Stefan Ecks
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- March 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780814724767
- eISBN:
- 9780814760307
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- NYU Press
- DOI:
- 10.18574/nyu/9780814724767.003.0006
- Subject:
- Anthropology, Medical Anthropology
This concluding chapter returns to “mind food,” showing how psychiatrists are both trying to counter nonbiomedical notions of drug effects and the biomedical model of short-term targeted action ...
More
This concluding chapter returns to “mind food,” showing how psychiatrists are both trying to counter nonbiomedical notions of drug effects and the biomedical model of short-term targeted action itself. “Mind food” after all echoes the popular centrality of digestion, so likening psychopharmaceuticals to food makes these drugs seem innocuous. These biomedical prescribers explain the action of psychopharmaceuticals as “mind food” and that they compare ill moods to a nutritional imbalance is deeply ironical if the paradigmatic opposition between specific etiology and humoralism in the history of medicine is considered. Calcutta doctors tend to evade explaining diagnoses and therapies when this causes resistance from patients, and there is no regulation that stands in their way. The chapter goes on to elaborate on the medical and ethical implications of these issues, highlighting the ongoing public anxieties regarding mind medications.Less
This concluding chapter returns to “mind food,” showing how psychiatrists are both trying to counter nonbiomedical notions of drug effects and the biomedical model of short-term targeted action itself. “Mind food” after all echoes the popular centrality of digestion, so likening psychopharmaceuticals to food makes these drugs seem innocuous. These biomedical prescribers explain the action of psychopharmaceuticals as “mind food” and that they compare ill moods to a nutritional imbalance is deeply ironical if the paradigmatic opposition between specific etiology and humoralism in the history of medicine is considered. Calcutta doctors tend to evade explaining diagnoses and therapies when this causes resistance from patients, and there is no regulation that stands in their way. The chapter goes on to elaborate on the medical and ethical implications of these issues, highlighting the ongoing public anxieties regarding mind medications.
Stefan Ecks
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- March 2016
- ISBN:
- 9780814724767
- eISBN:
- 9780814760307
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- NYU Press
- DOI:
- 10.18574/nyu/9780814724767.003.0001
- Subject:
- Anthropology, Medical Anthropology
This introductory chapter explores the prevailing attitudes in India regarding the use of psychopharmaceuticals, especially in the neologism, moner khabar, or “mind food.” The efficacy of ...
More
This introductory chapter explores the prevailing attitudes in India regarding the use of psychopharmaceuticals, especially in the neologism, moner khabar, or “mind food.” The efficacy of psychopharmaceuticals, especially of antidepressants, has long been the subject of controversy. Moner khabar was coined with the intention of making psychotropic drugs acceptable to those hesitant to take them. However, the author notes that although the parallels between food and psychopharmaceuticals were strongly established in one hospital, not all psychiatrists were equally ready to simplify—or dissimulate—psychiatric models for their lay clients. Indeed, in the hundreds of consultations that were witnessed, psychiatrists' explanations of disease etiologies and drug effects were either absent or kept to a bare minimum.Less
This introductory chapter explores the prevailing attitudes in India regarding the use of psychopharmaceuticals, especially in the neologism, moner khabar, or “mind food.” The efficacy of psychopharmaceuticals, especially of antidepressants, has long been the subject of controversy. Moner khabar was coined with the intention of making psychotropic drugs acceptable to those hesitant to take them. However, the author notes that although the parallels between food and psychopharmaceuticals were strongly established in one hospital, not all psychiatrists were equally ready to simplify—or dissimulate—psychiatric models for their lay clients. Indeed, in the hundreds of consultations that were witnessed, psychiatrists' explanations of disease etiologies and drug effects were either absent or kept to a bare minimum.
