Héstia & Hermes – pesquisa e reflexões sobre o simbólico e a hospitalidade

This article exposes a reflection about the symbolic and mythical dimensions of hospitality sustained in a empirical study developed with tourism and hospitality students, theoretically framed by the thinking of contemporary authors as Jacques Derrida, Marcel Mauss e Leonardo Boff.Este artigo expõe uma reflexão sobre as dimensões simbólicas e míticas da hospitalidade sustentada num estudo empírico realizado junto dos estudantes das áreas de Turismo e Hospitalidade, teoricamente enquadradado pelo pensamento de autores contemporâneos como Jacques Derrida, Marcel Mauss e Leonardo Boff

Educomunicação e suas áreas de intervenção: Novos paradigmas para o diálogo intercultural

oai:omp.abpeducom.org.br:publicationFormat/1O material aqui divulgado representa, em essência, a contribuição do VII Encontro Brasileiro de Educomunicação ao V Global MIL Week, da UNESCO, ocorrido na ECA/USP, entre 3 e 5 de novembro de 2016. Estamos diante de um conjunto de 104 papers executivos, com uma média de entre 7 e 10 páginas, cada um. Com este rico e abundante material, chegamos ao sétimo e-book publicado pela ABPEducom, em seus seis primeiros anos de existência. A especificidade desta obra é a de trazer as “Áreas de Intervenção” do campo da Educomunicação, colocando-as a serviço de uma meta essencial ao agir educomunicativo: o diálogo intercultural, trabalhado na linha do tema geral do evento internacional: Media and Information Literacy: New Paradigms for Intercultural Dialogue

-

O objetivo desta tese é avaliar criticamente o discurso da sustentabilidade global e seu repasse local nas organizações. Aqui é adotada a perspectiva crítica, sendo a produção do discurso vista como vinculada às condições de existência, mas, com base na dinâmica dialética, o discurso pode ser um agente de mudança e promover novas maneiras de viver. A partir do entendimento da questão da sustentabilidade como resultante da globalização, Milton Santos é nossa inspiração na avaliação da sustentabilidade global enquanto discurso. O autor, ao refletir sobre a globalização considera a existência de três mundos em um só: a globalização como fábula; a globalização como perversidade; e a possibilidade de uma outra globalização. Da mesma maneira entendemos que a sustentabilidade também envolve três discursos em um só. A sustentabilidade é apresentada como solução, salvação do mundo, mas ela encobre que é o grande problema da atualidade, a danação do mundo. Consequência da globalização, a questão da sustentabilidade tem sua base em um modelo econômico perverso, gerador dos aspectos centrais da insustentabilidade global, a saber, de um lado, o aquecimento global e as mudanças climáticas, devido a alta utilização de energias fósseis e a emissão de gás de efeito estufa (GEE); e , de outro, uma pegada ecológica que demanda um planeta e meio, o que indica a sobreexploração e a deterioração dos serviços ecossistêmicos, os quais são o suporte para a vida no planeta. A pesquisa empírica deste estudo mostra que as empresas adotam o discurso da sustentabilidade global, mas não reconhecem sua responsabilidade no impacto sobre o planeta. Mas não precisa ser assim. Podemos dizer que um outro mundo é possível, e escolher seguir um novo caminho, uma outra sustentabilidade. Uma sustentabilidade que está na dimensão das pessoas e das relações com o outro e que, dessa maneira, faz-se presente na categoria dos direitos sociais e da cidadania. A adoção da comunicação como estratégia possível de sustentabilidade é o que nos leva do discurso da sustentabilidade global ao exercício da sustentabilidade enquanto cidadania local.The objective of this thesis is to critically evaluate the discourse of global sustainability and its transference to the local level, within the organizations. A critical perspective is assumed; with the production of speech perceived as a link for living conditions , yet, based on the dynamic dialectic, the discourse can be a means of change and to promote new ways of living. As from the understanding of the discourse of sustainability as a result of globalization, Milton Santos is our inspiration for reasoning in the appraisal of the discourse of global sustainability. The author, reflecting on globalization considers the existence of three worlds in one: globalization as a fable; globalization as perversity; and the possibility of another globalization. Thereto, we understand that sustainability also involves three discourses in one. Sustainability is presented as a solution, a world\'s salvation, however we are faced with an enormous problem today, the damnation of the world. Consequence of globalization, sustainability is based in a perverse economic model, generator of the key issues of global unsustainability, specifically, on the one hand, global warming and climate changes, due to the high use of fossil fuels and the emission of greenhouse gases (GHG) ;and on the other hand, an ecological footprint that demands one planet and a half, which indicates over-exploitation and deterioration on the ecosystemic services, as a support for life on the planet. The empirical research of this study shows that companies adopt the discourse of global sustainability, but do not recognize its\' responsibility in the impact on the planet. Nevertheless, it does not need to be in such a way. We can say that another world is possible, and choose to follow a new path, another sustainability. A sustainability that is in the dimension of people and the relationship with others; thereby, becomes present in the category of social rights and citizenship. The adoption of communication as a possible strategy of sustainability is what takes us from the discourse of global sustainability to the exercise of sustainability as local citizenship

-

O objetivo desta tese é avaliar criticamente o discurso da sustentabilidade global e seu repasse local nas organizações. Aqui é adotada a perspectiva crítica, sendo a produção do discurso vista como vinculada às condições de existência, mas, com base na dinâmica dialética, o discurso pode ser um agente de mudança e promover novas maneiras de viver. A partir do entendimento da questão da sustentabilidade como resultante da globalização, Milton Santos é nossa inspiração na avaliação da sustentabilidade global enquanto discurso. O autor, ao refletir sobre a globalização considera a existência de três mundos em um só: a globalização como fábula; a globalização como perversidade; e a possibilidade de uma outra globalização. Da mesma maneira entendemos que a sustentabilidade também envolve três discursos em um só. A sustentabilidade é apresentada como solução, salvação do mundo, mas ela encobre que é o grande problema da atualidade, a danação do mundo. Consequência da globalização, a questão da sustentabilidade tem sua base em um modelo econômico perverso, gerador dos aspectos centrais da insustentabilidade global, a saber, de um lado, o aquecimento global e as mudanças climáticas, devido a alta utilização de energias fósseis e a emissão de gás de efeito estufa (GEE); e , de outro, uma pegada ecológica que demanda um planeta e meio, o que indica a sobreexploração e a deterioração dos serviços ecossistêmicos, os quais são o suporte para a vida no planeta. A pesquisa empírica deste estudo mostra que as empresas adotam o discurso da sustentabilidade global, mas não reconhecem sua responsabilidade no impacto sobre o planeta. Mas não precisa ser assim. Podemos dizer que um outro mundo é possível, e escolher seguir um novo caminho, uma outra sustentabilidade. Uma sustentabilidade que está na dimensão das pessoas e das relações com o outro e que, dessa maneira, faz-se presente na categoria dos direitos sociais e da cidadania. A adoção da comunicação como estratégia possível de sustentabilidade é o que nos leva do discurso da sustentabilidade global ao exercício da sustentabilidade enquanto cidadania local.The objective of this thesis is to critically evaluate the discourse of global sustainability and its transference to the local level, within the organizations. A critical perspective is assumed; with the production of speech perceived as a link for living conditions , yet, based on the dynamic dialectic, the discourse can be a means of change and to promote new ways of living. As from the understanding of the discourse of sustainability as a result of globalization, Milton Santos is our inspiration for reasoning in the appraisal of the discourse of global sustainability. The author, reflecting on globalization considers the existence of three worlds in one: globalization as a fable; globalization as perversity; and the possibility of another globalization. Thereto, we understand that sustainability also involves three discourses in one. Sustainability is presented as a solution, a world\'s salvation, however we are faced with an enormous problem today, the damnation of the world. Consequence of globalization, sustainability is based in a perverse economic model, generator of the key issues of global unsustainability, specifically, on the one hand, global warming and climate changes, due to the high use of fossil fuels and the emission of greenhouse gases (GHG) ;and on the other hand, an ecological footprint that demands one planet and a half, which indicates over-exploitation and deterioration on the ecosystemic services, as a support for life on the planet. The empirical research of this study shows that companies adopt the discourse of global sustainability, but do not recognize its\' responsibility in the impact on the planet. Nevertheless, it does not need to be in such a way. We can say that another world is possible, and choose to follow a new path, another sustainability. A sustainability that is in the dimension of people and the relationship with others; thereby, becomes present in the category of social rights and citizenship. The adoption of communication as a possible strategy of sustainability is what takes us from the discourse of global sustainability to the exercise of sustainability as local citizenship

Efficacy and safety of sparsentan versus irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy (PROTECT): 2-year results from a randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trial

BackgroundSparsentan, a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin angiotensin receptor antagonist, significantly reduced proteinuria versus irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, at 36 weeks (primary endpoint) in patients with immunoglobulin A nephropathy in the phase 3 PROTECT trial's previously reported interim analysis. Here, we report kidney function and outcomes over 110 weeks from the double-blind final analysis.MethodsPROTECT, a double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 study, was done across 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries throughout the Americas, Asia, and Europe. Patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-proven primary IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of at least 1·0 g per day despite maximised renin–angiotensin system inhibition for at least 12 weeks were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive sparsentan (target dose 400 mg oral sparsentan once daily) or irbesartan (target dose 300 mg oral irbesartan once daily) based on a permuted-block randomisation method. The primary endpoint was proteinuria change between treatment groups at 36 weeks. Secondary endpoints included rate of change (slope) of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), changes in proteinuria, a composite of kidney failure (confirmed 40% eGFR reduction, end-stage kidney disease, or all-cause mortality), and safety and tolerability up to 110 weeks from randomisation. Secondary efficacy outcomes were assessed in the full analysis set and safety was assessed in the safety set, both of which were defined as all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of randomly assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850.FindingsBetween Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 203 patients were randomly assigned to the sparsentan group and 203 to the irbesartan group. One patient from each group did not receive the study drug and was excluded from the efficacy and safety analyses (282 [70%] of 404 included patients were male and 272 [67%] were White) . Patients in the sparsentan group had a slower rate of eGFR decline than those in the irbesartan group. eGFR chronic 2-year slope (weeks 6–110) was −2·7 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·8 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·1 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI 0·1 to 2·1; p=0·037); total 2-year slope (day 1–week 110) was −2·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·0 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI −0·03 to 1·94; p=0·058). The significant reduction in proteinuria at 36 weeks with sparsentan was maintained throughout the study period; at 110 weeks, proteinuria, as determined by the change from baseline in urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, was 40% lower in the sparsentan group than in the irbesartan group (−42·8%, 95% CI −49·8 to −35·0, with sparsentan versus −4·4%, −15·8 to 8·7, with irbesartan; geometric least-squares mean ratio 0·60, 95% CI 0·50 to 0·72). The composite kidney failure endpoint was reached by 18 (9%) of 202 patients in the sparsentan group versus 26 (13%) of 202 patients in the irbesartan group (relative risk 0·7, 95% CI 0·4 to 1·2). Treatment-emergent adverse events were well balanced between sparsentan and irbesartan, with no new safety signals.InterpretationOver 110 weeks, treatment with sparsentan versus maximally titrated irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy resulted in significant reductions in proteinuria and preservation of kidney function

Sparsentan in patients with IgA nephropathy: a prespecified interim analysis from a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial

Background: Sparsentan is a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin and angiotensin receptor antagonist being examined in an ongoing phase 3 trial in adults with IgA nephropathy. We report the prespecified interim analysis of the primary proteinuria efficacy endpoint, and safety. Methods: PROTECT is an international, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled study, being conducted in 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries. The study examines sparsentan versus irbesartan in adults (aged ≥18 years) with biopsy-proven IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of 1·0 g/day or higher despite maximised renin-angiotensin system inhibitor treatment for at least 12 weeks. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive sparsentan 400 mg once daily or irbesartan 300 mg once daily, stratified by estimated glomerular filtration rate at screening (30 to 1·75 g/day). The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to week 36 in urine protein-creatinine ratio based on a 24-h urine sample, assessed using mixed model repeated measures. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were safety endpoints. All endpoints were examined in all participants who received at least one dose of randomised treatment. The study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850. Findings: Between Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 404 participants were randomly assigned to sparsentan (n=202) or irbesartan (n=202) and received treatment. At week 36, the geometric least squares mean percent change from baseline in urine protein-creatinine ratio was statistically significantly greater in the sparsentan group (-49·8%) than the irbesartan group (-15·1%), resulting in a between-group relative reduction of 41% (least squares mean ratio=0·59; 95% CI 0·51-0·69; p<0·0001). TEAEs with sparsentan were similar to irbesartan. There were no cases of severe oedema, heart failure, hepatotoxicity, or oedema-related discontinuations. Bodyweight changes from baseline were not different between the sparsentan and irbesartan groups. Interpretation: Once-daily treatment with sparsentan produced meaningful reduction in proteinuria compared with irbesartan in adults with IgA nephropathy. Safety of sparsentan was similar to irbesartan. Future analyses after completion of the 2-year double-blind period will show whether these beneficial effects translate into a long-term nephroprotective potential of sparsentan. Funding: Travere Therapeutics

Efficacy and safety of sparsentan versus irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy (PROTECT): 2-year results from a randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trial

Background Sparsentan, a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin angiotensin receptor antagonist, significantly reduced proteinuria versus irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, at 36 weeks (primary endpoint) in patients with immunoglobulin A nephropathy in the phase 3 PROTECT trial's previously reported interim analysis. Here, we report kidney function and outcomes over 110 weeks from the double-blind final analysis. Methods PROTECT, a double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 study, was done across 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries throughout the Americas, Asia, and Europe. Patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-proven primary IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of at least 1·0 g per day despite maximised renin–angiotensin system inhibition for at least 12 weeks were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive sparsentan (target dose 400 mg oral sparsentan once daily) or irbesartan (target dose 300 mg oral irbesartan once daily) based on a permuted-block randomisation method. The primary endpoint was proteinuria change between treatment groups at 36 weeks. Secondary endpoints included rate of change (slope) of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), changes in proteinuria, a composite of kidney failure (confirmed 40% eGFR reduction, end-stage kidney disease, or all-cause mortality), and safety and tolerability up to 110 weeks from randomisation. Secondary efficacy outcomes were assessed in the full analysis set and safety was assessed in the safety set, both of which were defined as all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of randomly assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850. Findings Between Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 203 patients were randomly assigned to the sparsentan group and 203 to the irbesartan group. One patient from each group did not receive the study drug and was excluded from the efficacy and safety analyses (282 [70%] of 404 included patients were male and 272 [67%] were White) . Patients in the sparsentan group had a slower rate of eGFR decline than those in the irbesartan group. eGFR chronic 2-year slope (weeks 6–110) was −2·7 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·8 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·1 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI 0·1 to 2·1; p=0·037); total 2-year slope (day 1–week 110) was −2·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·0 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI −0·03 to 1·94; p=0·058). The significant reduction in proteinuria at 36 weeks with sparsentan was maintained throughout the study period; at 110 weeks, proteinuria, as determined by the change from baseline in urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, was 40% lower in the sparsentan group than in the irbesartan group (−42·8%, 95% CI −49·8 to −35·0, with sparsentan versus −4·4%, −15·8 to 8·7, with irbesartan; geometric least-squares mean ratio 0·60, 95% CI 0·50 to 0·72). The composite kidney failure endpoint was reached by 18 (9%) of 202 patients in the sparsentan group versus 26 (13%) of 202 patients in the irbesartan group (relative risk 0·7, 95% CI 0·4 to 1·2). Treatment-emergent adverse events were well balanced between sparsentan and irbesartan, with no new safety signals. Interpretation Over 110 weeks, treatment with sparsentan versus maximally titrated irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy resulted in significant reductions in proteinuria and preservation of kidney function.</p