Paper short abstract:

Biomedicine's view of somatisation is unhelpful in understanding GWS. An anthropological interpretation looks at what symptom reporting is conveying. BSS and low libido have become entwined with GWS narratives and become powerful markers of it and, thus, are communicating something meaningful.

Paper long abstract:

This paper argues that biomedicine's view of somatisation is unhelpful in understanding medically unexplained syndromes, by looking specifically at Gulf War Syndrome. I argue that attention needs to be paid to the more collective aspect of symptom and symptom language. Central to this is the way that, as an anthropologist, I look at and interpret individual symptom reporting differently than researchers from other disciplines. Illness symptoms are not only 'biological entities', but can also be conceptualised as a form of communication whereby the individual, having troubles in various areas of life, conveys these in bodily terms. Whereas for other disciplines, the 'reality' of the symptoms is key, for an anthropological interpretation, the most important issue is the fact that people talk about them. Of central importance is what symptom reporting is conveying, rather than focusing on uncovering the objective truth of them. For example, the symptoms Burning Semen Syndrome, impotence and infertility, have all become entwined with GWS narratives and become powerful markers of it and, thus, are clearly communicating something meaningful, yet these symptoms are unlikely to be picked up by epidemiological and medical inquiry. The body is a site of angst and resistance. I argue that GWS can be interpreted as the expression of a collective social angst and is a kind of shared bodily language, an expression of social distress as well as a form of commentary. It is both personal and social.