“Unscrupulous and Morally Ill-Prepared” Laymen or Professionals? Controlling Pharmacists during the Brazilian Military Dictatorship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article traces the transformation of the system of control and repression of Brazilian pharmaceutical activities between the 1930s and the 1970s, through a Foucauldian framework of "differential management of illegalisms." The period between 1930 and 1960 can be understood as a process of negotiation between pharmacists and state agencies that achieved a compromise on the differential management of illegalisms in relation to drugs, with a clear distinction between "laymen" and "professionals." This compromise came into question during the dictatorship, due to institutional transformations that reinforced the autonomy of institutions of repression and a military struggle against subversion and corruption. Pharmacists and laymen alike were considered potential suspects. This suspicion even extended to the civilian agencies that were at the core of the regulation of the licit drug market. These developments profoundly changed the way illegalisms committed by professionals and state officials were treated, blurring the boundaries that had been established between laymen, professionals, inspectors, and industrialists. The final section of the article focuses on the various ways in which institutions of repression focused on pharmacists and state regulatory control agencies as potential places of subversive activity or corruption.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".