Author: kaltwater

Let Me Hear Your Body Talk: Aerobics for Fat Women Only, 1981-1985

“’Each one of us is a valuable person who deserves the freedom to express and be herself.’” (210)

The most interesting part of this article for me was the introduction of the ParticipAction (208), which I then talked to my mom about her experience with it this weekend and she told me she vividly remembers doing the tested exercises once a year only on these test dates, and when the students would then receive: Award of excellence, Gold, Silver, or Bronze. What I found intersecting about this conversation with her about her experience was that the school would never recreate or practice any of these skills (besides running) year-round, the testing process was a way to separate the “us” from “them”, and the students that didn’t do well in the tests one year, usually didn’t do well in following years.

I was unaware that “By 1984 aerobics, dancercise, and jazzercise were among ‘the most popular physical activities of North American women.’” (193) as it was a fitness regime that would allow for a “…focus on femininity and feminine display…” (193) while also giving women the “freedom” that they desired. While these classes were displayed by “…lean white women [who] represented the self-monitoring, self-disciplining consumers of beauty culture…”, these women were only a piece of the picture. Overweight women were the ones who could be the ones that could benefit the most out of this new age up rise of health and fitness, and it wasn’t until “…fat women themselves began to teach the classes, enrolment [of women] multiplied.” (194), and exclusive pool times for larger women were set in the belief that “…individual growth was an essential part of collective action and that aerobics would contribute to their greater equality and self-esteem for fat women.” (194). Something I believe to be very important is everyone maintaining a healthy and sustainable lifestyle; however, while understanding that this was a different time and many people did not know or have as much access to what was and was not healthy (as we’ve discussed at length the last few weeks), I truly think one of the most important things people need when it comes to health and fitness is an understanding how not to be discouraged and work though any food and weight issues they have, as Partridge explained to be a major issue for larger women (198). With this being said, I do believe that a person’s health is their responsibility, and if there is no disease or other impingements holding them back, it is each individuals’ responsibility to work though their issues and “’care for themselves as they [won’t] be their own enemy.’” (197) and the LaL’s non-competitive environments allowed for all women to work at their own pace (201). However, “’Fat to Fit’” (202) mottos are stilling picking up momentum, idealizing the “fit” women and not necessarily the “healthy women”, which I think is still very much an issue today, especially regarding “fitspo” and “fitstagram” models. The way the books, magazines, TV shows and social media do not encompass the “whole picture” of health, fitness, and wellness which seems to not have changed much historically as “…group members developed their own discourses around fat and health, and began to apply these messages to the way they thought about themselves” (205) instead of how society wants them to be seen.

Another theme that I saw related very much to today’s fitness society is the sale and consumption of “fitting the part” and buying the “…’very trendy in peach tights, black leotards, and colour-coordinated head-band.’” (207) which as soon as I read I immediately associated with the big brands of fitness apparel sold today including Lululemon, but even more particularly Gymshark stuck out to me. Gym shark is a fairly new brand which uses Instagram and YouTube fitness models as affiliates to promote and sell their brand. This trendy brand has blown up, and are now seen as a fashionable “must have” athletic women, and it seems that historically people  aren’t that much less of consumerists, and we are still trying to fit the social ideal of what fitness “should look like”, instead of just trying our best to be healthy!!!

The Heterosexual Nature of Health and Hygiene Advertisements in the Cold War Era

The change of ideas in which the media portrays women changed dramatically since the mid 20th century as “… popular culture’s crusade for shrinking waistlines and dwindling dress sizes created an idealized body exploited by marketers to sell products promising thinner, more attractive and ultimately more sexually desirable bodies.” (245), which brings me back to my argument about consumerism playing such a large role in how men and women see their bodies. Returning to the argument about Gymshark’s clothing line, because it has created a brand based on an idealized body type to sell to worlds population, and the consumers hope that they will look like the models (large butts and teeny tiny waists) once they get their clothing order. And this isn’t the just case for women, if I stick with my Gymshark argument (but almost every brand does this), they show what guys who wear Gymshark look like on their website and Instagram, which has been shown increase body dysmorphia in men and “…health conditions such as muscle dysmorphia and the abuse of anabolic steroids as well as cultural signposts such as the proliferation of fitness facilities and the growth of the supplement market indicate that men suffer from an unhealthy obsession with the ideal body similar to that suffered by women.” (246) as “The male body of the Cold War era was predominantly on display and…often linked to images of idealized and healthy vitality.” (246) which I don’t think has changed since this cold war period and continued heavily today. While in this time Playboy and Esquire (247) were the advertisement mediums used heavily to convey what healthy body type looks like, whereas now there is also Instagram, YouTube, and Television shows directly associated with “what is healthy” while showing men and women “what they should look like” in this heterosexual ideal placed by society. The “Men’s leisure magazines celebrated hegemonic masculinity, a practice that ‘jeopardized’ the Americans man’s self-image by creating an unattainable ideal.” (251) and allowed for “The appearance of sporting masculinity within the magazines reinforced [a mans] need to dominate femininity in women and effeminacy in men themselves.” (251) which I believe could cause identity issues with anyone that doesn’t fit into these social ideals, like homosexuals and most of the population.

Hygiene was also very related to health in the past, and still is today in present Canada and “…advertisers also drew upon ideal commonly associated with good health to grant their products a sense of contextual authority.” (249) as a means to sell more product using masculine and feminine ideals to display their health and hygiene publically. While “The language used in health and hygiene advertisements reinforced a hyper-masculine identity that celebrated heterosexuality.” (261) causing masculinity to define what kind of man you were.

Here is the Gymshark link if you would like to check it out: https://www.gymshark.com

“We Remain Very Much the Second Sex”: The Constructions of Prostate Cancer in Popular News Magazines, 2000-2010

With the purpose of this research being to look at the “…portrayal of prostate cancer in high-circulating popular news magazines…” (15), it became immediately clear to me that this article was going to focus on some issues regarding men’s health that I have never thought of before. While “Prostate cancer is one of the most common male cancers affecting hundreds of thousands of men in North America mostly over the age of 50. In 2007, 22,300 Canadian men were diagnosed with prostate cancer and an additional 4,300 men died the same year.” (15) is alarming, it’s incredible that there is so much stigma and shame for men to get a prostate test. Although “…in Canada [in 2014], 1 in 7 men is expected to be diagnosed with prostate cancer, and 1 in 28 is expected to die from it. “(15) there doesn’t seem to be as much of a dramatic social shift in how a men’s masculinity and health go hand in hand.  While the ideas of health and masculinity should be separated in an ideal world, the prostate exam preformed on men is explained as emphasizing their role as a female partner, instead of leaving them feeling healthy and masculine (18). And “Despite [the] debate surrounding the efficacy of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screenings, nearly half of Canadian men over the age of 50 report having several PSA screenings over their lifetime. PSA screenings mostly occur because of anxiety and because of how PSA screening is constructed as imperative in the media (17), all caused by men being told by society that they must be the biggest, strongest, and most masculine version of themselves while never showing weakness. The idea of masculinity plays a huge part in the fight to have men seen as individuals, just as strong or weak as anyone else, and should cause me to be “…embarrassed because of the procedure, the fear surrounding cancer and diagnosis, and general confusion about the screening.” (17). While some men go into the exams scared and uncomfortable with what the examination entails, when the test comes back positive, the men are “…portrayed as courageous, brave, strong, and stoic throughout the articles. In these articles, hegemonic masculinity is portrayed as important and needed to survive prostate cancer.” (21), enforcing the idea even more of having to be a masculine man to survive the prostate cancer if you just so happen to get it. This article showcases the negative aspects that masculinity has on men and their desires to live up to the expectation that they need to be a “macho-man,” and the idea of maintaining their masculinity for some men may come before the concern of their health.

