sábado, 21 de noviembre de 2015

Princesses, Slaves, and Explosives: The Scandalous Origin of Vaccines

Algo de cultura general, tal cual nos llegó



Enviado desde Correo para Windows 10
Ing. Francisco Javier González Rodríguez MSc.
Ingeniero Consultor.


Princesses, Slaves, and Explosives: The Scandalous Origin of Vaccines1

The history of inoculation may sound a little dry, but it's really an epic tale of human trafficking, semi-illicit experimentation, and high explosives. It's a globe-hopping story that stars harem girls, noblewomen, prisoners, princesses, slaves, and even a witch hunter.

In the Shadow of Smallpox

Smallpox has troubled humanity for thousands of years. Wherever we've settled in the world, the smallpox virus has eventually followed.
A dangerously high fever comes first, accompanied by headaches, back pain, and vomiting. Painful sores open in your mouth and nose, and a rash spreads all over your body. Blisters form and fill with pus; these pustules eventually scab over and dry up. About 30% of people who catch smallpox will die; the rest will live with scars left behind by the pustules.

People eventually noticed one very important thing about smallpox: those who had survived didn't catch the disease again, or if they did, they didn't get very sick the second time around.
History doesn't record who first got the idea to expose healthy people to pus from infected patients' pustules - or how they talked anyone into letting them try it. But the practice seems to have sprung up independently in several places: India, China, West Africa, and elsewhere. The idea was already an old one in 570 AD when people in Europe started calling it "variolation," from the Latin name for smallpox, Variola. (Later generations used "variolation" and "inoculation" interchangeably; today "inoculation" also includes vaccination.)
Variolation usually meant rubbing pus from a smallpox pustule - a good ripe one, the runnier, the better - into a cut or scratch on a healthy person's arm, but in China, people just soaked a cotton ball in infected pus and stuck it up their noses. (Ah, the good old days, right?)
Most modern experts would consider this "stick it up your nose" strategy as the exact opposite of what you're supposed to do with a deadly pathogen. But it was the best option available at the time, and it worked remarkably well. Only about two percent of people who were exposed to smallpox through inoculation died of the disease, and only two to three percent spread the infection to others. Today, that wouldn't be an acceptable safety record for a vaccine, but in the 17th and 18th centuries, it beat the daylights out of a 15-30% chance of dying if you caught smallpox on your own.

Herd Immunity and the Harem

Princesses, Slaves, and Explosives: The Scandalous Origin of Vaccines

Circassia in 1700. Image: Adamsa123 via Wikimedia Commons
In the northern Caucasus Mountains, women of the Circassian ethnic group traditionally inoculated their children at about six months, and many Circassian women carried their knowledge with them when they were trafficked to Turkey as slaves - a common fate for many Circassians up until the early 20th century.
The French philosopher Voltaire described the situation in 1778:

"The Circassians are poor, and their daughters are beautiful, and indeed, it is in them they chiefly trade. They furnish with beauties the seraglios of the Turkish Sultan, of the Persian Sophy, and of all those who are wealthy enough to purchase and maintain such precious merchandise."

The unfortunate Circassian women who ended up in the Ottoman Sultan's harem left their mark on Turkish culture, one that would eventually spread across Europe and into North America. According to Voltaire,

"The Turks, who are people of good sense, soon adopted this custom, insomuch that at this time there is not a bassa in Constantinople but communicates the small-pox to his children of both sexes immediately upon their being weaned."

According to some sources, inoculation first caught on in Turkey in the late 1600s, thanks to the Sultan's trafficked Circassian women. Fifty years later, another woman carried the technique to England and eventually helped spread it throughout Europe.

A Woman on a Mission

Princesses, Slaves, and Explosives: The Scandalous Origin of Vaccines

Lady Mary Wortley Montagu in Turkish attire, painted 1756. Image: Wikimedia Commons
In December of 1715, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu was on top of the world, or at least her rather luxurious corner of it. She was the daughter of an English Duke and the wife of a member of Parliament (with whom she'd eloped a couple of years earlier to avoid marrying the unfortunately named Clotworthy Skeffington). Her wit and beauty made her the toast of King George I's court.
Then she caught smallpox.
She recovered, but with the characteristic pockmarked scars. Early in 1716, she left London behind to accompany her husband to Turkey, where he was the King's new ambassador to the Ottoman court. In early 1718, she wrote to a friend,

