Repository logo
 

The Institute for Global Health and Development

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://eresearch.qmu.ac.uk/handle/20.500.12289/9

Browse

Filters

20152

Settings

Has files: NoSubject: search.filters.subject.Safety

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Problematizing the “global” in global health: An assessment of the global discourse of safety
    (Springer, 2015-09-30) Kadetz, Paul
    The practice of global health assumes that there are no differences between what is decided at a global level of policy making and what is implemented at a given local level. However, this research reveals a marked disconnect between the normative assumptions and understandings of global health and their appropriateness for local level implementation. The normative discourse of safety, embedded in global health, provides a case example by which to critically examine the importance of recognizing the differences between global and local understandings of health. The lack of a hegemonic understanding of safety and the dangers and risks that are generated when imposing foreign understandings of safety onto local levels, serve to problematize the ethnocentric assumptions embedded in the discourse of global health.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Safety net—the construction of biomedical safety in the global ‘traditional medicine’ discourse
    (Brill, 2015-10-03) Kadetz, Paul
    This paper examines the social construction of the World Health Organization’s normative discourse of the safety of ‘traditional medicines’. The findings presented are based on archival research, a review of the literature, discourse analysis of who documents, semi-structured interviews with pertinent stakeholders, and participant experience at the Western Pacific Region Office of the who. This discourse of safety can be traced to the rise and global dominance of scientific medicine over plural health care and the construction of biomedical expertise. This paper argues that biomedicine’s global hegemony and construction of a dominant discourse of safety was, at least in part, influenced by the American Medical Association, The Flexner Report, The Rockefeller Foundation, the League of Nations Health Organization, the World Health Organization, and the who’s adoption of traditional Chinese medicine as a template for health care integration. This network of stakeholders influenced the construction and dissemination of the global biomedical discourse of safety and the purported ‘safe’ control, regulation, and integration of non-biomedical practices and practitioners via biomedical expertise.