Biosensing Networks: Sense-Making in Consumer Genomics and Ovulation Tracking
How do individuals make sense of their biosensor data? Focusing on two different health biosensors—an ovulation monitor and the consumer gene test—we discuss how individuals interpret their biosensor data by engaging in exchanges on online forums. Participants share and discuss ovulation patterns and genetic susceptibilities by drawing on a range of materials. We argue that it is through these biosensing networks that genetic and ovulation data become meaningful, and that it is through this process that the biosensing body is acquired. We show how discussion and speculation, artefacts and body sensations, anticipations and corporeal imaginaries are part of what constitute and hold together the biosensing body.
- 23andMe. (2015). What your DNA says about you. Available online at https://www.23andme.com/en-gb/. Accessed December 11, 2015.
- Duden, B. (1993). Disembodying women: Perspectives on pregnancy and the unborn. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
- Haraway, D. (1997). Modest Witness@Second Millenium: Femaleman meets oncomouse feminism and technoscience . London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Hartouni, V. (1997). Cultural conceptions: On reproductive technologies and the making of life. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
- Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Markam, N. (2003). Representation in Online Ethnographies. A Matter of Context Sensitivity. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Department of Communication, University of Illinois at Chicago.Google Scholar
- Mort, M., Roberts, C., Furbo, M., Wilkinson, J., & Mackenzie, A. (2016). Biosensing: How citizens’ views illuminate emerging health and social risks. Health, Risk and Society doi:10/1080/13698575.1135234.Google Scholar
- Nafus, D. (Ed.). (2016). Quantified: Biosensing technologies in everyday life. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Oudshoorn, N., & Pinch, T. (2002). How users matter: The co-construction of users and technology. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Pols, J., & Hoogsteyns, M. (2016). Shaping the subject of incontinence. Relating experience to knowledge. ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research 10 (2016), 40–53.Google Scholar
- Rogers, R. (2013). Digital methods. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Rose, N. (2007). The politics of life itself. Biomedicine, Power, and Subjectivity in the twenty-first century. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Till, C. (2014). Exercise as labour: Quantified self and the transformation of exercise into labour. Societies, 4, 446–462.Google Scholar
- Viseu, A., & Suchman, L. (2010). Wearable augmentation: Imaginaries of the informed body. In J. Edwards, P. Harvey, & P. Wade (Eds.), Technologized images, technologized bodies (pp. 161–184). New York: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
- Yasko, A. (2004). Autism: Pathways to recovery. Bethel, ME: Neurological Research Institute.Google Scholar
- Yasko, A. (2016). Dr. Amy Yasko. Available online at http://www.dramyyasko.com/. Accessed January 29, 2016.