The Sociological Debate of the Life Sciences Research: from Molecular Biology to Human Genome Sequencing

Renan Goncalves Leonel da Silva, Maria Conceicao da Costa

Abstract


This paper presents some sociological debates involved in the new field of life sciences at the end of 20th century. From a bibliographic review concerning history of science and Social Studies of Science, it will be presented some particular sociological issues of the research on molecular biology and its historical evolution – the formation of speeches and legitimization; institutional arrangements and alliances in post-war period. We will focuses on the emerging systems of information and communication technology, ICTs. and how it transformed the biomedical research. The goal is to show briefly how molecular biology was built, from the post-war period to the end of the 90’s, and what was the main proceedings of interdisciplinary associations and technoscientific interactions in the life sciences agenda.


Full Text:

PDF

References


ABIR-AM. (1982). The Discourse of Physical Power and Biological Knowledge in the 1930s: A Reappraisal of the Rockefeller Foundation's "Policy" in Molecular Biology. Social Studies of Science, 12, 341-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631282012003001

Yoxen, E. J., & Abir-Am, P. (1984). Scepticism about the Centrality of Technology Transfer in the Rockefeller Foundation Programme in Molecular Biology. Social Studies of Science, 14, 248-52. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631284014002006

Abir-Am, P. (1993). From multidisciplinary collaboration to transnational objectivity: International space as constitutive of molecular biology, 1930-1970. In E. Crawford, T. Shinn, & S. So¨rlin (Eds.), Denationalizing science—The contexts of international scientific practice (pp. 153–186). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Strasser, B. J. (2010). Collecting, Comparing, and Computing Sequences: The Making of Margaret O. Dayhoff's Atlas of Protein Sequence and Structure, 1954–1965. Journal of the History of Biology, Winter, 43(4), 623-60.

AYUANG, S. (n.d.). Scientific convergence in the birth of molecular biology. Retrieved June 12, 2011, from http://www.creatingtechnology.org/Auyang

BBC BRASIL. (n.d.). "Pai de Dolly" abandona clonagem de embriões. Retrieved July 27, 2011, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/portuguese/reporterbbc/story/2007/11/071117_clonagem_cg.shtml

Bijker, W., & Pinch, T. (1990). The Social construction of Technological systems. Cambridge, MIT Press.

Bijker, W. (1995). Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs. Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change. Massachusetts, MIT Press.

Callon, M. (1987). "Society in the Making: The Study of Technology as a Tool for Sociological Analysis". In: BIJKER, W. et al. Social Construction of Technological Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Clarke, A. et al. (2003). Biomedicalization: Technoscientific Transformations of Health, Illness, and U.S. Biomedicine. American Sociological Review, 68, April, 2003, 161–194. https://doi.org/10.2307/1519765

Clarke, A., Shim, J., Mamo, L., Fosket, J., & Fishman, J. (2010). Biomedicalization: Technoscience and Transformations of Health and Illness in the U.S. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

COHEN, Eric. (2004). The Bioethics Agenda and the Bush Second Term. New Atlantis Journal of Technology and Society. Retrieved June 26, 2011, from http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-bioethics-agenda-and-the-bush-secondterm

DAYHOFF, Margaret O, ECK, Richard V, CHANG, Marie A. and SOCHARD, Minnie R. Atlas of Protein Sequence and Structure. Silver Spring: National Biomedical Research Foundation, 1965.

de Chadarevian, S., & Kamminga, H. (1998). Molecularizing biology and medicine: New practices and alliances 1910s–1970s. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203304235

de Chadarevian, S. (1996). Sequences, conformation, information: Biochemists and molecular biologists in the 1950s. Journal of the History of Biology, 29, 361-386. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00127380

de Solla Price, D. (1963). Little Science, Big Science. New York: Columbia University Press.

Fagot-Largeault, A. (2004). Embriões, células-tronco e terapias celulares: questões filosóficas e antropológicas. Estudos Avançados, 18(51), 227-245. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-40142004000200015

Fuerst, J. A. (1984). The Definition of Molecular Biology and the Definition of Policy: The Role of the Rockefeller Foundation's Policy for Molecular Biology. Social Studies of Science, 14, 225-237. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631284014002003

Keller, E. F. (1990). Physics and the emergence of molecular biology: A History of cognitive and political synergy. Journal of the History of Biology, 23, 389-409. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00136376

Keller, E. F. (2002). The century of the gene. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

KUHN, Thomas S. (1998). A estrutura das revoluções científicas. 5ª ed. São Paulo: Perspectiva.

Latour, B. (1992). Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane artifacts. In: W. BIJKER and J. LAW (orgs.) Shaping Technology/Building Society. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

LOCK, Margaret. Biomedical Technologies, Cultural Horizons, and Contested Boundaries.", pp. 875-900 in The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, (eds.) HACKETT, E J. AMSTERDAMSKA , O; LYNCH, M. & WAJCMAN, J. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2007.

Löwy, I., & GAUDILLIÈRE, Jean-Paul. (2008). Localizing the Global: Testing for Hereditary Risks of Breast Cancer. Science, Technology & Human Values. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243907306855

Mahoney, J. (2000). Path dependence in historical sociology. Theory and Society, 29(4), 507-48. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007113830879

MOWERY, D. (1998). The changing structure of the U. S. national innovation system: implications for international conflict and cooperation in R&D policy. Research Policy, 27, 639-654. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00060-2

NATURE. (2001). Initial Sequencing and analysis of human genome. Nature, 409, February(15), 86-921.

NIH STEM CELL INFORMATION. (2011). NIH Stem Cell Research Funding, FY 2002-2010. The National Institutes of Health resource for stem cell research. Retrieved June 20, 2011, from http://stemcells.nih.gov/research/funding/funding.htm

North, D. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808678

Osthus, R., & Benos, D. (2006). Making a Case for NIH Funding: How Cures Are Built on Decades of Research. The Physiologist, 49, 313-21.

Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence and the study of politics. The American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251-67. https://doi.org/10.2307/2586011

PINCH, T, BIJKER, W. The social construction of facts and artifacts: or how the sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology might benefit each other. In: 13 STEM CELLS NEWS. Latest Stem Cells News. Disponível em: . Acesso em 20 de Junho de 2011.

STRASSER, B. (2002). Institutionalizing molecular biology in post-war Europe: a comparative study. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological & Biomedical Sciences, 33, 515-546. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8486(02)00016-X

Thomson, J. (1998). Embryonic Stem Cell Lines Derived from Human Blastocysts Science, 282(5391), 1145-1147.

VELHO, L. Conceitos de Ciência e a Política Científica, Tecnológica e de Inovação. Sociologias, Porto Alegre, ano 13, no 26, jan./abr. 2011, p. 128-153.

WAJCMAN, Judy. (eds.) The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (3a ed).

Winner, L. "Do Artifacts have Politics?" In: WINNER, L. 1986. "The Whale and the Reactor: A Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology". Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. p. 19-39.

Yoxen, E. J. (1982) Giving Life a New Meaning: The Rise of the Molecular Biology Establishment. In N. Elias, H. Martins & R. Whitley (eds), Scientific Establishments and Hierarchies, Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook, 6, 123-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7729-7_5




DOI: https://doi.org/10.5296/ijssr.v5i1.10185

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Bookmark and Share


International Journal of Social Science Research (Online ISSN: 2327-5510) E-mail: ijssr@macrothink.org

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the 'macrothink.org' domain to your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.

Copyright © Macrothink Institute   ISSN 2327-5510