{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020596205962059622, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004336043360433604, 'mean_word_length': 5.546099290780142, '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}}
Money, Oil and Empire in the Middle East: Sterling and Postwar Imperialism, 1944–1971 (review)

elucidate the standpoint of medical science—how different medical aelds and professions viewed Iran’s “body,” adding an important dimension to our understanding of how and why political language had a medical component during this period in its deep connection to new notions of citizenship, nationalism, national identity, and popular sovereignty. In a meticulously constructed argument, Shayegh avoids the simplistic binary opposition of modern/traditional—the presumption that modern equates with progress—instead preferring to look at perspectives on modernity and on its collateral costs to Iranian society. Another strength of this book is that Shayegh contextualizes the academic debates and concerns of this middle-class scientiac/medical professional class within the relevant scientiac aelds, as well as the social history of transportation, time, reproductive health, etc. Shayegh has written the arst history of modern Iranian medical thought, detailing both its scientiac premises and its attendant social concerns. He is also clearly conversant with similar issues that professional groups in other non-Western societies have encountered in dealing with the complexities of Western science. An intriguing question left by the book concerns the extent to which an adoption of theories and practices of modern science can anticipate and mitigate the resulting problems in a country like Iran. Another one concerns the path not taken in Iran. In other words, were there alternatives to medical modernity, or does Shayegh view it as largely inevitable during this period? These questions are not meant as criticisms; they testify to the unique and substantial contributions made by this study and the many issues that the book illuminates.