首页> 外文期刊>Medicine studies. >Anti-Aging is not Necessarily Anti-Death: Bioethics and the Front Lines of Practice
【24h】

Anti-Aging is not Necessarily Anti-Death: Bioethics and the Front Lines of Practice

机译:抗衰老不一定是抗死亡的:生物伦理学和实践的前线

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Anti-aging medicine has emerged in the past two decades as both a medical practice and scientific objective largely aimed at intervening into the process of aging itself rather than its "associated" diseases. This has provoked a both excitement and concern in bioethical deliberations on the meaning and potential impact of an effective intervention. In this article, I examine the different ways in which bioethicists, other social scientists, and anti-aging proponents frame anti-aging goals, in particular, the construction of immortality as its implicit and explicit aim. This research is based upon over 9 years of anthropological, ethnographic interview- and observation-based research in the field and draws substantially from the US President's Council on Bioethics' deliberations on this topic as well as from interview data and other publications/discussion on anti-aging medicine. I argue that while the -framework of life and death provide the primary structure for many bioethical and social science critiques of anti-aging medicine, many if not most anti-aging practitioners, researchers, and advocates employ the alternative structure of health and pain to orient their work. These divergent orientations of life/death and health/ pain beget competing conversations around anti-aging medicine; including voices from the front lines of anti-aging practice complicate bioethical critiques and ultimately beg different questions. Positioning the painful, physiological decline of aging as the ultimate adversary rather than death challenges traditional models of biomedical intervention based on "nature" and "disease" constructions.
机译:在过去的二十年中,抗衰老药物作为一种医学实践和科学目标而出现,主要目的是干预衰老本身而不是其“相关”疾病。这在生物伦理学讨论中激起了人们对有效干预措施的含义和潜在影响的兴奋和关注。在本文中,我研究了生物伦理学家,其他社会科学家和抗衰老支持者制定抗衰老目标的不同方式,特别是将永生性作为其内隐和明确的目的。该研究基于该领域超过9年的基于人类学,人种学,访谈和观察的研究,并且很大程度上借鉴了美国总统生物伦理委员会对这一主题的审议以及访谈数据和其他有关反人类的出版物/讨论。衰老药。我认为,尽管生死的框架为许多抗衰老医学的生物伦理学和社会科学批评提供了主要结构,但许多抗衰老医生,研究人员和倡导者(如果不是大多数的话)采用了健康和痛苦的替代结构来确定他们的工作方向。生活/死亡和健康/痛苦的这些不同取向导致围绕抗衰老药物的竞争性对话;包括来自抗衰老实践一线的声音,使生物伦理学批评变得复杂,并最终提出了不同的问题。将衰老的痛苦,生理上的衰落定位为最终的对手而不是死亡,这对基于“自然”和“疾病”构造的传统生物医学干预模型提出了挑战。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号