Precision Medicine: Historiography of Life Sciences and the Geneticization of the Clinics.

In 2013, Hans Jörg Rheinberger proposed that Mendelian genetics and molecular biology were "scientific ideologies," that is, for him they are systems of thought whose objects are hyperbolic; they are not, or not yet, in the realm of and not, or not yet, under the control of that system. This article proposes that precision medicine today is a scientific ideology and analyses the implications of this statement for historians of biology, genetics, and medicine.

Non-invasive prenatal testing: A diagnostic innovation shaped by commercial interests and the regulation conundrum.

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is grounded in the analysis of free circulating fetal DNA (cfDNA) in pregnant women's blood. The rolling out of this screening method was in large part driven by commercial firms, which hoped to reach a huge potential market by offering a test that was expected to be risk-free, reliable, inexpensive, and able to detect a wide range of genetic traits of the future child. To date, most predictions about the scope and uses of NIPT have not materialized: in 2020 NIPT detects only a limited number of genetic anomalies, while results have to be confirmed by amniocentesis. NIPT has become a commercial success. Nevertheless the implementation of NIPT has tended to diverge across different national settings. In countries that already have state-sponsored screening for Down risk, NIPT has been offered by the state health insurance to women defined as "high risk", using a variant of the test that detects only three autosomal aneuploidies: trisomy 21, 13 and 18. These countries effectively regulate the supply of NIPT on grounds of cost-effectiveness and reliability. In countries without state-sponsored screening for Down risk, in contrast, multiple versions of NIPT covering a wider range of birth defects are commonly available on the free market, and purchased by women at low as well as high risk of having an affected child. Market-based healthcare systems tend to present women who can afford to pay for NIPT with a largely unregulated choice of technologies - though reimbursement rules imposed by private insurance providers may serve in effect to regulate use by those consumers who cannot afford to pay for tests from their own pockets. This regulatory divergence is shaped by the presence or absence of prior state-sponsored screening programs for Down risk.

The 1942 Massive Contamination of Yellow Fever Vaccine: A Public Health Consequence of Scientific Arrogance.

In the late 1930s, the 17D vaccine against yellow fever was produced in record time. 17D was and is an excellent vaccine. Its rapid diffusion led, however, to several problems, the most important among them being the 1942 massive contamination of the vaccine distributed to the US Army by the hepatitis B virus. The US part of this story is relatively well-known, but its Brazilian part much less so. In 1940, scientists who were producing the 17D vaccine in Rio de Janeiro found that it was contaminated by an "icterus virus" that originated in normal human serum. They solved this problem through the exclusion of human serum from vaccine production, but failed to persuade their US colleagues to do the same. The Rio experts, aware of the potential pitfalls of a new technology, carefully supervised the consequences of their vaccination campaigns. They were thus able to rapidly spot problems and eliminate them. By contrast, US scientists, persuaded of their technical superiority and distrustful of warnings that originated from a "less developed" country, neglected to implement basic public health rules. A major disaster followed. (Am J Public Health. 2021;111(9): 1654-1660. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306313).

Imperfect diagnosis: The truncated legacies of Zika testing.

When the Zika virus burst onto the international scene in the second half of 2015, the development of diagnostic tools was seen as an urgent global health priority. Diagnostic capacity was restricted to a small number of reference laboratories, and none of the few available molecular or serological tests had been validated for extensive use in an outbreak setting. In the early weeks of the crisis, key funders stepped in to accelerate research and development efforts, and the WHO took responsibility for steering diagnostic standardization, a role it had successfully played during the West Africa Ebola virus outbreak. Yet when the WHO declared the end of the Zika Public Health Emergency of International Concern in November 2016, diagnostic capacity remained patchy, and few tools were available at the scale required in the countries that bore the brunt of the epidemic, particularly Brazil. This article analyses the limited impact of global R&D efforts on the availability of Zika diagnostic options where they were most needed and for those most vulnerable: women who might have been exposed to the virus during their pregnancy and children born with suspected congenital Zika syndrome. The truncated legacies of testing during the Zika crisis reveal some of the fault lines in the global health enterprise, particularly the limits of 'emergency R&D' to operate in geopolitical contexts that do not conform to the ideal type of a humanitarian crisis, or to tackle technical issues that are inextricably linked to domestic struggles over the scope and distribution of biological citizenship. Diagnostic shortcomings, we argue, lie at the heart of the stunning transformation, in less than two years, in the status of Zika: from international public health emergency to neglected disease.

