","volume":"33 4","pages":"423-440"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science in Context","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269889721000144","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines the medical and political discussions regarding a controversial medicinal bark from Ecuador - cundurango - that was actively sponsored by the Ecuadorian government as a new botanical cure for cancer in the late nineteenth century United States and elsewhere. The article focuses on the commercial and diplomatic interests behind the public discussion and advertising techniques of this drug. It argues that diverse elements - including the struggle for positioning scientific societies and the disapproval of the capacities of Ecuadorian doctors, US abolitionist history, regional and local political struggles - played a role in the quackery accusations against cundurango and its promoters. The development and international trade of this remedy offer interesting insights into the global history of drugs, particularly how medical knowledge was challenged during a period when scientific medicine was struggling for hegemony. It explores how newspapers expanded "the public interest" in a possible cancer cure.

“有争议的昆都兰戈疗法”:医疗专业化和药物的全球流通。
这篇文章检视一种来自厄瓜多的有争议的药用树皮(cundurango)在医学和政治上的讨论,这种树皮在19世纪晚期的美国和其他地方被厄瓜多政府积极赞助,作为治疗癌症的新植物。本文重点分析了这种药物的公众讨论和广告技术背后的商业和外交利益。它认为,不同的因素——包括科学界定位的斗争、对厄瓜多尔医生能力的反对、美国废奴主义历史、地区和地方政治斗争——在对昆都兰戈及其推动者的江湖指控中发挥了作用。这种药物的发展和国际贸易为全球药物史提供了有趣的见解,特别是在科学医学为霸权而斗争的时期,医学知识是如何受到挑战的。它探讨了报纸如何扩大公众对一种可能治愈癌症的兴趣。
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
Science in Context
Science in Context 综合性期刊-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Science in Context is an international journal edited at The Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Ideas, Tel Aviv University, with the support of the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute. It is devoted to the study of the sciences from the points of view of comparative epistemology and historical sociology of scientific knowledge. The journal is committed to an interdisciplinary approach to the study of science and its cultural development - it does not segregate considerations drawn from history, philosophy and sociology. Controversies within scientific knowledge and debates about methodology are presented in their contexts.
×
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