Body Failure

While doctors dealt with issues of women’s health regarding cervical and breast cancer “…doctors perceived women’s bodies as problematic.” (215) and that these issues were due to womanly duties including childbirth (219). It was believed that “Women who conformed to the norms of society—who married and had children, especially those with many children— were most at risk.” (219) due to the trauma done to the woman’s cervix during pregnancy, this was seen as a “design flaw” in women’s bodies. While in the 1940’s it was “…estimated that [cervical cancer] was the second most common site of cancer in women.” (219) it’s very interesting that the use of Pap smears only become available to women in screening clinics around Canada in the late 1940s (223). Although “…cancer deaths in women occurred about 10 years earlier than men, at age 55 rather than 65…” (216), the invasive and very personal Pap examination face similar drawbacks as the rectal prostate exam that men face, as “…the challenge of getting apparently healthy women to come in for what was still an unwanted and rather personal examination was one factor…” (223) that may have held some women back from understanding their health (this seemed to be the big issue in the previous article when discussing male health). When discussing women’s health, it’s important to also discuss breast cancer, as it has been seen as even more of a worrisome than cervical cancer as breast cancer death rates in Canada were 13.2 per 100,000 in the early 1920’s (226), making a large impact on women’s lives throughout Canada. And it was “In the 1930s and 1940s, some physicians began to make a like between the female hormone estrogen and breast cancer.” (229) which allowed for new theories to be constructed regarding how breast cancer developed and “…it [was] suggested that breast cancer was a delayed disease or one with a long incubation.” (229), not a fundamental flaw with how women’s bodies were made. Yet while the pressures and stigma on women of “the cancer being your fault” have decreased since the early 1900s, its noted in this article that many older women would be hesitant regarding breast examinations due to the possibility of breast removal if their results came back positive (232). However, “While the radical mastectomy remained the dominant approach to breast cancer…X-ray and radium became therapeutic aids to surgery” (235) while many people had side effects from radiation treatment supporters were overall excited by the results, which has since has had a large historical importance as a double mastectomy is usually seen as one of a woman’s “last options” when faced with the troubles of breast cancer, not her first and only option like it was previously.

 The Challenge of Developing and Publicizing Cervical Cancer Screening Programs

While new information has come out saying “Cervical cancer is one the few cancers that with early detection, can have a 100 per cent cure rate.” (127) which shows so much medical advancement from the previous documents. I found it very interesting that “While science and technology took a powerful hold of Canadian society in the 1950s and 1960s, there was little focus on prevention…. scientists wanted to prove they could ‘cure’ any disease, cervical cancer was not on the radar of concern…” (127-128), as they wish to find the cure the disease once it has already occurred, not try to prevent it entirely. As the “war against cancer” (131) became a growing concern in North America “…as early as 1947, American women actively participated in cervical cancer screening.” (133) whereas in Canada, things moved much slower moving through each province individually.” and it wouldn’t be until the fall of 1978 when “… Health and Welfare Canada created a small pamphlet encouraging women to have annual Pap smears and education women very generally about the risk of cervical cancer. “(136). This article also discusses the difficulty around women bringing themselves in to pay for an invasive test (in regard to Pap smears) as a preventative means of checking their health, and it wasn’t until the early 1980s when an increased understanding of the human papilloma virus would increase the awareness around cervical cancer (128), and “…this type of cancer [cervical], if caught early enough, was very treatable so all women should have annual examinations” (143) which is very interesting, and I’d like to know more of the research done on this because when I was 18 the doctor told me that it is only recommended to get a Pap smear every 5 years, even though my mother had cervical cancer. But with “The introduction of a regular “Health” column demonstrated a keener awareness of women’s health care needs in the 1970s.” (142) that has prevailed through the last 40-ish years, an although “Being examined is so humiliating ‘” (145) for many women, it’s worth the “risk”.

