Search

The 2020's are to be named (if not already) the pandemia times. The present paper does not aim to analyses the changes and consequences that this sanitary crisis has produced, or to determine possible scenarios about how the world (in all its dynamics and layers) will survive in the post-pandemia period. There are other academics and (already) plenty of scientific papers that tackled these issues (the social sciences scientific community has responded almost instantly to the COVID-19 effects). This research paper contains the idea of science that social research encompasses by analysing (from a socio-anthropologist eye and based on professional training) the data circulation vortex during the first semester of 2020. The results and the manner of research (constrained by the urgency and isolation restrictions), respectively the quest for the discrepancies between the information offered by governments and international organisations, and by scientific inquiries and academic sources, represent an original perspective on data legitimacy when used for the public. This paper's main aim is not to achieve the comfortable status of the academic "likes" (converted in citations and indexes). It aspires to become a manifesto about the approximation and the substitution of the daily life with the computed (technologically-mediated) narratives about it!. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In our opinion, the last two years since the debut of the COVID-19 pandemic throughout the world have already left an important legacy: the urge of re-thinking the Modern suppositions regarding freedom, welfare, progress, and happiness. However, this imperative involves not only the reality of these principles, but also a side-effect of the newly-shaped pandemic world: i.e. the regression of social life from the standards of "good life" to the level of survival; the increasingly thinner line between the human being and the automaton; the giving up of creativity in favour of complying with the new social standards and formal-mechanic imitation. Our paper emphasizes some attempts made by various authors whose research works tried to sketch solutions to these problems, before and after the pandemic (Drăgănescu, Gonseth, Han, Galparsoro et alia). We believe that, unlike the traditional and Modern society, where the value of sacrifice for a collective purpose was assumed by the community/society itself, the supreme value of this new kind of utopia in the contemporary society consists of the sacrifice imposed top-bottom by the authorities, regardless of other social conditions. It is a sacrifice based on simple collective trust on the official emergency regulations, which promises some individual good-feeling in return for the good-will of the person to accept being protected by the inoculation of the serum. Would this status quo function during the next possible future pandemics? It is an open question, depending on many factors, as, for instance, the willingness of communities and nations to comply with future unpredictable and not always transparent regulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors’ aim is to review some considerations derived from the daily clinical practice during the COVID-19 pandemic in one of the most frequent emergencies: the epistaxis. We present both the specific ethiologies of nose bleeding during the pandemic and the therapeutic options according to actual protocols. A particular mention in the paper is attributed to different approach options for the epistaxis patient with SARS-CoV-2 infection, in order to ensure the safety of both health care providers and other inpatients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]