Search

To assess the health conditions of families from the Landless Rural Workers' Movement and temporary rural workers.The research involved a comparative study of three populations: a settlement and a camp linked to the Rural Workers' Movement, and the families of temporary rural workers in a city of Southeast Brazil, in 2005. Information relating to sociodemographic characteristics and families were collected by means of questionnaires that were put to 202 families. In addition, structured observation and group discussions were used. A discriminative factor analysis was carried out to confirm differences between the communities.The three communities scored an average of 89%, which implies that they are distinct groups and supports the hypothesis that there are real differences between them when it come to health and lifestyle conditions. There was a high rate of food insecurity (39.5%) among temporary rural workers, almost double that of families who were camping and four times greater than those living on settlements. Temporary rural workers' salaries were low and fluctuate, meaning that they were more exposed to pesticides than the families living on settlements or in camps. A striking characteristic of families living on the settlement was that they all practiced animal rearing, unlike the families of temporary rural workers, practically none of whom were able to do so in the city. The perceptions of most families who were living on settlements or in camps were that the Brazilian Health System had not been meeting their health needs, mainly due to access difficulties. For this group, their needs are met only after making complaints to and putting pressure on governors.The view held by families from the Landless Rural Workers' Movement was that the fact that they belonged to the Movement and were better organized meant their health was better than that of temporary rural workers. The conservative modernization of rural Brazil has led to worse conditions for temporary rural workers, while Agrarian Reform has allowed for a better quality of life and improved health conditions among families, when compared in the areas under study.

OBJETIVO: Avaliar as condições de saúde de famílias ligadas ao Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra e de bóias-frias. MÉTODOS: Realizou-se estudo comparativo de três populações: assentamento e acampamento do Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra, e famílias de bóias-frias, em Unaí, MG, em 2005. Foram coletados os dados referentes às características sociodemográficas e familiares por meio de questionários aplicados a 202 famílias, e realizadas observação estruturada e discussões em grupo. Realizou-se a análise fatorial discriminante para se verificar diferenças entre as comunidades. RESULTADOS: As três comunidades apresentaram uma média de 89%, caracterizando-se como grupos distintos e reforçando a hipótese de que são realmente diferentes entre si em termos de suas condições de vida e saúde. Os trabalhadores bóias-frias apresentaram um alto índice de insegurança alimentar (39,5%), quase o dobro da proporção entre as famílias acampadas e quatro vezes mais que as assentadas. Com uma renda variável e baixa, os bóias-frias estavam mais expostos aos agrotóxicos se comparados aos assentados e acampados. A produção animal desenvolvida por todas as famílias assentadas foi uma característica marcante, ao contrário das famílias bóias-frias que praticamente não contavam com essa possibilidade na cidade. Segundo a percepção das famílias assentadas e acampadas, o Sistema Único de Saúde não tem atendido as necessidades de saúde da maioria delas, principalmente pela dificuldade do acesso aos serviços. Para esse grupo, o atendimento de suas necessidades se dá após reivindicações e pressões sobre os governos. CONCLUSÕES: Segundo a percepção das famílias do Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra, o fato de ser do Movimento e estar organizado melhora suas perspectivas de saúde, em comparação aos bóias-frias. Os resultados da modernização conservadora no campo brasileiro têm agravado as condições de vida dos bóias-frias gerando uma superexploração do trabalho humano, enquanto que a Reforma Agrária tem possibilitado uma melhor qualidade de vida e saúde para as famílias, quando comparadas nas áreas estudadas. OBJECTIVE: To assess the health conditions of families from the Landless Rural Workers' Movement and temporary rural workers. METHODS: The research involved a comparative study of three populations: a settlement and a camp linked to the Rural Workers' Movement, and the families of temporary rural workers in a city of Southeast Brazil, in 2005. Information relating to sociodemographic characteristics and families were collected by means of questionnaires that were put to 202 families. In addition, structured observation and group discussions were used. A discriminative factor analysis was carried out to confirm differences between the communities. RESULTS: The three communities scored an average of 89%, which implies that they are distinct groups and supports the hypothesis that there are real differences between them when it come to health and lifestyle conditions. There was a high rate of food insecurity (39.5%) among temporary rural workers, almost double that of families who were camping and four times greater than those living on settlements. Temporary rural workers' salaries were low and fluctuate, meaning that they were more exposed to pesticides than the families living on settlements or in camps. A striking characteristic of families living on the settlement was that they all practiced animal rearing, unlike the families of temporary rural workers, practically none of whom were able to do so in the city. The perceptions of most families who were living on settlements or in camps were that the Brazilian Health System had not been meeting their health needs, mainly due to access difficulties. For this group, their needs are met only after making complaints to and putting pressure on governors. CONCLUSIONS: The view held by families from the Landless Rural Workers' Movement was that the fact that they belonged to the Movement and were better organized meant their health was better than that of temporary rural workers. The conservative modernization of rural Brazil has led to worse conditions for temporary rural workers, while Agrarian Reform has allowed for a better quality of life and improved health conditions among families, when compared in the areas under study. OBJETIVO: Evaluar las condiciones de salud de familias relacionadas al Movimiento de Trabajadores Rurales Sin Tierra de Brasil y de trabajadores rurales "jornaleros". MÉTODOS: Se realizó estudio comparativo de tres poblaciones: asentamiento e acampamento del Movimiento de Trabajadores Rurales Sin Tierra, y familias de trabajadores rurales "jornaleros", en 2005. Fueron colectados los datos referentes a características sociodemográficas y familiares por medio de cuestionarios aplicados a 202 familias y realizadas observaciones estructuradas y discusiones en grupo. Se realizó análisis factorial discriminante para verificar diferencias entre las comunidades. RESULTADOS: Las tres comunidades presentaron una media de 89%, caracterizándose como grupos distintos entre si en términos de sus condiciones de vida y salud. Los trabajadores rurales "jornaleros" presentaron un alto índice de inseguridad alimenticia (39,5%), casi el doble de la proporción entre las familias acampadas y cuatro veces más que las asentadas. Con una renta variable y baja, las familias de "jornaleros" estaban más expuestos a los plaguicidas si comparados a los asentados y acampados. La producción animal desarrollada por todas las familias asentadas fue una característica determinante, al contrario de las familias de "jornaleros" que prácticamente no contaban con esa posibilidad en la ciudad. Según la percepción de las familias asentadas y acampadas, el Sistema de Salud no ha atendido las necesidades de salud de la mayoría de ellas, principalmente por la dificultad de acceso a los servicios. Para ese grupo, la atención a sus necesidades se da después de reclamaciones y presiones sobre los gobiernos. CONCLUSÕES: Según la percepción de las familias del Movimiento de los Trabajadores Rurales Sin Tierra, el hecho de ser del Movimiento y estar organizado mejora sus perspectivas de salud, en comparación a los "jornaleros". Los resultados de la modernización conservadora en el campo brasileño ha empeorado las condiciones de vida de los trabajadores rurales "jornaleros" generando una superexplotación del trabajo humano, mientras que la Reforma Agraria ha hecho posible una mejor calidad de vida y salud para las familias, cuando comparadas en las áreas estudiadas.