Usher Fleising

Time and the structuring of ritual performance in the xenotransplantation debate

Advancements in biotechnology provoke fundamental questions about the relationship of humans to the natural world. A crisis arises as the knowledge, practice, and policies concerning biotechnology grow further out of step with each other. This paper examines the role of ritual performance as a means of resolving this crisis, uniting the organic with the socio-moral aspects of science, technology and regulatory policy. Ritual performance is evident in the public discussions of the United States’ Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Xenotransplantation (SACX). In an attempt to understand the cultural responses to new knowledge, this paper examines the transcripts of several SACX meetings for its ritual elements and references to authority. We find that time is used by scientists to structure ritual performance in a way that guides public policy and attitudes toward xenotransplantation.

The development of property rights in biotechnology

The translation of biological theory into engineering (biotechnology) has resulted in the development of novel products and processes. Some of these products are living organisms, usually containing unique genetic arrangements not found in nature. The extension of legal protection to products and processes was required in order for biotechnology to become an unexceptional way in which to do business. The American experience with biotechnology, repeated elsewhere, is demonstrated to have proceeded first through the negotiation of obstacles in administrative law and second through challenges to property law. This outcome for the regulatory management of biotechnology and the legal protection of its products may be interpreted as a function of a cultural bias for scientific authority and progress ideology.

The legacy of nuclear risk and the founder effect in biotechnology organizations

In the wake of the Chernobyl nuclear accident and a decline in the public trust of science, the founders of modern biotechnology recognized the strategic importance of risk assessment and regulatory affairs. In an effort to avoid the demonization that was attached to the nuclear industry, the pioneers of modern biotechnology delegated authority for regulatory negotiation and risk management to senior positions in the firm. At the same time, the Biotechnology Industry Organization was handed great latitude and trust with making public pronouncements on issues of bioethics and public policy. The way in which founders and leaders embed norms for negotiating regulation and responding to public perceptions has proved important in the maturation and acceptance of a biotechnology sector.

The ethology of mythical images in healthcare biotechnology: A methodological approach to uncovering ritualized behavior in the evolution of sickness and healing

Drawing on biblical and mythical imagery employed in the marketing and advocacy of healthcare biotechnology, this study is a methodological exercise in combining the diachronic methods of ethology and of symbolic structural anthropology. A medical anthropology of emotions is described as a fourth body, an evolutionary body and an addition to the individual, social, and political bodies described by Schepher-Hughes and Lock. This leads to an investigation of Fabregas sickness and healing adaptation model which assumes a neurobiological substrate for responses to disease and injury. Images used in healthcare biotechnology demonstrate formal and contextual features which show homologous development cross-culturally. This suggests the presence of phylogenetically developed social conventions for sickness and healing adaptations. At least for the healer/caregivers, these conventions are about the ritualized expression of ambivalent approach/avoidance tendencies. These signals may be interpreted as both a visualization of the liminal status of genetic technology and the unconscious sharing of psychic processes involved in sickness and healing adaptations.

Genetic essentialism, mana , and the meaning of DNA

Concerns about the commercialization of genetics have spawned a debate over the symbolic logic and meaning of DNA. The assumption is that different meanings for DNA have social and ethical consequences. Genetic essentialism as an interpretive meaning for DNA is argued to encapsulate values of materialism and autonomy that make it compatible with capital accumulation. Whether or not genetic commerce actually requires genetic essentialism is an empirical question and this study proposes that it is not difficult to find non-essentialist genetics. Two paths of inquiry are adopted. First, the history and origins of the distinction between genotype and phenotype is revisited. This history of gene theory, in particular the effort to purge vitalism, is linked to DNA and the central dogma of molecular biology. Secondly, a rather specialized debate within anthropology about the meaning of mana is introduced. An analysis of definitions for genotype and phenotype reveals a structure commensurate with the metaphysics of mana. Parallels are established between how the meaning of mana has been essentialized and the current efforts to fix the symbolic logic of DNA.

Ecology, Social Structure, and Blood Feud1

Cross-cultural research has indicated a correlation between social structural indicators of close-knit networks and feud. It has been argued by other investigators that such a relationship is spurious and that ecological variables account for the covariation. This spuriousness hypothesis is tested, employing ecological measures from the Ethno graphic Atlas and two foraging indicators derived from theoretical ecology. A conditional model is found to account for the relationship between ecology, feud, and social structure.

Unpacking animal metaphors for commercial relationships in the biotechnology industry

Metaphors are cognitive instruments with the capacity to influence how humans think about the world. Guiding our representations and shaping our experiences, metaphor is of anthropological interest because it is an integral aspect of culture. This paper aims to highlight the role of metaphor in the biotechnology industry. In particular, animal metaphors provide a means of consolidating information. In a culture where time is highly restricted, metaphors enable the speedy transmission of knowledge, placing information in a familiar context or cultural model. Ethnographic findings reveal that animal metaphors contribute to a larger conceptual framework that equates biological evolution with commercial relationships. Depending on the context, metaphors both conceal and reveal different aspects of the financial world, affecting interpretations of the market.

ImClone's failed culture of expertise

February 2001: Food and Drug Administration (FDA) grants fast-track status for the colorectal cancer drug Erbitux.19 September 2001: Bristol-Myers Squibb agrees to pay US

American and European Citations in the Feud Literature

2 billion for 20% of ImClone and the rights to market Erbitux.Mid-December 2001: ImClone trading at US

In search of genohype: A content analysis of biotechnology company documents

70.28 December 2001: FDA sends letter rejecting the ImClone application to sell Erbitux6 January 2002: The Cancer Letter publishes excerpts from the FDA nine-page private letter to ImClone.9 January 2002: ImClone president and CEO Samual Waksal addresses J.P. Morgan H&Q Healthcare Conference in San Francisco.Mid-January 2002: ImClone trading at US