Abstract
Nineteenth-century medical advances were entwined with a conceptual innovation: the idea that many cases of disease which were previously thought to have diverse causes could be explained by the action of a single kind of cause, for example a certain bacterial or parasitic infestation. The focus of modern epidemiology, however, is on chronic non-communicable diseases, which frequently do not seem to be attributable to any single causal factor. This paper is an effort to resolve the resulting tension. The paper criticises the monocausal model of disease, so successful in the nineteenth century. It also argues that a multifactorial model of disease can only be satisfactory if it amounts to more than a mere rejection of the monocausal model. A third alternative, the contrastive model, is proposed and defended on the grounds that it links the notions of disease and of general explanation, while avoiding the philosophical naiveties and practical difficulties of the monocausal model.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 302-311 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Journal | Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C :Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences |
| Volume | 40 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Dec 2009 |
| Externally published | Yes |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
Keywords
- Cause
- Disease
- Epidemiology
- Monocausal
- Multifactorial
- Risk factor
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- History
- History and Philosophy of Science
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Causation and models of disease in epidemiology'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver