Categorías diagnósticas y género: los ejemplos de la clorosis y la neurastenia en la medicina española contemporánea (1877-1936)

Abstract

RESUMENLa Clorosis y la Neurastenia representan dos ejemplos históricos de disociaciones patológicas y de las dificultades que conlleva abordar su diagnóstico con los criterios de la mentalidad científico-natural. En el contexto de aquellas dificultades, el trabajo profundiza en la visión androcéntrica y el discurso ideológico con el que observaba la medicina española contemporánea a la naturaleza femenina y a las patologías de mujeres. Así mismo, a partir de las similitudes mostradas con los actuales síndromes del dolor y la fatiga, la investigación plantea la necesidad de revisar el abordaje clínico de éstas dolencias al intentar superar las limitaciones que ofrece el modelo biomédico.PALABRAS CLAVE: Clorosis; neurastenia, síndromes del dolor y la fatiga, categoría diagnósti-cas, disociaciones patológicas, género, medicina española contemporánea. DIAGNOSTIC CATEGORIES AND GENDER: TWO EXAMPLES IN CON-TEMPORARY SPANISH MEDICINE, CHLOROSIS AND NEURASTHENIA (1877-1936) ABSTRACTChlorosis and Neurasthenia are two classical examples of pathological dissociations and the difficulties involved in approaching their diagnosis using scientific-naturalistic criteria. In the realm of those difficulties, the study examines the androcentric viewpoint and the ideological perspective of Contemporary Spanish Medicine when addressing the feminine nature and women's pathologies. Moreover, based on the similarities with present-day pain and fatigue syndromes, the study under-

The Classification of Causes of Historical Mortality (CCHM): A proposal of the study of death records

“…It is considered feasible to include senile marasmus in the corresponding categories of the classifications oriented toward old age and senility (ICD-4: 16.162, CCHM: 2.16.0.0) because the meaning is encompassed in a specific age group. Similarly, according to Bernabeu-Mestre et al [48], chlorosis (ICD-4: 4.71, CCHM: 2.1.0.0), similar to marasmus and hysteria, was a diagnostic expression that had its peak in the 19th century. Its use was reduced according to the improved diagnostic techniques in the 20th century, so it was consigned as a secondary ailment between infection or deficient blood disease.…”