English 1B
The field of medicine will continue to move forward (Worboys 117), and this has been
indicated by the products produced by laboratory sciences, as well as the development of significant medical products like penicillin, which was made possible through the discovery of ‘macromolecularization’ (Lowy 117). Like the industrialization since the post-World War II era, the field of medicine will continue to move forward (Worboys 117), as was indicated by history, specifically the industrialization period, which shows “development of hospital and laboratory medicine, public health, and the rise of the asylum took place” (Worboys 109). However, when discussing the genomics and genetic issues, there has a public debate on the risks related to the new biotechnologies and genetics (Nerlich et al. 364; Pickstone 132). Thus, as technology continues to move forward, so will the field of medicine as these two
go hand in hand, as shown in the way modern medicine for both hospital and laboratory were developed through laboratory science (Worboys 109), the development of important medical products through macromolecularization developed during World War II (Lowy 119), how the interaction between science, technology, and medicine has revolutionized the medical field, and the apparent link established among medicine, technology, and science as shown in history.
A look at history would reveal that like everything else, the field of medicine has grown
exponentially to what it is now. In order to establish the relationship of growth in medicine as influenced by technology, the paper begs for a review on the development in the field of medicine from the industrialization period, and look into the way modern medicine for both hospital and laboratory were developed through laboratory science (Worboys 109).
Key Terms
The three key terms in this paper include Macromolecularization, biomedicine, and modern medicine. In the context of the synthetic scheme, Macromolecularization "can be performed either binding CDP-choline to a preformed polymeric matrix or by polymerization of CDP-choline derivatives acylated with polymerizable carboxy acids in conditions not degrading the active principle" (Zappia et al. 3). Löwy defines Macromolecularization as the process "of biology and medicine and to the increasing homogenization of the methods and techniques used to study fundamental life phenomena and those applied to the investigation of diseases" (Lowy 117). However, this paper utilizes Macromolecularization as the medicinal or biological process that enhances homogenization of the strategies used to study the fundamental life phenomena and investigation of diseases in the role development of medical products (Lowy 117). Lowy suggests that biomedicine is a term that became popular during the inter-war era to provide insight into the work of scientist and doctors (117). Lowy also asserts, "Today some historians use the term "biomedicine" to describe nineteenth-century Western science-based medicine" (117). Pickstone also argues biomedicine was created because of "postwar migrations of physicists to biology and medicine" (129). This research aims to retain the Lowy's definition of the term, simply as a historical term that illustrates the integration between the work of scientists and the doctors. Modern medicine is a concept that was coined in the nineteenth century, which was an area of medical historical scholarship (Worboys 109). In this paper, modern medicine is used as a nineteenth-century concept that illustrates the dramatic change in the field of medicine where various development has been made in preventing and identifying diseases.
Significance
The study of the interrelation between technology and medicine is significant to me to help me understand the development made in the medical field and laboratory science. The research on medicine and technology would help me understand the way modern medicine for both laboratory and hospital were developed through laboratory science (Warboys 109). This could also help me to determine and identify the various way in which the prevailing technology can contribute to the development of measures to preventing and identifying diseases. For instance, in the contemporary world, wars are becoming more prevalent and severe than before as the technology develops. Therefore, the world has become more devastating with mass injuries that require new medical and surgical techniques. With this light, it is important to review the development in the medicine fields since the industrialized era and observe how the laboratory science helped to develop modern medicine for both laboratory and hospital (Worboys 109)
Historical background
The field of medicine will continue to move forward (Worboys 117), and this has been indicated by the products produced by laboratory sciences, as well as the development of significant medical products like penicillin, which was made possible through the discovery of ‘macromolecularization' (Lowy 117). According to Pickstone, the relationship between medicine and technology can be traced back in 1800 through the elements such as sciences of technical rationalization and substantive analysis. He argues that even in history, the relationship between science, technology, and medicine was prevalent. Remedies of solving everyday problems "were understood through "biographical" narratives that drew informally on natural histories and philosophies, mixing kinds and meanings" (124). This is the same way science or technology started to interact. However, Worboys argues, "That the potential of exploring the practice of science in medicine has yet to be realized, especially with regard to its performative aspects" (110). This indicates that the histories of science of medicine during the nineteenth century had complex relations of various kinds of practice and knowledge that are required to be explored. Worboys asserts that this exploration need not just "through programmatic statements, or generalizations about the successions of bedside, hospital, and laboratory medicine, but through studies of performance in the clinic as well as in the laboratory and the field" (Löwy 115). This paper suggests that there is a knowledge gap on how the scientific work interacts with medical lives since the historical time. Also suggest that there is a need to investigate various topics of "biomedicine studies" that include the role of terms like "bioethics," "biopower," "biosociality," and "biocitizenship." (Löwy 122).
