The value of bio-objects and policy discourses in Europe

Croatian Medical Journal

Volumn 55, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 167-170

  Svalastog, Anna Lydia ^a  

^a UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICINE; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CONFLICT; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; EUROPE; HEALTH; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; HUMANITIES; HYPOTHESIS; INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; KNOWLEDGE; KNOWLEDGE GAP HYPOTHESIS; PHYSICIAN; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; SOCIETY; SOCIOECONOMICS; TRANSGENIC ORGANISM; TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH; WAR;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; EUROPEAN UNION; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS;

EID: 84901314889     PISSN: 03539504     EISSN: 13328166     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3325/cmj.2014.55.167     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Metzler I, Webster A. Bio-objects and their boundaries: governing matters at the intersection of society, politics, and science. Croat Med J. 2011;52:648-50. Medline:21990084 doi:10.3325/cmj.2011.52.648.
2. Svalastog AL, Martinelli L. Representing life as opposed to being: the bio-objectification process of the HeLa cells and its relation to personalized medicine. Croat Med J. 2013;54:397-402. Medline:23986283 doi:10.3325/cmj.2013.54.397.
3. Maeseele P, Hendrickx K, Pavone K, Van Hoyweghen I. Bio-objects' political capacity: a research agenda. Croat Med J. 2013;54:206-11. Medline:23630150 doi:10.3325/cmj.2013.54.206.
4. Svalastog AL, Allgaier J, Martinelli L, Gajovic S. Distortion, confusion and impass: could knowledge landscape contribute to a better public communication, understanding, and dialogue about innovative knowledge? Croat Med J. 2014;55:54-60. Medline:24577828 doi:10.3325/cmj.2014.55.54.
5. de Chadarevian S. Designs for life. molecular biology after World War II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2002.
6. Torgersen H, Hampel J, von Bergman-Winberg ML, Bridgman E, Durant J, Einsiedel E, et al. Promise, problems and proximies: twenty-five years of debate and regulation in Europe. In: Bauer MW, Gaskell G, editors. Bioetechnology. The making of a global controversy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Published in association with the Science Museum, London; 2002. p. 21-94.
7. Svalastog AL. Gene myths in public perceptions. Public Underst Sci. 2012;21:478-94. Medline:23038860 doi:10.1177/0963662510376284.
8. Gutteling JM, Olofsson A, Fjćstad B, Kohring M, Goerke A, Bauer MW, et al. Media coverage 1973-1996: trends and dynamics. In: Bauer MW, Gaskell G, editors. Bioetechnology. The making of a global controversy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Published in association with the Science Museum, London; 2002. p. 95-128.
9. Nielsen TV, Jelsoe E, Öhman S. Traditional blue and modern green resistance. In: Bauer MW, Gaskell G, editors. Bioetechnology. The making of a global controversy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Published in association with the Science Museum, London; 2002. p. 179-202.
10. Bauer MW, Bonfadelli H. Controversy, media coverage and public knowledge. In: Bauer MW, Gaskell G, editors. Bioetechnology. The making of a global controversy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Published in association with the Science Museum, London; 2002. p. 149-178.
11. Bauer MV, Gaskell G. Reaching the public sphere of biotechnology. In: Bauer MW, Gaskell G, editors. Bioetechnology. The making of a global controversy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Published in association with the Science Museum, London; 2002. p. 1-20.
12. Helsvig KG. 1975-2011 Towards a new societal contract [in Norwegian], book Nr 6 in the series: University of Oslo 1811-2011. Oslo: Akademika Publisher; 2011.
13. Öhman S. Public perceptions of gene technology. On the edge of risk society? Umea: Umea University: Department of Sociology; 2002.