Skip to main content
Log in

Managing Medicinal Risks in Self-Medication

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Drug Safety Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The practice of self-medication is exemplary in raising the question of medicinal uses and risks. In contrast to the biomedical or pharmacological view of self-medication, the anthropological approach looks to understand the logics that underpin it.

Objective

Therefore, I wished to question how users choose the medicines they take and how they construct the modalities of their use. However, not only are the users conscious of the risks associated with pharmaceutical use, they even devise strategies that specifically aim to reduce these risks. Based on research carried out in France on how people use medicines in the context of self-medication, I examined the strategies they adopt in order to reduce the risks connected with such use.

Method

This study relies on qualitative research. It combines interviews with users and anthropological observation, both conducted at the participants’ homes, to reveal their uses, their decisions, their hesitations and the precautions they take regarding their medicines.

Results

The logics underpinning the management of risks associated with medicinal consumption are varied. Thus we find quantitative and qualitative logics, in virtue of which users choose to limit their medicines depending on the number of different medicines or on their intrinsic qualities. Their choices hinge on a logic of cumulation and a logic of identity, where, in the former, users seek to increase or reduce their medicinal consumption to augment the efficacy of a medicine or, in the latter case, they aim to reduce the risks in relation to their personal characteristics. In the same way, the perception of risk that underpins consumption practices is organised according to the notions of risk in itself and risk for oneself, where risk is either considered to be inherent to the medicine or to be linked to the incompatibility between a given substance and a person’s body. Managing risk is thus done in parallel to managing efficacy, where a balance is sought between maximising the latter and minimising the former. This either leads patients to limit the consumption of medicines because of their adverse effects, or, on the contrary, to consume them precisely for these effects. Risk reduction strategies often consist of verifying, experimenting with, and personalising treatments.

Conclusion

Although users sometimes resort to practices that do not comply with biomedical recommendations, they do so in order to attain the values and exigencies of biomedicine as regards the validation or personalisation of treatments. However irrational and peculiar these practices may appear, the mechanisms on which they are based do not necessarily break away from medical recommendations. Therefore, anthropologically speaking, we cannot oppose good and bad practices in terms of medicinal uses, since what health professionals would consider to be bad practices are thought by patients to be in keeping with good use.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The health minister for example wrote, “For public health reasons, it is very important to change some types of behaviours by increasing awareness of the risks associated with inappropriate medicinal consumption” [10].

  2. A given cultural group (here, autonomous adults living in urban environments), belonging to the contemporary category called the “middle classes” in sociology (upper and lower, old and new) [23].

  3. This previous research on the social uses of medicines led to the discovery that the image of self-medication differs according the individual’s cultural and religious origins. On this point, a stronger tendency among certain groups to practice, and above all capitalise on, self-medication, and inversely for other groups to forbid and condemn it, showed that refusing or choosing to practice it is a socially and culturally conditioned attitude. Thus we noticed that, in accordance with the values diffused within their familial setting, and in response to medical discourse that tends to consider self-medication as a deviant practice, many patients take recourse to it only with the feeling they are acting in transgression to medical power, and try to hide this practice from their doctor, attempting to appear to behave in conformity with the idea of a “good patient”.

  4. On the perception of “calming” medicine, see Haxaire [39].

  5. The opposition between the notions of “natural” and “unnatural” medicines has been studied by many anthropologists in the domain of complementary and alternative medicines [38].

  6. Using the experiences of animals to judge the efficacy and absence of risk in a medicine is also what Mr. D, a computing consultant, does. He treats his own ailments with homeopathy because he says he always saw his parents, former farmers, successfully treating their dogs and chickens with homeopathy.

  7. According to the WHO and EU official definition [42, 43].

  8. We should note that the confusion between side effects and adverse side effects is maintained in the way the pharmaceutical information leaflets are written, where neuro-vegetative effects such as drowsiness, induced by certain molecules, are sometimes mentioned in the side effects and sometimes in the adverse side effects.

References

  1. Bégaud B, Costagliola D. Rapport sur la surveillance et la promotion du bon usage du médicament en France, remis au Ministre de la santé le. 2013. (http://www.sante.gouv.fr/rapport-sur-la-surveillance-et-la-promotion-du-bon-usage-du-medicament-en-france.html).

  2. Britten N. Medicines and Society. Patients, Professionals and the Dominance of Pharmaceuticals. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan; 2008.

  3. Fainzang S. Médicaments et sociétés. Le patient, le médecin et l’ordonnance. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France; 2001.

  4. Sarradon-Eck A. Le sens de l’observance. Ethnographie des pratiques médicamenteuses de personnes hypertendues. Sc. Soc. et santé. 2007;25,2:5–36.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Van der Geest S, Whyte SR. Popularité et scepticisme. Opinions contrastées sur les médicaments. Anthropologie et sociétés. 2003;27,2:97–117.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hughes CM, McElnay JC, Fleming GF. Benefits and risks of self-medication. Drug Saf. 2001;24(14):1027–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ruiz ME. Risks of Self-medication practices. Current Drug Saf. 2010;5:315–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Queneau P, editor. Automédication, autoprescription, autoconsommation. Paris: John Libbey Eurotext; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fainzang S. L’automédication, une pratique qui peut en cacher une autre. Anthropol Soc. 2010;34(1):115–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Campagne nationale d’information et de sensibilisation sur le bon usage du médicament, dossier de presse. 2012. (http://www.sante.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/Dossier_de_presse_-_campagne_medicaments.pdf).

