Médecine sociate en 2013: quand la précarité précède la pauvrete [Social medicine: does it still make sense in 2013?].

Social medicine is a medicine that seeks to understand the impact of socio-economic conditions on human health and diseases in order to improve the health of a society and its individuals. In this field of medicine, determining the socio-economic status of individuals is generally not sufficient to explain and/or understand the underlying mechanisms leading to social inequalities in health. Other factors must be considered such as environmental, psychosocial, behavioral and biological factors that, together, can lead to more or less permanent damages to the health of the individuals in a society. In a time where considerable progresses have been made in the field of the biomedicine, does the practice of social medicine in a primary care setting still make sense?

Alveolar macrophages and lung dendritic cells sense RNA and drive mucosal IgA responses.

The mechanisms regulating systemic and mucosal IgA responses in the respiratory tract are incompletely understood. Using virus-like particles loaded with single-stranded RNA as a ligand for TLR7, we found that systemic vs mucosal IgA responses in mice were differently regulated. Systemic IgA responses following s.c. immunization were T cell independent and did not require TACI or TGFbeta, whereas mucosal IgA production was dependent on Th cells, TACI, and TGFbeta. Strikingly, both responses required TLR7 signaling, but systemic IgA depended upon TLR7 signaling directly to B cells whereas mucosal IgA required TLR7 signaling to lung dendritic cells and alveolar macrophages. Our data show that IgA switching is controlled differently according to the cell type receiving TLR signals. This knowledge should facilitate the development of IgA-inducing vaccines.

"Public on the outside, private on the inside": the organizational hybridization, sense of belonging and identity strategies of the employees of a public unemployment insurance fund in Switzerland

A number of studies show that New Public Management reforms have altered the current identity benchmarks of public officials, particularly by hybridizing values or management practices. However, existing studies have largely glossed over the sense of belonging of officials when their organization straddles the concerns of public service and private enterprise, so that the boundary between public and private sector is blurred. The purpose of this article is precisely to explore this sense of belonging in the context of organizational hybridization. It does so by drawing on the results of research conducted among the employees of a public unemployment insurance fund in Switzerland. On the one hand, the analysis shows how much their markers of belonging are hybrid, multiple and constructed in negative terms (with regard to the State), while indicating that the working practices of the employees point to an identity that is nevertheless closely bound with the public sector. On the other hand, the analysis shows that the organization plays strategically with its State status, by exploiting either its private or public identity in line with the needs related to its external image. The article concludes with a discussion of the results highlighting the strategic functionality of the hybrid identity of the actors.