Counter
Like the industrialization since the post-World War II era, the field of medicine will continue to move forward (Worboys 117), as was indicated by history, specifically the industrialization period, which shows “development of hospital and laboratory medicine, public health, and the rise of the asylum took place” (Worboys 109). It was also the period when several “neglected areas” in the fields of medicine were given attention, and this includes the history of human body, gender, alternative medicine, and patients. Medical research to battle the effects of World War II as well as the pharmaceutical industry also increased . Other disciplines such as endocrinology, hematology, and oncology also became grounded on biomedical.
Main Points
First, in order to see the future path of medicine, it would be helpful to learn and understand some of its most significant achievements as influenced by technology. The nineteenth century marks the birth of modern medicine. It was during this time that “development of hospital and laboratory medicine, public health, and the rise of the asylum took place” (Worboys 109). It was also the period when several “neglected areas” in the fields of medicine were given attention, and this includes the history of the human body, gender, alternative medicine, and patients. However, while this period marks a milestone for the medical world, as defined by the products produced by laboratory sciences, other scientists argue that the field of medicine should revert to biology-based medical sciences (Lowy 116). According to the Rockefeller Foundation, biological knowledge should be the basis of medical sciences, such that application of the cure and prevention of diseases should be anchored on it. Compared to laboratory science, biomedicine, which had its roots in World War II, when an increase in collaboration among biologists, clinicians, and industrialist lead to the creation of important medical products such as penicillin through the discovery of ‘macromolecularization’ (Lowy 117). With larger funds allocated for medical research to battle the effects of World War II, the pharmaceutical industry also increased. Other disciplines such as endocrinology, hematology, and oncology also became grounded on biomedical. In addition, historians of medicine who were highly trained in history increased in number, thereby providing a wider and richer collaboration between historians of medicine and scholars who worked on investigating current developments in the field of medicine.
Second, further development in medicine was achieved with the popularity of biomedicine and the discovery of macromolecularization. During the late twentieth century, biomedicine increased rapidly and became a subject of interest among sociologists, philosophers, and anthropologists (Lowy 119). As gender also became a subject studied by historians of medicine, sex hormones to control fertility, body performance enhancers, as well as medicines that would deal with atypical bodies as a result of sex/gender change materialized. These developments in pharmaceuticals show the rich contribution of biomedicine. However, as issues regarding biomedicine and gender are linked with various factors that include but is not limited to legal history, business, political science, and industrial history, historians of medicine, or more popularly called ‘scholars’ these days continue to work on expanding the pharmaceutical industry following the biomedicine approach.
Third, while medicine and technology have been intertwined for so many years that they have become inseparable, this is not the case between science and medicine. Scholars apparently find it challenging, if not awkward, to link science and medicine, and even all three together. Historians trace as far back as the Renaissance how certain terms started being used, specifically those which refer to genres of knowledge, i.e. ‘natural philosophy,’ ‘natural history,’ and ‘mixed mathematics.’ These three have strong links with science, technology, and medicine, collectively called STM, such that natural philosophy deals with meanings of the world, mathematicians with quantities, and naturalists in different kinds like animals, plants, and minerals, to name a few (Pickstone 124). Regardless of the historical disjoint of science, medicine, and technology, their functions and relationship with each other has made it possible for all three to work together effectively, such that science gave way to technology, which in turn developed medicine, thereby making medicine linked to science.
Fourth, Scholars have also conducted the study to show how the interaction between science, technology, and medicine has revolutionized the medical field. Nerlich et al. illustrate how the interaction of these three fields have enabled the development of biological sciences in the second half of the twentieth century (363). Biological science and medical technology have significantly helped to facilitate healthcare and enhancing the quality of life. Therefore, innovative technology has come with many benefits in the medical field. According to Nerlich et al., the innovative technology and biological science has facilitated the "discovery of DNA to the creation of mammalian clones, like Dolly the sheep, and plants modified to incorporate genetic material from other species, or even other kingdoms, one breakthrough seemed to follow another" (363). This has been one of the breakthroughs in modern medicine and the establishment of the new medical treatments for various diseases. However, when discussing the genomics and genetic issues, there has a public debate on the risks related to the new biotechnologies and genetics (Nerlich et al. 364; Pickstone 132). Nerlich et al. posits, "As the publication of scientific advances and their associated risks and benefits has become part of a cyclic debate among scientists, the media and certain parts of the general public" (364). This illustrates that the there is a perception that the interaction between technology, science, and medicine have both the negative side and the positive side. The positive side is how this interaction has helped to revolutionize the medical field while the negative side is associated with the public perception of the risks involved in new biotechnologies and genetics.
