Search

Through quantitative exploratory research, the present study analyzed the amount foreseen in the Federal Budget and the amounts paid (nominal and deflated) for programs and actions to promote body practices and physical activities (Health Academy Program and the Federal Incentive for Physical Activity in Primary Health Care) from 2019 to 2022. The values of investment in body practices and physical activities in SUS per capita, according to the population covered by Primary Health Care (PHC) and per participant in public programs, were also calculated. The following was found: (1) that the resources that were actually paid were 3.31% to 15.06% lower than those approved in the budget (nominal) and (2) the low annual (maximum) values found, regardless of whether nominal or deflated - per capita (R$ 0.21 to 0.30) per population covered by PHC (R$ 0.25 to 0.40) and per participant (R$ 10.61 to 14.61). It was concluded that the low investment in the promotion of body practices and physical activities decreases access and does not contribute to the full functioning of SUS by preventing or hindering the expansion of possibilities of comprehensive health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Physical Education (24482455) is the property of Universidade Estadual de Maringa and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Physical Education (24482455) is the property of Universidade Estadual de Maringa and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Ciência & Saúde Coletiva is the property of Associacao Brasileira de Pos-Graduacao em Saude Coletiva and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Cadernos de Saude Publica is the property of Escola Nacional de Saude Publica Sergio Arouca and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article discusses how preventive and promotional discourses have been incorporated by the Brazilian population in the context of the coronavirus pandemic. It analyzes materials posted on the internet and social after the first case of COVID 19-related death in Brazil that are related health promotion and COVID-19 aimed at orienting society's response to the pandemic. The analysis considers two key factors: the mismanagement of the pandemic by the Brazilian government and infodemic. There is complex use of scientific information with recommendations that focus on what people should do (intervention) and in transforming individuals' behaviors, based on an ideal model of healthy behaviors. Narratives aimed to delegate to the population and specific groups the task of taking care of themselves have been reinforced, removing from the State the responsibility to offer conditions for the population to address the situation. There is a sophistication of strategies that blame individual practices, personal organization and that are disconnected from the collective, especially for those who live in situation of extreme vulnerability. Concomitantly, there are also discourses based on notions of solidarity and renewed social connections, which are empowering and consistent with the practice of health promotion as it attributes meanings to the subjects and their ways of life. We conclude that greatest advocacy in the field of health promotion at this moment is political and could be directed toward reaffirming health promotion principles, supporting permanent mobilization against setbacks in the public sphere and defending a new, democratic, inclusive and collective vision of society., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)