Universitätspublikationen
Refine
Year of publication
- 2021 (2927) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (1793)
- Doctoral Thesis (245)
- Preprint (207)
- Part of Periodical (183)
- Contribution to a Periodical (152)
- Working Paper (133)
- Book (119)
- Review (45)
- Conference Proceeding (24)
- Bachelor Thesis (11)
Language
Has Fulltext
- yes (2927) (remove)
Keywords
- COVID-19 (43)
- SARS-CoV-2 (37)
- inflammation (21)
- prostate cancer (14)
- aging (12)
- children (11)
- climate change (10)
- Cancer (9)
- Epilepsy (9)
- autophagy (9)
Institute
- Medizin (981)
- Physik (356)
- Präsidium (284)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (233)
- Biowissenschaften (199)
- Sustainable Architecture for Finance in Europe (SAFE) (158)
- Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies (FIAS) (155)
- Biochemie, Chemie und Pharmazie (154)
- Informatik (130)
- Psychologie und Sportwissenschaften (107)
In this article, I question the use of the notion of ‘constituent power’ as a tool for the democratization of the European Union (EU). Rather than seeing the absence of a transnational constituent power as a cause of the EU’s ‘democratic deficit’, I identify it as an opportunity for unfettered democratic participation. Against the reification of power-in-action into a power-constituted-in-law, I argue that the democratization of the EU can only be achieved through the multiplication of ‘constituent moments’. I begin by deconstructing the normative justifications surrounding the concept of constituent power. Here I analyze the structural aporia of constituent power and question the autonomous and emancipatory dimension of this notion. I then test the theoretical hypothesis of this structural aporia of the popular constituent power by comparing it with the historical experiments of a European popular constituent power. Finally, based on these theoretical and empirical observations, I propose to replace the ambivalence of the concept of popular constituent power with a more cautious approach to the bottom-up democratization of European integration: that of a multiplication of transnational constituent moments.
It is increasingly recognized that neuroscience has not delivered the revolutionary clinical possibilities for psychiatry that had been promised. Explanations differ, however: some proponents emphasize the divide between biopsychosocial psychiatry and mechanistic neurology. Others rely on further basic experimental neuroscience as only the most elementary level of explanation will allow us to fully understand and treat mental disorders. From a clinical-neuropsychological perspective, I shall argue that both views are mistaken. Diagnosis and treatment of neurological diseases demands a biopsychosocial perspective similar to psychiatry. Acknowledging this might help to bring both disciplines together and improve clinical outcome.
Species is the fundamental taxonomic unit in biology and its delimitation has implications for conservation. In giraffe (Giraffa spp.), multiple taxonomic classifications have been proposed since the early 1900s.1 However, one species with nine subspecies has been generally accepted,2 likely due to limited in-depth assessments, subspecies hybridizing in captivity,3,4 and anecdotal reports of hybrids in the wild.5 Giraffe taxonomy received new attention after population genetic studies using traditional genetic markers suggested at least four species.6,7 This view has been met with controversy,8 setting the stage for debate.9,10 Genomics is significantly enhancing our understanding of biodiversity and speciation relative to traditional genetic approaches and thus has important implications for species delineation and conservation.11 We present a high-quality de novo genome assembly of the critically endangered Kordofan giraffe (G. camelopardalis antiquorum)12 and a comprehensive whole-genome analysis of 50 giraffe representing all traditionally recognized subspecies. Population structure and phylogenomic analyses support four separately evolving giraffe lineages, which diverged 230–370 ka ago. These lineages underwent distinct demographic histories and show different levels of heterozygosity and inbreeding. Our results strengthen previous findings of limited gene flow and admixture among putative giraffe species6,7,9 and establish a genomic foundation for recognizing four species and seven subspecies, the latter of which should be considered as evolutionary significant units. Achieving a consensus over the number of species and subspecies in giraffe is essential for adequately assessing their threat level and will improve conservation efforts for these iconic taxa.
