Food and Nutrition Security - meanings and appropriations from the civil society segment of the National Council for Food and Nutrition Security

The huge transformations that occurred in the last two decades had impacts on the standards of food production and consumption, and determined a wider discussion in Brazil about the theme of food and nutrition security. It has also expanded the scope of it, which now considers nourishing aspects regarding the entire population and not only its most vulnerable segments. This research identified different meanings present in the speech about food and nutrition security, terms incorporated by movements and civil society organizations that were represented at the National Council for Food and Nutrition Security (administration 2004-2007). Thematic appropriation could be observed in the following directions: a) privileging the interaction between thematic fields from both production and consumption spheres; b) strengthening the idea of nutrition as a human right; c) including an ethical goal to the country's development; d) development of an intra and intersectorial perspective; e) identifying the need of dialogic and freeing educational processes.

Cross-national differences in questionnaires do not necessarily reflect comparable differences in disorder prevalence

To examine whether the widely used Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) can validly be used to compare the prevalence of child mental health problems cross nationally. We used data on 29,225 5- to 16-year olds in eight population-based studies from seven countries: Bangladesh, Brazil, Britain, India, Norway, Russia and Yemen. Parents completed the SDQ in all eight studies, teachers in seven studies and youth in five studies. We used these SDQ data to calculate three different sorts of "caseness indicators" based on (1) SDQ symptoms, (2) SDQ symptoms plus impact and (3) an overall respondent judgement of 'definite' or 'severe' difficulties. Respondents also completed structured diagnostic interviews including extensive open-ended questions (the Development and Well-Being Assessment, DAWBA). Diagnostic ratings were all carried out or supervised by the DAWBA's creator, working in conjunction with experienced local professionals. As judged by the DAWBA, the prevalence of any mental disorder ranged from 2.2% in India to 17.1% in Russia. The nine SDQ caseness indicators (three indicators times three informants) explained 8-56% of the cross-national variation in disorder prevalence. This was insufficient to make meaningful prevalence estimates since populations with a similar measured prevalence of disorder on the DAWBA showed large variations across the various SDQ caseness indicators. The relationship between SDQ caseness indicators and disorder rates varies substantially between populations: cross-national differences in SDQ indicators do not necessarily reflect comparable differences in disorder rates. More generally, considerable caution is required when interpreting cross-cultural comparisons of mental health, particularly when these rely on brief questionnaires.