"The small-pox, so fatal, and so general amongst us, is here entirely harmless, by the invention of ingrafting, which is the term they give it. There is a set of old women, who make it their business to perform the operation, every autumn, in the month of September, when the great heat is abated. People send to one another to know if any of their family has a mind to have the small-pox: they make parties for this purpose, and when they are met (commonly fifteen or sixteen together) the old woman comes with a nutshell full of the matter of the best sort of small-pox, and asks what vein you please to have opened. She immediately rips open that you offer to her, with a large needle, (which gives you no more pain than a common scratch) and puts into the vein as much matter as can ly upon the head of her needle, and after that, binds up the little wound with a hollow bit of shell; and in this manner opens four or five veins."

Soon after, she convinced embassy surgeon Charles Maitland to variolate her five-year-old son, Edward. The procedure went well, and Mary Wortley Montagu was now a woman on a mission:

"I am patriot enough to take pains to bring this useful invention into fashion in England; and I should not fail to write to some of our doctors very particularly about it, if I knew any one of them that I thought had virtue enough to destroy such a considerable branch of their revenue, for the good of mankind. But that distemper is too beneficial to them, not to expose to all their resentment the hardy wight that should undertake to put an end to it. Perhaps, if I live to return, I may, however, have courage to war with them."

Cotton Mather and the Anti-Vaxxers

Princesses, Slaves, and Explosives: The Scandalous Origin of Vaccines

The first slaves arriving in Boston in 1683. Image: Library of Congress.
While Lady Montagu learned about inoculation, the practice was also beginning to spread to North America. In Massachusetts, an aging Puritan minister named Cotton Mather (now best known as the architect of the Salem Witch Trials, which killed 24 people in 1692, mostly women), had a chat about smallpox with an African man named Onesimus, a slave in his Boston household.
"He told me that he had undergone the operation which had given something of the smallpox and would forever preserve him from it," Mather wrote in a July 1716 letter to physician John Woodward. Onesimus described the inoculation process and showed off the small scar it had left on his arm.
"How does it come to pass, that no more is done to bring this operation, into experiment and fashion in England?" Mather asked Woodward. He was fascinated by the lifesaving potential of inoculation - but he didn't appreciate the knowledge quite enough to free the man who shared it with him. (Mather did free Onesimus a few months later, but only after making him promise to pay five pounds and to do chores for the family whenever they asked. Nobody ever said Cotton Mather was a nice guy.)
But when a ship from the West Indies sailed into Boston with infected sailors on board in April of 1721, Mather remembered what Onesimus had shared. As a well-known minister in 18th century Massachusetts, Mather had both celebrity and political clout, and he used both to advocate for inoculation. He addressed Boston's physicians on June 6, 1721, making an earnest case for inoculation as the best way to stop the disease from spreading.
That address stirred up an immediate controversy among Boston doctors and even in Mather's own congregation. People worried that inoculation would be too dangerous and that it would only spread the disease more quickly. Others argued that it was a "heathen practice" and in defiance of the Puritan view of disease as part of God's plan for whoever might fall ill.
He managed to convince only one man: a doctor named Zabdiel Boylston (fact: names were at least 48% cooler in the 1700s, with some very obvious exceptions). Boylston launched a variolation campaign, and he sought input on variolation from African slaves around Boston who had experience with the process, though their contributions, like Onesimus', went mostly unrewarded and remain anonymous to this day.

Things Get Violent

Princesses, Slaves, and Explosives: The Scandalous Origin of Vaccines

Cotton Mather, about 1700.
Throughout the summer of 1721, Mather published tracts and treatises, gave addresses and sermons, and wrote letters arguing that inoculation was safe, moral, and urgently necessary. But Boston was having none of it. Although people had embraced Mather's every word when he was calling for the hanging of women in Salem for putting curses on their neighbors, they recoiled at the idea of inoculation. It was a weird time.
In July, he wrote in his diary:

"The Destroyer, being enraged at the proposal of any Thing, that may rescue the lives of our poor People from him, has taken a strange Possession of the People on this Occasion. They rave, they rail, they blaspheme; they talk not only like Ideots but also like Franticks, And not only the Physician who began the Experiment, but I also am an Object of their Fury; their furious Obloquies and Invectives."