Testing COVID-19 in Brazil: fragmented efforts and challenges to expand diagnostic capacity at the Brazilian Unified National Health System.

Since the first recorded case of COVID-19 on February 26, 2020, Brazil has seen an exponential growth in the number of cases and deaths. The national testing approach has been insufficient to correctly use this tool in the support of containing the epidemic in the country. In this communication, we discuss efforts and challenges to scale-up COVID-19 testing at the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS). This communication presents the initial results of the research project created to investigate the political, industrial, technological, and regulatory aspects that may affect the diagnostic and testing capacity for COVID-19 in Brazil. The paper draws on the review of academic literature, media publication, and collection of public data on tests purchase and regulation. It enlists initiatives to enhance PCR testing, national production and development of technologies, as well as regulatory measures to fast-track new tests. Our analysis indicates some points of reflection. Firstly, the lack of a consistent national strategy to fight COVID-19 exarcebated supply problems of diagnostic components. If the country was eventually able to circumvent this situation, it still faces a more structural dependency on the importation of diagnostic components. Secondly, the discontinued funding and distribution of tests may have implied health policy fragmentation and the growing importance of local governments and non-state actors to fighting the epidemics within SUS. Finally, initiatives established since the second semester of 2020 have expanded the testing capacity at SUS. However, it has not been sufficient to control the progress of the epidemic in the country.

Testing COVID-19 in Brazil: fragmented efforts and challenges to expand diagnostic capacity at the Brazilian Unified National Health System / A testagem para COVID-19 no Brasil: esforços fragmentados e desafios para ampliar a capacidade diagnóstica no Sistema Único de Saúde / Testar para COVID-19 en Brasil: esfuerzos fragmentados y desafíos para expandir la capacidad diagnóstica en el Sistema Único de Salud

Abstract: Since the first recorded case of COVID-19 on February 26, 2020, Brazil has seen an exponential growth in the number of cases and deaths. The national testing approach has been insufficient to correctly use this tool in the support of containing the epidemic in the country. In this communication, we discuss efforts and challenges to scale-up COVID-19 testing at the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS). This communication presents the initial results of the research project created to investigate the political, industrial, technological, and regulatory aspects that may affect the diagnostic and testing capacity for COVID-19 in Brazil. The paper draws on the review of academic literature, media publication, and collection of public data on tests purchase and regulation. It enlists initiatives to enhance PCR testing, national production and development of technologies, as well as regulatory measures to fast-track new tests. Our analysis indicates some points of reflection. Firstly, the lack of a consistent national strategy to fight COVID-19 exarcebated supply problems of diagnostic components. If the country was eventually able to circumvent this situation, it still faces a more structural dependency on the importation of diagnostic components. Secondly, the discontinued funding and distribution of tests may have implied health policy fragmentation and the growing importance of local governments and non-state actors to fighting the epidemics within SUS. Finally, initiatives established since the second semester of 2020 have expanded the testing capacity at SUS. However, it has not been sufficient to control the progress of the epidemic in the country.

