Proponents of Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) argue that EBM’s approach to medicine promotes good clinical decisions while it escapes adverse issues such as implicit bias. However, EBM approaches the causation of diseases from a homogenous standpoint; that is, EBM overgeneralises evidence and the intervention measures it provides. As a result, proponents of Patient-Centred Care (PCC) allude that the strictness of EBM towards evidence impairs it from considering case-by-case treatment of patients but a generalised method of intervention. Given this problem, I argue that EBM cannot be considered a medical approach to practising medicine and conducting medical research that is in the best interest of individual patients, especially patients that prefer alternative interventions other than the methods of EBM. I conclude by drawing from the best features of EBM and PCC to create an alternative that accommodates the interests of both EBM and PCC patients.

No abstract

This paper critically investigates whether there is a racial scheme that is epistemically useful in approximating disease in biomedicine. Quayshawn Spencer, Risch et al. and Burchard et al. argue that racial schemes are classified based on the different continental populations that exist according to the US census data of 1997. These continental populations have diverse genetic differences that could account for various diseases that exist in the different populations. I argue contra this view from Quayshawn Spencer, Risch et al., and Burchard et al. It is my contention that race is not genetic and/or biological. I contend that race is socially constructed due to some social features; as a result, this social constructivism of race gives clear epistemic insights about diseases and how they can be approximated. I conclude that what these theorists conceive as genetic diseases is mistaken. Instead, these diseases occur due to the divide amongst the different populations based on social grounds such as skin colour, financial affluence, and environmental differences.

The articles in the book, Law and Industry 4.0: Selected Perspective on a New Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (edited book by Mzukisi Njotini and Letlhokwa Mpedi) address the disruption that is currently experienced in the education sphere, especially for legal students, educators, and practitioners, due to the proliferation of the technologies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR), such as robotics, artificial intelligence (AI), and information communication technologies (ICTs).