Search

In this paper, we draw on three ethnographic studies of surrogacy we carried out separately in different contexts: the western US state of California, the south Indian state of Karnataka, and the western Russian metropolis of St Petersburg. In our interviews with surrogate mothers, intended parents, and surrogacy professionals, we traced the meanings and ideologies through which they understood the clinical labour of surrogacy. We found that in the US, interviewed surrogates, intended parents and professionals understood surrogacy as an exchange of both gifts and commodities, where gift-giving, reciprocity, and relatedness between surrogates and intended parents were the major tropes. In India, differing narratives of surrogacy were offered by its different parties: whilst professionals and intended parents framed it as a win-win exchange with an emphasis on the economic side, the interviewed surrogate mothers talked about surrogacy as creative labour of giving life. In Russia, approaches to surrogacy among the interviewed surrogate mothers, professionals and intended parents overlapped in framing it as work and a businesslike commodity exchange. We suggest these three different ways of ethical reasoning about the clinical labour of surrogacy, including justifications of women's incorporation into this labour, were situated in local moral frameworks. We name them "repro-regional moral frameworks", inspired by earlier work on moral frameworks as well as on reproductive nationalisms and transnational reproduction. Building on these findings, we argue that any international or global regulation of surrogacy, or indeed any moral stance on it, needs to take these local differences into account. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the orthopedics markets in the US and the EU reaching a plateau, the market size in countries such as Brazil, Russia, India, and China is steadily growing. As a result, major orthopedic companies are shifting their focus towards these markets and developing products tailored to their needs. However, a significant challenge associated with this new opportunity is the requirement for the development of more affordable prostheses compared to those sold in the US and Europe. With the introduction of these lower-cost models into the market, this article aims to assess their performance in comparison to traditional models. A literature review was conducted, analyzing four parameters—the Hospital for Special Surgery Score, Knee Society Score, Range of Motion, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index—to evaluate different models. The findings indicated that low-cost models perform either equally well or, in some cases, slightly worse than traditional ones. It is worth to mention that the existing literature on this topic is limited, resulting in a relatively small number of models and studies included in this specific study. Nevertheless, this latter serves as a valuable foundation for future in-depth analyses and investigations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]