Cardio-oncology in Latin America and the Caribbean. Current state

Atopic Dermatitis in Latin America: A Roadmap to Address Data Collection, Knowledge Gaps, and Challenges.

Latin American and World Histories: Old and New Approaches to the Pluribus and the Unum

Evidence suggests that Latin Americans display elevated levels of emotional expressivity and positivity. Here, we tested whether Latin Americans possess a unique form of interdependence called expressive interdependence, characterized by the open expression of positive emotions related to social engagement (e.g., feelings of closeness to others). In Study 1, we compared Latin Americans from Chile and Mexico with European Americans in the United States, a group known to be highly independent. Latin Americans expressed positive socially engaging emotions, particularly in response to negative events affecting others, whereas European Americans favored positive socially disengaging emotions, such as pride, especially in response to personally favorable circumstances. Study 2 replicated these findings with another group of Latin Americans from Colombia and European Americans in the United States. Study 2 also included Japanese in Japan, who expressed positive emotions less than Latin and European Americans. However, Japanese displayed a higher tendency to express negative socially engaging emotions, such as guilt and shame, compared to both groups. Our data demonstrate that emotional expression patterns align with overarching ethos of interdependence in Latin America and Japan and independence among European Americans. However, Latin Americans and Japanese exhibited different styles of interdependence. Latin Americans were expressive of positive socially engaging emotions, whereas Japanese were less expressive overall. Moreover, when Japanese expressed emotions, they emphasized negative socially engaging emotions. Implications for theories of culture and emotion are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

The purpose of the article involves a thorough study of the original sources of the emergence in Latin and South America of such an instrument as the piano. In addition, it is necessary to trace the historical stages of the transformation of the composer’s style — from European classical to a new ideological and artistic musical embodiment of a specific Latin American culture. The methodology. The main research method in the article is based on next principals: cultural-historical, comparative-typological, structural, analysis and synthesis and ascent from the abstract to the concrete. The results. The conducted historical and musical analysis revealed the importance of the piano for the formation of the musical culture of South and Latin America. Thanks to touring artists from Europe, the piano gradually gained popularity. Its evolution has gone from European imitation to the formation of its own identity in world music culture. The path of Latin and South American composers to national identity took place through rethinking and interpreting the musical styles of past eras (baroque, classicism, romanticism) and folklore. During the period of experiments, study and introduction of national cultural elements, piano works by composers of Latin and South America had a high level of professionalism and popularity. The scientific novelty. It is that the work is a comprehensive scientific study, which substantiates a holistic system of evolution and transformation of piano culture in South and Latin America. The practical significance. The materials of the article can be used in further research on the phenomenon of Latin America piano culture, as well as in classes on the history of piano art and world music history.

In low-income and middle-income countries, such as those in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, the COVID-19 pandemic has had substantial implications for women's wellbeing. Policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic have highlighted the gendered aspect of pandemics; however, addressing the gendered implications of the COVID-19 pandemic comprehensively and effectively requires a planetary health perspective that embraces systems thinking to inequalities. This Viewpoint is based on collective reflections from research done by the authors on COVID-19 responses by international and regional organisations, and national governments, in Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa between June, 2020, and June, 2021. A range of international and regional actors have made important policy recommendations to address the gendered implications of the COVID-19 pandemic on women's health and wellbeing since the start of the pandemic. However, national-level policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic have been partial and inconsistent with regards to gender in both sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, largely failing to recognise the multiple drivers of gendered health inequalities. This Viewpoint proposes that addressing the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on women in low-income and middle-income countries should adopt a systems thinking approach and be informed by the question of who is affected as opposed to who is infected. In adopting the systems thinking approach, responses will be more able to recognise and address the direct gendered effects of the pandemic and those that emerge indirectly through a combination of long-standing structural inequalities and gendered responses to the pandemic.

<i>Cultural Capital</i>: Reflections from a Latin Americanist

Impact of a National Multicentric Strategy to Support Kidney Transplant Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Latin America: FUTAC Team Creation and Activities.