Overall, these three articles really work together in showing the social pressures and sigmas that men and women both face when dealing with elective tests to check their healths. While the feelings that women face now days considering Pap tests has shifted to a more necessary and less “scary” to many women (from my experiences from female family members and friends), it is still need as de-masculinizing and shameful for many men to talk about getting prostate exams. With this being said, these articles were very eye opening to all the advancements made in regards to cancer in Canada, and I hope that we can changer

An Illness of Nine Months’ Duration”: Pregnancy and Thalidomide Use in Canada and the United States
Barbara Clow
Based on the information I could find on the effects that thalidomide had in this article in Canada, I couldn’t believe the that doctors “…tended to prescribe tranquilizers on the grounds that many of the common ‘complaints’ of pregnancy could be attributed to psychological disturbance[s].” (49 Clow) while the encouragement and “Medical enthusiasm for sedatives and tranquilizers also led hundreds of American doctors to participate in clinical trials of thalidomide; some physicians even imported private supplies of the drug while it was still under review by the Food and Drug Administration.” (49 Clow). With this “push” or “medical enthusiasm” by pharmaceutical manufacturers “On 1 April 1961 Richardson-Merrell’s brand of thalidomide, Kevadon, went on sale in Canada…” (47 Clow) although clinical trials as early as 1956 spotted “dizziness and loss of balance among elderly patients treated with Contergan.” (48), but the big red flags didn’t go up until reports of undesirable side effects skyrocketed including: “…severe constipation, hangover, loss of memory, hypotension, petechial hemorrhages, trembling, incoordination, numb- ness, and even partial paralysis.” (48) but this was only the beginning. The occurrence of phocomelia being known to be onset by thalidomide wouldn’t be noted until 1961, which is when countries would begin to withdraw and recall the product from circulation, yet was not recalled in Canada until 1962 (48). The information that I find the most troubling (aside from all the children that faced life-altering handicaps) is that thalidomide which was used as a sedative and tranquilizer, was given to for pregnant women for morning sickness as “Many practitioners relied on sedatives and tranquilizers specifically because they regarded pregnancy as a time of emotional instability and morning sickness as a psychosomatic symptom” (54) really showing how medical professionals saw women at this time. While thalidomide was prescribed to pregnant women it was not yet tested “properly”, as U.S. officials even refused to approve thalidomide as “…they were dissatisfied with the details of toxicity studies, [yet] Canadian regulators apparently felt that the safety of thalidomide had been well established by European experience and the five hundred pages of documentation submitted by the company.” (47) which in my opinion is not sufficient evidence concerning what the future health and wellbeing of the population will look like. This article really allowed me as a reader to see what types of impacts doctors and pharmaceutical manufacturers have on us, and allowed me to notice that as a population we should really put more effort into looking at what we are being prescribed (or even what we “self-prescribe” ourselves), and allow ourselves to ask questions on what we are being given from physicians, and what kind of medical research is behind it.

Exercising Caution: The Production of Medical Knowledge about Physical Exertion during Pregnancy
Shannon Jette
While looking at the risks of exercising while pregnant in the second half of the 20th century, and an editorial piece was published regarding guidelines that pregnant women should as “It was postulated that maternal exercise would result in a redistribution of blood flow to the woman’s working muscles and away from the pregnant uterus.” (300 Jette) which doctors at this time believed would cause competition between the fetus and mother for oxygenated blood, substrates including glucose, and heat dissipation. As it was agreed upon that more research needed to be done on if pregnant women should do physical activity, it was tested whether or not “The effect on [a] fetal outcome of a single factor such as exercise,’” (301) was even possible to test, as all other risk factors of pregnancy would have to be controlled to ensure it was the physical exercise that would or would not affect these children/mothers. As low levels of physical activity were still encouraged to pregnant women, walking was an encouraged form of exercises but heart rates of expecting mothers “’…should not exceed 140-150 bpm’” 3-5 times per week for only 15 minutes (303). It was only in the 1990s and obstetricians/gynecologists and phycologists “…weighted the potential risks and benefits of prenatal exercise…” (307) and came to the conclusion that “moderate exercise was safe from healthy pregnant women” (307) which was very shocking to me, I couldn’t imagine my mother being pregnant with me and the doctors telling her “well we’ve weighted the odds, and you should be fine”, which is when I found the information about how there are still ”substantial gaps and limitations” in the research regarding the “appropriate exercise limit for [pregnant] women” (308) although less conservative practices are being pushed on women today, and women are now encouraged to do moderate exercise while pregnant!

Gender Expectations: Natural Bodies and Natural Births in the New Midwifery in Canada
Margaret Macdonald

While looking at the “natural births” thanks to contemporary midwifery in Canada, as we have looked at previously, the medicalization of many “natural” practices (in this case pregnancy) has been questioned by “…critiques of the cultural construction of the female body and medicalized birth[s] arose [due to] a certain romantic bias toward non-Western birthing systems.” (239), allowing us as readers to question once again if we should continue to allow medicalized birthing methods, or if we should look closer at “more natural” practices of giving birth. Has this cultural construction of medicalized birthing become hurtful among mothers? As perhaps many expectant mothers see natural birthing options as “…the nostalgic desire for birth as a natural event that takes place in the home…” (239), but what about the mothers that are compelling, excited, and only comfortable giving birth in a medicalized facility? I’ve seen evidence of “mother-shaming” online, in TV shows, and even in person of mothers being shamed for “taking the drugs” and countless other decision that mothers have to make when they are expecting a baby. While many women wish to go through midwives and doulas as a way that can help “…discursively to affect women’s knowledge and experience of labor pain and [show] how this becomes central (and indeed desirable) to having a natural birth.” (246), that’s not to say that women need to “embrace” the pain as their womanly responsibility and even “…achieve some sort of womanhood.”(243). I enjoyed the information regarding women who do decide to give natural birth, and “…if an intervention is done because it is absolutely necessary, and not simply convenient or expedient, then the birth could still be considered natural.” (249) is very interesting to me because it made it seem (in my interpretation) that it was the coined phrase “natural birth” more than the true experience of having a natural birth. While this pressure the expecting mothers have is very alarming to me, I can also appreciate many of the reasons for home births, including being in a comfortable home setting, less possible stress and not having your baby “taken” away from the mother immediately after giving birth (242), and to me, these are all very understandable and positive reasons on having a midwife/ homebirth and how this profession has expanded so much in recent years due to way that midwifery culture has influenced so many individual cultures (242). While having natural pregnancies shown and talked about so much more than ever before has allowed for many women to weigh their options more than ever before, and allow the mothers to decide what feels better for them as an individual (242), do we want to replace all medicalization? Or do we just want more options and give more of a choice. I think it’s vital to give the options and allow the family to choose whether or not they would like to have a midwife, home birth, birth at a hospital, or even anesthesia rather than trying to “replace” cultural visions. I’m assuming that there are people currently living in Canada that find a lot more comfort in giving birth in a hospital with doctors, and women being left full of shame if they had given birth in a hospital, or god forbid they had to have a C-section (463). Overall, I believe this article had a lot of great information, especially for people looking to find alternative birth methods rather than the typical medicalized version, with that being said, I do believe that “shaming” a way that any given mother chooses to give birth may only worsen the social construction, I believe that it’s important to listen to what some individual wants, not what “most people” want, which i believe all 3 of these articles showcase very well- a direct view of how every individual should have a voice and be able to speak freely and ask questions about their heath/health concerns with a variety of people (doctors, natural paths, doulas, etc)!

