ArticleAmerican journal of biological anthropology2025
The disposability and inclusion of Brown bodies.
Article in American journal of biological anthropology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Development of Recommendations for Legacy Anatomical Collections: A Tale of Two Approaches.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Article
- On Making Descendant Communities: Three Case Studies From Historical Bioarchaeology.American journal of biological anthropology · 2026Review
- A global overview of anatomical science education and its present and future role in biomedical curricula.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Review
- Responding to the call: Population affinity estimation in a South African forensic context of identification - are we helping or harming?Forensic science international. Synergy · 2025Article
- The disposability and inclusion of Brown bodies.American journal of biological anthropology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While there has been increased awareness of the ethics of curation, research, and teaching with human skeletal remains, there has been little recognition of the millions of skeletal remains from South Asia that were harvested illegally and/or unethically for educational institutions globally for over a century. This article gives a contextualization of the unique history and nature of anatomical teaching collections, and why they are an important locus for a decolonized and antiracist biological anthropology. I present the historical background of how the exportation and commodification of Indian bodies came to dominate the global bone trade. I also discuss how historical necropolitics explicitly erased the identity and objectified South Asian people made into study skeletons, and the way our current practices continue to uphold colonial violence. Finally, I discuss what we might do with these historical collections and the ways that inclusion of Brown voices is critical to ethical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.