The fertility incentive of land tenure in Mexico.

PIP: Ejidos are communal holding groups of redistributed land expropriated (generally without compensation) from large private landowners during Mexico's post-1910 land reform. The model in this study of the "ejidal" system's influence on fertility differs from DeVany and Sanchez in providing more current data and including the following more detailed variables: the land area of ejidos and the number of ejidos, the need for children, male income, female income share, and social security coverage. The data pertains to states rather than municipalities. DeVany and Sanchez found that the ejidal system encouraged fertility, because having more children helped an ejido family retain land rights, increased its chances of gaining additional productive land, and gave it increased political power. Children also provided a means of intergenerational transfer of resources. The estimation results of this study revealed that the total proportion of land held as ejidos had a positive, significant effect on fertility. The ratio of ejidos to total number of farms was negative and significant. There was support for the hypothesis that the impact of ejidos land holdings and area was diminished when ejidos were dominant in the state. Fertility declined with the increase in unpaid workers per hectare of land. Elasticity functions were small: 0.075 on ejidal land, -0.222 on ejidal farms, and -0.045 on workers. A positive significant demographic effect on fertility was illiteracy. Infant mortality and female income share each had a negative, significant effect on fertility. Insignificant variables were male income, social security coverage, and the dummy for northern states. There have been changes in the Mexican ejidal system. These changes and the availability of farm labor are expected to reduce urban and rural fertility differentials.^ieng

Hemorrhagic shock and encephalopathy: further description of a new syndrome.

Abrupt onset of coma, seizures, severe shock, and hyperpyrexia occurred in two previously healthy children. Their illnesses closely resembled a clinical syndrome of uncertain cause, the hemorrhagic shock and encephalopathy syndrome. Our patients had striking similarities to as well as certain differences from reported patients. Based on the similarities, we believe our two cases represent additional occurrences of the syndrome. Based on the differences, we conclude that the syndrome should be labeled "shock and encephalopathy syndrome" and that the prognosis may be improved by early aggressive treatment of shock.