Figuring Out Type 2 Diabetes through Genetic Research: Reckoning Kinship and the Origins of Sickness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genetic research on type 2 diabetes serves as a point of departure in this paper. Drawing together classic work in the anthropology of medical epistemologies and the recent revitalization of kinship studies, the paper has two main objectives: (1) further unsettling a portrait of biomedicine as having a single overarching epistemological orientation that locates the origins of disease squarely within individual human bodies; and (2) inviting further reflection and discussion about history, social structures and cultural norms as bona fide causes of disease. The paper shows that causal roles ascribed to history, social structures and cultural norms through genetic research on diabetes hinge on underscoring evolutionary 'blood relations' between people, as well as between human and 'lower' nonhuman beings. It is argued that type 2 diabetes has not thoroughly undergone geneticization, but, partly through genetic research, it has undergone greater medicalization. Despite broad consensus that 'the environment' is the root cause of increased type 2 diabetes incidence, proposed remedies still tend to privilege clinical management.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".