.
O "ponto do marido"
Duas em cada três mulheres portuguesas têm os seus filhos por cesariana, apesar dos riscos. Um recém-nascido que não passe pelo trabalho de parto tem maior probabilidade de ter diabetes, asma e obesidade. Mas parece que estas preocupações não são elegíveis para debate entre os nossos representantes no Parlamento.
𝑂 𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑠 𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑜 𝑒́ 𝑛𝑢𝑛𝑐𝑎 𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑢𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑜 𝑓𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑟 𝑠𝑜𝑏𝑟𝑒 𝑜 “𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑑𝑜 𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑜”. 𝐸 𝑠𝑒 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑚 𝑓𝑜𝑟, 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑎 𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑓𝑢𝑠𝑎̃𝑜 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑢 𝑛𝑎 𝑠𝑢𝑎 𝑐𝑎𝑏𝑒𝑐̧𝑎, 𝑎̀ 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑎 𝑑𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑠 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎 𝑢𝑚𝑎 𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎̃𝑜 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑒́ 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒 𝑑𝑜 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑜 𝑑𝑎 𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑚𝑒́𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎, 𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑒 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑜 𝑑𝑎 𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑖𝑎-𝑜𝑏𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑡𝑟𝑖́𝑐𝑖𝑎. 𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑒 “𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑜” 𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑜 𝑎 𝑠𝑢𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑟 𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑐𝑢𝑠𝑠𝑎̃𝑜 𝑛𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑑𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑚𝑒́𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑒 𝑠𝑖, 𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑑𝑎 𝑝𝑜𝑟 𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑜𝑠 𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑜𝑠 𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑠 𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑠, 𝑠𝑒 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑚𝑜𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑒 𝑢𝑚𝑎 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒̂𝑛𝑐𝑖𝑎 𝑜𝑏𝑠𝑡𝑒́𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎 𝑜𝑢 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜.
𝑃𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑜 𝑎 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑟: 𝑜 “𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑑𝑜 𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑜” 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑒́ 𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑠 𝑑𝑜 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑢𝑚 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑐𝑖𝑟𝑢́𝑟𝑔𝑖𝑐𝑜 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑖𝑟 𝑎 𝑎𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑎 𝑒 𝑓𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑖𝑎 𝑛𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑎 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟, 𝑎𝑝𝑜́𝑠 𝑎 𝑜𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒̂𝑛𝑐𝑖𝑎 𝑑𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑢 𝑟𝑎𝑠𝑔𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑑𝑜 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖́𝑛𝑒𝑜 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑒 𝑜 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑜. 𝐴 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑒́𝑚𝑖𝑐𝑎 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎́ 𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑑𝑎 𝑒 𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑜𝑢 𝑎 𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑎𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑎 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑜 𝑎̀ 𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑖𝑎 𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑧𝑎𝑑𝑎 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟 𝑜 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑜. 𝐴 𝑝𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑣𝑟𝑎 “𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑜” 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎́ 𝑎 𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑠 𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑎𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜, 𝑝𝑜𝑢𝑐𝑜 𝑐𝑙𝑖́𝑛𝑖𝑐𝑎, 𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑎 𝑎𝑠 𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑠 𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑟𝑎 𝑓𝑒𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑠 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑚 𝑒𝑚 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑟 𝑎 𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑔𝑒𝑚 𝑑𝑜 𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑑𝑜 𝑑𝑎 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑎̃𝑜, 𝑐𝑢𝑗𝑜 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑖𝑟𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑔𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑜 𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑎 𝑑𝑒 𝟷𝟾𝟾𝟻, 𝑒 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑢𝑛ℎ𝑎 𝑢𝑚 𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑒𝑥𝑡𝑟𝑎, 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎 𝑎𝑙𝑒́𝑚 𝑑𝑜𝑠 𝑛𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑎́𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑠. 𝑂𝑏𝑣𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒 𝑞𝑢𝑒, 𝑛𝑜𝑠 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑠 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑚, 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎 𝑝𝑟𝑎́𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑠𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑧𝑎 𝑑𝑎 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑎𝑙𝑔𝑢𝑛𝑠 𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑚 𝑎 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟, 𝑠𝑢𝑔𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑜 𝑞𝑢𝑒 ℎ𝑎́ 𝑢𝑚 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑢𝑖𝑜 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑏𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑠 𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑜𝑠, 𝑒𝑚 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑓𝑎𝑣𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑑𝑜 𝑏𝑒𝑚-𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟 𝑑𝑎 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒. 𝐸́ 𝑢𝑚𝑎 𝑓𝑎𝑙𝑎́𝑐𝑖𝑎 𝑎𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑣𝑎 𝑞𝑢𝑒, 𝑠𝑒𝑔𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑜 𝑎 𝑝𝑟𝑜́𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑎 𝑂𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑚 𝑑𝑜𝑠 𝑀𝑒́𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑜𝑠, 𝑛𝑜 𝑎𝑛𝑜 𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑎𝑑𝑜, 𝑒𝑚 𝑡𝑟𝑒̂𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑜𝑠 𝑑𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑜, 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑖𝑎𝑚 𝑟𝑒𝑔𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑑𝑜 “𝑛𝑒𝑛ℎ𝑢𝑚𝑎 𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑖𝑥𝑎 𝑛𝑜 𝐶𝑜𝑙𝑒́𝑔𝑖𝑜 𝑑𝑎 𝐸𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑑𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑚 𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑟 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑑𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑚 𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑑𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑐̧𝑜̃𝑒𝑠 𝑣𝑎𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑖𝑠 𝑜𝑢 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑎𝑖𝑠, 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑙𝑢𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑜 𝑎𝑠 𝑒𝑝𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑎𝑠.”
𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑒 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑒́ 𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒́𝑟𝑖𝑎 𝑑𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑑𝑜𝑠 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖́𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑜 𝑜 𝑃𝐴𝑁, 𝑞𝑢𝑒 ℎ𝑎́ 𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑎 𝑑𝑒 𝑢𝑚 𝑎𝑛𝑜 𝑎𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑜𝑢 𝑢𝑚 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑗𝑒𝑡𝑜 𝑑𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑒 𝑎 𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑑𝑎𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑙𝑜 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑎𝑑𝑗𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑜 𝑝𝑟𝑎́𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑠 𝑎𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑣𝑎𝑠, 𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑒 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎́ 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑙𝑢𝑖́𝑑𝑎 𝑎 𝑒𝑝𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑎 𝑑𝑒 𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑎, 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑜 𝑜 𝑝𝑎𝑝𝑒𝑙 𝑑𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑜𝑟 𝑑𝑎𝑠 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑛𝑎 𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑎 𝑝𝑒𝑙𝑎 𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑑𝑎𝑠 𝑝𝑟𝑎́𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑠 𝑜𝑏𝑠𝑡𝑒́𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑠 𝑎𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑣𝑎𝑠 𝑒𝑚 𝑃𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑢𝑔𝑎𝑙. 𝑈𝑚 𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑎̃𝑜 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑒 𝑚𝑢𝑖𝑡𝑜 𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑜 𝑑𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑎 𝑛𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑠𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑒 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑝𝑜𝑑𝑒 𝑖𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑖𝑟 𝑚𝑢𝑖𝑡𝑎𝑠 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑎𝑜 𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑚 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎̃𝑜 𝑎 𝑠𝑒𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑑𝑎𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑠 𝑎𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑜𝑠 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑢́𝑚𝑒𝑟𝑜𝑠 𝑑𝑒 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑠𝑎̃𝑜 𝑎𝑙𝑣𝑜. 𝐵𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑎𝑜 𝑃𝐴𝑁 𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑔𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑒 𝑎 𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑖𝑎 𝑑𝑒 𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑟 𝑎 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑎𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑑𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑑𝑜 “𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑜”. 𝑁𝑎̃𝑜 𝑠𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑠𝑓𝑒𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑚 𝑡𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑛ℎ𝑎 𝑖𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑣𝑎̂𝑛𝑐𝑖𝑎 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑝𝑢𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑠𝑒𝑟 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒 𝑑𝑜𝑐𝑢𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑑𝑎 𝑚𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒, 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑣𝑒𝑚 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑧𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎 𝑎 𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑎 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖́𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎 𝑢𝑚 𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑎 𝑣𝑎𝑧𝑖𝑜, 𝑠𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑓𝑙𝑎𝑑𝑜 𝑝𝑒𝑙𝑜 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑛𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑎𝑠 𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑠 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑑𝑎́𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑚.
