MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2521807036

Book Review: Big Pharma, Women, and the Labour of Love

2016· article· en· W2521807036 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nayantara Sheoran

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of international women's studies · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal Changes
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicalizationPsychological interventionHuman sexualityGender studiesPsychologySociologyMedicinePsychiatry
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Big Pharma, Women, and the Labour of Love. Thea Cacchioni, 2015. University of Toronto Press: Toronto, Buffalo, London. 167 pages (including index) $26.00 (paperback on Amazon) In August 2015, the United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) approved the pink Viagra or female Viagra with the trade name of Addyi (Flibanserin is the name of the medication). Prior to its approval in 2015, the FDA had denied the pharmaceutical company's application twice before, because of the concerns raised around issues of safety and efficacy of the drug based on the data collected. One of these denials happened after a FDA hearing in 2010, a hearing at which Thea Cacchioni testified against Flibanserin. Thus, then this book Big Pharma, Women, and the Labour of Love by Thea Cacchioni is a joy to read as it allows the reader direct access to a historical moment--a moment that Cacchioni is not only writing about, but also participating in by being involved with the hearings. Her experiences, her depth of knowledge about Female Sexual Dysfunction and its mis/classification within the medical establishment, her empirical work with women suffering from sexual pain and her effort to view this critically through the theoretical paradigms of bio-medicalization and heteronormativity makes this an engaging read. The book, while concerned with issues of pharmaceutical interventions in women's sexual lives and choices, extends the analysis to work with women who have experienced physical pain, displeasure, and even marginalization because of not being able to participate in heteronormative sexual behavior (penetration followed by orgasm). Here Cacchioni looks at women's articulations of their sexual problems, how they address them, what factors influence their perceptions and choices, what coping strategies they employ, and above all what this tells us about medicalization of sexual pain, FSD, and heterosexual norms. She concludes, [...] that despite sophisticated efforts, drug companies and sexual medicine physicians so far have failed in their vision to create a market of pill-popping women diagnosed with Female Sexual Dysfunction (FSD) (pg. 4). Thus this book creates a new critical mode of analysis that looks beyond the first layer of critique of the marketization of under neoliberal regimens, and uncovers the complexities of sexual medicalization by focusing on women who do suffer from sexual pain and who desperately seek to live lives beyond this pain and discomfort. However, the cohort of women that made up the research in this book upend any simplistic analysis, and instead of promoting or encouraging pharmaceutical interventions offer transgressive and sometimes subversive solutions to achieving more fulfilling lives--sexual and otherwise. From refusing to be normal in terms of hetero sex, to seeking alternative relationships that were based on non-sexual pleasure, these women refused to participate in sex work. The book is divided into six chapters, an introduction, and an epilogue, with each section being a comprehensive analysis and conclusion that the author builds towards. This is particularly helpful, if this book is to be used in upper level undergraduate or graduate classes. The Introductory Chapter and Chapter One lay out the author's main argument about the need to look beyond medicalization of women's sexual lives and looking at their socio-economics to truly enhance their sexual and everyday lives. Chapter One, in particular is a through and fascinating read as the author brings into focus the myriad ways corporate, medical, and pharmaceutical interest coalesce to create a market for FSD, as a per-cursor to any launch for a medical intervention. The readers would appreciate the details in which she lays out the academic and professional (profitably so) journeys of Dr. Irwin Goldstein and Dr. Jennifer Berman (and her sister), the leading experts who worked through public media and academic publications to create and promote the idea of FSD and its possible cure being limited to pharmaceutical interventions. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,050
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,167

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0060,004
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0500,023

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,044
Tête enseignante GPT0,296
Écart entre enseignants0,252 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2016
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of international women's studiesMême sujetHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal ChangesTravaux en français237 207