Abstract
Biobanks are thus considered as developing infrastructures calling for a joint political, ethical and legal regulation. They are a focus for action. But how do matters stand when biobanks are a sociological focus of research, released from performative issues, when “the social” is not seen as the equivalent of “society” which causes problems or generates constraints in relation to the access and the use of parts of the human body? A theoretical approach to the social as an attachment process between human and non-human entities raises the question of biobanks being considered as a body of living organisms socialization, meaning a place where human and non-human entities are associated, where the human body is broken up.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For a critical review of the literature see Lafontaine (2014).
- 2.
Re-source, re-surgerer in Latin; to appear again.
- 3.
There are about 60 of them in France. For more information, cf. Les tumorothèques hospitalières. Recommandations à l’usage des cliniciens et des chercheurs, Collection “Recommandations professionnelles” published by Institut National du Cancer (Inca), Boulogne-Billancourt, 2006.
- 4.
For a theoretical perspective on the notion of grasp, see the work of Bessy and Chateauraynaud (1995, reissued in 2015).
- 5.
The ultra-microtome is a device that performs cuts of 80 nm thick on samples included in blocks of very hard resin. The elements of the examined cell can then be magnified up to 100,000 times under a beam of electrons. As for the cryotome, it enables cutting at low temperatures (−25 °C) a sample, previously frozen, into thin sections (a few micrometers), which will be colored after having been placed on a transparent slide.
References
Barbier, R., & Trepos, J.-Y. (2007). Humains et non humains: un bilan d’étape de la sociologie des collectifs. Revue d’Anthropologie des Connaissances, 1(1), 35–58.
Beier, K., Schnorrer, S., Hoppe, N., & Lenk, C. (Eds.). (2011). The ethical and legal regulation of human tissue and biobank research in Europe. Göttingen, Germany: Universitätsverlag Göttingen.
Bessy, C., & Chateauraynaud, F. (2015). Experts et faussaires. Pour une sociologie de la perception. Paris: Petra. (1st issue in 1995).
Callon, M., & Law, J. (1997). L’irruption des non-humains dans les sciences humaines: quelques leçons tirées de la sociologie des sciences et des techniques. In Les limites de la rationalité (tome 2), Colloquium of Cerisy (under the supervision of Bénédicte Raynaud) (pp. 199–218). Paris: La Découverte.
Chassang, G., Cambon-Thomsen, A., & Rial-Sebbag, E. (2015). Ethique et réglementation des biobanques de recherche. Paris: Biobanques Inserm US013.
Gottweis, H., & Petersen, A. (2008). Biobanks. Governance in comparative perspective. London: Routledge.
Helmreich, S. (2015). Sounding the limits of life: essays in the anthropology of biology and beyond. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Houdart, S., & Thiéry, O. (Eds.). (2011). Humains, non humains - Comment repeupler les sciences sociales. Paris: La Découverte.
Lafontaine, C. (2014). Le corps-marché. La marchandisation de la vie humaine à l’ère de la bioéconomie. Paris: Seuil.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Milanovic, F. (2008) La socialisation des tumeurs cancéreuses. Une enquête sociologique des tumorothèques françaises (research report). Toulouse, France: Inserm U558, funded by INCa.
Milanovic, F. (2015), Utilitarisme et rapports à la nature: la fin d’une démesure ? Sur les modes d’existence et l’agentivité du vivant. In “Démesure”, 2nd international Congress of AFEA, 29 June–2 July 2015, Université Toulouse-Jean Jaurès, Campus du Mirail, Toulouse. Online: https://demesure.sciencesconf.org/156876/document (consulted on 6 July 2017).
Milanovic, F., Pontille, D., & Cambon-Thomsen, A. (2007). Biobanking and data sharing: A plurality of exchange regimes. Genomics, Society and Policy, 3(1), 17–30. Downloadable article: http://www.gspjournal.com/ (consulted on 6 July 2017).
Milanovic, F., Merleau-Ponty, N., & Pitrou, P. (2017). Biobanques: quelles reconfigurations pour le vivant? Approches interdisciplinaires. Natures Sciences Sociétés, 25(3), 268–275.
Noiville, C., & Bellivier, F. (2009). Les biobanques. Paris: PUF.
Pontille, D., Milanovic, F., & Rial-Sebbag, E. (2007). Collectionner le vivant: régulation, marché, valeur. Revue d’économie industrielle, 120, 195–212.
Rose, N. (2007). The politics of life itself. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Strauss, A., Fagerhaugh, S., Suczek, B., & Wiener, C. (1992). Le travail d’articulation. In A. Strauss (Ed.), La trame de la négociation (pp. 191–244). Paris: L’Harmattan.
Vermeulen, N., Tamminen, S., & Webster, A. (Eds.). (2012). Bio-objects: life in the 21st century. Farnham, England: Ashgate.
Webster, A. (2012). Bio-objects: exploring the boundaries of life. In N. Vermeulen, S. Tamminen, & A. Webster (Eds.), BioObjects: life in the 21st century (pp. 1–10). Farnham, England: Ashgate.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Milanovic, F. (2018). Socializing Tumors: From the Conservation of Tumors in Banks to Their Ontological Variations. In: Bioy, X. (eds) Public Regulation of Tumor Banks. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90563-1_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90563-1_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-90562-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-90563-1
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)