In Gleason’s “School Medical Inspection and ‘Healthy’ Children in British Columbia, 1890-1930,”, she continuously conveys the argument that middle-class professional white men were dictating how “the social construction of health” should be viewed and carried out in British Columbia.  Gleason talks about how First Nations people were isolated and faced blame regarding the outbreak of smallpox, Gleason stating that the health officials didn’t focus on the option of treatment, and also didn’t provide guards insuring that this outbreak wouldn’t cause a provincial wide epidemic as notices were placed on houses, but no strict isolations were carried out, and some contacts had even traveled to town  (forced quarantines were also seen as detrimental to breadwinners that were confined especially in working-class families), bringing to light the inaccuracy of the “hopes” to keep the spread of the dreaded diseases and infections as outlined by the middle-class professional white men who made the rules. All while these “procedures” seem to be ignored, actively neglecting the health of the Nanaimo Indian Reservation, while continuing to place blame on the “filth and disease”, perhaps this was the cause of “rates if death from tuberculosis among Native peoples were five times that of whites in 1929.” (Gleason 289). All the while, “the others” including First Nations, Asian immigrants, and other non-whites and foreigners (Italians, Greeks, and Russians) were targeted as minority populations with a lack of understanding of the struggles that the immigrants faced, including having children working as a way to help the family survive. This can be seen by Mary Jong, a young Chinese Canadian who had to work in the vegetable garden before school, and would be punished for coming to school dirty, while the staff at the school payed no attention to the fact that she did not have time to clean up before school stated. While more responsibility to the parents was expected as reporting a “contagious disease was considered both a moral and a legal responsibility.” (Gleason 290) which I believe is an important good step in the right direction to maintain the health and safely of the population. While the middle-class professional white men who shared their socially constructed view of what health should be, and what it meant to be healthy (clean, orderly, etc.), I don’t find it unreasonable for people to be concerned at this time for the spread of contagious diseases in families, schools, and communities. While their intensions may not have been put into place in the most respectful ways (as many people seemed to have anxieties and fears about the new reforms), it was necessary to have a standard line of cleanliness and sanitation as a way to reduce massive amounts of disease and infections from the population in British Columbia.

In Rutherdale’s article “Children, Health, and Hygiene in Northern Canadian Communities” shows the insensitivity that missionaries, teachers, doctors, and nurses showed towards the reformation of Aboriginal communities. Colonizers criticized how First Nations women gave birth in “untradition” ways (the rope method) causing the Aboriginal women to feel as if they had “lost their sense of empowerment through the erosion of their control over childbirth” (306). This bring back the idea (mention by Gleason) of white colonizers trying to force their beliefs of “how it should be” and “what is right” onto a group of people with different beliefs and ideals than them. While colonizers had “a profound belief that traditional [Aboriginal] culture practices could and should be displaced, id not eradicated.” (305 Rutherdale), and separated the locals from their “customary practices” (306). Yet, Wilsons description of experiences is show as “she did not want Aboriginal women to give up the entirety of their traditional practices.” (308) they only wanted the Indigenous women to give up some of them…perhaps not a great “compromise”, but it is important that Wilson is seen as sensitive to many of their practices, and “did not appear to advocate to change.” (308). Yet many new comers disapproved of other practices, including:

• the lack of clothing, allowing the outsiders to view the Aboriginals as “’Barbarism’ to ‘civilization’” as infants clothing was criticized by nurses and missionaries until the end of the 1850s (311)
• the lack of adequate bathing, as settlers were obsessed with hygiene, as a boy named Yarley is described as being a smelly “’dirty little barbarian’” (314), as Fleming then decided to slowly introduce reforms on cleanliness (similar to what we read in Gleason). As Rutherdale states “From Fleming’s perspective, the transition to Christianity required a good dose of personal and public hygiene.” (315) …but who said they Aboriginals wanted to transition to Christianity.

Scheduling, routine, and lessons were a way for all of the above (clothing, bathing birthing) to be given instruction. Would these content communities ever be comfortable with the white man’s idea of cleanliness? In the “mission-run comunit[ies], schools, continued to face missionaries and nurses who placed as much emphasis on hygiene and they did on religion and scholarship.” (316) and “Repetition was viewed as the key to success.” (317). Clean students meant studious students, according to Marsh (317) and viewed hygiene and health as important as religion and the three R’s.” (318).  More cases of Inuit’s being encouraged to leave their cultures behind and move into prefabricated homes, go to local schools (on times that were “acceptable to the outsiders, but didn’t really make sense to the geographic location due to long days due to the “midnight sun” hours) are all shown by the establishment of the Pont Inlet, established by the Canadian Government where the main language spoken was Inuktituk. In Lower Post scales were used inaccurately, doctors acted as dentists because they had “nothing better to do” (319), and Inuit students at Aklavik’s Anglican All Saints Residential School remembered being forced to have cod liver oil every morning in the 1930’s, before running to the bathroom to spit it out (320).

