China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
New guidelines for setting up an assisted reproduction technology laboratory
Published in David K. Gardner, Ariel Weissman, Colin M. Howles, Zeev Shoham, Textbook of Assisted Reproductive Techniques, 2017
Jacques Cohen, Mina Alikani, Antonia Gilligan, Tim Schimmel
For the construction of a new laboratory or if changes are to be made to areas adjacent to the IVF facility, the following guidelines should be followed. First, the area to be demolished and reconstructed needs to be physically isolated from the IVF laboratory (if this is not the new IVF laboratory itself). The degree of isolation should be equivalent to an asbestos or lead abatement project. The isolation should be done through: (1) physical barriers, consisting of poly-sheeting supported by studding where needed; (2) limited access to the construction area and the use of an access passageway with two doors in series; (3) removal of all construction waste via an exterior opening or proper containment of waste before using an interior exit; (4) negative air pressure in the construction area, exhausting to the exterior, far removed from the laboratory’s air intake, and properly located with regard to the prevailing winds and exterior airflow; (5) extra interior fans during any painting or the use of adhesives to maximize removal of noxious fumes; and (6) compiling and logging of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for all paints, solvents, and adhesives in use.
Hospital Taxes, Medicaid Supplemental Payments, and State Budgets
Published in Journal of Legal Medicine, 2020
Jennifer L. Herbst, Sara J. O’Brien, Emily G. Chumas
As such, state governments have authority to proactively raise and direct state general revenue funds (including any funds raised and leveraged by a provider tax) toward the systems and communities responsible for the full range of social determinants of health.142 These state expenditures may include using these general budget funds to support programs providing jobs, food and housing security, affordable utilities, education, health care delivery and insurance, civil rights enforcement, reentry programs for those previously incarcerated, lead abatement (in housing and public water systems), reliable public transportation, or neighborhood safety, all efforts that improve community health. Indeed, this use of funds is consistent with the Health in All Policies approach143 recommended by the American Public Health Association144 and the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials145 and increasingly used by larger cities in the United States.146
Returning Results to Family Members: Professional Duties in Genomics Research in the United States
Published in Journal of Legal Medicine, 2018
Dov Fox, Emily Spencer, Ali Torkamani
How does Tarasoff in the context of medical treatment apply to the context of genetic research? The answer depends on whether a similar special relationship exists between researcher and research subject that would create a similar duty to warn family members, assuming that genomic results implicate a nontrivial and foreseeable harm for them. Insight can be gleaned from a duty-to-warn case involving nongenetic research.34Grimes v. Kennedy Krieger Inst., Inc., 782 A.2d 807 (Md. 2001). The case of Grimes v. Kennedy Krieger Institute involved an experiment that tested children's blood samples to determine the health effects of reducing levels of lead paint in their homes.35Id. at 822. Parents sued when investigators declined to report results that their children were suffering from lead poisoning.36Id. at 824–29. Central to their complaint was that they could have acted on the warning to minimize the harm to their children by moving to dwellings that posed lesser risks of lead exposure.37Id. at 812. The risks that genomic research might identify for close relatives tend to be far less well-defined or readily actionable. Yet, the relationship between researchers and subjects is similar in both contexts. Similar to research participants (and their families) in genomics research, the parents in the lead abatement study were never promised, when they agreed to their children's participation in the study, that the results of the investigation would be returned to them.38Id. at 846.