Classifying Diseases in Dewey LI804, Spring, 2011 Kelli Doubledee Microsoft Word Version 7 The Dewey Decimal Classification

and Relative Index (DDC) has contained structurally ingrained cultural biases throughout its evolution. Melvil Dewey, with his ideas shaped possibly by the environment of which he was a part, transferred certain unavoidable views into the DDC. Those views, although he acknowledges, the inverted Baconian arrangement of the St. Louis Library has been followed (Dewey 10), are historical accounts of a predominately white, Anglo-Saxon view of the world and possible reflections of the Amherst College curriculum in 1873. Evidence of this reflection can be found in the preface to the 1876 edition in which he describes the three years trial of DDC usage at Amherst College (1870), Much valuable aid has been rendered by specialists in many departments, and nearly every member of the Faculty has given advice from time to time (Dewey 9). More importantly, he points out the mere bias of his plan in the preface, Throughout the catalogues the number of a book shows not only where it is but what it is; therefore we know that means one has to make a decision of one number for each item; A decision which has continued to reflect the biases of the state power and result in the growth of the Dewey Decimal Classification and Relative Index to its current size. The state power which Gramsci defines as the mechanism by which the higher, elite imparts it views upon the lower classes without them knowing, is one reason for the biases reflected in DDC. Melvil Dewey, being immersed in the curriculum at Amherst, established a set of principles of knowledge which could be argued as defining society, hiding its outcasts, and labeling its subjects. Furthermore, Deweys schedules structured the very subsets of knowledge to be researched, studied, debated, and reported. Although DDC has allowed expansion and

restructuring of its schedules, the fact remains that it is still structurally representative of Deweys original classification scheme. Kau (257-59), who examined the biases contained in the 400 and 800 schedules, explained one of the problems of the Dewey classification scheme is that it assumes and allows for the majority of space to be given to the Western world and leaves only a small amount of space for all of the others. Class 800 (literature) is organized by language. One problem with organizing the literature section by language, and the one that is most cited, is this ordering of classification facets breaks up national literatures of countries that employ more than one language.The problem is that it relegates non-Western languages, and thus the people who speak these languages, to being afterthoughts in its organization of knowledge (Kau 260). There are, in fact, other groups relegated to be afterthoughts of Deweys organization of knowledge. The class of 600, which organizes medicine and classifies diseases as affecting one body part/system, is laden with these groups from the 1876 edition to the current edition of DDC. Before delving into one example, one might need a brief reason as to why this is problematic. Until the late 1800s disease had been thought of as: an infliction, a punishment, an evil doing of some God, and even an imbalance in body fluid that needed to be excreted out of the body in some way (Majno and Joris 11-12). In the mid -1800s, the scientific community embraced the cellular theory of disease. In 1858, Rudolph Virchow gave a series of lectures, Cellular Pathology as Based upon Physiological and Pathological Histology, which set in motion our current understanding of disease on a cellular level (Majno and Joris 14). Yet, Deweys first edition (1876), Classification and Subject Index for a Library, listed diseases in the subject index as affecting one body part/system, and then randomly listed specific diseases such as bronchitis and cholera. In the 1876 edition, medicine is listed in the Useful Arts Division with

corresponding numbers 610 through 620. Examples of listings in the subject index given a number from 610 to 620 are: Abortion 618,Amputation 617, Anatomy, Human 618, Aneurism 617, Brandy 615, Bronchitis 616, Burial 614, Cancer 616, Childbirth 618, Clinics 610, Contagion 614, Cremation 614, Croup 616, Deafness 616, Death 612, Dentistry 617, Diet 613, Digestion 612, Diphtheria 616, Diseases 616, Disinfection 614, Drugs 615, Dispensatories 615, Dysentery 616, Dyspepsia 616, Ear Diseases 616, Epidemics 614, Eye Diseases 616, Eye Functions 612, Family Medicines 616, Fevers 616, Heart Diseases 616, Lung Diseases 616. (Dewey 23-32) There are indeed a large number of diseases that affect more than one body system and this allowance is not allowed for in DDC. When a disease does not fit into the schedules, it is given a new number which allows its inclusion, but does little to show its relationship to the whole body. Can this oversight then affect research, understanding, knowledge, and treatment of that group of people within society? In the current edition of DDC, the disease Sjgren's Syndrome was added. One might speculate that, prior to its addition; information regarding Sjgren's Syndrome could be classified in various schedules of diseases within DDC. According to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke: Sjgren's Syndrome is an autoimmune disorder in which immune cells attack and destroy the glands that produce tears and saliva. Sjgren's Syndrome is also associated with rheumatic disorders such as rheumatoid arthritis. The hallmark symptoms of the disorder are dry mouth and dry eyes. In addition, Sjgren's Syndrome may cause skin, nose, and vaginal dryness, and may affect other organs of the body including the kidneys, blood vessels, lungs, liver, pancreas, and brain (NINDS Sjgren's Syndrome Information Page). How could you have possibly picked one Dewey decimal classification number for this disease prior to its establishment? Can people be misdiagnosed by doctors due to classification of disease research within an information classification system? Our very system of physicians and referrals for disease