All the while, the infection raged. At its peak, some sources estimate that half of Boston was sick. Boylston inoculated as many people as he could convince, but that wasn't nearly enough of the population to have any real chance of stopping the spread of the infection. As the epidemic worsened, people blamed Mather and Boylston for its swift, unstoppable spread.
"Towards three a clock in the night, as it grew towards Morning of this Day, some unknown Hands, threw a fired Granado into the Chamber where my kinsman lay, which uses to be my Lodging-Room," he wrote in his diary on November 14 after a rather eventful night. A relative had traveled to Boston for inoculation and was staying with Mather while he recovered. He almost didn't make it home.
But Mather and his family were lucky. The firebomb - a heavy iron ball, split into two halves filled with gunpowder and turpentine, according to Mather - hit part of the window casement on the way in and bounced to the floor in a way that just happened to put out the fuse in the process. Because the bomb failed, Mather got to read the message, tied to the fuse with string: "COTTON MATHER, You Dog, Dam you; I'll inoculate you with this, with a Pox to you."
To make his case for variolation, Mather published data on the fatality rate for inoculation - about 2% - and for actual smallpox infection - about 14% in the Boston outbreak. It was the first documented use of comparative data in medicine, and it eventually helped persuade people to accept inoculation.

Meanwhile, Back in England

Princesses, Slaves, and Explosives: The Scandalous Origin of Vaccines

Lady Mary Wortley Montagu.
That same year, Lady Montagu insisted that Charles Maitland inoculate her four-year-old daughter in a demonstration for the royal physicians. It worked, and in August, the King gave Maitland permission to conduct a trial of the technique on prisoners in London's Newgate Prison. Six men volunteered on the promise of the King's pardon for the survivors.
When all six prisoners survived and later proved to be immune to smallpox, Maitland moved on to testing his inoculation on orphaned children, who were slightly less expendable than convicted criminals. But only slightly.
The plucky orphans also survived, so Maitland moved on to inoculating princesses (skipping several rungs on the expendability ladder). In April of 1722, he inoculated the daughters of the Princess of Wales. After that, inoculation started to catch on in England, though it took another few decades to become widely accepted in the rest of Europe. According to Voltaire in 1774,

"It is inadvertently affirmed in the Christian countries of Europe that the English are fools and madmen. Fools, because they give their children the small-pox to prevent their catching it; and madmen, because they wantonly communicate a certain and dreadful distemper to their children, merely to prevent an uncertain evil. The English, on the other side, call the rest of the Europeans cowardly and unnatural. Cowardly, because they are afraid of putting their children to a little pain; unnatural, because they expose them to die one time or other of the small-pox."

Variolation had actually been banned in France for five years, from 1762 to 1767, after it caught the blame for an outbreak. But in 1774, when King Louis XV died of the disease after two weeks of illness, along with 10 other members of his court, his son - the newly crowned King Louis XVI — boldly decided to have himself and his two younger brothers variolated (the guillotine, rather than smallpox, finished off Louis XVI).
And eventually, inoculation did catch on in Europe, partly thanks to the data published by Mather and others, and partly thanks to Lady Montagu's trendsetting advocacy in England. It was the best defense against smallpox until 1840, when England banned variolation in favor of a new preventative: vaccination.

How Vaccination Went Viral

Princesses, Slaves, and Explosives: The Scandalous Origin of Vaccines

A milkmaid and cows, sometime between 1790 and 1843. Image: Dordrechts Museum via Wikimedia Commons.
Thirty-five years later, in 1757, a young boy named Edward Jenner received an inoculation against smallpox. Eventually, he also received most of the credit for developing the first smallpox vaccination: a way to give people immunity smallpox without exposing them to the live smallpox virus.
Cows' udders sometimes become infected with a virus that causes small pustules, similar to smallpox but less severe. The two viruses are closely related - so closely that the human immune system has trouble telling them apart. So exposure to one will help you develop immunity against the other. In the 1700s, most people in Gloucestershire and the surrounding counties knew, or at least suspected, that exposure to cowpox kept milkmaids from catching its deadlier cousin, smallpox - just as people all around the world knew that variolation worked for years before Montagu, Maitland, Mather, and Boylston. That's how Jenner heard about the connection between cowpox and immunity to smallpox; he spent the early days of his medical career in a dairy community.
In May of 1796, he tested cowpox inoculation on the nearest available child - as one does, presumably. Eight-year-old James Phipps suffered from a mild fever and aches for about nine days, and then felt better.
So of course Jenner inoculated him with smallpox a couple of months later. Phipps didn't get sick. The cowpox had given him immunity to smallpox.
Jenner self-published his results in 1798, after rejection by the Royal Society. He called the new technique "vaccination," from the Latin word vaccinia for cowpox. By inoculating people with cowpox, it was possible to protect them from smallpox, without actually exposing them to the deadly
Today, the word "vaccine" is a generic term for any substance that causes the body to develop immunity to a disease. Usually, vaccines are made from dead or weakened forms of the virus being vaccinated against. Modern vaccines use viruses, or antigens from viruses, grown in cultures in a laboratory - not an actual gob of someone else's infected pus. We've come a long way.

Whose Discovery Was It?

Princesses, Slaves, and Explosives: The Scandalous Origin of Vaccines

Benjamin Jesty in 1805. Source: Jesty.org via Wikimedia Commons
Today Edward Jenner is known as the father of vaccination - but he wasn't the first to inoculate with cowpox. In fact, the first person to vaccinate with cowpox wasn't even a doctor.
In 1791, a German teacher named Peter Plett inoculated three children with cowpox; like Jenner, he had learned about the connection from milkmaids (who probably deserve most of the credit in the long run). When he reported his results to professors of medicine at the nearby University of Kiel, they basically ignored him, so Plett resumed his teaching career. He got a little recognition in the early 1800s, but barely a footnote compared to the accolades Jenner eventually received.
But even Plett wasn't the first. A Dorset cattle farmer named Benjamin Jesty inoculated his wife and two sons with cowpox (and one of his wife's knitting needles) in 1794 to protect them from a nearby smallpox outbreak. That claim is carved in stone - literally. The epitaph on Jesty's tombstone calls him "an upright honest Man; particularly noted for having been the first Person (known) that introduced the Cow Pox by Inoculation, and who from his great strength of mind made the Experiment from the (Cow) on his Wife and two Sons in the Year 1774."
Ultimately, of course, it's probably the milkmaids and dairy farmers of rural Europe who deserve the credit for discovering the smallpox vaccine.
So why does Jenner get all the credit? Although the link between cowpox and smallpox immunity was pretty well known in dairy farming areas, it was still a new idea outside those areas. Jenner might not have been the first person to figure out the connection, or even to apply that knowledge to inoculation, but he did bring it to the attention of the scientific community and convince them to accept it.
In the words of Victorian statistician and scientist Francis Galton, "In science, credit goes to the man convinces the world, not the man to whom the idea first occurs."

Contact the author at k.smithstrickland@gmail.com or follow her on Twitter.



miércoles, 18 de noviembre de 2015

UCAB e IDEA Internacional proponen medidas urgentes paragarantizar integridad y credibilidad a las elecciones



UCAB e IDEA Internacional proponen medidas urgentes para garantizar integridad y credibilidad a las elecciones


Presentan informe con recomendaciones al CNE y al Ejecutivo Nacional

PDF compartir

Realizar una intensa campaña sobre el secreto del voto, garantizar condiciones efectivas de equidad para todas las organizaciones políticas, fortalecer la observación internacional y levantar el estado de excepción que rige en municipios de estados fronterizos, son las principales recomendaciones que la Misión de Estudio propone a las autoridades del Estado venezolano

"Con espíritu propositivo esta Misión de Estudio recomienda con absoluta urgencia cuatro aspectos prioritarios para asegurar la integridad y la credibilidad de las elecciones del 6 de diciembre: que el CNE difunda pública y masivamente el carácter secreto del voto; evite el ventajismo garantizando condiciones de equidad, impidiendo el uso de recursos públicos y permitiendo el acceso equilibrado de los candidatos a los medios de comunicación durante la campaña electoral; fortalecer y ampliar la observación electoral internacional; y que el Ejecutivo Nacional derogue o suspenda el estado de excepción impuesto en municipios de los estados fronterizos con el objetivo de dar plena vigencia a los derechos civiles y políticos", planteó en rueda de prensa realizada en Caracas, Daniel Zovatto, director regional para América Latina y el Caribe del Instituto Internacional para la Democracia y la Asistencia Electoral (IDEA Internacional).

En esto consisten las cuatro recomendaciones principales de un decálogo de propuestas contenidas en el informe realizado por la Misión de Estudio integrada por expertos electorales del Centro de Estudios Políticos de la Universidad Católica Andrés Bello (UCAB) y de IDEA Internacional —organización intergubernamental constituida por 28 Países Miembros, con sede en Estocolmo, Suecia y cuya misión es apoyar la democracia sostenible en todo el mundo.

Benigno Alarcón, director del Centro de Estudios Políticos de la UCAB, explicó que esta Misión de Estudio realizó el análisis de las condiciones en que se viene desarrollando el proceso electoral mediante entrevistas con actores relevantes en los ámbitos nacional y regional, consulta de informes de grupos especializados locales y visitas a algunas circunscripciones. Entre los principales documentos consultados destacan los aportes del Proyecto Integridad Electoral Venezuela y el Informe de la Comisión Global sobre Elecciones, Democracia y Seguridad. Las recomendaciones para superar las debilidades en el corto plazo son resultado del trabajo de campo desarrollado por la Misión en de dos visitas, la primera en la última semana de octubre y la siguiente durante la segunda semana de noviembre.

Fortalezas y debilidades del proceso electoral

Alarcón señaló que el objetivo principal de la Misión de UCAB-IDEA Internacional es elaborar un diagnóstico del proceso electoral, tanto de sus fortalezas como de sus carencias para, con base en él, identificar un conjunto de recomendaciones que contribuyan a mejorar la calidad de las elecciones legislativas del próximo 6D.

Si la fortaleza del proceso electoral venezolano se encuentra en el sistema automatizado de emisión y escrutinio del voto, su mayor debilidad está en la falta de equidad (el ventajismo oficial) de las condiciones de la competencia electoral, afirmó Zovatto.

El informe de la Misión sostiene que el proceso electoral adolece de serias debilidades y distorsiones que afectan la integridad, transparencia y equidad del mismo; y que de no ser corregidas de manera oportuna podrían comprometer la legitimidad y credibilidad de las elecciones del 6 de diciembre.

La Misión de Estudio identificó 10 debilidades y distorsiones principales, a saber: (i) cuestionamiento al procedimiento de designación de las autoridades electorales y limitada imparcialidad del CNE; (ii) registro electoral sin auditoría independiente desde 2005; (iii) dudas sobre el secreto del voto; uso indebido del voto asistido;  y riesgo de confusión en la ubicación de la oferta electoral en el tarjetón; (iv) marcada inequidad en la competencia electoral: uso de los recursos del Estado para favorecer a partidos o proyectos políticos; acceso inequitativo a los medios públicos de comunicación; y una regulación insuficiente del financiamiento de partidos y campañas; (v) negación de registro de partidos e inhabilitaciones de candidatos; (vi) injerencia indebida del TSJ en la dinámica de las organizaciones políticas; (vii) procedimientos imprecisos de resolución de los conflictos electorales; (viii) normativa inoportuna e inequitativa sobre la paridad de género en las postulaciones; (ix) desproporcionalidad del sistema electoral; (x) vigencia del estado de excepción y su impacto en el proceso electoral.


Zovatto explicó que el informe de la Misión de Estudio no se limita a señalar las distorsiones y debilidades que afectan al proceso electoral sino que va mas allá, puesto que propone un decálogo de recomendaciones que pueden implementarse durante la campaña electoral y el mismo día de los comicios. "Si hay voluntad, hay tiempo", expresó.

La primera de las propuestas de aplicación inmediata consiste en la realización de una intensa campaña publicitaria por parte del CNE sobre el secreto del voto. "Si bien este aspecto está garantizado, existe una percepción generalizada entre los ciudadanos de que no es así. De ahí la importancia de una campaña pública que fortalezca la certeza del carácter secreto del voto", afirmó.

La segunda recomendación está dirigida a evitar el ventajismo, garantizando condiciones de equidad. El ventajismo electoral (la existencia de condiciones de juego desiguales) en favor del oficialismo sigue siendo uno de los elementos principales que afecta la calidad de las elecciones en Venezuela. Ello junto a una legislación electoral muy débil en relación con esta temática y un CNE que, a la fecha, no ha ejercido plenamente sus atribuciones y su responsabilidad en esta materia.

"Hemos observado diversas conductas que evidencian el uso y abuso de los recursos públicos y, en concreto, candidatos junto a funcionarios públicos en actos de campaña electoral usando incluso cadenas audiovisuales. Durante la campaña, el CNE, la Contraloría General de la República y el Ministerio Público, de conformidad con la Ley Orgánica de Procesos Electorales y la Ley Contra la Corrupción, deben actuar de manera firme y coordinada para sancionar oportunamente a quienes utilicen los bienes públicos para favorecer a organizaciones políticas", dijo.

