Health and disease as practical concepts: exploring function in context-specific definitions

What is a cure through gene therapy? An analysis and evaluation of the use of "cure"

The development of gene therapy has always come with the expectation that it will offer a cure for various disorders, of which hemophilia is a paradigm example. However, although the term is used regularly, it is unclear what exactly is meant with "cure". Therefore, the aim of this paper is to analyse how the concept of cure is used in practice and evaluate which of the interpretations is most suitable in discussions surrounding gene therapy. We analysed how cure is used in four different medical fields where the concept raises discussion. We show that cure can be used in three different ways: cure as normalization of the body, cure as obtaining a normal life, or cure as a change in identity. We argue that since cure is a practical term, its interpretation should be context-specific and the various uses can exist simultaneously, as long as their use is suitable to the function the notion of cure plays in each of the settings. We end by highlighting three different settings in the domain of hemophilia gene therapy in which the term cure is used and explore the function(s) it serves in each setting. We conclude that in the clinical application of gene therapy, it could be better to abandon the term cure, whereas more modest and specified definitions of cure are required in the context of health resource allocation decisions and decisions on research funding.

Exploring health and disease concepts in healthcare practice: an empirical philosophy of medicine study

In line with recent proposals for experimental philosophy and philosophy of science in practice, we propose that the philosophy of medicine could benefit from incorporating empirical research, just as bioethics has. In this paper, we therefore take first steps towards the development of an empirical philosophy of medicine, that includes investigating practical and moral dimensions. This qualitative study gives insight into the views and experiences of a group of various medical professionals and patient representatives regarding the conceptualization of health and disease concepts in practice and the possible problems that surround them. This includes clinical, epistemological, and ethical issues. We have conducted qualitative interviews with a broad range of participants (n = 17), working in various health-related disciplines, fields and organizations. From the interviews, we highlight several different practical functions of definitions of health and disease. Furthermore, we discuss 5 types of problematic situations that emerged from the interviews and analyze the underlying conceptual issues. By providing theoretical frameworks and conceptual tools, and by suggesting conceptual changes or adaptations, philosophers might be able to help solve some of these problems. This empirical-philosophical study contributes to a more pragmatic way of understanding the relevance of conceptualizing health and disease by connecting the participants' views and experiences to the theoretical debate. Going back and forth between theory and practice will likely result in a more complex but hopefully also better and more fruitful understanding of health and disease concepts.

Animal board invited review: Improving animal health and welfare in the transition of livestock farming systems: Towards social acceptability and sustainability

The need to integrate more clearly societal expectations on livestock farming has led the authors of this article to consider that livestock farming systems must be redesigned to position health and welfare at the heart of their objectives. This article proposes a vision of the advances in knowledge required at different scales to contribute to this transformation. After defining health and welfare of animals, the article emphasises the need to consider health in a broader perspective, to deepen the question of positive emotional experiences regarding welfare, and raises the question of how to assess these two elements on farms. The positive interactions between health and welfare are presented. Some possible tensions between them are also discussed, in particular when improving welfare by providing a more stimulating and richer environment such as access to outdoor increases the risk of infectious diseases. Jointly improving health and welfare of animals poses a number of questions at various scales, from the animal level to the production chain. At the animal level, the authors highlight the need to explore: the long-term links between better welfare and physiological balance, the role of microbiota, the psycho-neuro-endocrine mechanisms linking positive mental state and health, and the trade-off between the physiological functions of production, reproduction and immunity. At the farm level, in addition to studying the relationships at the group level between welfare, health and production, the paper supports the idea of co-constructing innovative systems with livestock farmers, as well as analysing the cost, acceptability and impact of improved systems on their working conditions and well-being. At the production chain or territory levels, various questions are raised. These include studying the best strategies to improve animal health and welfare while preserving economic viability, the labelling of products and the consumers' willingness to pay, the consequences of heterogeneity in animal traits on the processing of animal products, and the spatial distribution of livestock farming and the organisation of the production and value chain. At the level of the citizen and consumer, one of the challenges is to better inter-relate sanitary and health perspectives on the one hand, and welfare concerns on the other hand. There is also a need to improve citizens' knowledge on livestock farming, and to develop more intense and constructive exchanges between livestock farmers, the livestock industry and citizens. These difficult issues plead for interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research involving various scientific disciplines and the different stakeholders, including public policy makers through participatory research.

Concepts and definitions of healthy ageing: a systematic review and synthesis of theoretical models

Background

Healthy ageing (HA) has been defined using multiple approaches. We aim to produce a comprehensive overview and analysis of the theoretical models underpinning this concept and its associated normative terms and definitions.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed HA models in Embase.com, Medline (Ovid), Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science until August 2022. Original theoretical papers, concept analyses, and reviews that proposed new models were included. Operational models/definitions, development psychology theories and mechanisms of ageing were excluded. We followed an iterative approach to extract the models' characteristics and thematically analyze them based on the approach of Walker and Avant. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021238796).

Findings

Out of 10,741 records, we included 59 papers comprising 65 models/definitions, published in English (1960-2022) from 16 countries in Europe, Asia, and America. Human ageing was described using 12 normative terms, mainly (models (%)): successful (34 (52%)), healthy (eight (12%)), well (five (8%)), and active (four (6%)). We identified intrinsic/extrinsic factors interacting throughout the life course, adaptive processes as attributes, and outcomes describing ageing patterns across objective and subjective dimensions (number of models/definitions): cognitive (62), psychological (53), physical (49), social (49), environmental (19), spiritual (16), economic (13), cultural (eight), political (six), and demographic (four) dimensions. Three types of models emerged: health-state outcomes (three), adaptations across the life course (31), or a combination of both (31). Two additional sub-classifications emphasized person-environment congruence and health promotion.

Interpretation

HA conceptualizations highlight its multidimensionality and complexity that renders a monistic model/definition challenging. It has become evident that life long person-environment interactions, adaptations, environments, and health promotion/empowerment are essential for HA. Our model classification provides a basis for harmonizing terms and dimensions that can guide research and comparisons of empirical findings, and inform social and health policies enabling HA for various populations and contexts.

Funding

MM, ZMRD, and OI are supported by the European Union's Horizon 2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant No 801076, and MM is also supported by the Swiss National Foundation grant No 189235.

'If it can't be coded, it doesn't exist'. A historical-philosophical analysis of the new ICD-11 classification of chronic pain

Chronic pain entails a large burden of disease and high social costs, but is seldom 'in the picture' and barely understood. Until recently, it was not systematically classified but instead viewed as a symptom or sign. In the new International Classification of Diseases, (ICD)-11, to be implemented in 2022, 'chronic' pain is now classified as a separate disease category and, to a certain extent, approached as a 'disease in its own right'. Reasons that have been given for this are not based so much on new scientific insights, but are rather of pragmatic nature. To explore the background of these recent changes in definition and classification of chronic pain, this paper provides a historical-philosophical analysis. By sketching a brief history of how pain experts have been working on the definition and taxonomy since the 1970s, we demonstrate the various social and practical functions that underlie the new ICD-11 classification of chronic pain. Building on this historical-empirical basis, we discuss philosophical issues regarding defining and classifying chronic pain, in particular performativity and pragmatism, and discuss their implications for the broader philosophical debate on health and disease.