The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record.

No abstract

Medical anthropology is concerned with both the causes and consequences of human sickness, and its various theoretical orientations can be grouped into four major approaches: medical ecology, critical medical anthropology, interpretative medical anthropology, and ethnomedicine. While medical anthropologists of all theoretical persuasions have examined why people get sick, the analysis and understanding of patterns of treatment has been largely confined to ethnomedicine. Historically, more emphasis has been placed on the personalistic or supernatural aspects of ethnomedical systems than on naturalistic or empirical components. While this focus has produced valuable insights into the role of ritual and belief in healing, it has led to the impression that traditional medicine is primarily symbolic. Moreover, it ignores the theoretical bases of traditional healing strategies and the practical means by which most of the world heals itself, namely plants. Recently there has been more interest in the empirical character of ethnomedical systems, and in this paper we consider the role that medical ethnobiology has played in this shift of focus. We begin with a brief history of medical anthropology to illuminate why naturalistic medicine was neglected for so long. We then review exemplary research in two areas of medical ethnobiology -ethnophysiology and medical ethnobotany -that address the study of naturalistic aspects of medical systems. We conclude with suggestions for future research at the interface between medical ethnobiology and medical anthropology that will contribute to both fields.Medical anthropology is the study of the causes and consequences of sickness 1 in human beings, and its diverse theoretical orientations can be grouped into four major approaches: the medical ecology/biocultural approach, the political economy/critical medical anthropology approach, the interpretative or postmodern approach, and the ethnomedical approach. Medical ecology encompasses the contributions of biological anthropology to the understanding of human disease. An ecological perspective is employed to analyse the interaction of populations, pathogens, and environments at the core of disease processes (Armelagos, Leatherman, Ryan & Sibley : ; McElroy & Townsend : ). In contrast, critical medical anthropology is concerned primarily with political and economic factors in health and disease (Baer : ; Singer, Valentín, Baer & Jian : -), while interpretative medical anthropology focuses on metaphorical conceptions of the body and shows the social, political, and individual

While Hispanics are among the most economically disadvantaged groups in the United States, immigrants from Latin America have health profiles equal to or better than Americans of European descent. Research on this epidemiological paradox suggests that aspects of Hispanic culture prevent negative health outcomes associated with poverty, poor education, and barriers to professional care. However, little attention has been given to the ethnomedical beliefs and practices of any Hispanic subgroup. Here I present an ethnographic study of women's popular medicine in a Mexican migrant community in Athens, Georgia. Migrant women promote healthy behaviors, diagnose sick family members, and prescribe home remedies. These practices stem from long traditions of self-medication and family care, which have experienced less disruption by the biomedical profession than have other North American popular medical systems. Examining Mexican popular medicine within the context of scientific literature suggests that these self-care practices protect health and should be considered by investigators of the "Hispanic health paradox." The study also suggests that directing more attention to self-care will be fruitful for medical anthropology.

As members of the Mexican diaspora acculturate ⁄ assimilate to life in the United States they gain skills that help them improve their socioeconomic status and overcome barriers to the mainstream American healthcare system. Thus, we might expect better health among more acculturated Mexicans. However, most of the research conducted during the past 20 years shows that the health of Mexicans living in the United States deteriorates as acculturation increases. This suggests that certain health promoting aspects of Mexican culture are lost as migrants adapt to and adopt American ways of life. This paper is the first step in testing the hypothesis that declining health among acculturated people of Mexican descent is related to a loss of traditional medical knowledge.During an ethnographic study of women's medical knowledge in an unacculturated Mexican migrant community in Athens, Georgia, I observed many ways low-income, undocumented migrants maintain good health. Migrant women encourage health-promoting behaviors and treat sick family members with a variety of home remedies that appear to be effective according to chemical and pharmacological analyses. Additionally, migrant women in Athens learn how to navigate the American medical and social service systems and overcome barriers to professional healthcare services using information provided through social networks. Nevertheless, migrant women often prefer to treat sick family at home and indicated a preference for Mexican folk medicines over professional medical care in most situations.This case study suggests that migration and diaspora need not always lead to disease. The maintenance of a Mexican culture that is distinct from the rest of American society helps ensure that traditional medical knowledge is