Afectaciones en la salud pública inducidas Por el uso del glifosato en el putumayo, Colombia

Central Issue: Colombia has had to live a continuous fight against drug trafficking, a way to counter terrorist groups, is to eradicate illicit crops; through aerial spraying of herbicides in areas where these groups were mobilized. In an attempt by the Colombian government to combat them, did not measure adverse effects eradication plan causing various harmful effects on public health related areas fumigation. Objective: To analyze the impact to public health from the use of glyphosate herbicide. Methodology: the collection of scientific publications in which the level impacts public health in the region of Putumayo is evident dueto aerial spraying with the herbicide glyphosate was performed. Results: In Colombia, the issue of public health in relation to the use of herbicides is not a matter of such importance as is the eradication of illegal crops. Conclusion: The lack of veracity of studies on the effects and consequences caused by use of herbicides is a clear example of the lack of information on possible alternative herbicides that do not conflict with human, animal and environmental.Colombia ha tenido que vivir una lucha continua contra el narcotráfico, una forma de hacer contraataque a los grupos terroristas es erradicando los cultivos ilícitos; por medio de la aspersión aérea de herbicidas en las zonas donde estos grupos se movilizaban. En un intento del gobierno colombiano por combatirlos, no midió los efectos adversos al plan de erradicación, causando varios efectos nocivos para la salud pública, relacionados con las zonas de fumigación. Analizar el impacto a la salud pública por causa del uso del glifosato como herbicida. Se realizó la recopilación de publicaciones científicas en las cuales se evidencia los impactos a nivel de la salud pública de la región del Putumayo debido a las aspersiones aéreas con el herbicida glifosato. En Colombia, el tema de la salud pública con relación a la utilización de herbicidas no es un asunto de tanta relevancia como lo es la erradicación de cultivos ilícitos. La falta de veracidad de los estudios sobre los efectos y las consecuencias que causa el uso de herbicidas es un claro ejemplo de la falta de información sobre posibles herbicidas alternativos que no atenten contra la salud humana, animal y medioambiental

Propuesta de gestión con la comunidad para contribuir a la transformación de hábitos y prácticas alimenticias en padres y estudiantes de tres instituciones educativas públicas de la provincia comunera de Santander (Colombia)

La gestión de la Comunidad desde el ámbito educativo, se centra en buscar que todos los estudiantes reciban una atención apropiada y pertinente que responda a sus expectativas, atendiendo a grupos de poblaciones con necesidades especiales; por tanto, esta investigación se centró en el desarrollo de un programa de Educación Alimentaria, para padres y estudiantes de básica primaria de colegios urbanos y rurales, teniendo en cuenta que, en la actualidad la población infantil en edad escolar presenta con mayor regularidad problemas nutricionales. Se aplicó el método de Investigación - Acción, el cual incluyó una intervención pedagógica; teniendo como resultados más sobresalientes que, antes de la intervención el 74% de los estudiantes se encontraban con bajo peso y el 1% con sobrepeso, siendo los niños los más afectados con un 70% en comparación con el 68% de las niñas participantes de la muestra; en cuanto a los hábitos alimenticios, se encontró que estos prefieren las comidas rápidas, productos empaquetados, golosinas y bebidas azucaradas como gaseosas y jugos artificiales, antes que alimentos saludables como frutas y lácteos. Una vez finalizada la intervención, el resultado del nuevo tamizaje mostró un cambio significativo, pues solo el 4% de estudiantes mostró bajo peso, es decir, una reducción del 70%; así mismo, se empezó a evidenciar cambios en los hábitos alimenticios con loncheras más saludables, mejor manipulación de alimentos y la creación de huertos escolares y familiares.Universidad Libre Seccional Socorro - Facultad de ciencias de la educaciónThe management of the Community from the educational field, focuses on seeking that all students receive appropriate and relevant care that meets their expectations, serving groups of populations with special needs; therefore, this investigation he focused on the development of a Food Education program, for parents and elementary school students in urban and rural schools, taking into account that, at present, the school-age child population presents nutritional problems more regularly. The Research - Action method was applied, which included a pedagogical intervention; having as more outstanding results that, before the intervention, 74% of the students were underweight and 1% were overweight, with boys being the most affected with 70% compared to 68% of the girls participating in the sample; In terms of eating habits, it was found that they prefer fast foods, packaged products, sweets and sugary drinks such as soda and artificial juices, rather than healthy foods such as fruits and dairy. Once the intervention was over, the result of the new screening showed a significant change, since only 4% of students showed low weight, that is, a reduction of 70%; Likewise, changes in eating habits began to show with healthier lunch boxes, better food handling and the creation of school and family gardens

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health