The Regulation of Dental Licensing: The Dark Ages?

1991 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 249-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard Friedland ◽  
Richard W. Valachovic

Current state laws regulating the licensure of dentists place severe restrictions upon the freedom of movement of practitioners. Most state laws were enacted during a period when a strong rationale for regulating public health and welfare existed. Today, these laws hamper the free movement of dentists and are anachronisms in an era of national standards and practices. The authors contend that the extant laws rest upon outdated assumptions and serve economic and protectionist goals rather than public health and safety.This Article examines the history and application of the traditional justifications for state licensure and their present ramifications. The authors suggest that replacing the current regulatory system with a national clinical examination and a national licensure program will best serve the interests of the public and the dental profession.

1969 ◽  
Vol 32 (12) ◽  
pp. 474-476
Author(s):  
David E. Hartley

While the automatic vending of food and beverages—and non-food merchandise—has been a part of The American scene since the late 1880's, problems of public health and safety did not enter the picture until the end of World War II when the first hot beverage vending machine went on location. In 1947, the vending industry and health officials first came together to discuss the development of uniform national standards for vending machines and vending operators. In 1957, after necessary research and preparation, The Public Health Service published The Vending of Food and Beverages—A Recommended Ordinance and Code. In the same year, the industry launched a full-time public health and safety program, guided by a nationally-constituted Health-Industry Council. The progress in sanitation and safety made as a result of cooperative industry and agency efforts over the past 12 years is discussed in terms of vending legislation, internal and external training, machine standardization and testing, and research. Concluding, a review of current problems in such matters as microwave safety, copper poisoning safeguards, temperature controls, icemaker design, and commissary layout is made, together with a “crystal ball” look at the future.


Author(s):  
Gangyang Zheng ◽  
Paul Nelson ◽  
Vera Moiseytseva ◽  
Ernie Kee ◽  
Fatma Yilmaz

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is mandated to ensure “adequate protection” to the public health and safety, regardless of cost. It also has steadfastly declined to specify precisely what constitutes “adequate protection,” except that it does not mean “zero risk.” Rather it judges on a case-by-case basis whether the “adequate protection” standard has been met. NRC also seems to reserve the right to require an even higher level of protection, when that can be achieved in a manner that it judges to meet similarly imprecisely specified criteria such as “practicality” and “reasonableness.” In Regulatory Guide 1.174 NRC comes close to a concrete specification of “adequate protection,” albeit one that depends upon the historical licensing basis for a specific plant. And the technical portion of this paper begins with a description of how the approach of Regulatory Guide 1.174 can be viewed from the perspective of Risk-Informed Safety Margin Characterization. Meanwhile, in this research, in order to better understand the role of regulation, a microeconomic model of a price-taking nuclear power plant is constructed, particularly of the cost (C) of achieving any specified level of core damage frequency (CDF). Solution of this model reveals an economic optimum, at a point that balances plant value against risk of losing the plant via an accident involving core damage. For CDFs slightly smaller than this economic optimum there is scope for a regulatory mandate of even smaller CDF, should that be deemed either necessary to attain “adequate protection,” or reasonably attainable in order to achieve greater than adequate protection of the public health and safety. It is argued that regulatory bodies must have scope for discretionary decisions, because the information necessary to formulate a reasonable approximation to the cost curve C (fortunately) does not exist.


2009 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 452-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tracynda L. Davis ◽  
Jon H. Standridge ◽  
Alan J. Degnan

Water parks are a rapidly growing element of the United States tourist industry. To reduce incidence of abrasion and impact injuries in such parks, designers are searching for padding materials that can withstand the harsh oxidative environments of chlorinated water. Although padded features help reduce physical injuries, they may also compromise the microbiological safety of water attractions. This study describes bacteriological testing performed on 31 different pad materials, play features and pools from 10 Wisconsin water parks. Materials and surrounding pool waters were sampled and tested quantitatively for total coliforms, Escherichia coli, E. coli 0157:H7, enterococci, staphylococci, heterotrophic bacteria, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, using standard methods. Each location was sampled during three visits, and results were averaged. Pool waters were within acceptable levels of target organisms and disinfectant residuals, but target organisms were found on water features, even those submerged in chlorinated water. Bacteria were detected more frequently in pools using pad materials compared with pools without. These findings provide data that will help the public health community understand the relations between designs, materials and maintenance of water features. Additionally, the information will help state regulators and owner/operators develop guidelines to improve public health and safety at water parks.