Korean Abstract: 무역·통상 부문에서부터 정치·외교 분야에 이르기까지 미국과 중국 간 갈등은 여러 지역에서 다양한 형태로 나타나고 있다. 특히 포스트 코로나 시대에 다자주의 체제가 위협을 받고 보호무역주의가 대두될 것으로 전망됨에 따라 양국간 갈등은 더욱 격화될 개연성이 있다. 중남미 지역도 미·중 갈등의 이슈에서 예외가 아니다. 더욱이 중남미 지역과 미국의 지리적 근접성을 고려한다면, 안보 측면에서도 미국은 중남미 지역 내 중국의 영향력이 커지는 것에 민감하게 반응할 수밖에 없다. 이러한 이유로 중남미 지역 내에서 미·중 경쟁 또는 갈등의 양상이 다양한 형태로 나타나고 있다. 본 연구는 중남미 지역에서 나타나는 미·중 경쟁의 양상을 조사하고 이것이 중남미 국가들에 미치는 영향을 다방면에서 분석하였다. 제2장에서는 미국과 중국의 대중남미 정책이 어떻게 변해왔는지 살펴보고 트럼프 정부에서 추진한 구체적인 대중남미 정책을 정리하였다. 미국 대중남미 정책의 기본방향은 소위 당근과 채찍을 통해 중남미 지역 패권국으로서의 위치를 점하는 것이었다. 그에 따라 트럼프 정부 출범 후 다양한 부문에서 중남미를 압박하는 경향이 두드러졌다. 반면 중국의 대중남미 정책은 구체적 내용이 부재한 상태에서 중남미 국가들과의 협력관계를 유지하는 것에 그 목적이 있었다. 제3장에서는 중남미 지역에서 관찰되는 미·중 갈등 사례를 제시하였다. 이러한 갈등은 주로 인프라 부문에서 두드러졌는데, 갈등 상황에서 미국은 중남미 국가들을 압박하고 중국을 관련 프로젝트에서 배제하려는 시도들이 나타났다. 제4장에서는 실증분석을 수행하였는데, 2018년에 일어난 미·중 통상갈등, 즉 양국 사이의 보복관세 조치에 초점을 맞추어 이것이 중남미 주요국의 대미국 및 대중국 수출에 미친 영향을 분석하였다. 또한 연산가능일반균형모형(CGE: Computational General Equilibrium)을 통해 동 통상갈등이 중남미 국가들의 후생에 미치는 영향을 보완적으로 살펴보았다. 분석결과 브라질의 대중 수출액은 관세부과 이후 큰 폭으로 증가한 후 시간이 지나면서 그 효과가 사라지는 추세를 보였다. 반면 브라질 이외 다른 국가들의 경우 일관된 추세가 나타나지 않았다. CGE를 활용하여 분석한 미·중 통상갈등이 중남미 주요국 후생수준에 미치는 영향도 그 크기가 미미한 것으로 나타났다. 중남미 내에서 발생하는 미·중 간 갈등은 우리나라 기업에 중남미 진출의 기회요인이 될 수 있다. 미국의 압박에 직면한 중남미 국가들이 해당 분야, 특히 인프라 부문에서 중국을 배제하려는 움직임을 보이면서 의도하지 않았던 기회가 주어질 가능성이 있다. 그러므로 중남미 국가들의 정치적 입장을 모니터링하는 것은 향후 중남미 진출 기회를 모색하는 측면에서 중요하다.English Abstract: Conflicts between the United States and China have been appearing in various forms across many regions; it can be seen in trade, commerce, politics, and diplomacy. In addition, it is likely that the conflicts between the two countries intensify as the multilateralism would be threatened and protectionism would emerge in the post-COVID 19 era. Latin America is not an exception to this issue of the US-China conflict. In terms of national security, the United States has only option to react sensitively to the growing influence of China in Latin America, considering the geographical proximity between the United States and Latin America. For this reason, varied conflicts between the United States and China occur in Latin America. This study investigated the patterns of US-China rivalry that appeared in Latin America and analyzed the effects of this rivalry on Latin American countries in multifaceted ways. In Chapter 2, we examined how the US and Chinese foreign policies against Latin America have changed. Furthermore, we summarized specific policies against Latin America that were implemented under the Trump administration. The fundamental goal of the US policy was to occupy a regional hegemony in Latin America by giving them incentive and pressure. In particular, the Trump administration tended to weigh on Latin America in many sectors such as immigration, infrastructure, and so on. By contrast, Chinese policies against Latin America aim at maintaining cooperative relations with Latin America in the absence of specifics. In Chapter 3, we presented several examples of the US-China conflict that were observed in Latin America. This conflict was mostly prominent in the infrastructure sector, in which the United States was likely to press Latin America in order to exclude China from related projects. In Chapter 4, we conducted an empirical analysis by focusing on the trade dispute between the United States and China that occurred in 2018. Specifically, we analyzed the impact of the retaliatory tariffs between the two countries on exports of major Latin America countries to United States and China. In addition, we complementarily examined the effect of the trade dispute on the welfare of the Latin American countries with the CGE (Computational General Equilibrium) model. As a result of the empirical analysis, Brazil’s export to China have increased significantly since the imposition of the tariffs, and then the effect has disappeared over time. In contrast, there was no consistent pattern for countries other than Brazil. The impact of the US-China conflict on the welfare of the countries in Latin America was trivial. The conflict between the United States and China that occurs in Latin America could be an opportunity for Korean companies that seek to advance into Latin America. The companies may be given an unintended chance as Latin America is faced by US pressure to rule out China from infrastructure sector. Therefore, it would be important to monitor the political position of Latin American countries in terms of seeking opportunities to enter Latin America in the future.