Last, while a strong link is established between medicine and technology, Worboys offered another perspective on the disjoint between science and medicine in his article “Practice and the Science of Medicine in the Nineteenth Century.” Worboys believes that the practice of science in medicine has yet to be completely realized, but that the focus of historians of medicine became less on medicine but more in history as they were said to be working more in history departments instead of “alongside historians of science or in medical schools” (110). Warner (as cited in Worboys) prescribes historians to look into meanings when it comes to science for medicine, delving into the wider roles of medicine ‘in shaping cultural values and social order, such as gender roles, hygienic ideas, and notions of normality’ (111). This suggests that knowledge about science in alternative medicine is important as it is linked to the “democratization of knowledge, as at its meanings in laboratory investigations, where special sites, long training, and esoteric terms seemed necessarily linked to expertise, exclusivity, and hierarchies” (Worboys 111). Science in medicine plays an important role in anchoring terminologies which are closely linked to practice and expertise, thus making it imperative for science and medicine to work together in order to not only explore the multitudes of possibility that the application of one to another could offer, but also to see how effective each would perform when applied.
The Common Ground
A look at history would reveal that like everything else, the field of medicine has grown exponentially to what it is now. Biomedicine gave way to “micromolecularization” or “macromolecularization,” a standard method and technique was established when studying life phenomena and diseases, as well as the invention of certain medicines such as the Penicillin, which paved the way for the antibiotic age (Worboys 117).
Solution/Conclusion
In order to establish the relationship of growth in medicine as influenced by technology, the paper begs for a review on the development in the field of medicine from the industrialization period, and look into the way modern medicine for both hospital and laboratory were developed through laboratory science (Worboys 109), and how these led, in one way or another to the development of important medical products through macromolecularization were developed during World War II (Lowy 119), and medical procedures and techniques which are being used in hospitals today. The paper has found: 1) further development in medicine was achieved with the popularity of biomedicine and the discovery of macromolecularization. 2) while medicine and technology have been intertwined for so many years that they have become inseparable, this is not the case between science and medicine. The paper has also shown that there is a knowledge gap on how the scientific work interacts with medial lives since the historical time. Also suggest that there is a need to investigate various topics of "biomedicine studies" that include the role of terms like "bioethics," "biopower," "biosociality," and "biocitizenship." However, the interaction of science, medicine and technology have helped to revolutionize the medical field, but it has also generated public perception on the risks related to the new biotechnologies and genetics. Therefore, the interaction between science, technology, and medicine produces both the positive and adverse impact.
Works Cited
Lowy, Ilana. “Historiography of Biomedicine: “Bio,” “Medicine,” and in Between.” History of Science Society 102.1 (2011). pp.116-122. jstor.org. Web. 9 March 2016.
Nerlich, Brigitte, Robert Dingwall, and Paul Martin. "GUEST EDITORIAL: Genetic and genomic discourses at the dawn of the 21st century." Discourse & Society 15.4 (2004): 363-368.
Pickstone, John V. “Sketching Together the Modern Histories of Science, Technology, and Medicine.”History of Science Society 102.1 (2011). pp.123-133. jstor.org. Web. 9 March 2016.
Raj, Kapil. “Beyond Postcolonialism and Postpositivism: Circulation and the Global History of Science.” History of Science Society 104.2 (2013). pp.337-347. jstor.org. Web. 9 March 2016.
Worboys, Michael. “Practice and the Science of Medicine in the Nineteenth Century.” History of Science Society 102.1 (2011). pp.109-115. jstor.org. Web. 9 March 2016.
Zappia, Vincenzo, and Mario De Rosa. "Macromolecular CDP-choline derivatives, process for their preparation and pharmaceutical compositions containing them." U.S. Patent No. 4,772,463. 20 Sep. 1988.
