Therapeutic governance in Hong Kong’s anti-narcotics war, 1959–1980s
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 article examines the medical front of the anti-narcotics war in post-war Hong Kong. Situating Hong Kong in the American global drug war, this article traces colonial Hong Kong’s development of addiction treatment and cooperation with American medical experts in conducting a controversial experiment, methadone maintenance. It argues that the colonial government constructed a new form of therapeutic governance to medicalize social issues as behavioural problems. Through large-scale rehabilitation and methadone maintenance, the colonial government claimed to transform addicts in the island colony into useful subjects and justified its radical intervention into social life. To American experts, Hong Kong was an ideal laboratory to examine the controversial treatment. Hong Kong’s methadone experiment became an international success and a model reimported into the United States in the 1980s. A medical history of the anti-narcotics war not only offers a new way to reassess the social reform in the 1970s but also helps us understand the contemporary hard-line approach against drugs in Hong Kong and post-colonial Asia.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it