notes
Introduction
1. ims 2011.
2. Akinbami et al. 2011; Express Scripts 2007; nchs 2007; Pratt, Brody, and Gu
2011.
3. Pollock 2012.
4. Marks 1997.
5. Greene 2007.
6. The stories of these drugs and conditions are the subject of Greene 2007.
7. Ernst & Young llp 2006.
8. Kremer and Snyder 2003, 2.
9. Bartfai and Lees 2006, 221.
10. See the Centers for Disease Control (http://www.cdc.gov/chronicdisease/over
view).
11. Kleinman 1988a, 1988b; Strauss 1984.
12. Beck- Gernsheim 1995, 82. Risk and pharmaceuticals, especially psychopharma-
ceuticals, are the object of a growing body of social science scholarship. A number
of these scholars have used a discursive analysis of the self in the late twentieth
century to develop important critiques of the geneticization, somaticization, mo-
lecularization, and psychiatrization of society. These analyses focus on how the
promise of therapy and the threat of risk form the kinds of persons we take our-
selves to be: beings influenced by biology and amenable to social control through
what we take to be self- chosen or managed freedom. They attend to the uses by
hegemonic institutions like schools, the workplace, healthcare, and the military of
pharmacological and genetic discourse for what Foucault called governmentality,
acting on our actions so that we act in accordance with their objectives. On gov-
ernmentality used in this way, see N. S. Rose 1999. On risk, genes, and pharma-
ceutical discourse, see Lakoff 2004; Nelkin and Lindee 1995; Nelkin and Tancredi
1989; Rabinow 1996; Rapp 1999; N. Rose 2003.
13. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services 2011.
Previous Page Next Page