Nurs Philos. 2016 Oct;17(4):250-61. doi: 10.1111/nup.12136. Epub 2016 Jul 20.
Body-drug assemblages: theorizing the experience of side effects in the context of HIV treatment.
Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals
Marilou Gagnon, Dave Holmes
Affiliations
Affiliations
- School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. [email protected].
- School of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
PMID: 27435229
PMCID: PMC5035547 DOI: 10.1111/nup.12136
Abstract
Each of the antiretroviral drugs that are currently used to stop the progression of HIV infection causes its own specific side effects. Despite the expansion, multiplication, and simplification of treatment options over the past decade, side effects continue to affect people living with HIV. Yet, we see a clear disconnect between the way side effects are normalized, routinized, and framed in clinical practice and the way they are experienced by people living with HIV. This paper builds on the premise that new approaches are needed to understand side effects in a manner that is more reflective of the subjective accounts of people living with HIV. Drawing on the work of Deleuze and Guattari, it offers an original application of the theory of 'assemblage'. This theory offers a new way of theorizing side effects, and ultimately the relationship between the body and antiretroviral drugs (as technologies). Combining theory with examples derived from empirical data, we examine the multiple ways in which the body connects not only to the drugs but also to people, things, and systems. Our objective is to illustrate how this theory dares us to think differently about side effects and allows us to originally (re)think the experience of taking antiretroviral drugs.
© 2016 The Authors. Nursing Philosophy Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Keywords: ART; Deleuze and Guattari; HIV/AIDS; antiretroviral; assemblage; side effects
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
References
- Br J Sociol. 2000 Dec;51(4):605-22 - PubMed
- Sociol Health Illn. 2004 Jul;26(5):575-96 - PubMed
- Qual Health Res. 2004 Oct;14(8):1140-50 - PubMed
- J Adv Nurs. 2005 Jun;50(5):536-44 - PubMed
- J Adv Nurs. 2005 Jul;51(1):55-63 - PubMed
- Med Anthropol. 2005 Jul-Sep;24(3):237-64 - PubMed
- Antiviral Res. 2010 Jan;85(1):201-9 - PubMed
- Antiviral Res. 2010 Jan;85(1):25-33 - PubMed
- Nurs Philos. 2010 Oct;11(4):250-9 - PubMed
- AIDS. 2011 Jan 28;25(3):291-3 - PubMed
- Res Theory Nurs Pract. 2011;25(1):23-38 - PubMed
- Am Fam Physician. 2011 Jun 15;83(12):1443-51 - PubMed
- Int J Nurs Stud. 2012 May;49(5):539-48 - PubMed
- Sociol Health Illn. 2013 Sep;35(7):1065-79 - PubMed
- J Med Toxicol. 2014 Mar;10(1):26-39 - PubMed
- Soc Sci Med. 2014 Apr;106:10-9 - PubMed
- Int J Drug Policy. 2014 Jul;25(4):663-72 - PubMed
- J Med Humanit. 2016 Sep;37(3):257-74 - PubMed
- Nurse Res. 2006 Jul 1;13(4):84 - PubMed
- Aporia. 2016 Jan 1;8(1):19-40 - PubMed
Substances
MeSH terms
Publication Types
Grant support