Both of these writings pose very interesting insights regarding how settlers/ middle-class white men viewed how these indigenous societies should be “changed” and abandon their traditions and roots. In turn, many sanitation procedures were places as “Children and their bodies stood at the center of the battle waged with Native people over the regimes and rituals that would govern the most intimate parts of their lives. (Rutherdale 320), allowing me as a reader to think critically about what sanitations may have been necessary (basic cleaning) and what protocols may have been overboard: unclean students meant non-studious children, as some including the Chinese girl who had to work in the farmland before school every morning before class and didn’t have time to clean up before school.

1930s:

LUX: Canadians targeted Aboriginal people by isolating them on reserves and in residential schools when the scare of “Indian tuberculosis” became a threat in the 1930s. Lux characterizes colonists/ the Canadian government as “racially careless” and she eludes to them as viewing the Indigenous people of Canada as “a menace to their neighbors and a danger to the nation.” (407). I think this isolation could have been a possible way for the Canadian government to have hoped parts of the reservations would “die off naturally” in large batches from the tuberculosis scare with no blood on their hands, allowing the bacterial disease to remove the “menaces” from their society, while not infecting any “good” (probably white) members on society. Lux focuses on Western Canada as she states that colonialism, medical and bureaucratic discourse had a huge threat upon this region, as the threat of “Indian tuberculosis” was very harsh in these areas (408-409). Superintendent of Manitoba’s Ninette sanatorium, Dr. David Stewart called it “the racial carelessness and ignorance’ of First Nations ‘soaked with tuberculosis [that] could no longer be left to well-meaning missionaries and apathetic Indian Agents.

MOSBY: A drop within in the fur trade dropped incomes 66% between 1924-1935, and a cutback of Indian Affairs, drawing back unemployment relief lead to malnutrition issues in the 30’s outside residential schools as well (149).

KELM: Birth rates of Aboriginal populations begin to rise, a factor in helping to raise the population numbers after a steady decline from previous years, there was even encouragements to have as many children as possible, some families having up to 20 children (4-5). In 1935, over 80% of victims from tuberculosis in BC Aboriginal communities were under 30 years old, 70% were under 20, killing mostly young people. (10). In 1935, there was 28 violent/accidental deaths from Native populations reported, and by 1939 that number increased to 42 deaths. (17), with death rates due to accidents or violence being 131.7 per 100,000 people for Aboriginals, and 69.6 per 100,000 people in non-Aboriginals in 1943 (16) some caused by fishing accidents etc.

1940s:

LUX: There is now “state-run racially segregated Indian hospitals institutionalized Aboriginal people who were not welcome in provincial sanatoria or in the modernizing community hospitals.” (407) while Edmonton was the home to the Charles Camsell Indian Hospital in 1946 which demonstrates “one of the first acts of the newly created department of National Health and Welfare” marking publically that the states would be promoting the idea of “national health” by “isolating and institutionalizing Aboriginal people.” (408). From 19945-1985 Charles Camsell Indian Hospital treated First Nations and Inuit people: in its 1^st year 69% of admissions were from tuberculosis, in its 3^rd year only 38% of admissions were from tuberculosis (431-432).

MOSBY: Indian Affairs officials began making “inquiries regarding the prevalence of malathion in remote aboriginal communities or in residential schools, [as] there had been warnings of widespread hunger in both for decades.” (148-149).

KELM: “in the mid-1940’s, the death rate due to disease…was three times higher among the Aboriginal population than among non-Natives.” (6). In 1942, “the Aboriginal death rate from tuberculosis was fifteen times higher than the rate for the population as a whole.” (9) and only worsened as the Aboriginal rate grew to seventeen times greater than the national even with country wide improvements and expansions regarding sanatorium care for Aboriginal patients (9).

1950’s

LUX: “Alberta in 1950, warned that Alberta hospitals had “‘…practically ceased to accept a sick Indian except in the most emergent of circumstances, and for the shortest possible time.’” (418) Stated Dr. E.L. Stone as costs of hospital care in the 50’s was soaring and the hospitals were “overcrowded by patients from their own municipalities.” (418).