2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Lawrence

<p>Diet-related diseases such as obesity, heart disease, diabetes and cancer are reaching epidemic proportions in many developed countries. Although there are increasing calls across the food regulatory system for interventions to help protect and promote public health, there is not a<br />strong history of collaboration between public health nutritionists and food law experts in this area. This article explores the challenges facing public health nutritionists and food law experts and their opportunities to collaborate in the food regulatory system. Through a reflection on experiences with food fortification and food labelling policy debates,<br />challenges to the objective of protecting public health and safety in the food regulatory system are identified. These challenges include: the absence of a coherent food and nutrition policy; the lack of a clear definition of what is<br />meant by the objective ‘to protect public health and safety’; capacity constraints; and limitations imposed by dominant regulatory reform agendas. Two case studies are provided to describe opportunities that are being pursued for public health nutritionists and food law experts to collaborate in the food regulatory system. The first case study describes a<br />research project investigating reform of the Australian food regulatory system in relation to obesity prevention. The second case study describes a research proposal to review the role of nutrition in decision-making within the Australian food regulatory system. The paper concludes that, to become<br />more effective when working across the food regulatory system to protect and promote public health, public health nutritionists and food law experts need to collaborate more strategically in research and practice.</p>


2004 ◽  
Vol 30 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 155-188
Author(s):  
Jay D. Wexler

When scholars and policymakers think about the relationship between public health and environmental law and policy, they likely think first about controlling pollution and other toxic substances. As other articles have amply demonstrated, water pollution, air pollution, and other environmental toxins can have significant deleterious effects on the public's health. Scholars rightly pay serious attention to these relationships, and policymakers wisely devise methods and strategies to ameliorate the public health risks posed by these polluting substances.Although pollution control might be the most obvious and important intersection between environmental policy and public health, legal and policy decisions regarding the management and preservation of the nation's natural resources potentially also significantly affect the public's health. Preserving plant and animal species, allocating water resources, and managing the nation's public lands, just to name a few examples, all potentially bear on matters of public health and safety.


2001 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 167-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
TIM STOCKWELL ◽  
TANYA CHIKRITZHS ◽  
DELIA HENDRIE ◽  
RICHARD FORDHAM ◽  
FAITH YING ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 85 (1) ◽  
pp. 179-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krista Sigurdson ◽  
Najib T. Ayas

Sleep deprivation and medical disorders of sleep are common in today’s society and have significant public health implications. In this article, we address 3 specific issues related to the public health and safety consequences of sleep disorders. First, we review data that has linked sleep restriction to a variety of adverse physiologic and long-term health outcomes including all-cause mortality, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. Second, we will review recent data that has demonstrated that therapy for obstructive sleep apnea (the most common respiratory disorder of sleep) is an extremely efficient use of healthcare resources (in terms of dollars spent per quality adjusted life year gained), and compares favorably with other commonly funded medical therapies. Finally, we will review data that illustrate the potential adverse patient and occupational safety impacts of the extreme work schedules of housestaff (physicians in training).


2015 ◽  
Vol 101 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Doris C. Gundersen

Despite many decades of warnings about the safety and effectiveness of marijuana for medical treatment, public policy in recent years has moved steadily towards loosening restrictions on its use. In 2000, a ballot initiative to change Colorado's constitution was passed by 54% of voters in the general election, thereby legalizing marijuana for specific disabling conditions. After the Obama administration indicated in 2009 that medical marijuana prosecution would have a low priority and arrests would not be sought, provided medical marijuana users and providers conformed strictly to state laws, the issuance of cards for the medical use of marijuana in the state increased dramatically. By 2013, the state had changed its laws to allow not just medicinal use of marijuana, but recreational use as well. Since that decision, a variety of public health and safety trends and statistics have been published, raising questions about the long-term impacts of marijuana use in the state on health care, medical regulation and public safety. Medical regulators and policy makers in other states should review data from Colorado as they assess their own states' approaches to marijuana, including carefully balancing physicians' responsibilities to their patients with the need for wise public health and safety decision-making. Three factors are particularly important as regulators develop policy: 1) the impact of liberalized marijuana laws on public health and safety; 2) limitations in the scope and availability of evidence-based research on the efficacy of marijuana; and 3) the wide gulf between federal and state laws and procedures regarding marijuana use. By being cognizant of trends and developments in all three areas, regulators can make better decisions regarding their own policies. In today's rapidly changing marijuana policy environment, medical regulators should encourage their licensees to follow practical steps aimed at ensuring that when medical marijuana prescribing does occur, it is based on established standards of care and adherence to the basic tenets of the patient-physician relationship.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document