| Abstract | The Anthropocene has been officially declared as a new geological epoch owing to the lasting impact made by humans on environments, negatively affecting the health and even survival of human populations. Furthermore, over the past decade, molecular science has shown that the human genome is reactive to environments that are external and internal to the body. Hence, environments impact directly on individual bodies by bringing about epigenetic changes in the genome. Following a discussion of human exceptionalism and its limitations, I argue that an anthropology of embodiment should be situated in time and space, and recognition given to local biologies as a subcategory of situated biologies evident globally. Examples are then given of the intergenerational transmission of epigenetic effects due to environmental toxic exposures with a concluding call for anthropologists to engage with the worldwide challenge.
|
| Notes | 'doi: 10.1146/annurev-anthro-102116-041253\n - kecox'
'anthro of embodiment should be situated in time and space: \"thus bringing to the fore the inevitable coalescence of material bodies in environments,histories, social/political variables, and medical knowledge of all kinds\" (5)\nhumans are transforming the environment irreparably. meanwhile, it is the environment that shapes who we are (eg epigenetics). \"the environmentwe are constantly remaking is in the driver\'s seat\"\n \ndiscussion of:\nhuman exceptionalism\nepigenetics\nlocal biologies\n \n eloping organism to anticipate\nfuture adverse environments” can have maladaptive consequences if the environment is notwhat has been “biologically anticipated” (Gluckman & Hanson 2008, p. 12)\nSituated biologies vs local biologies: \"local biologies increasingly travel and may well be modified as people try to subsist in new, often impoverished environments. Anthropologistsare now employing a second concept, that of situated biologies, in part to address concerns raised by certain of our colleagues about local biologies, namely that this concept may inadvertently reinforce a false belief about inherent biological difference among humankind. The examples above make clear that this is not so because environmental variables—dietary, toxic exposures, climate change, and so on—clearly bring about biological difference, following Darwinian logic. The concept local biologies highlights how such transformations come about, but it is useful to conceptualize local biologies inserted under an overarching concept of situated biologies\" (11)\nAyo Wahlberg (2016): notion of \"exposed biologies\" -- combination of multiple forms of exposure that result in China\'s \"cancer villages\"\n \n - kecox'
|