𝐴 𝑟𝑎𝑧𝑜𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑑𝑒 𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑠 𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑢𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑜𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑑𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐̧𝑎 𝑒 𝑠𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑜 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑎𝑚𝑜𝑠 𝑎𝑙𝑔𝑢𝑛𝑠 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑜𝑠 𝑠𝑜𝑏𝑟𝑒, 𝑝𝑜𝑟 𝑒𝑥𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑜, 𝑎 𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑧 𝑒 𝑜 𝑛𝑎𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑎𝑚𝑜𝑠 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑃𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑢𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎́ 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑠 𝑝𝑎𝑖́𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑒𝑢𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑢𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑚 𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑎𝑥𝑎 𝑑𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑎𝑠, 𝑒𝑝𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑎𝑠 𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑑𝑜 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑎𝑙ℎ𝑜 𝑑𝑒 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑜 (𝐸𝑢𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑡ℎ 𝑅𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡). 𝐷𝑢𝑎𝑠 𝑒𝑚 𝑐𝑎𝑑𝑎 𝑡𝑟𝑒̂𝑠 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑢𝑔𝑢𝑒𝑠𝑎𝑠 𝑡𝑒̂𝑚 𝑜𝑠 𝑠𝑒𝑢𝑠 𝑓𝑖𝑙ℎ𝑜𝑠 𝑝𝑜𝑟 𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑎, 𝑎𝑝𝑒𝑠𝑎𝑟 𝑑𝑜𝑠 𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑑𝑜𝑠 𝑎 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜, 𝑠𝑒𝑗𝑎 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎 𝑎 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑜 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎 𝑜 𝑏𝑒𝑏𝑒́. 𝑈𝑚 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑒́𝑚-𝑛𝑎𝑠𝑐𝑖𝑑𝑜 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑙𝑜 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑎𝑙ℎ𝑜 𝑑𝑒 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑜 𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑜𝑟 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑏𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑑𝑒 𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑏𝑙𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑖𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜́𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑠, 𝑏𝑒𝑚 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑜, 𝑛𝑜 𝑓𝑢𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑜, 𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑜𝑟 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑎̃𝑜 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎 𝑜 𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑐𝑜 𝑑𝑒 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑠, 𝑎𝑠𝑚𝑎 𝑒 𝑜𝑏𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑎𝑑𝑒. 𝑀𝑎𝑠 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑒 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑠 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑜𝑐𝑢𝑝𝑎𝑐̧𝑜̃𝑒𝑠 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑠𝑎̃𝑜 𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑔𝑖́𝑣𝑒𝑖𝑠 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎 𝑑𝑒𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑠 𝑛𝑜𝑠𝑠𝑜𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝑛𝑜 𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑜, 𝑛𝑒𝑚 𝑡𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑜𝑢𝑐𝑜 𝑜𝑠 𝑛𝑢́𝑚𝑒𝑟𝑜𝑠 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑣𝑜𝑠 𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑐̧𝑎𝑚 𝑎 𝑠𝑢𝑎 𝑣𝑒𝑖𝑎 𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑠 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑜𝑟𝑎 𝑑𝑎 𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑜𝑢 𝑟𝑒𝑑𝑢𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑑𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑎𝑠 𝑝𝑟𝑎́𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑠 𝑐𝑙𝑖́𝑛𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑠 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑡𝑒̂𝑚 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑒̂𝑛𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑠 𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑠.
𝐴̀ 𝑚𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑑𝑎 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑎̀𝑠 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑣𝑎̃𝑜 𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛ℎ𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑑𝑜𝑠 𝑜𝑠 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑜𝑠 𝑑𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑠 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑔𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑚 𝑎 𝑖𝑔𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑑𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑒 ℎ𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑠 𝑒 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑒 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑎 𝑠𝑢𝑎 𝑣𝑜𝑧 𝑚𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑎́𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎 𝑣𝑎𝑖 𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑜 𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑑𝑎, 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑑𝑒𝑖𝑥𝑜 𝑑𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑟 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑜 𝑠𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎 𝑜 𝑛𝑜𝑠𝑠𝑜 𝑙𝑎𝑑𝑜. 