How Holistic is Complementary and Alternative Med-icine (CAM)? Examining Self-Responsibilization in CAM and Biomedicine in a Neoliberal Age
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review paper adds to recent social science interrogation of common boundaries between CAM (complementary and alternative medicine) and biomedicine, by examining an unquestioned dichotomy often ascribed to them: holism vs. individualism. Drawing from social scientific literature review, this paper draws attention to the individualistic focus of CAM by situating contemporary CAM developments within a neoliberal climate that emphasizes individual responsibility for health care. Focusing on the individualistic features of CAM helps rethink commonly held assumptions regarding the holistic features of CAM, which tend to gain the most attention in popular and scholarly representations of CAM as distinct from biomedicine. As well, the individualistic features of CAM shed light on the significant role of CAM in health care as a form of individual consumptive choice rather than as a collective responsibility on the part of the state to complement national health care systems.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it