MOSBY: Regulations were put into place (by Moore) that regulated what kinds of goods families could buy with their Family Allowance (some clothing, and goods with nigh nutritional value) (156). Great in theory until some families weren’t allowed to purchase flour (key staple) causing many Inuit families in Great Whale River (1949-1950) to go hungry then “forced to resort to eating their sled dogs and boiled seal skin.” (157).

Individuals

LUX: Fines ($) are also discussed in this journal (433) as punishment for sickness/disease, similar to the articles we read last week regarding cleanliness. As the liberal view of individualism and how one succeeds (body and mind) vary greatly from the Indigenous view where “wellness required community support…and where the value of goods was realized by giving them away.” (411) and as their legal status was not based on a rational citizenship, “without fundamental social, cultural, and political change.” (411) by colonial controls. Aboriginals are once again isolates, targeted, and excluded from being a part of a complete and whole Canadian society and was “fundamental to the emerging welfare state” (434).

-I think one of the large overarching ideas from Lux’s writing is her emphasized in her statement “I argue that the Indian hospitals emerge as Canada was consciously defining national health, or a normal while citizenship.” (409) while “the CTA (Canadian Tuberculosis Association) urged, [that] the state must include Aboriginal people in its calculations of national health, if only to keep them properly isolated. State-run Indian hospitals also acknowledged community prejudices that demanded segregated health care, ensuring that modernizing hospitals were increasing white hospitals.” (410). As Indian hospitals may “serve the social imperative to ‘break up Indian customs,’ while reserving community hospitals for white patients.” (417)

MOSBY: The Cross Lake First Nations Group Chief stated that “his band was running out of treaty money and that from May to October, when the muskrat trapping season was over, they were likely to face six months of no earnings and little food.” (150).

-The James Bay Survey from 1947-48 used 6 physicians, a dentist, an x-ray tech, a photographer, and 3 anthropologists to get a look at the coloration of health and nutrition in the North as well as “to elucidate the connection between food nutrition, and the ‘Indian Problem’ more generally.” (154). When investigators came to check the quality of the foods in residential schools, “the tendency of inspectors to see better food service than was typically being provided [to the students], their investigations nonetheless showed overwhelmingly poor conditions in the schools…[and] typically failed to meet the government’s own stated basic nutritional requirements.” (159), estimated by Pett that schools often served only half that of what was needed for a balanced diet (159). “

KELM: Rates of disease and death were higher among Aboriginals than non-Aboriginals in the first half on 20^th century. “Some of the most recent studies start with a population as high as 188,344 on the northwest coast at contact and estimate a 90% decline by 1890.” (4) and its presumed that “the first nations lost 65,395 living individuals in the first 150 years after contact, a 74% decline in population.” (4). After birth rated increased in the 1930s, abortion is no longer practiced in some areas (as frequently I presume) due to the introduction of Catholicism, yet maternal, childhood and infant mortality rates were high (families could lose 2 children before they reached adulthood) (6). Limited access to medical care was one reason for high death rates of mothers, newborns, while most post-neonatal deaths were caused by poor conditions on the reserve (7). Other communicable diseases and complications commonly negatively effecting Aboriginals more than non-Aboriginals: bronchopneumonia, pneumonia, whooping cough, influenza, and measles (10-11). Drinking was a way to celebrate a good fishing catch, but spun out of control and became an epidemic in some communities, and drinking became associated as a number of violent deaths over Native communities, damaging many communities. (17).

ALL:

-Interesting of how white, middle-class, colonial, men in government and medicine are still (as in these readings, as well as currently in society) the ones able to dictate who should get health care, who isn’t clean, what people should eat, all while feeling obligated to implement their Western medicine as given right based off their colonial status. As Mosby states that the most significant part of the studies being done regarding malnutrition were due to bureaucrats, scientists, and other experts “further[ing] their own professional and political interests rather than to address the root cause of these problems…[and] the Canadian government’s compliancy in them.” During the 1940’s and 1950’s (Mosby 171).

-All articles seem to refer to the indigenous communities being a part of some kind or crisis or another.

– As “the full impact of colonization played out upon Aboriginal bodies, through increasing restrictions on access to land and recourses, and through intensifying interventions into their lives.” (Kelm 18)