The Undoing Project is an ongoing educational feminist YouTube channel that serves as an introduction to feminism and feminist theory. The objective for this project is to present feminist theory and feminist ideology in an accessible and entertaining way. Through this project I sought to accomplish three goals: to challenge the negative image of feminism, bridge the gap between the language of academia and the public, and to acknowledge and unlearn ingrained prejudices. The videos focus on theory, history, legislation, current events, and pop culture. The initial project consists of ten videos addressing the feminist wave models, a brief history of the feminist movement, and discussions of concepts like hegemony, intersectionality, masculinity, femininity, and race.

This paper encompasses part of the complex topic of relationships between consumers, organic products, and advertising in America with a particular focus on Tempe, Arizona. Background research included in this paper includes how the term "organic" was developed and regulated to fit the federal standards that are implied through the use of the USDA organic label that was introduced in October of 2002. Further research considers the factors that have empirically and overwhelmingly contributed to motivations of attitude development and purchasing behaviors of the average organic consumer in America, tracking changes and potential causes over the past several decades. A large proportion of this paper analyzes the results of a survey conducted in Tempe between late 2014 and early 2015. This survey, shown in the appendices, includes responses from 310 Tempe consumers regarding questions of demographics, knowledge and perception of organic products, perceived access to organic products, consumer values, and purchasing behaviors. The results of the survey reflect the values displayed in previous studies on national surveys, with some discrepancies that appear to set Tempe apart from the national average. However, the results of the survey are limited by their exclusion and limited parsing of multiple confounds. Additionally, the respondents of the survey were not proportionate to the actually population of Tempe and therefore cannot be accurately generalized to the Tempe population as a whole. The third and final section of this paper deals with the relationship between advertisers and consumers. This considers how advertising helps to develop product values and perceptions through various methods. Future directions for advertising of organic products is also addressed, as advertisers can potentially become a source of developing scientific information if properly utilized. Further directives and gaps in research are addressed in the final portion of the paper and include how to increase consumer knowledge, the problems faced by organic advocates, what is important about what we already know, and where to go from here.

A fundamental component of Transhumanism, radical life extension is the process of utilizing ever increasing technologies to further extend the average life span of humans. This iterative process has continued to increase in speed since the digital age. As society develops a larger knowledge base, and scientific fields combine their knowledge bases, the capability of medical professionals continues to increase at an exponential rate. Through an understanding of these technological trends the social, legal, logistical and economic implications can be better understood. Scenarios can be used to better categorize these implications based on the evolution of these technologies. By considering biological, non-biological and linear life extension technologies a broad analysis of the varied implications can be constructed. Based on these scenarios one can conclude radical life extension technologies will have significant impacts on the current social definitions of what it means to be human and how society organizes itself. Continued research towards radical life extension technologies comes with high social implications which must be considered in tandem.

This is a project about medicine and the history of a condition called premenstrual syndrome (PMS), its “discovery” and conceptual development at both scientific and socio-cultural levels. Since it was first mentioned in medical literature, PMS has been explored empirically as a medical condition and conceptually as non-somatic cultural phenomenon. Many attempts have been made to produce scientific, empirical evidence to bolster the theory of PMS as a biological disease. Some non-medical perspectives argue that invoking biology as the cause of PMS medicalizes a natural function of the female reproductive system and shallowly interrogates what is actually a complex bio-psycho-social phenomenon. This thesis questions both sides of this debate in order to reveal how criteria for PMS were categorized despite disagreement surrounding its etiology.

This thesis illustrates how the concept of PMS developed and was informed by the discovery of hormones and the resulting field of endocrinology that provided a framework for conceptualizing PMS. It displays how the development of the medical diagnostic category of PMS developed in tandem with the emergence of the field of endocrinology and was legitimized and effectively medicalized through this connection. The diagnosis of PMS became established though the diagnostic techniques like questionnaires in spite of persistent disagreement over its definition. The thesis shows how these medical concepts and practices legitimated the category of PMS, and how it has become ubiquitous in contemporary culture.

Today in the U.S. the narrative of the “bad drug” has become quite a familiar account. There is an ever-growing collection of pharmaceutical products whose safety and efficacy has been debunked through the scandalous exposure of violations of integrity on the part of researchers, lapses in procedure and judgment on the part of the FDA, and reckless profiteering on the part of big pharma. However, a closer look reveals that the oversights and loopholes depicted in the bad drug narrative are not incidental failures of an otherwise intact, effective system. Rather, bad drugs, like good drugs, are a product of normal operations of the system; the same processes, actors, and influences manifest in both. The aim of this project is to shed light on these processes, actors, and influences at work in drug normalization by interrogating the peculiar case of the drug Lupron. Lupron exhibits all of the controversial features of the “bad drug” narrative but has remained an endorsed and embraced staple of the infertility industry. This contradiction situates Lupron to expose a number of the contingencies on which drug normalization rests more generally. In order to put forth an explanatory model for drug normalization, three such contingencies are described in detail for the case at hand: the nature of drug regulation, the structures and value that underpin the medical categorization of diseases, and the inextricability of post-medicine from the forces of industry. These contingencies provide some explanatory power for understanding not only the retention of Lupron but the ways in which all drugs are produced, validated, and perpetuated in a society.

Corporations in biomedicine hold significant power and influence, in both political and personal spheres. The decisions these companies make about ethics are critically important, as they help determine what products are developed, how they are developed, how they are promoted, and potentially even how they are regulated. In the last fifteen years, for-profit private companies have been assembling bioethics committees to help resolve dilemmas that require informed deliberation about ethical, legal, scientific, and economic considerations. Private sector bioethics committees represent an important innovation in the governance of emerging technologies, with corporations taking a lead role in deciding what is ethically appropriate or problematic. And yet, we know very little about these committees, including their structures, memberships, mandates, authority, and impact. Drawing on an extensive literature review and qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews with executives, scientists and board members, this dissertation provides an in-depth analysis of the Ethics and Public Policy Board at SmithKline Beecham, the Ethics Advisory Board at Advanced Cell Technology, and the Bioethics Committee at Eli Lilly and offers insights about how ideas of bioethics and governance are currently imagined and enacted within corporations. The SmithKline Beecham board was the first private sector bioethics committee; its mandate was to explore, in a comprehensive and balanced analysis, the ethics of macro trends in science and technology. The Advanced Cell Technology board was created to be like a watchdog for the company, to prevent them from making major errors. The Eli Lilly board is different than the others in that it is made up mostly of internal employees and does research ethics consultations within the company. These private sector bioethics committees evaluate and construct new boundaries between their private interests and the public values they claim to promote. Findings from this dissertation show that criticisms of private sector bioethics that focus narrowly on financial conflicts of interest and a lack of transparency obscure analysis of the ideas about governance (about expertise, credibility and authority) that emerge from these structures and hamper serious debate about the possible impacts of moving ethical deliberation from the public to the private sector.