Potential impact of temperature and atmospheric pressure on the number of cases of COVID-19 in Mozambique, Southern Africa

The potential reasons why COVID-19 is not spreading rapidly in Sub-Saharan Africa include sociopolitical, biological and environmental variables. Among the latter, some studies indicate temperature and atmospheric pressure as significantly influential. Could they have impact on the number of COVID-19 cases in Mozambique? The aim of this study is to analyze the relationships between weather and the frequency of confirmed COVID-19 cases in Mozambique, Southern Africa. The study was conducted in Mozambique, Maputo area (Province and City) and Nampula Province. Daily history of weather variables ­ daily maximum and minimum temperatures and atmospheric pressure ­ was obtained from three online databases (AccuWeather, Time and Date AS and WeatherSpark) and the number of COVID-19 cases from official Government's daily Bulletins. The main statistical analyses were Pearson correlations between the variables. The first case was observed in the Maputo area on 22 March, 2020 and the cases in Mozambique increased exponentially up to 769 by 24 June, 2020. The first three cases in Nampula province were observed on 24 May 2020 but its frequency surpassed Maputo area's within one month. Temperatures showed negative correlations with the number of cases in all areas and pressure showed positive correlations in Maputo area and Nampula Province. A bubble chart allowed the visualization of the combined relationship of both weather variables and the number of cases, suggesting that the number of cases increases as temperature decreases and pressure increases. Temperature and atmospheric pressure seems to be correlated with the number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 in Mozambique. Thus, decision-makers should consider weather as a predictor of the rate at which the pandemic is spreading in the country

Alvorecer do Paradigma Sistêmico na Educação Médica / Dawn of the Systemic Paradigm in Medical Education

RESUMO A formação de médicos no Brasil seguia os moldes do projeto flexneriano até que o emergente Sistema Único de Saúde, com o diagnóstico da situação do setor saúde e a implantação de políticas de reorientação do modelo assistencial para um voltado à Atenção Básica, mostrou a necessidade de realinhar a formação médica às suas necessidades. As novas escolas médicas têm que iniciar com um modelo pedagógico que se utilize de metodologias ativas de ensino-aprendizagem, e as antigas escolas têm que se adaptar ao modelo proposto. Este momento de transição vem gerando conflitos, dificuldades, angústias, currículo oculto e incompreensões. Tal situação é decorrente da exigência de ultrapassagem de paradigmas para atuar no novo modelo pedagógico, sem, contudo, que as pessoas envolvidas tenham consciência disso. Vemos e interpretamos o mundo por meio dos nossos paradigmas, que agem como lentes que filtram o que enxergamos, estabelecem limites do que acreditamos, e influenciam nossas percepções e ações. Assim, o objetivo deste artigo é propor um olhar sobre conceitos e práticas neste momento de transição paradigmática, visando colaborar com a discussão e, principalmente, compreensão das incoerências, dificuldades e insucessos na implantação de projetos contemporâneos na área da saúde. O estudo das partes simples não é suficiente para entender o todo complexo, que deve ser estudado e compreendido em sua inteireza, a partir, inclusive, da sua relação com o outro. A instabilidade e a complexidade do mundo colocam em evidência a importância dos processos, do contexto de cada situação e das conexões sistêmicas entre todos os fenômenos. No emergente Pensamento Complexo, não cabem mais as contribuições isoladas de cada disciplina, mas exige-se o olhar e posicionamento interdisciplinar para buscar verdades construídas em conjunto, estabelecidas no contexto e na relação com o outro. Não se fala mais em saúde ou em doença, mas sim no processo saúde-doença; da mesma forma, o ensino e o aprendizado dão lugar ao processo de ensino-aprendizagem. Como característico em uma situação de transição paradigmática, há conflitos e diferenças de compreensão do mundo, que geram situações identificadas como crises. Vivemos sob a égide de dois paradigmas diferentes e simultâneos, que partilham conhecimentos e práticas: o Paradigma Newton-Cartesiano e o Paradigma Sistêmico. A partir da reflexão gerada por este artigo, espera-se que o leitor identifique o paradigma dominante em sua vida e seu posicionamento no contexto da transição paradigmática, compreenda os conflitos que enfrenta no seu trabalho e na sua vida, e se permita uma reorientação de rota, com vistas a viver melhor e atuar de forma mais coerente e saudável no mundo.

ABSTRACT The training of doctors in Brazil followed the Flexnerian project until the Unified Health System (SUS), with the diagnosis of the health sector situation and the implementation of policies to reorient the care model to one that favours Basic Care, showed the need to realign medical education to the needs of the emerging SUS. The new medical schools have to start with a pedagogical model that uses active teaching-learning methodologies, and the old ones have to adapt to this proposed model. This moment of transition is generating conflicts, difficulties, anxiety, hidden curriculum and misunderstandings. This situation is due to the need to overcome paradigms to act in the new pedagogical model, without, however, the people involved being aware of this. As we see and interpret the world through our paradigms, which act as lenses that filter what we see, establish limits of what is possible to believe and influence our perceptions and actions, the objective of this article is to propose a look at concepts and practices in this complex paradigmatic transition moment, aiming to collaborate with the discussion and, mainly, to understand the inconsistencies, difficulties and failures in the implementation of contemporary projects in the health education area. The study of the simple parts is not enough to understand the complex whole, which must be studied and understood in its entirety, from its relation to the other. The instability and complexity of the world highlight the importance of the processes, of the context of each situation, and the systemic connections between all phenomena. In the emerging Complex Thinking, the isolated contributions of each discipline no longer fit, but an interdisciplinary look and positioning is required to seek co-constructed truths, which are established in the context, and in the relationship with the other. One does not talk about health or disease anymore, but about the health-disease process; similarly, teaching and learning give way to the teaching-learning process. As characteristic in a paradigm transition situation, there are conflicts and differences regarding the understanding of the world, generating situations identified as crises. We live under the aegis of two different and simultaneous paradigms that share knowledge and practices: the Newton-Cartesian Paradigm and the Systemic Paradigm. From the reflection generated by this article it is expected that the reader will identify the dominant paradigm in their life and their consequent positioning in the context of the paradigmatic transition; will understand the conflicts faced in daily work and life; and will allow a route reorientation, aiming at living better and acting in a more coherent and healthy way in the world.