Identification of factors and groups at risk of infection with Schistosoma mansoni: a strategy for the implementation of control measures?

A fourteen year schistosomiasis control program in Peri-Peri (Capim Branco, MG) reduced prevalence from 43.5 to 4.4%; incidence from 19.0 to 2.9%, the geometric mean of the number of eggs from 281 to 87 and the level of the hepatoesplenic form cases from 5.9 to 0.0%. In 1991, three years after the interruption of the program, the prevalence had risen to 19.6%. The district consists of Barbosa (a rural area) and Peri-Peri itself (an urban area). In 1991, the prevalence in the two areas was 28.4% and 16.0% respectively. A multivariate analysis of risk factors for schistosomiasis indicated the domestic agricultural activity with population attributive risk (PAR) of 29.82%, the distance (< 10 m) from home to water source (PAR = 25.93%) and weekly fishing (PAR = 17.21%) as being responsible for infections in the rural area. The recommended control measures for this area are non-manual irrigation and removal of homes to more than ten meters from irrigation ditches. In the urban area, it was observed that swimming at weekly intervals (PAR = 20.71%), daily domestic agricultural activity (PAR = 4.07%) and the absence of drinking water in the home (PAR=4.29%) were responsible for infections. Thus, in the urban area the recommended control measures are the substitution of manual irrigation with an irrigation method that avoids contact with water, the creation of leisure options of the population and the provision of a domestic water supply. The authors call attention to the need for the efficacy of multivariate analysis of risk factors to be evaluated for schistosomiasis prior to its large scale use as a indicator of the control measures to be implemented.

General terms and rigidity: another solution to the trivialization problem

In this paper I am concerned with the problem of applying the notion of rigidity to general terms. In Naming and Necessity, Kripke has clearly suggested that we should include some general terms among the rigid ones, namely, those common nouns semantically correlated with natural substances, species and phenomena, in general, natural kinds -'water', 'tiger', 'heat'- and some adjectives -'red', 'hot', 'loud'. However, the notion of rigidity has been defined for singular terms; after all, the notion that Kripke has provided us with is the notion of a rigid designator. But general terms do not designate single individuals: rather, they apply to many of them. In sum, the original concept of rigidity cannot be straightforwardly applied to general terms: it has to be somehow redefined in order to make it cover them. As is known, two main positions have been put forward to accomplish that task: the identity of designation conception, according to which a rigid general term is one that designates the same property or kind in all possible worlds, and the essentialist conception, which conceives of a rigid general term as an essentialist one, namely, a term that expresses an essential property of an object. My purpose in the present paper is to defend a particular version of the identity of designation conception: on the proposed approach, a rigid general term will be one that expresses the same property in all possible worlds and names the property it expresses. In my opinion, the position can be established on the basis of an inference to the best explanation of our intuitive interpretation and evaluation, relative to counterfactual circumstances, of statements containing different kinds of general terms, which is strictly analogous to our intuitive interpretation and evaluation, relative to such circumstances, of statements containing different kinds of singular ones. I will argue that it is possible to offer a new solution to the trivialization problem that is thought to threaten all versions of the identity of designation conception of rigidity. Finally, I will also sketch a solution to the so-called 'over-generalization and under-generalization problems', both closely related to the above-mentioned one.

Existe uma ordem econômica internacional? A problematização de uma premissa

This article invites to a reflection on the ontological and axiological foundations of the concept 'international economic order'. We argue that the notion of 'order' implies, at first, identifying a sort of social arrangement or pattern. However, as we intend to demonstrate, this pattern is hardly present in contemporary international economic relations. Besides, the adjectives 'economic' and 'international' instill doubt not only in regard to the nature of the 'international', but also in what concerns the feasibility of spotting a working pattern in international economy nowadays. Thus, it seems, on heuristical terms, an appropriate methodological option to revisit some of the main canonical contributions to the theme of international (economic) order, and to submit it to academic scrutiny. Additionally, we seek to evaluate how plausible it is to think of a 'multilateral' economic international order.