Twentieth-Century Latin American Literary Studies and Cultural Autonomy

Latin America and the Global Cold War

Tracking the Cold War in Latin America William Michael Schmidli (bio) Hal Brands . Latin America's Cold War. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2010. 385 pp. Figures, notes and index. $29.95. Stephen G. Rabe . The Killing Zone: The United States Wages Cold War in Latin America. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. xxxvii + 247 pp. Chronology, notes, recommendations for further reading and research, and index. $19.95. In an influential 2003 survey of recent scholarship on U.S.-Latin American relations, Max Paul Friedman asserted that, after decades of intellectual jostling with advocates of the orthodox or nationalist position, revisionist scholars had come to dominate the field. "It is now unusual" Friedman wrote, "to come across a work of history that strongly argues the merit of U.S. policies in the region or claims these have been designed principally to protect and promote freedom and democracy."1 Yet if revisionist scholarship still revolved around the "tragic idiom" first articulated by William Appleman Williams, Friedman continued, the field was nonetheless in the midst of a dynamic evolution. Reflecting broader trends in U.S. foreign relations scholarship, studies of U.S.-Latin American relations increasingly incorporated multinational (and multilingual) research and revealed a willingness to consider non-U.S. perspectives and an emphasis on Latin American agency. As a result, "their findings question some conventional wisdom about U.S. power," Friedman concluded, "including elements of the revisionist synthesis that depicted the United States as a regional hegemon, a 'core' nation to the Latin American 'periphery,' or—to take any one of the familiar images—a puppetmaster pulling the strings of puppet leaders, a central planet orbited by satellites, or the manipulator of client states."2 Nine years later, Hal Brands' Latin America's Cold War reveals just how far scholarship on U.S.-Latin American relations has moved in the direction anticipated by Friedman. The breadth of Brands' research is impressive: forty archives in thirteen countries—including ten Latin American nations. The scope of Latin America's Cold War is equally ambitious: Brands describes his book as the first "multiarchival, international" history to assess the entire Cold War era in Latin America. Both "multinational and multilayered," Latin America's [End Page 332] Cold War "deals seriously with all sides of the diplomatic and transnational struggles that occurred during this period," Brands writes, and it weaves diverse perspectives "from the highest echelons of superpower diplomacy to the everyday negotiation of social and political relationships—into an understanding of how the global, the regional, and the local interacted in shaping Latin America's Cold War" (p. 2). As a result, Latin America's Cold War offers a sharp corrective to revisionist studies that situate the projection of U.S. political, economic, and military power into Latin America at the heart of the conflict. The U.S. effort to prevent communist inroads in the hemisphere, Brands contends, was just one facet in a "series of overlapping conflicts" that buffeted Latin America during the Cold War era, including longstanding social, political, and economic struggles and the ideological impact of decolonization and the emergence of the Third World (p. 7). Far from exerting unchallenged hemispheric hegemony, he continues, U.S. Cold War policymakers struggled to contain the initiatives of their Soviet and Cuban counterparts in Latin America in a competition for influence marked by "substantial symmetry" (p. 262). Moreover, even U.S. success in shaping Latin American allies was decidedly limited; not only were the region's "shrewder statesmen as likely to manipulate as to be manipulated by the United States," Brands writes, but U.S. Cold War initiatives had a limited impact on anticommunist Latin American policymakers and military leaders, who needed "no coaching on the dangers of internal violence and upheaval" (pp. 257, 81). With its emphasis on Latin American agency and sensitivity to the many players and layers that shaped the Cold War in Latin America, Brands' book stands as a model of international history. But does Latin America's Cold War go too far in decentering the role of the United States? In striving for balance, nuance, and complexity, does Brands assign too much agency to Latin America relative to the enormous power...