𝑁𝑎̃𝑜 𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑛𝑎 𝑠𝑢𝑎 𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑎 𝑎𝑠 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑠𝑎𝑖𝑏𝑎𝑚 𝑜𝑢 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑚 𝑎𝑠 𝑠𝑢𝑎𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑖𝑠 𝑓𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑠 𝑒 𝑎𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑜̃𝑒𝑠, 𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑡𝑒𝑛ℎ𝑜 𝑎 𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑧𝑎 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑎𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑛ℎ𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑚 𝑒 𝑎𝑠 𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝑛𝑎 𝑝𝑒𝑙𝑒, 𝑛𝑜 𝑠𝑒𝑢 𝑑𝑖𝑎 𝑎 𝑑𝑖𝑎. 𝑇𝑢𝑑𝑜 𝑠𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎 𝑒 𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑎 𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑓𝑢𝑠𝑜 𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑜 𝑎𝑙𝑔𝑢𝑚𝑎𝑠 𝑒𝑚 𝑛𝑜𝑚𝑒 𝑑𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑑𝑎𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑜𝑐𝑎𝑚 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑎 𝑎 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑎 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖́𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎 𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑠 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑎𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑚, 𝑛𝑒𝑚 𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑚 𝑎𝑠 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑖𝑠. 𝐸 𝑎𝑞𝑢𝑖, 𝑛𝑎𝑠 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑖𝑠, 𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑜𝑏𝑜 𝑡𝑜𝑑𝑎𝑠: 𝑎𝑠 𝑚𝑎̃𝑒𝑠 𝑒 𝑎𝑠 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑡𝑒̂𝑚 𝑓𝑖𝑙ℎ𝑜𝑠; 𝑎𝑠 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑎𝑙ℎ𝑎𝑚 𝑒 𝑎𝑠 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑏𝑒𝑚 𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑢𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑝𝑒𝑙𝑜 𝑠𝑒𝑢 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑏𝑎𝑙ℎ𝑜; 𝑎𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑎𝑑𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑠 𝑒 𝑎𝑠 𝑙𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑠; 𝑎𝑠 𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑡𝑒𝑖𝑟𝑎𝑠, 𝑎𝑠 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑎𝑑𝑎𝑠, 𝑎𝑠 𝑑𝑖𝑣𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑑𝑎𝑠 𝑒 𝑎𝑠 𝑣𝑖𝑢́𝑣𝑎𝑠; 𝑎𝑠 𝑒𝑚𝑖𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝑒 𝑎𝑠 𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑠; 𝑒 𝑝𝑜𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑟 𝑎 𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑎𝑟 𝑎 𝑑𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑑𝑒 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝑒 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑚 𝑎 𝑠𝑒𝑟 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑠, 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑜𝑏𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑒 𝑎𝑠 𝑠𝑢𝑎𝑠 𝑣𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑑𝑎𝑠 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐̧𝑎𝑠.
𝑆𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑛𝑜𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑚𝑜𝑠 𝑛𝑜 𝑐𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑛ℎ𝑜 𝑑𝑎 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑒́𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎 𝑑𝑜 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑒́ 𝑠𝑒𝑟 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑒 𝑛𝑜𝑠 𝑑𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑠 𝑑𝑎 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟. 𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑎̀ 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑖𝑟𝑎, 𝑛𝑎̃𝑜 𝑡𝑒𝑛ℎ𝑜 𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑟 𝑑𝑢́𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑎 𝑠𝑜𝑏𝑟𝑒 𝑜 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑒́ 𝑠𝑒𝑟 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟, 𝑎𝑝𝑒𝑠𝑎𝑟 𝑑𝑒 ℎ𝑜𝑗𝑒 𝑒𝑚 𝑑𝑖𝑎 𝑠𝑒𝑟 𝑢𝑚𝑎 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑐𝑎𝑑𝑎 𝑣𝑒𝑧 𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑥𝑎 𝑒 𝑎𝑏𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑎. 𝐸𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑟 𝑛𝑜 𝑠𝑒𝑢 𝑐𝑖́𝑟𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑜 𝑑𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑜𝑎𝑠 𝑎 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑑𝑒 𝑚𝑢𝑙ℎ𝑒𝑟… 𝑒𝑚 𝑝𝑜𝑢𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑡𝑜𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑎́ 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑎 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑠𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑎𝑙ℎ𝑎 𝑒𝑚 𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑎𝑠 𝑠𝑒𝑚 𝑠𝑎𝑖́𝑑𝑎, 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑎𝑑𝑜 𝑑𝑒 𝑠𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑏𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑛𝑜𝑠 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑚 𝑒𝑚 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑎 𝑝𝑒𝑙𝑎 𝑡𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑠𝑎̃𝑜 𝑎 𝑡𝑜𝑑𝑎 𝑎 ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑎. 𝐴 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑖𝑟𝑎 𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎̃𝑜 𝑎 “𝑝𝑖𝑝𝑜𝑐𝑎𝑟” 𝑒́ 𝑠𝑒 𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑜𝑠 𝑢𝑚𝑎 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑐̧𝑎̃𝑜 𝑏𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑜́𝑔𝑖𝑐𝑎 𝑜𝑢 𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑙. 𝑄𝑢𝑒 𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑜 𝑑𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑎 𝑒́ 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎?
* Jornalista
IN "iN" 13/06/22.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário