Postdoctoral Researcher, MESH (Medicine Environment Societies Health), Institut Français de Pondichéry, Pondicherry, India.
Med Anthropol Q. 2014 Sep;28(3):323-41. doi: 10.1111/maq.12067. Epub 2014 Jan 28.
It is often argued that biomedicine alienates patients from doctors, from ailments and from understanding treatment processes, while indigenous and alternative healing systems are portrayed as respectful of patients and their experience. Specifically, South Indian siddha medicine has been seen as diverging from biomedicine in empowering its patients. This approach not only assumes biomedicine to be a homogeneous practice, but also lumps together diverse therapeutic techniques under the labels of "traditional" or "alternative." Analysis of a manual subdiscipline of siddha medicine cautions against such analytic imprecision and active/passive binaries in physician-patient encounters. Practitioners of vital spot medicine claim to "heal the hidden." They rarely communicate diagnostic insights verbally and object to auxiliary devices. However, their physical engagement with patients' ailing bodies highlights the corporeal nature of manual medicine in particular and processual, situational, and reciprocal characteristics of curing in general.
人们常认为,生物医学使患者与医生、疾病和治疗过程脱节,而本土和替代疗法则被认为尊重患者及其体验。具体来说,南印度悉达医学被视为在赋予其患者权力方面与生物医学不同。这种方法不仅假设生物医学是一种同质的实践,而且还将不同的治疗技术归入“传统”或“替代”标签下。对悉达医学一个分支学科的分析告诫人们要避免这种分析上的不精确性和医患互动中的主动/被动二分法。生命点医学的从业者声称要“治愈隐藏的疾病”。他们很少通过言语传达诊断见解,并反对辅助设备。然而,他们与患者病痛身体的身体接触突出了手法医学的肉体性质以及一般治疗的过程性、情境性和相互性特征。