shock, holds a special place in medical anthropology. For the past 25 years or more it has provided a convenient springboard tor ethnographic descriptions, for explorations ot the effect of culture on health beliefs, and it has been a common analytical arena for the assessment of stress, social roles, sex roles, the nature-nuture controversy, and the epistemology of medical anthropology itself. While this is a significant burden to load onto a single ailment, susto has withstood this analytical onslaught extremely well and still provides a useful focus for fur ther investigation. The earlier works on susto fail into three broad categories. First are rhose which provide a conventional ethnographic description of the illness (e.g., Rubel 1960,
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Robert T. Trotter (1982) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: