Conhecemos a
cena: alguém descobre que está sendo enganado por uma propaganda, reclama desse
fato e o autor da propaganda enganosa defende-se com unhas e dentes,
desqualificando o denunciante, mas sem jamais provar que a denúncia era falsa.
Some-se a isso o
fato de o denunciante não encontrar apoio nos órgãos públicos e o resultado,
bem conhecido, é que a denúncia cai no vazio, sem que haja reparação ou
eliminação da conduta enganosa.
Frustrante, né?
E quando a
propaganda enganosa é sobre o tempo de eficácia do repelente que você passa no
seu filho, quando ele vai para a escola, ou que a grávida usa, para se prevenir
contra o aedes
aegypti?
Pois
bem, a entidade Proteste alertou os consumidores de que os repelentes vendidos
no mercado brasileiro a peso de ouro não funcionam por tanto tempo quanto o
divulgado por seus fabricantes. Estes, em vez de divulgar o resultado dos testes
de eficácia que já fizeram em seus produtos, apoiados pela Agencia Nacional de
Vigilância Sanitária – ANVISA, que é o órgão que aprova o uso dos repelentes –,
limitaram-se a desqualificar os testes feitos pela Proteste, os quais revelaram
que os melhores repelentes disponíveis para a venda protegem de 1:30 a 2:45
horas.
Ou
seja, você paga por “até 10 horas” de proteção, leva 2:45 horas de eficácia, é
picado pelo aedes aegypti (pernilongo da dengue) e
fica com o mico. Ou com a dengue. Ou com a zika. Ou com a chikungunya.
Um estudo,
realizado em 2002 e divulgado pelo New England Journal of Medicine (“Comparative
Efficacy of Insect Repellents against Mosquito Bites”, disponível em http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa011699)
fez um teste comparativo da eficácia de repelentes de insetos em produtos
contendo DEET (N,N-diethyl-3-methylbenzamide, antes chamado de N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide) e IR3535 (ethyl
butylacetylaminopropionate) e constatou que os produtos à base de DEET protegem
por mais tempo contra o aedes aegypti, sendo que:
a) uma formula com 23.8 % de DEET protegeu por 301.5 minutos
(mais ou menos 5 horas);
b) uma formula com 20 % de DEET protegeu por 234 minutos (quase
4 horas);
c) uma formula com 6,65 % de DEET protegeu por 112 minutos
(quase 2 horas);
d) uma formula com 4,75 % de DEET protegeu por 88 minutos (mais
ou menos 1 hora e meia);
e) uma formula à base de IR3535
protegeu por 22.9 minutos;
f) pulseiras com repelente não funcionaram.
No texto completo
do estudo há referência a outros produtos, cuja eficácia varia de 9 a 20
minutos que, convenhamos, é quase o tempo que se leva para passar repelente em crianças.
Ali, também, há um alerta para o fato de que os repelentes não protegem todo mundo de forma igual, o que faz sentido, porque, mesmo leigos podem notar que algumas pessoas sofrem mais picadas de inseto que outras, no mesmo ambiente.
Ali, também, há um alerta para o fato de que os repelentes não protegem todo mundo de forma igual, o que faz sentido, porque, mesmo leigos podem notar que algumas pessoas sofrem mais picadas de inseto que outras, no mesmo ambiente.
Mas, como somos
brasileiros e não desistimos nunca, pois aprendemos a resistir aos diversos
(des)governos do país, vamos continuar comprando os repelentes (lupas para ler os componentes), pois não dá pra
botar calças nas crianças no verão, e vamos limpar as vasilhas de águas dos
cachorros e gatos com buchas e vamos verificar se há folhas nas calhas e vamos fechar as janelas e portas das casas
(neste calor!), para dormirmos em paz, sem repelentes.
E torçamos para
que as prefeituras usem nosso dinheiro para limpar os lixos das ruas e terrenos e para abastecer os postos de
saúde com médicos e soros suficientes.
