A Word of Caution against the Stigma Trend in Neglected Tropical Disease Research and Control

Such labeling of some neglected tropical diseases as ‘‘stigmatizing’’ may indeed increase political commitment to these diseases [2], but it also bears some risks. Research can easily end up confirming previous assumptions, i.e., that it is the social stigma associated with the disease that leads to socialisolation, hampers access to care, and reduces treatment adherence. Although this may be the case, in contexts with high levels of poverty and poor health services, other factors, such as high treatment costs, tedious travel to health centers, and long hospital admittances, must not be ignored. In fact, the task of social science research is to scrutinize all possible explanations, without being blinded by the apparently obvious. Moreover, a narrow focus on stigma is not only a methodological pitfall, but it is also a dangerous way of taking responsibility for poor health care attendance away from the political and economic domains and placing the blame on ‘‘culture’’. The aim of this paper is to caution against an all too euphoric use of ‘‘stigma’’ in neglected tropical diseases research. In order to prevent losing sight of the variety of possible explanatory options, we encourage the use of a ‘‘falsificationist’’ approach with systematic hypothesis testing that incorporates,butis not restricted to, stigma.