  11. Chamberlain K, Maden H, Gabe J, Dew K, Norris P. Forms of resistance to medications within New Zealand households. Med Antropol. 2011;23(2):299–307.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fainzang S. Religious attitudes toward prescriptions, medicines and doctors in France. Cult Med Psych. 2005;29(4):457–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Britten N, Stevenson F, Gafaranga J, Barry C, Bradley C. The expression of aversion to medicines in general practice consultations. Soc Sci Med. 2004;59:1495–503.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Britten N, Riley R, Morgan M. Resisting psychotropic medicines: a synthesis of qualitative studies of medicines use. Adv Psychiatric Treatment. 2010;16:207–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Dowell J, Hudson H. A qualitative study of medication-taking behaviour in primary care. Fam Pract. 1997;14:369–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pound P, Britten N, Morgan M, Yardley L, Pope C, Daker-White G, Campbell R. Resisting medicines: a synthesis of qualitative studies of medicine taking. Soc Sci Med. 2005;61:133–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Van der Geest S. Why are pharmaceuticals sometimes liked and sometimes disliked. Vienn Ethnomed Newslett. 2010;12(2–3):15–20.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Webster A, Douglas C, Lewis G. Making sense of medicines: lay pharmacology and Narratives of safety and efficacy. Sci Cult. 2009;18(2):233–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fainzang S. Discourse on safe drug use, symbolic logics and ethical aspects. Drug Saf. 2010;33(8):1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Fainzang S. L’automédication ou les mirages de l’autonomie. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hamel J. Défense et illustration de la méthode des études de cas en sociologie et en anthropologie. Quelques notes et rappels: Figures de la connaissance. Cah Int Sociol. 1998;104:121–38.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Mauss M. Sociologie et anthropologie. Paris: Presses universitaires de France; 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Chauvel L. Les classes moyennes à la dérive. Paris: La République des idées/Le Seuil; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hamel J. A propos de l’échantillon. De l’utilité de quelques mises au point. Rech Qual. 2000;21:3–20.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Bourdieu P. La misère du monde. Paris: Le Seuil; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Pouillard J. Risques et limites de l’automédication. Bulletin de l’Ordre des Médecins. 2001. [http://bulletin.conseil-national.medecin.fr/Archives].

  27. AFIPA, Pour une automédication responsable, communiqué de presse. http://www.afipa.org/afipa/pdf/4178_afipa_communique_presse_24_oct_2007.pdf. Accessed 12 Jan 2009

  28. Pause Santé, Automédication, un libre accès surveillé. http://www.pausesante.fr/article-sante-136-automedication-un-libre-acces-surveille.php. Accessed 2 Dec 2009.

  29. Agora Forum, Les 10 commandements de l'automédication. http://agoraforum.positifforum.com/t27-les-10-commandements-de-l-automedication. Accessed 2 Nov 2010.

  30. Eureka Santé, Les 10 commandements de l'automédication. http://www.eurekasante.fr/medicaments/automedication/dix-commandements-automedication.html. Accessed 15 April 2010.

  31. Pharmasite, Les 10 commandements de l'automédication responsable. http://www.pharmasite.fr/therapeutique/fiches-conseils/les-10-commandements-de-l-automedication-responsable.html. Accessed 11 Dec 2012.

  32. Jaibobola, Les 10 comportements responsables de l'automédication. http://www.jaibobola.fr/2010/04/les-10-comportements-responsables-de-l-automedication.html. Accessed 19 Dec 2012.

  33. Massé R. Ethique et santé publique. Enjeux, valeurs, normativités. Québec: Presses de l’Université Laval; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hardey M. Doctor in the house: the Internet as a source of lay health knowledge and the challenge to expertise. Soc Health Illn. 1999;21(6):820–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Akrich M, Méadel C. Prendre ses médicaments/prendre la parole : les usages des médicaments par les patients dans les listes de discussion électroniques. Sci Soc Santé. 2002;20(1):89–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Ouest-France, Santé, Les Français restent accros aux antibiotiques. http://www.ouest-france.fr/sante-les-francais-restent-accros-aux-antibiotiques-386426. Accessed 20 Sept 2013.

  37. Pharmacritique, Surmédicalisation et conséquences. http://pharmacritique.20minutes-blogs.fr/archive/2011/09/28/surmedicalisation-et-consequences-surprescription-surmedicam.html. Accessed 2 Oct 2011.

  38. Despres C. Soigner par la nature à la Réunion: l’usage des plantes médicinales comme recours thérapeutique dans la prise en charge du cancer. Anthropol Santé. 2011;2 [http://anthropologiesante.revues.org/710].

  39. Haxaire C. Calmer les nerfs: automédication, observance et dépendance à l’égard des médicaments psychotropes. Sci Soc Santé. 2002;20(1):63–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Van der Geest S, Whyte SR. The context of medicines in developing countries. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1988.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  41. Etkin NL. Side effects: cultural constructions and reinterpretations of western pharmaceuticals. Med Anthrop Quart. 1992;6:99–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. WHO. Surveillance de la sécurité d’emploi des médicaments. The Uppsala Monitoring Centre, Centre de collaboration de l’OMS pour la surveillance internationale des médicaments, Uppsala, Sweden. 2000. (http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/documents/h2934f/h2934f.pdf);

  43. LEO Pharma, Médicaments, Pharmacovigilance. http://www.leo-pharma.fr/Home/M%C3%A9dicaments/Pharmacovigilance.aspx. Accessed 15 Feb 2014.

  44. Van der Geest S. Discussing and testing efficacy. RIM. 2012;4(1):1–13.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Ms. Jenefer Bonczyk for English language services. No sources of funding were used to conduct this study or prepare this manuscript. Sylvie Fainzang has no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sylvie Fainzang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fainzang, S. Managing Medicinal Risks in Self-Medication. Drug Saf 37, 333–342 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-014-0153-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-014-0153-z

Keywords

Navigation