{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03221288515406162, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004201680672268907, 'mean_word_length': 4.909090909090909, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Biomedical Platforms: Realigning the Normal and the Pathological in Late-Twentieth-Century Medicine (review)

“understanding a PET image of a person with depression requires . . . reflection on categories of people and metaphors of the brain, as well as imaging technologies and practices” (p. 185). What began as an anthropological study of the PET culture evolved into a study of the interaction between PET and the larger culture. Dumit raises many questions (maybe too many), but especially that of objectivity. PET imaging is not a simple recording of an objective truth but rather a sophisticated scientifictechnological-cultural process, whose outcome is formed by the very culture it is supposed to inform.