Suchergebnisse

This research presents an analysis of the jurisprudence versions that reflect in Venezuela the scheme of economic freedom, as well as the right to work consecrated in the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, and especially the Constitutional Branch of the Supreme Court in relation to these concepts of capital importance when examining the projection of work as a social reality. This research visualizes economic liberty as a technical concept and not as a basic consecrated right in the economic development of the country, and analyzes the doctrines of two superior Venezuelan judicial orderings, work and economic freedom, based on a democratic and social State of Rights and on justice. ; Este estudio presenta un análisis sobre las versiones jurisprudenciales que irradian en Venezuela el esquema de Libertad Económica, así como también la libertad de trabajo consagrado en la Constitución de la Republica Bolivariana de Venezuela, especialmente de la Sala Constitucional relativos a estos conceptos, de importancia capital a la hora de examinar la proyección del trabajo como hecho social. La investigación visualiza la libertad económica como concepto técnico y no como Derecho enraizado en el desarrollo económico de un país, analiza las doctrinas sobre los dos valores superiores del ordenamiento jurídico venezolano –trabajo y libertad económica- sustentados sobre el Estado democrático y social de Derecho y de Justicia.

La presente investigación evaluó la mejora del pensamiento matemático, desde una intervención de habilidades computacionales en estudiantes adolescentes de grado octavo de la Institución Educativa Santo Domingo Savio de Chinchiná (Caldas-Colombia), de estrato socioeconómico 1, 2 y 3, con edades comprendidas entre los 12 y 17 años. El trabajo se elaboró en los años 2020 y 2021, se fundamentó conceptualmente en pensamiento computacional propuesto por (Wing, 2014), para el proceso se consideró como la variable de estudio independiente y se referenció la teoría de (Piaget, 1952) sobre el pensamiento matemático, la cual en el estudio es la variable dependiente. La investigación desarrollada es de tipo cuasiexperimental, con un muestreo de tipo no probabilístico intencionado, se trabajó con grupos experimentales, un grupo por cada año, a quienes se les aplicó durante cuatro meses el programa de intervención; previo y posterior al programa de intervención se aplicó pruebas pretest y postest, mediante los test internacionales denominados test de "inteligencia matemática de Binet-Simón y Wechsler", para efectos de comparación de evidencias. Finalmente, mediante pruebas de hipótesis, usando las distribuciones normal y t de Student, se concluye que el pensamiento computacional (variable independiente), afecta de manera estadísticamente significativa en la mejora del pensamiento matemático (variable dependiente).

et al. ; Guano samples from 412 Brazilian bats were screened with real-time PCR for the virulence genes (eae, est, elt, stx1, stx2, ehxA, invA, bfpA, aggR) representing five intestinal pathotypes of Escherichia coli. From 82 pooled samples, 22% contained Escherichia coli DNA, and eae, est, bfpA, aggR were detected. ; Research was supported by European Union FP7 ANTIGONE (Anticipating the Global Onset of Novel Epidemics) project 278976 ; Peer Reviewed

En el presente trabajo se ofrecen elementos teo?ricos de intere?s relacionados con el desarrollo de la educacio?n ambiental, la evaluacio?n como componente del proceso pedago?gico, especi?ficamente lo concerniente a las caracteri?sticas de la evaluacio?n de la ensen?anza de la educacio?n ambiental, se muestran los principales resultados del diagno?stico inicial y se propone sobre esta base, un conjunto de indicadores para evaluar las metas y objetivos de la educacio?n ambiental en el desarrollo de los diferentes componentes del proceso pedago?gico (acade?mico, laboral, investigativo), en los estudiantes de primer an?o de la carrera de Licenciatura en Educacio?n Primaria de la Facultad de Ciencias Pedago?gicas de la Universidad de Camagu?ey.

This opinion describes outdoor farming of pigs in the EU, assesses the risk of African swine fewer (ASF) introduction and spread associated with outdoor pig farms and proposes biosecurity and control measures for outdoor pig farms in ASF-affected areas of the EU. Evidence was collected from Member States (MSs) veterinary authorities, farmers' associations, literature and legislative documents. An Expert knowledge elicitation (EKE) was carried out to group outdoor pig farms according to their risk of introduction and spread of ASF, to rank biosecurity measures regarding their effectiveness with regard to ASF and propose improvements of biosecurity for outdoor pig farming and accompanying control measures. Outdoor pig farming is common and various farm types are present throughout the EU. As there is no legislation at European level for categorising outdoor pig farms in the EU, information is limited, not harmonised and needs to be interpreted with care. The baseline risk of outdoor pig farms for ASFV introduction and its spread is high but with considerable uncertainty. The Panel is 66–90% certain that, if single solid or double fences were fully and properly implemented on all outdoor pig farms in areas of the EU where ASF is present in wild boar and in domestic pigs in indoor farms and outdoor farms (worst case scenario not considering different restriction zones or particular situations), without requiring any other outdoor-specific biosecurity measures or control measures, this would reduce the number of new ASF outbreaks occurring in these farms within a year by more than 50% compared to the baseline risk. The Panel concludes that the regular implementation of independent and objective on-farm biosecurity assessments using comprehensive standard protocols and approving outdoor pig farms on the basis of their biosecurity risk in an official system managed by competent authorities will further reduce the risk of ASF introduction and spread related to outdoor pig farms.

EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW). ; The AGRI committee of the European Parliament requested EFSA to assess the welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems, including organic production, and to update its 2005 scientific opinion about the health and welfare of rabbits kept for meat production. Considering reproducing does, kits and growing rabbits, this scientific opinion focusses on six different housing systems, namely conventional cages, structurally enriched cages, elevated pens, floor pens, outdoor/partially outdoor systems and organic systems. To compare the level of welfare in the different housing systems and rabbit categories, welfare impact scores for 20 welfare consequences identified from the literature were calculated, taking their occurrence, duration and severity into account. Based on the overall welfare impact score (sum of scores for the single welfare consequences), obtained via a 2‐step expert knowledge elicitation process, the welfare of reproducing does is likely (certainty 66–90%) to be lower in conventional cages compared to the five other housing systems. In addition, it is likely to extremely likely (certainty 66–99%) that the welfare of kits is lower in outdoor systems compared to the other systems and that the welfare is higher in elevated pens than in the other systems. Finally, it is likely to extremely likely (certainty 66–99%) that the welfare of growing rabbits is lower in conventional cages compared to the other systems and that the welfare is higher in elevated pens than in the other systems. Ranking of the welfare consequences allowed an analysis of the main welfare consequences within each system and rabbit category. It was concluded that for reproducing does, as well as growing rabbits, welfare consequences related to behavioural restrictions were more prominent in conventional cages, elevated pens and enriched cages, whereas those related to health problems were more important in floor pens, outdoor and organic systems. Housing in organic rabbit farming is diverse, which can result in different welfare consequences, but the overall welfare impact scores suggest that welfare in organic systems is generally good. ; Peer reviewed

EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW). ; This opinion on the killing of rabbits for human consumption ('slaughtering') responds to two mandates: one from the European Parliament (EP) and the other from the European Commission. The opinion describes stunning methods for rabbits known to the experts in the EFSA working group, which can be used in commercial practice, and which are sufficiently described in scientific and technical literature for the development of an opinion. These are electrical stunning, mechanical stunning with a penetrative and non‐penetrative captive bolt and gas stunning. The latter method is not allowed in the EU anymore following Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009, but may still be practiced elsewhere in the world. Related hazards and welfare consequences are also evaluated. To monitor stunning effectiveness as requested by the EP mandate, the opinion suggests the use of indicators for the state of consciousness, selected on the basis of their sensitivity, specificity and ease of use. Similarly, it suggests indicators to confirm animals are dead before dressing. For the European Commission mandate, slaughter processes were assessed from the arrival of rabbits in containers until their death, and grouped in three main phases: pre‐stunning (including arrival, unloading of containers from the truck, lairage, handling/removing of rabbits from containers), stunning (including restraint) and bleeding (including bleeding following stunning and bleeding during slaughter without stunning). Ten welfare consequences resulting from the hazards that rabbits can be exposed to during slaughter are identified: consciousness, animal not dead, thermal stress (heat or cold stress), prolonged thirst, prolonged hunger, restriction of movements, pain, fear, distress and respiratory distress. Welfare consequences and relevant animal‐based measures (indicators) are described. Outcome tables linking hazards, welfare consequences, indicators, origins, preventive and corrective measures are developed for each process. Mitigation measures to minimise welfare consequences are also proposed. ; Peer reviewed