We consider an additively time-separable life-cycle model for the family of power period utility functions u such that u0(c) = c−θ for resistance to inter-temporal substitution of θ > 0. The utility maximization problem over life-time consumption is dynamically inconsistent for almost all specifications of effective discount factors. Pollak (1968) shows that the savings behavior of a sophisticated agent and her naive counterpart is always identical for a logarithmic utility function (i.e., for θ = 1). As an extension of Pollak’s result we show that the sophisticated agent saves a greater (smaller) fraction of her wealth in every period than her naive counterpart whenever θ > 1 (θ < 1) irrespective of the specification of discount factors. We further show that this finding extends to an environment with risky returns and dynamically inconsistent Epstein-Zin-Weil preferences.
This paper uses a novel account of non-ideal political action that can justify radical responses to severe climate injustice, including and especially deliberate attempts to engineer the climate system in order reflect sunlight into space and cooling the planet. In particular, it discusses the question of what those suffering from climate injustice may do in order to secure their fundamental rights and interests in the face of severe climate change impacts. Using the example of risky geoengineering strategies such as sulfate aerosol injections, I argue that peoples that are innocently subject to severely negative climate change impacts may have a special permission to engage in large-scale yet risky climate interventions to prevent them. Furthermore, this can be true even if those interventions wrongly harm innocent people.
The future of work has become a pressing matter of concern: Researchers, business consultancies, and industrial companies are intensively studying how new work models could be best implemented to increase workplace flexibility and creativity. In particular, the agile model has become one of the “must-have” elements for re-organizing work practices, especially for technology development work. However, the implementation of agile work often comes together with strong presumptions: it is regarded as an inevitable tool that can be universally integrated into different workplaces while having the same outcome of flexibility, transparency, and flattened hierarchies everywhere. This paper challenges such essentializing assumptions by turning agile work into a “matter of care.” We argue that care work occurs in contexts other than feminized reproductive work, namely, technology development. Drawing on concepts from feminist Science and Technology Studies and ethnographic research at agile technology development workplaces in Germany and Kenya, we examine what work it takes to actually keep up with the imperative of agile work. The analysis brings the often invisibilized care practices of human and nonhuman actors to the fore that are necessary to enact and stabilize the agile promises of flexibilization, co-working, and rapid prototyping. Revealing the caring sociotechnical relationships that are vital for working agile, we discuss the emergence of power asymmetries characterized by hierarchies of skills that are differently acknowledged in the daily work of technology development. The paper ends by speculating on the emancipatory potential of a care perspective, by which we seek to inspire careful Emancipatory Technology Studies.
Background: Peanuts are a member of the legume family (botanical family Leguminosae) and peanut allergies are the most common cause of food anaphylaxis in many countries. The prevalence of peanut allergy is increasing.
Methods: Experts from Germany and Austria performed a standardized literature search and published their consensus recommendations in a White Paper on Peanut Allergy, which this care pathway is based upon, thus, providing a comprehensive diagnosis and treatment algorithm.
Results: The most important diagnostic key elements include a detailed clinical medical history, evidence of peanut-specific sensitization by means of skin prick testing and/or in vitro determination of the peanut (extract)-specific IgE and/or the molecular component diagnostics (most important Ara h 2-specific IgE, sometimes also Ara h1-, 3-, 6-, 8- and 9-specific IgE) as well as the gold standard, the double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge. The diagnostic algorithms were created for the following constellations: Suspected primary peanut allergy with a clear history of systemic immediate-type reaction, suspected primary peanut allergy with questionable symptoms, suspected secondary (possibly pollen-associated) peanut allergy with a history of solely oropharyngeal symptoms and incidental finding of sensitization and no peanut ingestion so far.
Conclusions: After established diagnosis the standard of care is counseling to avoid peanut contact and prescription of emergency medications (oral antihistamines, oral steroids, inhaled β2-agonists, injectable intramuscular epinephrine) as needed. Instruction on the use of these emergency medications should be provided. A preparation for oral immunotherapy (OIT) for 4 to 17 years old peanut allergic children/ adolescents has been recently approved by the regulatory authorities. OIT for peanut allergy shows high efficacy and an acceptable safety profile, improves quality of life, and health economic aspects. Thus it offers a therapeutic option for peanut allergic children and adolescents.