En este contexto, la Misión solicitó al CNE no ser indiferente ni pasivo ante el incumplimiento de las normas electorales sobre este tema, recomendándole tomar con urgencia todas las medidas necesarias para evitar que distintos actos de gobierno puedan utilizarse con fines proselitistas, tales como inauguración de obras, entrega de ayudas sociales, distribución de bienes y alimentos, etc.

La tercera recomendación es fortalecer y ampliar la observación electoral internacional. La Misión lamenta que el CNE no haya invitado a organizaciones internacionales de observación electoral, de reconocido prestigio, a enviar sus misiones a Venezuela. Organizaciones como la OEA y la UE cuentan con probada experiencia, profesionalismo e imparcialidad en el ámbito de la observación electoral, y su presencia en el país contribuiría, sin duda, a dar mayor credibilidad al proceso y sus resultados.

Dentro del decálogo de recomendaciones que proponen UCAB e IDEA Internacional se incluyen, además: una campaña para evitar confusión entre los votantes sobre la oferta en el tarjetón electoral; aplicar de forma estricta la normativa sobre el funcionamiento y el horario de cierre de mesas; impedir el uso indebido del voto asistido; fortalecer la capacitación de los miembros de mesa, y exigir el estricto cumplimiento de las normas que regulan las competencias del Plan República y de los coordinadores de centros de votación.

También se considera necesario que el CNE establezca, previamente a la jornada electoral, un procedimiento preciso de resolución de controversias electorales.

Finalmente, Zovatto realizó un exhorto al Consejo Nacional Electoral para que, en su carácter de ente rector, garantice las condiciones de integridad, transparencia y equidad de este proceso en el que se elegirá a los miembros del nuevo Parlamento. "Si estas elecciones se llevan a cabo en condiciones confiables para todos, se reducirán los temores, generando un ambiente favorable para la credibilidad del proceso y la aceptación de sus resultados, todo lo cual contribuiría a crear condiciones propicias para restablecer el diálogo y favorecer la reconciliación después del 6D".

Al concluir su exposición, Zovatto señaló que la UCAB e IDEA Internacional continuarán  monitoreando la marcha de la campaña electoral y que, a su cierre, se actualizará el Informe, que contendrá la evaluación de la contienda, así como una serie de recomendaciones de cara a la jornada electoral del próximo 6 de diciembre.

El informe completo de la Misión de Estudio UCAB-IDEA Internacional está disponible enwww.politikaucab.net y en www.idea.int.

Ver informe IDEA-UCAB en PDF y sus Anexos




Sagrado Corazón de Jesús

Sagrado Corazón de Jesús
¡Deténte! El Corazón de Jesús está conmigo. ¡Venga a nosotros tu reino

(El Halcon Negro) Pedro Gonzalez's Fan Box

Pedro Gonzalez on Facebook

Elementos compartidos de infragon

Premio Recibidos, nominaciones y roles en la web

Blog Creado en Libertad - Postulación

Blog Creado en Libertad - Postulación
Gracias a Inés de Cuevas, Libertad Preciado Tesoro y La Protesta Militar

Premios 20Blogs (Categorías Blog Latinoamericano y Diseño)

Premios 20Blogs

Blog Ácido

Blog Ácido
Gracias por la postulacion en la categoria de Noticias

Premio Dardos

Premio Dardos
Agredecemos a Epicentro Hispánico

Premio Symbelmine de solidaridad entre Blogueros

Premio Symbelmine de solidaridad entre Blogueros
Gracias al Blog del padre Carlos

Premio 11 de Abril de 2002

Premio 11 de Abril de 2002
Muchas gracias a Libertad Preciado Tesoro, El Blog del Padre Carlos, Inés de Cuevas y el blog el que siembra su maiz

Premio inconfidentes

Premio inconfidentes
Agradecimiento al Blog del Padre Carlos Ares

Premio a Liberar el Tocororo

Premio a Liberar el Tocororo
Agradecimiento a Todos por una Cuba Libre

Campañas que Apoyamos

Nube de etiquetas de Technorati

Authority by Technorati

Widgetbox Blog Network: Politics

BBC Mundo | Portada


Creative Commons License
El Hijo del Halcon Negro by Msc Ing Francisco Javier Gonzalez Rodriguez is licensed under a Creative Commons Reconocimiento-No comercial-Compartir bajo la misma licencia 3.0 Unported License.