Resumo: Desde que o primeiro caso de COVID-19 no Brasil foi notificado, em 26 de fevereiro de 2020, o país assiste a um crescimento exponencial no número de casos e mortes. A estratégia nacional de testagem tem sido insuficiente para usar essa ferramenta corretamente no apoio à contenção da epidemia no país. O artigo discute os esforços e desafios para escalonar a testagem para COVID-19 no Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS). O texto apresenta os resultados iniciais de um projeto de pesquisa sobre os aspectos políticos, industriais, tecnológicos e regulatórios que podem afetar a capacidade diagnóstica e de testagem para COVID-19 no Brasil. O estudo se apoia em revisão da literatura cientifica, artigos publicados na mídia e coleta de dados públicos sobre a compra e regulamentação de testes. O texto faz referência a iniciativas para ampliar a testagem de PCR, a produção nacional e o desenvolvimento de tecnologias, além de medidas regulatórias fast-track para novos testes. Nossa análise sugere alguns pontos para reflexão. Primeiro, a falta de uma estratégia nacional consistente para combater a COVID-19 agravou os problemas de fornecimento de reagentes de diagnostico num primeiro momento. Esta situação foi posteriormente resolvida, embora coloque novamente em pauta a dependência estrutural do país na importação de insumos de saúde estratégicos. Em segundo lugar, financiamento e a distribuição de testes, que ocorreram de forma descontinuada, podem indicar a fragmentação da política sanitária, assim como o papel de governos estaduais, municipais e atores não estatais no combate à epidemia no âmbito do SUS. Por último, iniciativas estabelecidas no segundo semestre de 2020 contribuíram para ampliar a capacidade de testagem molecular no SUS. Contudo, essa capacidade não foi suficiente para controlar a epidemia no Brasil.

Resumen: Desde que se registró el primer caso de COVID-19 el 26 de febrero de 2020, Brasil ha visto un crecimiento exponencial en el número de casos y muertes. La estrategia nacional para preconizar el test de diagnóstico ha sido insuficiente en el uso correcto de esta herramienta, con el fin de ayudar a contener la epidemia en el país. Se presentó los esfuerzos y los desafíos para ampliar la realización de pruebas de COVID-19 en el Sistema Único de Salud brasileño (SUS). Este artículo presenta los resultados iniciales del proyecto de investigación sobre los aspectos políticos, industriales, tecnológicos y regulatorios que pueden afectar la capacidad de diagnóstico para la COVID-19 en Brasil. El grupo de investigación realizó una revisión de la literatura académica, medios de comunicación y recogida de datos públicos respecto a la adquisición de tests y su regulación. Se haz referencia a iniciativas para promover la realización de pruebas de PCR, la producción nacional y el desarrollo de tecnologías, así como las medidas regulatorias fast-track para nuevas pruebas. Nuestro análisis indica algunos puntos de reflexión. Primero, la falta de una estrategia nacional consistente para luchar contra la COVID-19 que exacerbó los problemas de sumistro de los componentes de diagnóstico en un primer momento. Se solucionó posteriormente esta situación, aunque se coloque nuevamente en pauta la dependencia estructural del país en la importación de insumos de salud estratégicos. Segundo, la financiación y la distribución de tests de forma descontinuada pueden indicar la fragmentación de la política de salud, así como los gobiernos estaduales, municipales, y atores no estatales asumiendo un rol preponderante en acciones de combate a la epidemia en el SUS. En último, las iniciativas establecidas en el segundo semestre del 2020 contribuyeron para ampliar la capacidad de realización de tests moleculares en el SUS. Sin embargo, esa capacidad no fue suficiente para controlar la epidemia en Brasil.

ART with PGD: Risky heredity and stratified reproduction.

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) was developed to allow women/couples at risk of having a child with 'severe and incurable' hereditary disease to produce embryos through in-vitro fertilization, followed by implantation of embryos devoid of mutated genes, allowing the birth of children free of the pathology present in the family. This article examines the highly regulated practice of PGD in France, the highly deregulated practice of PGD in the USA and Brazil, and the extensive use of this biomedical technology in Israel, and highlights the ways that distinct national policies produce distinct definitions of risk and different norms, standards and rules. PGD, this article argues, is a situated practice. Shaped to an important extent by legal and economic constraints, it displays the ways that new technologies continuously reframe our definitions of the normal and the pathological.

Hydroxychloroquine Controversies: Clinical Trials, Epistemology, and the Democratization of Science.

The claim that anti-malaria drugs, chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, can cure COVID-19 became a focus of fierce political battles that pitted promoters of these pharmaceuticals, Presidents Bolsonaro and Trump among them, against "medical elites." At the center of these battles are different meanings of effectiveness in medicine, the complex role of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in proving such effectiveness, the task of medical experts and the state in regulating pharmaceuticals, patients' activism, and the collective production of medical knowledge. This article follows the trajectory of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine as anti-COVID-19 drugs, focusing on the reception of views of their main scientific promoter, the French infectious disease specialist, Didier Raoult. The surprising career of these drugs, our text proposes, is fundamentally a political event, not in the narrow sense of engaging specific political fractions, but in the much broader sense of the politics of public participation in science.

