(Re)politicizing harm reduction: Poststructuralist thinking to challenge the medicalization of harms among people who use drugs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Poststructuralism, with its critical interpretations of knowledge, discourse, truth, and power, offers a set of compelling analytic tools for disentangling and deconstructing the ways in which health-related phenomena exist and are understood. This paper adopts a poststructuralist stance to outline the impacts of medical hegemony on the lives of people who use drugs, as well as responses to the harms experienced by this population. This analysis reveals how structuralist projects have narrowed the scope and impact of harm reduction through processes of medicalization, neoliberal responsibilitization, and medical co-opting and depoliticization. Nomadic thinking is then introduced as a means for health policy makers and practitioners to transform the boundaries of dominant approaches to harm reduction – particularly, in ways that (re)politicize harm reduction through forms of equity-promoting and social justice-oriented action. Implications for (re)politicized, community-engaged, and structurally responsive approaches to harm reduction in health policy and practice are then discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".