Peace Challenges and the Moral Weapons of Pacification in Rio de Janeiro

The policy known as « pacification » in Rio de Janeiro started as an intervention proposed by Brazil’s State Secretary of Public Security in 2008, with the official objective of ‘retaking territories’ under the control of criminal factions. In practice this meant military occupation of the ’favelas and control of their populations. The main aim of this article is to analyze the pacification project in Rio de Janeiro and its multiple effects over the last eight years, looking beyond public security practices and Brazilian state forces, and proposing a reflection on the symbolic, moral and cultural processes that contribute significantly to the legitimization of pacification actions. Based on different experiences in the field, this article analyses two events staged in Complexo do Alemão six months after its occupation : the « Peace Challenge » race and a Gospel Show. They reveal, different moral « weapons » from the arsenal of pacification, such as religious and cultural practices and discourses that model and remodel ways of living, thinking and feeling in these territories and their effects on the populations targeted by these interventions. The conclusion to this paper suggests that a key element of Rio de Janeiro’s pacification policy is the dissociative potential of state practices that impact the residents’ own creative strategies for protection and resistance, by influencing local social relations and partnerships established over decades in Rio’s favelas. While we might hastily conclude that the presence of the state offers an alternative regime of protection to favela residents, careful long-term research demonstrates that this « dissociation » is a goal in itself, and its consequences are simply further vulnerability and exposure of this population to state violence.Les politiques de « pacification » à Rio de Janeiro, initialement promues par le secrétaire d’État à la sécurité publique en 2008, ont pour objectif proclamé de « se rapproprier les territoires » sous le contrôle des factions criminelles. Dans la pratique, cela signifie l’occupation militaire des favelas et le contrôle de leurs populations. L’objectif principal de cet article est d’analyser le projet de pacification à Rio de Janeiro et ses multiples effets lors des huit dernières années, au-delà des pratiques de sécurité publique menées par les forces de l’ordre brésiliennes, et de proposer une réflexion sur les processus symboliques, moraux et culturels qui contribuent significativement à la légitimation des actions de pacification. Basé sur des enquêtes de terrain, cette contribution examine deux événements ayant fait l’objet d’une mise en scène dans la favela Complexo do Alemão six mois après son occupation : la course « Peace Challenge » et un concert de gospel. Ces deux événements révèlent que l’arsenal de la pacification est aussi fait d’« armes » morales qui, par des discours et des pratiques culturelles et religieuses, contribuent à façonner l’existence et les idées des populations ciblées par ces interventions. Il ressort de cette étude qu’un élément clé des politiques de pacification à Rio de Janeiro est le potentiel dissociatif des pratiques d’État qui, tout en influençant les relations sociales et les alliances dans les favelas pendant des décennies, ont un impact sur les stratégies créatives mobilisées par les résidants pour obtenir protection et résistance. Alors qu’on pourrait en conclure que la présence de l’État constitue un régime de protection pour les résidants, une recherche approfondie sur le long terme montre que la « dissociation » est un but en soi qui ne fait qu’accroître la vulnérabilité des populations

EVANGÉLICOS, MÍDIAS E PERIFERIAS URBANAS: QUESTÕES PARA UM DIÁLOGO SOBRE RELIGIÃO, CIDADE, NAÇÃO E SOCIEDADE CIVIL NO BRASIL CONTEMPORÂNEO

O objetivo deste artigo é dialogar com as questões analíticas provocadas por Paula Montero em seu artigo “Religião cívica, religião civil e religião pública: continuidades e descontinuidades”, destacando algumas reflexões específicas ao tomar como ponto de partida meus interesses acerca das relações entre o “meio evangélico” e o “problema da política” hoje no Brasil, com ênfase em questões articuladas ao tema da mídia, das questões urbanas, e das periferias. Em cada um dos tópicos abordados, procurarei explicitar o diálogo com o texto de Montero, e aspectos pontuais da relação entre religião e política que a autora destaca em sua análise das expressões “religião cívica”, “religião civil”, e “religião pública”. Somando-me a outros autores neste campo de estudos, pretendi neste texto discutir não apenas o conteúdo, mas a forma da ação religiosa e política evangélica, pois esta compreensão é elemento crucial para uma análise densa do Brasil contemporâneo e suas transformações, dentre elas a forte ameaça evangélica à hegemonia Católica na produção dos termos do debate sobre política, nação, sociedade civil e cultura no Brasil. Destaco dentre os temas discutidos, a centralidade de um olhar sobre a relação entre religião e mídia (esta última entendida como mediação, política, negócio, campo de sentidos, disputas, afetos e modo de ocupar vidas e territórios) como via analítica potente a fim de construirmos um quadro de referências consistente para um debate sobre o tempo e o espaço da política que vivemos no Brasil e no mundo na contemporaneidade

Os Anjos de Raël: uma análise das contradições éticas e estéticas da concepção de "feminilidade" no movimento raeliano

Resumo: a valorização do â??femininoâ?? inerente à mensagem raeliana coloca em cena questões fortemente controversas. Se por um lado sugere-se no Movimento uma moralidade â??libertáriaâ?? para as mulheres, por outro, convive com esta liberdade um projeto moderno de submissão consentida, representada pela Ordem dos Anjos de Raël - grupo de mulheres que voluntariamente se oferece, inclusive sexualmente, ao Profeta Raël. A adesão voluntária destas mulheres à Ordem e seu interesse no desenvolvimento da â??feminilidadeâ??, tido como um valor raeliano, são os principais focos deste artigo. A partir de uma breve releitura da antropologia feminista, são analisados aspectos pertinentes à questão da mulher principalmente nas culturas europeias â??pós feminismoâ??. A tensão entre liberdade de escolha e submissão norteia esta análise que procura nos meandros das concepções modernas de individualidade e autonomia o sentido da escolha servil destas mulheres. Palavras-chave: Feminilidade. Antropologia feminista. Religião. Modernidade

Pentecostalismo e o sofrimento do (ex-)bandido

Este trabalho propõe a análise da experiência de sofrimento do ponto de vista do algoz da violência, tomando como perspectiva privilegiada dessa questão suas imbricações com experiências religiosas, particularmente as pentecostais. Para tal, analiso testemunhos dos chamados “resgatados da morte”: grupo de homens com alguma passagem pelo mundo do crime, membros da Assembleia de Deus dos Últimos Dias (Adud), com sede em São João de Meriti, Baixada Fluminense do Rio de Janeiro. A via de redenção oferecida pela Adud a esses sujeitos apresenta-se como uma composição complexa de elementos significativos nesse processo: o acolhimento do sofrimento e da dor do bandido; o perdão de seus pecados; e a reconfiguração de sua subjetividade de fama e poder dentro do evangelho, a partir da figura potente do “resgatado”. Essas práticas e representações combinadas, sugiro, dão forma a um dispositivo pentecostal particularmente eficaz para lidar com o sofrimento através do contornamento da vitimização.This paper aims the analysis of the experience of suffering from the viewpoint of the executioner of violence, taking as its privileged perspective how this issue overlaps with religious experiences, particularly Pentecostal. To do this, I suggest the analysis of the testimonies of the so-called “rescued from death”: a group of men somehow related in their past with crime experiences, nowadays members of the Assembleia de Deus dos Últimos Dias – Adud, headquartered in São João de Meriti, periphery of Rio de Janeiro. The path to redemption offered by this church to these subjects is presented as a complex composition of significant elements in this process: the acceptance of the suffering and the pain of the bandit; the forgiveness of their sins; and the reconfiguration of their subjectivity – based upon fame and power when related to criminal practices – into a gospel version of it, represented by the potent image of the “rescued”. These combined practices and representations, I suggest, form a particularly effective Pentecostal device for dealing with suffering through the circumvention of victimization

SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections among vaccinated individuals with rheumatic disease : Results from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance provider registry

Funding Information: members of the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance and do not necessarily represent the views of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), EULAR, the UK National Health Service (NHS), the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), the UK Department of Health or any other organisation. Competing interests KLH reports she has received non-personal speaker’s fees from AbbVie and grant income from BMS, UCB and Pfizer, all unrelated to this manuscript; KLH is supported by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. LG reports personal consultant fees from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Biogen, Celgene, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi-Aventis and UCB, and grants from Amgen, Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi and Galapagos, all unrelated to this manuscript. AS reports research grants from a consortium of 14 companies (among them AbbVie, BMS, Celltrion, Fresenius Funding Information: Kabi, Gilead/Galapagos, Lilly, Mylan/Viatris, Hexal, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi-Aventis and UCB) supporting the German RABBIT register and personal fees from lectures for AbbVie, MSD, Roche, BMS, Lilly and Pfizer, all unrelated to this manuscript. LC has not received fees or personal grants from any laboratory, but her institute works by contract for laboratories among other institutions, such as AbbVie Spain, Eisai, Gebro Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme España, Novartis Farmaceutica, Pfizer, Roche Farma, Sanofi-Aventis, Astellas Pharma, Actelion Pharmaceuticals España, Grünenthal and UCB Pharma. EF-M reports personal consultant fees from Boehringer Ingelheim Portugal and that LPCDR received support for specific activities: grants from AbbVie, Novartis, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly Portugal, Sanofi, Grünenthal, MSD, Celgene, Medac, Pharmakern and GAfPA; grants and non-financial support from Pfizer; and non-financial support from Grünenthal, outside the submitted work. IB reports personal consultant fees from AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer and Janssen, all unrelated to this manuscript. JZ reports speaker fees from AbbVie, Novartis and Janssen/Johnson & Johnson, all unrelated to this manuscript. GR-C reports personal consultant fees from Eli Lilly and Novartis, all unrelated to this manuscript. JS is supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (grant numbers: R01 AR077607, P30 AR070253 and P30 AR072577), and the R Bruce and Joan M Mickey Research Scholar Fund. JS has received research support from Amgen and Bristol Myers Squibb and performed consultancy for Bristol Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova, Janssen and Optum, unrelated to this work. LW receives speaker’s bureau fees from Aurinia Pharma, unrelated to this manuscript. SB reports no competing interests related to this work. He reports non-branded consulting fees for AbbVie, Horizon and Novartis (all <$10 000). MGM has no competing interests related to this work. She serves as a patient consultant for BMS, BI JNJ and Aurinia (all <$10 000). RG reports no competing interests related to this work. Outside of this work she reports personal and/or speaking fees from AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and Cornerstones and travel assistance from Pfizer (all <$10 000). JH reports no competing interests related to this work. He is supported by grants from the Rheumatology Research Foundation and has salary support from the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance. He has performed consulting for Novartis, Sobi and Biogen, all unrelated to this work (<$10 000). ESi reports non-financial support from Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance, outside the submitted work. PS reports personal fees from the American College of Rheumatology/Wiley Publishing, outside the submitted work. ZW reports grant support from Bristol Myers Squibb and Principia/Sanofi and performed consultancy for Viela Bio and MedPace, outside the submitted work. His work is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. PMM has received consulting/speaker’s fees from AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Orphazyme, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this study. PMM is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) University College London Hospitals (UCLH) Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). PCR reports no competing interests related to this work. Outside of this work PCR reports personal fees from AbbVie, Atom Bioscience, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Kukdong, Novartis, UCB, Roche and Pfizer; meeting attendance support from BMS, Pfizer and UCB; and grant funding from Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma (all <$10 000). JY reports no competing interests related to this work. Her work is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (K24 AR074534 and P30 AR070155). Outside of this work, she has received research grants or performed consulting for Gilead, BMS Foundation, Pfizer, Aurinia and AstraZeneca. Funding Information: Twitter Jean Liew @rheum_cat, Loreto Carmona @carmona_loreto, Pedro M Machado @pedrommcmachado and Philip C Robinson @philipcrobinson Contributors All authors contributed to the study design, data collection, interpretation of results and review/approval of the final submitted manuscript. JL and MG are guarantors for this manuscript. Funding MG reports grants from the National Institutes of Health, NIAMS, outside the submitted work. KLH is supported by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. JS is supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (grant numbers: R01 AR077607, P30 AR070253 and P30 AR072577), and the R Bruce and Joan M Mickey Research Scholar Fund. JH is supported by grants from the Rheumatology Research Foundation. ZW is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. PMM is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) University College London Hospitals (UCLH) Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). JY is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health (K24 AR074534 and P30 AR070155). Publisher Copyright: ©Objective. While COVID-19 vaccination prevents severe infections, poor immunogenicity in immunocompromised people threatens vaccine effectiveness. We analysed the clinical characteristics of patients with rheumatic disease who developed breakthrough COVID-19 after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2.  Methods. We included people partially or fully vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 who developed COVID-19 between 5 January and 30 September 2021 and were reported to the Global Rheumatology Alliance registry. Breakthrough infections were defined as occurring ≥14 days after completion of the vaccination series, specifically 14 days after the second dose in a two-dose series or 14 days after a single-dose vaccine. We analysed patients' demographic and clinical characteristics and COVID-19 symptoms and outcomes. Results SARS-CoV-2 infection was reported in 197 partially or fully vaccinated people with rheumatic disease (mean age 54 years, 77% female, 56% white). The majority (n=140/197, 71%) received messenger RNA vaccines. Among the fully vaccinated (n=87), infection occurred a mean of 112 (±60) days after the second vaccine dose. Among those fully vaccinated and hospitalised (n=22, age range 36-83 years), nine had used B cell-depleting therapy (BCDT), with six as monotherapy, at the time of vaccination. Three were on mycophenolate. The majority (n=14/22, 64%) were not taking systemic glucocorticoids. Eight patients had pre-existing lung disease and five patients died. Conclusion. More than half of fully vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections requiring hospitalisation were on BCDT or mycophenolate. Further risk mitigation strategies are likely needed to protect this selected high-risk population.publishersversionPeer reviewe

Early experience of COVID-19 vaccination in adults with systemic rheumatic diseases : Results from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Vaccine Survey

Funding Information: Competing interests SES has received funding from the Vasculitis Foundation and the Vasculitis Clinical Research Consortium unrelated to this work. JL has received research grant funding from Pfizer unrelated to this work. ES is a Board Member of the Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance, a patient run, volunteer-based organisation whose activities are primarily supported by independent grants from pharmaceutical companies. MP was supported by a Rheumatology Research Foundation Scientist Development grant. DA-R is a Scientific Advisor for GlaxoSmithKilne unrelated to this work. FB reports personal fees from Boehringer, Bone Therapeutics, Expanscience, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Merck Sereno, MSD, Nordic, Novartis, Pfizer, Regulaxis, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, Servier, UCB, Peptinov, TRB Chemedica and 4P Pharma outside of the submitted work. No funding relevant to this manuscript. RC: speakers bureau for Janssen, Roche, Sanofi, AbbVie. KD reports no COI-unpaid volunteer president of the Autoinflammatory Alliance. Any grants or funding from pharma is received by the non-profit organisation only. CLH received funding under a sponsored research agreement unrelated to the data in the paper from Vifor Pharmaceuticals. LeK has received a research grant from Lilly unrelated to this work. AHJK participated in consulting, advisory board or speaker's bureau for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Annexon Biosciences, Exagen Diagnostics and GlaxoSmithKilne and received funding under a sponsored research agreement unrelated to the data in the paper from GlaxoSmithKline. JSingh has received consultant fees from Crealta/ Horizon, Medisys, Fidia, PK Med, Two Labs, Adept Field Solutions, Clinical Care Options, Clearview Healthcare Partners, Putnam Associates, Focus Forward, Navigant Consulting, Spherix, MedIQ, Jupiter Life Science, UBM, Trio Health, Medscape, WebMD and Practice Point Communications; and the National Institutes of Health and the American College of Rheumatology. JSingh owns stock options in TPT Global Tech, Vaxart Pharmaceuticals and Charlotte’s Web Holdings. JSingh previously owned stock options in Amarin, Viking and Moderna Pharmaceuticals. JSingh is on the speaker’s bureau of Simply Speaking. JSingh is a member of the executive of Outcomes Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT), an organisation that develops outcome measures in rheumatology and receives arms-length funding from eight companies. JSingh serves on the FDA Arthritis Advisory Committee. JSingh is the chair of the Veterans Affairs Rheumatology Field Advisory Committee. JSingh is the editor and the Director of the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group Satellite Center on Network Meta-analysis. NSingh is supported by funding from the Rheumatology Research Foundation Investigator Award and the American Heart Association. MFU-G has received research support from Pfizer and Janssen, unrelated to this work. SB reports personal fees from Novartis, AbbVie, Pfizer and Horizon Pharma, outside the submitted work. RG reports personal fees from AbbVie New Zealand, Cornerstones, Janssen New Zealand and personal fees and non-financial support Pfizer New Zealand (all <US$10 000) outside the submitted work. PMM reports personal fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, grants and personal fees from Orphazyme, outside the submitted work. PCR reports personal fees from AbbVie, Gilead, Lilly and Roche, grants and personal fees from Novartis, UCB Pharma, Janssen and Pfizer and non-financial support from BMS, outside the submitted work. PS reports honoraria from Social media editor for @ACR_Journals, outside the submitted work. ZSW reports grants from NIH, BMS and Principia/ Sanofi and personal fees from Viela Bio and MedPace, outside the submitted work. JY reports personal fees from Pfizer and Eli Lilly, and grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. MJL reports grants from American College of Rheumatology, during the conduct of the study and consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Actelion, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Celgene, Gilead, J&J, Mallinckrodt, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, Sobi and UCB, outside the submitted work. LGR was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS; ZIAES101074) of the National Institutes of Health. JH reports grants from Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) and Rheumatology Research Alliance, and personal fees from Novartis, Pfizer and Biogen, outside the submitted work. JSimard received research grant funding from the National Institutes of Health unrelated to this work (NIAMS: R01 AR077103 and NIAID R01 AI154533). JSparks has performed consultancy for AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova Diagnostics, Optum and Pfizer unrelated to this work. Funding Information: Funding This study was supported by the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology and American College of Rheumatology Research and Education Foundation. Dr. Lisa Rider's involvement was supported in part by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Publisher Copyright: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Background. We describe the early experiences of adults with systemic rheumatic disease who received the COVID-19 vaccine. Methods From 2 April to 30 April 2021, we conducted an online, international survey of adults with systemic rheumatic disease who received COVID-19 vaccination. We collected patient-reported data on clinician communication, beliefs and intent about discontinuing disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) around the time of vaccination, and patient-reported adverse events after vaccination. Results We analysed 2860 adults with systemic rheumatic diseases who received COVID-19 vaccination (mean age 55.3 years, 86.7% female, 86.3% white). Types of COVID-19 vaccines were Pfizer-BioNTech (53.2%), Oxford/AstraZeneca (22.6%), Moderna (21.3%), Janssen/Johnson & Johnson (1.7%) and others (1.2%). The most common rheumatic disease was rheumatoid arthritis (42.3%), and 81.2% of respondents were on a DMARD. The majority (81.9%) reported communicating with clinicians about vaccination. Most (66.9%) were willing to temporarily discontinue DMARDs to improve vaccine efficacy, although many (44.3%) were concerned about rheumatic disease flares. After vaccination, the most reported patient-reported adverse events were fatigue/somnolence (33.4%), headache (27.7%), muscle/joint pains (22.8%) and fever/chills (19.9%). Rheumatic disease flares that required medication changes occurred in 4.6%. Conclusion. Among adults with systemic rheumatic disease who received COVID-19 vaccination, patient-reported adverse events were typical of those reported in the general population. Most patients were willing to temporarily discontinue DMARDs to improve vaccine efficacy. The relatively low frequency of rheumatic disease flare requiring medications was reassuring.publishersversionPeer reviewe