A study conducted in 2002 and published by the New England Journal of Medicine ( "Comparative Efficacy of Insect Repellents against Mosquito Bites", available in http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa011699) made a comparative test for the effectiveness of insect repellents containing DEET (N, N-diethyl-3-methylbenzamide, formerly known as N, N-diethyl-m-toluamide) and IR3535 (ethyl butylacetylaminopropionate), and found out that DEET products protect longer against Aedes aegypti, wherein:
a) formulated with 23.8% DEET protected by 301.5 minutes (about 5 hours);
b) formulated with 20% DEET protected for 234 minutes (about 4 hours);
c) A formulation with 6.65% DEET protected for 112 minutes (about 2 hours);
d) A formulation with 4.75% DEET protected by 88 minutes (about 1½ hours);
e) a formula to IR3535 base protected by 22.9 minutes;
f) bracelets (wristlet) with repellent did not work.
The study also refers to other products whose effectiveness varies 9-20 minutes, but, let's face it, is almost the time it take to use the repellent on children. There is also an alert to the fact that repellents do not protect everyone equally, what makes sense, because, as mothers know, some people suffer more insect bites than others.
But, as Brazilian people never give up, surviving so many mismanagement, we will continue buying the short-effective repellents because there's no way to convince children to use pants in this summer... we'll also keep cleaning our pet's water bowls and keep closed our home's windows and doors (besides this heat!).
And we will hope that local governments START cleaning up streets and parks and that the health centers have enough doctors and medicine.
We all know the scene: someone discovers that is being deceived by fake propaganda,
complains about it and the author of the false
advertising defends himself by disqualifying the accuser,
without ever proving that the complaint
was false.
Add to this the lack of government support for the complaint and the result, as well known, is that the claim falls into the void, without repair or elimination of the misleading conduct.
Frustrating, right?
And what about the false advertising on the effectiveness of the repellents against aedes aegypti, the ones our children use for going safely to school, or used by pregnant in Zika times?
Add to this the lack of government support for the complaint and the result, as well known, is that the claim falls into the void, without repair or elimination of the misleading conduct.
Frustrating, right?
And what about the false advertising on the effectiveness of the repellents against aedes aegypti, the ones our children use for going safely to school, or used by pregnant in Zika times?
Well, the Protest NGO warned consumers that the repellent sold in the Brazilian market is not effective for the period disclosed by their manufacturers. These laboratories, rather than disclose their own results of efficacy trials, which where supported by brazilian National Agency for Sanitary Vigilance - ANVISA - just limited themselves to disqualify the Proteste's results that revealed that the best repellent available offer protection from 1:30 to 2:45 hours.
So, we pay for "10 hours" of protection and take home just 2:45 hours of effectiveness, ending up being bitten by Aedes aegypti. That is dengue's mosquito. Or zika's mosquito. Or chikungunya's mosquito. Your choice. Or Lack of choice.
A study conducted in 2002 and published by the New England Journal of Medicine ( "Comparative Efficacy of Insect Repellents against Mosquito Bites", available in http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa011699) made a comparative test for the effectiveness of insect repellents containing DEET (N, N-diethyl-3-methylbenzamide, formerly known as N, N-diethyl-m-toluamide) and IR3535 (ethyl butylacetylaminopropionate), and found out that DEET products protect longer against Aedes aegypti, wherein:
a) formulated with 23.8% DEET protected by 301.5 minutes (about 5 hours);
b) formulated with 20% DEET protected for 234 minutes (about 4 hours);
c) A formulation with 6.65% DEET protected for 112 minutes (about 2 hours);
d) A formulation with 4.75% DEET protected by 88 minutes (about 1½ hours);
e) a formula to IR3535 base protected by 22.9 minutes;
f) bracelets (wristlet) with repellent did not work.
The study also refers to other products whose effectiveness varies 9-20 minutes, but, let's face it, is almost the time it take to use the repellent on children. There is also an alert to the fact that repellents do not protect everyone equally, what makes sense, because, as mothers know, some people suffer more insect bites than others.
But, as Brazilian people never give up, surviving so many mismanagement, we will continue buying the short-effective repellents because there's no way to convince children to use pants in this summer... we'll also keep cleaning our pet's water bowls and keep closed our home's windows and doors (besides this heat!).
And we will hope that local governments START cleaning up streets and parks and that the health centers have enough doctors and medicine.