I believe the ecological approach would be most useful in studying health as the environment can shape and change certain cultures perceptions of health and life itself. If a certain culture has been living in a specific environment for a long period of time, it is very likely that have had to adapt physically, mentally and socially to live in that environment and those adaptations can be passed on to their descendants. Health practices can, in turn, be affected by the adaptations and can be further studied with a geographical context that can change according to movement patterns and locations of cultures.
The distinction between disease and illness was difficult to understand as I had the assumption that both were the same or that disease was more chronic than the latter. I was surprised to learn the difference between the two could be determined according to presence or lack of symptoms as well as whom and how it was determined (Doctors and tests compared to people and Web MD, for example).
In the Nacirema article, the culture discussed was of an indigenous North American group that believed that the body was inherently unhealthy and decaying and that a substantial commitment to certain rituals had to be done so that it would not fall apart. The culture definitely follows ethnomedical approaches in the way health is viewed and handled. The two rituals that were –most intriguing to me where that of the home shrines which were very private and filled with a great amount of secrecy and the rituals of the latipso temple which completely contrasted the home rituals. These two rituals were very interesting as they both highlight the Nacirema beliefs of the ugliness of the body through the secrecy but also through the excruciating procedures which further points to the weakness of the body.