Le problème des sacrifices humains : cas du néolithique soudanais

From 1975 to 1999 about ten cemeteries in Central Sudan and in Nubia were studied. More than a thousand tombs which date from the first half of the 5th millenium to the first half of the 4th millenium were excavated. Among these thousand skeletons, five of them, all found in multiple burials, were discovered in positions which are quite different from the others. These «unusual» findings, combined with others, point to the practice of human sacrifices in relation to a process of social stratification. This precedes the first great African kingdom of Kerma.Entre 1975 et 1999, une dizaine de cimetières furent étudiés au Soudan central et en Nubie, à partir de la fouille de plus d’un millier de tombes, qui, chronologiquement, documentent la période qui s’étend entre la première moitié du Ve millénaire et la première moitié du IVe. Sur ce millier de squelettes, cinq, provenant de sépultures multiples, présentent des positions qui les différencient très nettement des autres. Ces «anomalies» s’ajoutant à d’autres, permettent d’évoquer des cas de sacrifices humains, en relation avec un processus de stratification sociale, prélude à l’apparition du premier grand royaume africain : Kerma.Reinold Jacques. Le problème des sacrifices humains : cas du néolithique soudanais. In: Archéo-Nil. Revue de la société pour l'étude des cultures prépharaoniques de la vallée du Nil, n°10, 2000. Le sacrifice humain en contexte funéraire. pp. 89-96

Développement d’un cimetière néolithique de type familial : le cas du cimetière néolithique d’El Kadada (district de Taragma) au Soudan central

Development of a family type neolithic cemetery : El-Kadada, Sudan Central. The following article deals with the results obtained from one of the final neolithic cemetery of El Kadada, Central Sudan. This cemetery is situated on one of the slopes of an old Nile terrace, which was used as settlement. Those inhumations correspond to a small community living on this hill side during one specific phase of the final neolithic period. Unfortunately the demographic image is not homogeneous because children deceased before being six were buried outside the cemetery (but in relation to the settlement). When combining the location plans of the grave, the contour lines and the content of the sepultures, we are able to individualize significant groups of tombs of about 12 people who most probably, had a family link.Le cimetière est situé sur une des pentes d’une ancienne terrasse du Nil qui fut utilisée comme habitat. Ces inhumations correspondent à une petite communauté qui vécut sur le bord de cette butte durant une phase spécifique du néolithique final. Malheureusement, l’image démographique n’est pas homogène en raison du fait que les enfants décédés avant six ans furent inhumés en dehors du cimetière (mais en relation avec l’habitat). Lorsqu’on combine les plans de localisation des tombes avec les lignes de contours et le contenu des sépultures, on arrive à individualiser des groupes significatifs de tombes d’environ 12 personnes qui ont probablement entre elles des liens de parenté.Reinold Jacques. Développement d’un cimetière néolithique de type familial : le cas du cimetière néolithique d’El Kadada (district de Taragma) au Soudan central . In: Archéo-Nil. Revue de la société pour l'étude des cultures prépharaoniques de la vallée du Nil, n°2, 1992. Paléo-ethnologie Funéraire et Paléo-Biologie. pp. 115-127

Use of IV Iron and Risk of Anaphylaxis: A Multinational Observational Post-Authorisation Safety Study in Europe

PURPOSE: This post-authorisation safety study estimated the risk of anaphylaxis in patients receiving intravenous (IV) iron in Europe, with interest in iron dextran and iron non-dextrans. Studies conducted in the United States have reported risk of anaphylaxis to IV iron ranging from 2.0 to 6.8 per 10 000 first treatments. METHODS: Cohort study of IV iron new users, captured mostly through pharmacy ambulatory dispensing, from populations covered by health and administrative data sources in five European countries from 1999 to 2017. Anaphylaxis events were identified through an algorithm that used parenteral penicillin as a positive control. RESULTS: A total of 304 210 patients with a first IV iron treatment (6367 iron dextran), among whom 13–16 anaphylaxis cases were identified and reported as a range to comply with data protection regulations. The pooled unadjusted incidence proportion (IP) ranged from 0.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2–0.9) to 0.5 (95% CI, 0.3–1.0) per 10 000 first treatments. No events were identified at first dextran treatments. There were 231 294 first penicillin treatments with 30 potential cases of anaphylaxis (IP = 1.2; 95% CI, 0.8–1.7 per 10 000 treatments). CONCLUSION: We found an IP of anaphylaxis from 0.4 to 0.5 per 10 000 first IV iron treatments. The study captured only a fraction of IV iron treatments administered in hospitals, where most first treatments are likely to happen. Due to this limitation, the study could not exclude a differential risk of anaphylaxis between iron dextran and iron non-dextrans. The IP of anaphylaxis in users of penicillin was consistent with incidences reported in the literature