Half a Century of Wilson & Jungner: Reflections on the Governance of Population Screening.

Background: In their landmark report on the "Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease" (1968), Wilson and Jungner noted that the practice of screening is just as important for securing beneficial outcomes and avoiding harms as the formulation of principles. Many jurisdictions have since established various kinds of "screening governance organizations" to provide oversight of screening practice. Yet to date there has been relatively little reflection on the nature and organization of screening governance itself, or on how different governance arrangements affect the way screening is implemented and perceived and the balance of benefits and harms it delivers. Methods: An international expert policy workshop convened by Sturdy, Miller and Hogarth. Results: While effective governance is essential to promote beneficial screening practices and avoid attendant harms, screening governance organizations face enduring challenges. These challenges are social and ethical as much as technical. Evidence-based adjudication of the benefits and harms of population screening must take account of factors that inform the production and interpretation of evidence, including the divergent professional, financial and personal commitments of stakeholders. Similarly, when planning and overseeing organized screening programs, screening governance organizations must persuade or compel multiple stakeholders to work together to a common end. Screening governance organizations in different jurisdictions vary widely in how they are constituted, how they relate to other interested organizations and actors, and what powers and authority they wield. Yet we know little about how these differences affect the way screening is implemented, and with what consequences. Conclusions: Systematic research into how screening governance is organized in different jurisdictions would facilitate policy learning to address enduring challenges. Even without such research, informal exchange and sharing of experiences between screening governance organizations can deliver invaluable insights into the social as well as the technical aspects of governance.

The "Abortion Pill" Misoprostol in Brazil: Women's Empowerment in a Conservative and Repressive Political Environment.

In the aftermath of the introduction of severe restrictions on abortion in several US states, some activists have argued that providing widespread access to an abortive drug, misoprostol, will transform an induced abortion into a fully private act and therefore will empower women. In Brazil, where abortion is criminalized, the majority of women who wish to terminate an unwanted pregnancy already use the illegal, but easily accessible, misoprostol. We examine the history of misoprostol as an abortifacient in Brazil from the late 1980s until today and the professional debates on the teratogenicity of this drug. The effects of a given pharmaceutical compound, we argue, are always articulated, elicited, and informed within dense networks of sociocultural, economic, legal, and political settings. In a conservative and repressive environment, the use of misoprostol for self-induced abortions, even when supported by formal or informal solidarity networks, is far from being a satisfactory solution to the curbing of women's reproductive rights.

Uncertainty in times of medical emergency: Knowledge gaps and structural ignorance during the Brazilian Zika crisis.

Uncertainty was a defining feature of the Brazilian Zika crisis of 2015-2016. The cluster of cases of neonatal microcephaly detected in the country's northeast in the second half of 2015, and the possibility that a new virus transmitted by Aedes mosquitoes was responsible for this new syndrome, created a deep sense of shock and confusion in Brazil and around the world. When in February 2016 the WHO declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), it noted that it did so on the basis of what was not known about the virus and its pathogenic potential. To better understand the role that non-knowledge played in the unfolding of the Brazilian Zika crisis we differentiate between three different kinds of uncertainty: global health uncertainty, public health uncertainty, and clinical uncertainty. While these three forms of uncertainty were difficult to disentangle in the early weeks of the crisis, very soon each one began to trace a distinct trajectory. Global health uncertainty centered on the question of the causative link between Zika virus infection and congenital malformations, and was declared resolved by the time the PHEIC was lifted in November 2016. Public health and clinical uncertainty, in contrast, persisted over a longer period of time and did, in some important ways, become entrenched. This taxonomy of uncertainties allows us to explore the systematic nonproduction of knowledge in times of medical emergency, and suggests structural limitations in the framework of "emergency research" that global health institutions have developed to deal with unexpected threats.

How diseases became "genetic".