management is arranged much like diseases within DDC. At the onset of a symptom, you go to your general family physician, who might refer you to a physician specializing in the body system in which you are having symptoms. Their ability to diagnose involves their specific knowledge and how well they are able to cross-reference all your symptoms. According to the Sjgren's Syndrome Foundation (SSF), Sjgrens syndrome often is undiagnosed or misdiagnosed.Because all symptoms are not always present at the same time and because Sjgrens can involve several body systems, physicians, eye care providers, and dentists sometimes treat each symptom individually and do not recognize that a systemic disease is present (SSF, About Sjgren's Syndrome, Sjgren's FAQs). Rheumatologists are the specialists who mainly treat patients with Sjgren's; although, they would not be the doctor you would typically see if your only symptom was a dry mouth. Maybe, the inability to classify certain diseases within DDC is a reflection of the state power. For research to happen in the medical world, funding has to be addressed. The Sjgren's Syndrome Foundation credits its achievements to finally becoming involved in government affairs, and clearing $2 million per year starting in 2008, of which they allot $400,000 to research initiatives each year. Their first publication, Sjgrens Syndrome Handbook, which educated the lay public and medical community, was seen as a precursor to the success of the Foundation. The 2000s brought big change for the Foundation. The SSF first moved its national offices from Long Island, New York to Bethesda, Maryland. This gave the staff and volunteers better access to Capitol Hill as well as the National Institutes of Health (SSF, About the Foundation, History). The funding of Sjgren's Syndrome research falls under National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) of the National Institutes of Health. Approximately 90% of the overall budget of NINDS is used to fund extramural research

through a variety of funding mechanisms. Each year, NINDS establishes funding strategy based on the appropriations received from Congress (SSF, About the Foundation, History). Because DDC reflects the biases of society in which it was conceived, there will continue to be a need to add terms, reclassify subjects, and morph 1876 structure to allow for societal growth and change. According to Majno and Joris (3), there is as much to learn from diseases which have disappeared. This statement is particularly true when considering the 1942 DDC of homosexuality in 132 mental derangements, 754 sexual perversions, and 6 sexual inversion compared to the current DDC schedule location of 306.766 (306 culture and institutions, .7 sexual relations, .76 sexual orientation). In conclusion, diseases classified in DDC reflect the problematic nature of picking one and only one Dewey number for an item and explains why there are relegated groups treated as afterthoughts in its organization of knowledge. The microcosm of individual diseases is relative to the macrocosm of society: it depends on time, place, and culture (Majno and Joris 3).

Works Cited Dewey, Melvil. Classification and Subject Index for Cataloguing and Arranging the Books and Pamphlets of a Library. 1876. Centennial 1876-1976 ed. Kingsport: Kingsport P, 1976. Print. Dewey, Melvil. Decimal Classification and Relativ Index. 14th ed. New York: Forest P, 1942. Print. Dewey, Melvil. Dewey Decimal Classification and Relative Index. 22nd ed. Ed. Joan S. Mitchell. Dublin: OCLC, 2003. Print. Kua, Eunice. Non-Western Languages and Literatures in the Dewey Decimal Classification Scheme. Libri. 54 (2004): 256-265. Blackboard. Web. 16 April 2011. Majno, Guido and Isabelle Joris. Cells, Tissues, and Disease: Principles of General Pathology. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford U P, 2004. Web. 16 April 2011. <http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=8yAf6U7njlcC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq= Doctors+and+%22whole+body+disease%22&ots=4JOAZjAQ4R&sig=SJ2Au1xX0yZdu HxGgxBsCGH-ZsA#v=onepage&q&f=false> Sjgren's Syndrome Foundation. 2009. Web. 16 April 2011. < http://www.sjogrens.org/> U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services. Natl. Inst. of Health. Natl. Inst. of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. NINDS Sjgren's Syndrome Information Page. 2008. Web. 16 April 2011. http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/sjogrens/sjogrens.htm