Transmitting Chinese Medicine: Changing Perceptions of Body, Pathology, and Treatment in Late Imperial China

Historians of Chinese medicine acknowledge the plurality of Chinese medicine along both synchronic and diachronic dimensions. Yet, there remains a tendency to think of tradition as being defined by some unchanging features. The Chinese medical body is a case in point. This is assumed to have been formalised by the late Han dynasty around a system of internal organs, conduits, collaterals, and associated body structures. Although criticism was voiced from time to time, this body and the micro/ macrocosmic cosmological resonances that underpin it are seen to persist until the present day. I challenge this view by attending to attempts by physicians in China and Japan in the period from the mid 16th to the late 18th century to reimagine this body. Working within the domain of cold damage therapeutics and combining philological scholarship, empirical observations, and new hermeneutic strategies these physicians worked their way towards a new territorial understanding of the body and of medicine as warfare that required an intimate familiarity with the body’s topography. In late imperial China this new view of the body and medicine was gradually re-absorbed into the mainstream. In Japan, however, it led to a break with this orthodoxy that in the Republican era became influential in China once more. I argue that attending further to the innovations of this period—commonly portrayed as one of decline—from a transnational perspective may help to go beyond the modern insistence to frame East Asian medicines as traditional.

Environmental pressures and impacts of public sector organizations: the case of the Portuguese Military

Progress in Industrial Ecology, An International Journal, nº 4(5), p. 363-381

Developing and implementing an environmental performance index for the Portuguese military

Business Strategy and the Environment nº 15, p. 71–86

Top Three Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Medicine Applications at the Nexus of Renal Pathophysiology and Cardiovascular Medicine.

Pharmacogenomics is a field with origins in the study of monogenic variations in drug metabolism in the 1950s. Perhaps because of these historical underpinnings, there has been an intensive investigation of 'hepatic pharmacogenes' such as CYP450s and liver drug metabolism using pharmacogenomics approaches over the past five decades. Surprisingly, kidney pathophysiology, attendant diseases and treatment outcomes have been vastly under-studied and under-theorized despite their central importance in maintenance of health, susceptibility to disease and rational personalized therapeutics. Indeed, chronic kidney disease (CKD) represents an increasing public health burden worldwide, both in developed and developing countries. Patients with CKD suffer from high cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, which is mainly attributable to cardiovascular events before reaching end-stage renal disease. In this paper, we focus our analyses on renal function before end-stage renal disease, as seen through the lens of pharmacogenomics and human genomic variation. We herein synthesize the recent evidence linking selected Very Important Pharmacogenes (VIP) to renal function, blood pressure and salt-sensitivity in humans, and ways in which these insights might inform rational personalized therapeutics. Notably, we highlight and present the rationale for three applications that we consider as important and actionable therapeutic and preventive focus areas in renal pharmacogenomics: 1) ACE inhibitors, as a confirmed application, 2) VDR agonists, as a promising application, and 3) moderate dietary salt intake, as a suggested novel application. Additionally, we emphasize the putative contributions of gene-environment interactions, discuss the implications of these findings to treat and prevent hypertension and CKD. Finally, we conclude with a strategic agenda and vision required to accelerate advances in this under-studied field of renal pharmacogenomics with vast significance for global public health.

Médecine sociate en 2013: quand la précarité précède la pauvrete [Social medicine: does it still make sense in 2013?].

Social medicine is a medicine that seeks to understand the impact of socio-economic conditions on human health and diseases in order to improve the health of a society and its individuals. In this field of medicine, determining the socio-economic status of individuals is generally not sufficient to explain and/or understand the underlying mechanisms leading to social inequalities in health. Other factors must be considered such as environmental, psychosocial, behavioral and biological factors that, together, can lead to more or less permanent damages to the health of the individuals in a society. In a time where considerable progresses have been made in the field of the biomedicine, does the practice of social medicine in a primary care setting still make sense?