Documents Schütz, Holger 5 results

"The results of the dialogue pertain on the one hand to procedural issues, and on the other hand to the results of these procedures, i.e. the evaluations.

First, the procedures that MUT developed and enhanced for the risk evaluation. This includes the initiation of a risk dialogue as well as instruments for the characterization of the evaluations of individual research studies.

The most important innovation is the aptly named "evidence framework", that allows for a transparent summarization of the experts' line of reasoning. As always, the summarization of individual studies into an overall evaluation is dependent upon their interpretation. Consequently, it is not surprising that subjective assessment measures are apparent since there exist no unambiguous rules or evaluation-standards as to the approach and implementation of how very different studies with at times contradictory findings are to be summarized into an overall picture.

To address this shortcoming of the risk evaluation process, MUT has developed the "evidence framework" with which the most crucial arguments for as well as against a risk suspicion, the conclusions of the experts, and the remaining uncertainties can be better understood.

For several issues, clarifications of content could be achieved through the dialogue process. In other areas, contradictions and ambiguity remain, which signifies a demand for future research. Consequently, according to the assessment of the experts, the present research studies provide no indication that high-frequency electromagnetic fields of mobile phone communication cause cancer in animal experiments or promote cancer growth. The studies of the blood-brain-barrier also find no indications of effects from electromagnetic fields by mobile phone communication.

Furthermore, the experts concluded that the experimentally determined effects of mobile phone communication on the central nervous system do not pose a recognizable health disadvantage. The same applies to the indications of genetic damage. Since this does not result in damage to the cells, it does not support the derivation of a health endangerment, according to the opinion of the experts.

For most impairments of well-being - the exception being headaches - the experts view the weight-of-evidence as so weak, that an evaluation is hardly feasible. However, from the perspective of the experts, the few existing research findings don't indicate a link to exposure with HF EMF. Admittedly, the experts see an indication of a link between headaches and mobile phone usage. However, it remains uncertain whether this proves a relationship between electromagnetic fields and headache, or whether the cause could simply be telephone stress.

The issue of a special sensitivity (electromagnetic hypersensitivity) of certain persons to the EMF of mobile phone communication could not be conclusively clarified. Admittedly, no findings that speak in favor of the existence of such a special sensitivity could be found, but it can also not be ruled out with certainty. For the same reason, it cannot be evaluated whether effects may possibly manifest themselves in sick or health-impaired individuals.

The findings regarding epidemiological cancer studies are in part contradictory. Consequently, the experts arrived at different evaluations: on the one hand they evaluated that a cancer-promoting effect is likely not to be expected, but on the other hand they evaluated that there is a vague initial suspicion. The scientists agreed, however, that after a few years of use of mobile phones, an increased risk of tumors is not to be expected.

Altogether, in light of the six topic areas investigated, support for the hypothesis that EMF of mobile phone communication exhibits unhealthy effects was not strengthened."

(Extract from the website)

"Possible adverse health effects due to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) from cellular phones and base stations present a major public health issue across Europe. Because scientists cannot exclude that EMFs may cause health problems, the application of the precautionary principle is debated heavily. By considering precautionary measures, political decision makers hope to cope with public fears about EMFs. We present results from two experimental studies that indicate that precautionary measures may trigger concerns, amplify EMF-related risk perceptions, and lower trust in public health protection. Such impacts, questioning common expectations, should be considered in decisions about precautionary measures."(Authors' abstract)

"Seit 1998 - und verstärkt im Zuge der so genannten Hartz-Reformen - werden Vermittlungsdienstleistungen privater Anbieter zunehmend öffentlich über Contracting Out und Gutscheinverfahren gefördert und als Alternative zur öffentlichen Arbeitsvermittlung diskutiert. Das vorliegende Papier stellt aktuelle theoretische und empirische Befunde zu diesen Privatisierungsformen vor. Zunächst werden die Funktionsvoraussetzungen einer Steuerung der Leistungserbringung durch private Dienstleister (Agenten) im Auftrag der öffentlichen Hand (Prinzipal) an so genannten Quasi-Märkten erörtert. Sodann werden Ergebnisse der Evaluation der neuen Vermittlungsinstrumente Beauftragung Dritter nach § 37 SGB III, Eingliederungsmaßnahmen nach § 421i SGB III und dem Vermittlungsgutschein vorgelegt, gefolgt von Befunden zum Kontraktmanagement von Arbeitsvermittlungsdienstleistungen in Australien, Großbritannien (Employment Zones) und den Niederlanden. Aufgrund der deutschen und internationalen Ergebnisse kommen die Autoren zu dem Schluss, dass angesichts der komplexen Funktionsvoraussetzungen und des hohen Regulierungsbedarfs die Effizienzsteigerungspotentiale der Arbeitsvermittlung durch die Beauftragung privater Dritter beschränkt bleiben. Der Ausbau der dezentralen Handlungsspielräume der öffentlichen Arbeitsvermittlung stellt eine funktionale Alternative der Effizienzmobilisierung dar, deren Möglichkeiten noch nicht ausgeschöpft werden."