Prolonged COVID-19 symptom duration in people with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases: results from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Vaccine Survey

OBJECTIVE: We investigated prolonged COVID-19 symptom duration, defined as lasting 28 days or longer, among people with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs). METHODS: We analysed data from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance Vaccine Survey (2 April 2021-15 October 2021) to identify people with SARDs reporting test-confirmed COVID-19. Participants reported COVID-19 severity and symptom duration, sociodemographics and clinical characteristics. We reported the proportion experiencing prolonged symptom duration and investigated associations with baseline characteristics using logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 441 respondents with SARDs and COVID-19 (mean age 48.2 years, 83.7% female, 39.5% rheumatoid arthritis). The median COVID-19 symptom duration was 15 days (IQR 7, 25). Overall, 107 (24.2%) respondents had prolonged symptom duration (≥28 days); 42/429 (9.8%) reported symptoms lasting ≥90 days. Factors associated with higher odds of prolonged symptom duration included: hospitalisation for COVID-19 vs not hospitalised and mild acute symptoms (age-adjusted OR (aOR) 6.49, 95% CI 3.03 to 14.1), comorbidity count (aOR 1.11 per comorbidity, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.21) and osteoarthritis (aOR 2.11, 95% CI 1.01 to 4.27). COVID-19 onset in 2021 vs June 2020 or earlier was associated with lower odds of prolonged symptom duration (aOR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.81). CONCLUSION: Most people with SARDs had complete symptom resolution by day 15 after COVID-19 onset. However, about 1 in 4 experienced COVID-19 symptom duration 28 days or longer; 1 in 10 experienced symptoms 90 days or longer. Future studies are needed to investigate the possible relationships between immunomodulating medications, SARD type/flare, vaccine doses and novel viral variants with prolonged COVID-19 symptoms and other postacute sequelae of COVID-19 among people with SARDs