The image, without the supporting caption, is commonsight, showing us the everyday presence of biomedical products that commands life across different geographies. But the image is asking us to reverse the question of biomedicine, not as a cure for weakened bodies but as an agent that weakens particular bodies.
The caption can definitely work though the complexity of the history of evangelization and the introduction of modern medicince. When did embrace turn to detest? Can embrace and detest exist simultaneously and be measured by the body?I am aware that detest might be too strong a word but I'm curious to know why the bottle of syrup still sits on the table, if it is understood to weaken the body. Is there a tension there that can be elaborated on?
Reading the image and caption together, we might want to reorient how toxic histories work the everyday of certain populations. Can histories of cure be contempraory measures of toxicity?
