IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v4y2018i1d10.1057_s41599-018-0196-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unsettling antibiosis: how might interdisciplinary researchers generate a feeling for the microbiome and to what effect?

Author

Listed:
  • Beth Greenhough

    (School of Geography and the Environment)

  • Andrew Dwyer

    (School of Geography and the Environment)

  • Richard Grenyer

    (School of Geography and the Environment)

  • Timothy Hodgetts

    (University of Oxford)

  • Carmen McLeod

    (University of Nottingham, Centre for Biomolecular Sciences)

  • Jamie Lorimer

    (School of Geography and the Environment)

Abstract

Decades of active public health messaging about the dangers of pathogenic microbes has led to a Western society dominated by an antibiotic worldview; however recent scientific and social interest in the microbiome suggests an emerging counter-current of more probiotic sentiments. Such stirrings are supported by cultural curiosity around the ‘hygiene hypothesis’, or the idea it is possible to be ‘too clean’ and a certain amount of microbial exposure is essential for health. These trends resonate with the ways in which scientists too have adopted a more ‘ecological’ perspective on the microbiome. Advances in sequencing technologies and decreasing costs have allowed researchers to more rapidly explore the abundance and diversity of microbial life. This paper seeks to expand on such probiotic tendencies by proposing an interdisciplinary methodology researchers might use to generate more-than-antibiotic relations between lay participants and their domestic microbiome. The paper draws on findings from an ESRC-funded study, Good Germs, Bad Germs: Mapping microbial life in the kitchen (grant number ES/N006968/1), which sought to: (i) explore human-microbe relations in the domestic kitchen; and (ii) make scientific techniques for visualising the domestic microbiome available to non-expert publics through a form of ‘participatory metagenomics’. We examine how scientific knowledge and techniques are enroled into lay practices of making microbes sensible; how these intersect with, reinforce or disrupt previous feelings for microorganisms; and how new ways of relating with microbial others emerge. In reflecting on these findings we draw on work in animal geographies, environmental humanities and the social science of the microbiome. We examine how cultural, emotional and embodied responses to nonhuman others—their ability to affect ‘us’ humans—have implications for the ways in which public health authorities, researchers and ‘lay’ publics alike seek to engage with and govern nonhuman life. We argue that understanding and potentially generating different modes of relating to microbes—a feeling for the microbiome—offers opportunities for reconfiguring microbiopolitics and intervening into the ways in which publics respond to perceived microbial opportunities and threats.

Suggested Citation

  • Beth Greenhough & Andrew Dwyer & Richard Grenyer & Timothy Hodgetts & Carmen McLeod & Jamie Lorimer, 2018. "Unsettling antibiosis: how might interdisciplinary researchers generate a feeling for the microbiome and to what effect?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-12, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:4:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-018-0196-3
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-018-0196-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-018-0196-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-018-0196-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nick Bingham, 2006. "Bees, Butterflies, and Bacteria: Biotechnology and the Politics of Nonhuman Friendship," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 38(3), pages 483-498, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Beth Greenhough & Cressida Jervis Read & Jamie Lorimer & Javier Lezaun & Carmen McLeod & Amber Benezra & Sally Bloomfield & Tim Brown & Megan Clinch & Fulvio D’Acquisto & Anna Dumitriu & Joshua Evans , 2020. "Setting the agenda for social science research on the human microbiome," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-11, December.
    2. Lenore Manderson, 2020. "Prescribing, care and resistance: antibiotic use in urban South Africa," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-10, December.
    3. Andrew Hardwick & Christopher Cummings & Joseph Graves & Jennifer Kuzma, 2024. "Can societal and ethical implications of precision microbiome engineering be applied to the built environment? A systematic review of the literature," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 215-238, June.
    4. Bradshaw, Aaron, 2023. "The invisible city: The unglamorous biogeographies of urban microbial ecologies," SocArXiv drcuw, Center for Open Science.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lewis Holloway & Christopher Bear & Katy Wilkinson, 2014. "Robotic milking technologies and renegotiating situated ethical relationships on UK dairy farms," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(2), pages 185-199, June.
    2. Paul Simpson, 2009. "‘Failing on Deaf Ears’: A Postphenomenology of Sonorous Presence," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 41(11), pages 2556-2575, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:4:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-018-0196-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.