��� The history of Latin America has been instrumental to the rise of world history as a research field. Some of the seminal works of world history have highlighted Latin American‐centered events, from William McNeill’s Plagues and Peoples to Alfred Crosby’s The Columbian Exchange. The region has also provided important subject matter for groundbreaking studies on topics that have become the bread and butter of global historians: diasporas, transnational movements, and the rise of global capitalism. It might seem, then, that the relationship between Latin American history and world history has been a close one and that the two fields have informed each other more than they have developed in isolation. Yet the reality is both more complex and more troubling. In the main paradigms of world history, Latin America has been placed not in the foreground, but off to the side, inhabiting a space that is not so much insignificant as it is simply strange. Many comparative analyses have cast the region as a contrast to patterns of change that in turn take on the character of historical models. Together, the trends produce a tendency to view the continent as “odd region out”— home to anomalous processes and perpetually out of sync with global historical periodization. Curiously, emphasis on the region’s oddities is perhaps most muted in the historiography of the precolumbian period. Here, though we might expect exceptionalism to attach itself to representations of Aztec and Incan Empires as, at the very least, technologically different from their counterparts in other world regions, historians and anthropologists have instead operated largely within a comparative framework that emphasizes shared structures of symbolic practices, social hierarchies, and agricultural regimes.1 The treatment of later

Latin America faces hurdles in health research

Proust's Latin Americans

Sleep medicine is a relatively young field with exponential growth in development and research in the last decades. Parallel to the advances in the United States, Latin America also had its beginnings in sleep medicine housed in neuroscience laboratories. Since the very first Latin American meeting in 1985, and the first sleep society in 1993, sleep research has undergone significant development in subsequent years. From contributions in animal research that allowed understanding of the activity of the brain during sleep to the studies that improved our knowledge of sleep disorders in humans, Latin America has become a scientific hub for expansion of sleep research. In this article, we present a historical account of the development of sleep medicine in Latin America, the current state of education and the achievements in research throughout history, and the latest advances in the trending areas of sleep science and medicine. These findings were presented during World Sleep Society meeting in Vancouver in 2019 and complement the work on sleep societies and training published by Vizcarra-Escobar et al in their article "Sleep societies and sleep training programs in Latin America" (J Clin Sleep Med. 2020;16(6):983-988).