Advertisement

Biocrossing Heterotopia: Revisiting Contemporary Stem Cell Research and Therapy in India

  • Nayantara Sheoran Appleton
  • Aditya Bharadwaj
Chapter

Abstract

The fraught and contested terrain of stem cell research and therapies is an undulating landscape of utopias and dystopias. Extending the tropic notion of ‘biocrossing’ (Bharadwaj 2008), the chapter articulates the faint traces of utopic and dystopic logics underscoring these ‘crossings’ and the evolving biography of a contested terrain this (re)scripts. The chapter engages with ethnographic immersion into the lives of physicians, researchers, policymakers, and patients to conceptualize evolving scenarios that remain divergent and yet the source of emergent but shifting utopias and dystopias that often get experienced as a heterotopia.

References

  1. Bharadwaj, Aditya. 2008. Biosociality and Biocrossings: Encounters with Assisted Conception and Embroyonic Stem Cell in India. In Biosocialities, Genetics and the Social Sciences: Making Biologies and Identities, ed. Sahra Gibbon and Carlos Novas, 98–116. London; New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. ———. 2012. Enculturating Cells: The Anthropology, Substance, and Science of Stem Cells. Annual Review of Anthropology 41 (1): 303–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. ———. 2013. Subaltern Biology? Local Biologies, Indian Odysseys and the Pursuit of Human Embryonic Stem Cell Therapies. Medical Anthropology 32 (4): 359–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. ———. 2015. Badnam Science? The Spectre of the ‘Bad’ Name and the Politics of Stem Cell Science in India. South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal. https://samaj.revues.org/3999. Accessed 31 August 2016.
  5. Central Drugs Standard Control Organization. 2013. Guidance Document for Regulatory Approvals of Stem Cell and Cell Based Products (SCCPs)/SPS/2013-001. New Delhi: Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. http://www.cdsco.nic.in/writereaddata/DRAFT%20GUIDANCE%20STEM%20CELLS-FINAL.pdf. Accessed 31 August 2016.
  6. Foucault, Michel. 1967. “Of Other Spaces,” Trans. Jay Miskowiec. Diacritics 16 (1): 22–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Franklin, Sarah. 2006. Embryonic Economies: The Double Reproductive Value of Stem Cells. BioSocieties 1 (01): 71–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. ———. 2007. Stem Cells R Us: Emergent Life Forms and the Global Biological. In Global Assemblages, ed. Aihwa Ong and Stephen J. Collier, 59–78. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9780470696569.ch4/summary. Accessed 31 July 2014.
  9. ———. 2013. Biological Relatives: IVF, Stem Cells, and the Future of Kinship. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. http://www.oapen.org/search?identifier=469257. Accessed 11 February 2016.
  10. Hetherington, Kevin. 1997. The Badlands of Modernity: Heterotopia and Social Ordering. London: Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Indian Council for Medical Research. 2007. Guidelines for Stem Cell Research and Therapy. Guideline Document. New Delhi: Department of Biotechnology and Indian Council of Medical Research. http://icmr.nic.in/stem_cell/stem_cell_guidelines_2007.pdf. Accessed 20 April 2017.
  12. ———. 2013. National Guidelines for Stem Cell Research. Guideline Document. New Delhi: Department of Health Research and Department of Biotechnology. https://www.ncbs.res.in/sites/default/files/policies/NGSCR%202013.pdf. Accessed 18 April 2017.
  13. Jayaraman, K.S. 2014. Unproven Stem Cell Therapy Banned. Nature India. http://www.natureasia.com/en/nindia/article/10.1038/nindia.2014.39. Accessed 18 April 2017.
  14. Rajagopal, Divya, and Rohini Mohan. 2015. India’s Disproportionately Tiny Health Budget: A National Security Concern? The Economic Times, October 31. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/healthcare/biotech/healthcare/indias-disproportionately-tiny-health-budget-a-national-security-concern/articleshow/49603121.cms. Accessed 18 April 2017.
  15. Sleeboom-Faulkner, Margaret, and Prasanna Kumar Patra. 2009. The Bioethical Vacuum: National Policies on Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research in India and China. Journal of International Biotechnology Law 5 (6): 221–234.Google Scholar
  16. Street, Alice, and Simon Coleman. 2012. Introduction: Real and Imagined Spaces. Space and Culture 15 (1): 4–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Thompson, Charis. 2013. Good Science: The Ethical Choreography of Stem Cell Research. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  18. Tiwari, Shashank S., and Sujatha Raman. 2014. Governing Stem Cell Therapy in India: Regulatory Vacuum or Jurisdictional Ambiguity? New Genetics and Society 33 (4): 413–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Winner, Langdon. 1980. Do Artifacts Have Politics? Daedalus 109 (1): 121–136.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nayantara Sheoran Appleton
    • 1
  • Aditya Bharadwaj
    • 2
  1. 1.Cultural Anthropology, School of Social and Cultural StudiesVictoria University of WellingtonWellingtonNew Zealand
  2. 2.Department of Anthropology and Sociology, Graduate Institute of International and Development StudiesGenevaSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations