“…My work was also burdened by the heavy constraints of anonymity, as it is for every ethnographic work in small or closed communities (Béliard and Eideliman, 2008; Van Den Hoonaard, 2003), but particularly strongly because of serious illegal dimensions of certain practices I observed (Van Maanen, 1982). The general context was such that it was also preferable to increase my own observations and interviews and to compare and combine my results to and with those of other ethnographic studies in similar fields (Anspach, 1993; Frohock, 1986; Garel et al , 1997; Gisquet, 2008; Guillemin and Holmstrom, 1986; Heimer and Staffen, 1998; Levin, 1986; Rostain, 1986; Wiener et al , 1979) or with epidemiological statistics (Larroque et al , 2004; Rebagliato et al , 2000). In other words, the context pushed me to adopt, among my ‘rhetorical strategies’ (Hammersley, 1993), a sort of (quantitative) strategy of data accumulation and diversification, even if fundamentally, my ethnography practice is more linked to a logic of immersion deepening into the studied word rather than a logic of data-hoarding.…”