This article examines the origins of the term "genetic disease." In the late 19 and early 20th century, an earlier idea that diseases that occur in families reflect a vague familiar "predisposition" was replaced by the view that such diseases have specific causes, while Mendelian genetics provided then clues to the patterns of their transmission. The genetictisation of inborn pathologies took a decisive turn with the redefinition, in 1959, of Down syndrome as a chromosomal anomaly, then the development of tests for the diagnosis of other hereditary pathologies. At that time, geneticists distinguished "hereditary" diseases that run in families, from "genetic" conditions that are the result of new mutations during the production of egg and sperm cells. In the latter case, the inborn impairment is produced by an anomaly in the genetic material of the cell, but is not hereditary, because it is not transmitted from one or both parents. In the late 20th and early 21st century, new genomic technologies blurred the distinction between hereditary and genetic impairments, extended the concept of genetic disease, and modified the experience of people living with such a disease.

How diseases became "genetic" / Como as doenças se tornaram "genéticas"

Abstract This article examines the origins of the term "genetic disease." In the late 19 and early 20th century, an earlier idea that diseases that occur in families reflect a vague familiar "predisposition" was replaced by the view that such diseases have specific causes, while Mendelian genetics provided then clues to the patterns of their transmission. The genetictisation of inborn pathologies took a decisive turn with the redefinition, in 1959, of Down syndrome as a chromosomal anomaly, then the development of tests for the diagnosis of other hereditary pathologies. At that time, geneticists distinguished "hereditary" diseases that run in families, from "genetic" conditions that are the result of new mutations during the production of egg and sperm cells. In the latter case, the inborn impairment is produced by an anomaly in the genetic material of the cell, but is not hereditary, because it is not transmitted from one or both parents. In the late 20th and early 21st century, new genomic technologies blurred the distinction between hereditary and genetic impairments, extended the concept of genetic disease, and modified the experience of people living with such a disease.

Resumo O presente artigo tem o objetivo de examinar as origens do termo "doença genética. No final do século XIX e início do XX, a vaga ideia que a doença manifesta entre familiares refletia uma "predisposição" familiar, foi substituída pela visão que essas doenças possuem causas específicas, enquanto a genética mendeliana forneceu as pistas para os padrões de transmissão da doença. A genética das patologias congênitas deu uma guinada decisiva, em 1959, com a redefinição da Síndrome de Down como uma anomalia cromossômica e, depois, com o desenvolvimento de testes para o diagnóstico de outras patologias hereditárias. Naquela época, os geneticistas distinguiam doenças "hereditárias" como aquelas que acometiam os elementos de uma família, de condições "genéticas" que são o resultado de novas mutações ocorridas durante a produção dos óvulos e espermatozoides. Neste último caso, a deficiência inata é causada por uma anomalia do material genético da célula, porque não é transmitida por qualquer um ou ambos os pais. No final do século XX e início do XXI, as novas tecnologias genômicas obscureceram a distinção entre deficiências hereditária e a genética, estenderam o conceito da doença genética e modificaram a experiência das pessoas que vivem com esse tipo de doença.

Re-imagining global health through social medicine.

The conceptual and practical work done by social medicine and global health have often overlapped. In this paper, we argue that new efforts to apprehend 'the social' in social medicine offer important insights to global health along five lines of critical analysis: (1) reconfigurations of the state and new forms of political activism, (2) philanthrocapitalism and the economisation of life, (3) The economy of attention, (4) anthropogenic climate change, and (5) the geopolitics of North and South.

The birthing house as a place for birth: contextualizing the Rio de Janeiro birthing house / A casa de parto como local de nascimento: contextualização da casa de parto do Rio de Janeiro

Abstract Within the context of the creation of birthing houses around the world and different models of care for childbirth, the author proposes an analysis that contributes to the discussion about the place for birth, especially in urban Brazil.

Resumo No contexto de criação de casas de parto em várias partes do mundo e diferentes modelos de cuidado do parto, a autora propõe uma análise que contribui para a discussão sobre o local de nascimento, especialmente no Brasil urbano.

The birthing house as a place for birth: contextualizing the Rio de Janeiro birthing house.

Within the context of the creation of birthing houses around the world and different models of care for childbirth, the author proposes an analysis that contributes to the discussion about the place for birth, especially in urban Brazil.