“…The socio-economic conditions contributed to the complexity of schistosomiasis control by exposing the population to psycho-social and chemical risks, given that irregularities and excesses in pesticide use were common in local agricultural production, with strong consequences for human and environmental health. The historical approach of schistosomiasis in Sumidouro showed the following: a) since the 1960s, there were cases of severe collateral effects from medicine, failures of sanitation, as well as environmental and material injuries after the use of moluscicides for snail control; b) in addition to these low quality of life, poverty, lack of good life quality perspectives, alcoholism and other factors that stimulate pessimism and inaction turned part of the communities against the diagnosis and treatment of schistosomiasis, as well as against the methodologies of sanitation and snail control suggested by the public powers and by the researchers; c) these refusals increased the limitations of coprological diagnosis that contributed to uncertainty in the real number of infected people; d) these facts demand the adoption of a wide range of measures, such as methodologies to understand the needs of the population and to make people understand schistosomiasis transmission and the serological techniques used for diagnosis (Gonçalves et al, 2005;Soares et al 2002). In this complex context, schistosomiasis transmission to the human population occurred in home backyards and for other reasons (occupational, recreational and occasional), with high ratios of non-treatment due to migration, refusal or medical precaution and with a high prevalence in specific groups (men and farm workers).…”