The status of genetically modified foods internationally and in the United States

Biotechnology refers to the broad set of techniques that allow genetic manipulation of organisms. The techniques of biotechnology have broad implications for many industries, however it promises the greatest innovations in the production of products regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Like many other powerful new technologies, biotechnology may carry risks as well as benefits. Several of its applications have engendered fervent emotional reactions and raised serious ethical concerns, especially internationally. ^ First, in my paper I discuss the historical and technical background of biotechnology. Second, I examine the development of biotechnology in Europe, the citizens' response to genetically modified (“GM”) foods and the governments' response. Third, I examine the regulation of bioengineered products and foods in the United States. ^ In conclusion, there are various problems with the current status of regulation of GM foods in the United States. These are four basic flaws: (1) the Coordinated Framework allows for too much jurisdictional overlap of biotechnological foods, (2) GM foods are considered GRAS and consequently, are placed on the market without pre-market approval, (3) federal mandatory labeling of GM foods cannot occur until the question of whether or not nondisclosure of a genetic engineering production processes is misleading or material information and (4) an independent state-labeling scheme of GM foods will most likely impede interstate commerce. ^

The medical malpractice insurance "crises" and federal medical malpractice tort reform: Collection and analysis of bills passed by the United States House of Representatives from 1995--2005

There have been three medical malpractice insurance "crises" in the United States over a time spanning roughly the past three decades (Poisson, 2004, p. 759-760). Each crisis is characterized by a number of common features, including rapidly increasing medical malpractice insurance premiums, cancellation of existing insurance policies, and a decreased willingness of insurers to offer or renew medical malpractice insurance policies (Poisson, 2004, p. 759-760). Given the recurrent "crises," many sources argue that medical malpractice insurance coverage has become too expensive a commodity—one that many physicians simply cannot afford (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services [HHS], 2002, p. 1-2; Physician Insurers Association of America [PIAA], 2003, p. 1; Jackiw, 2004, p. 506; Glassman, 2004, p. 417; Padget, 2003, p. 216). ^ The prohibitively high cost of medical liability insurance is said to limit the geographical areas and medical specializations in which physicians are willing to practice. As a result, the high costs of medical liability insurance are ultimately said to affect whether or not people have access to health care services. ^ In an effort to control the medical liability insurance crises—and to preserve or restore peoples' access to health care—every state in the United States has passed "at least some laws designed to reduce medical malpractice premium rates" (GAO, 2003, p.5-6). More recently, however, the United States has witnessed a push to implement federal reform of the medical malpractice tort system. Accordingly, this project focuses on federal medical malpractice tort reform. This project was designed to investigate the following specific question: Do the federal medical malpractice tort reform bills which passed in the House of Representatives between 1995 and 2005 differ in respect to their principle features? To answer this question, the text of the bills, law review articles, and reports from government and private agencies were analyzed. Further, a matrix was compiled to concisely summarize the principle features of the proposed federal medical malpractice tort reform bills. Insight gleaned from this investigation and matrix compilation informs discussion about the potential ramifications of enacting federal medical malpractice tort reform legislation. ^

Prevalence and determinants of hepatitis B co-infection among a United States Veterans Administration cohort with hepatitis C

Background and aim. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) co-infection is associated with increased risk of cirrhosis, decompensation, hepatocellular carcinoma, and death. Yet, there is sparse epidemiologic data on co-infection in the United States. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and determinants of HBV co-infection in a large United States population of HCV patients. ^ Methods. The National Veterans Affairs HCV Clinical Case Registry was used to identify patients tested for HCV during 1997–2005. HCV exposure was defined as two positive HCV tests (antibody, RNA or genotype) or one positive test combined with an ICD-9 code for HCV. HCV infection was defined as only a positive HCV RNA or genotype. HBV exposure was defined as a positive test for hepatitis B core antibodies, hepatitis B surface antigen, HBV DNA, hepatitis Be antigen, or hepatitis Be antibody. HBV infection was defined as only a positive test for hepatitis B surface antigen, HBV DNA, or hepatitis Be antigen within one year before or after the HCV index date. The prevalence of exposure to HBV in patients with HCV exposure and the prevalence of HBV infection in patients with HCV infection were determined. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify demographic and clinical determinants of co-infection. ^ Results. Among 168,239 patients with HCV exposure, 58,415 patients had HBV exposure for a prevalence of 34.7% (95% CI 34.5–35.0). Among 102,971 patients with HCV infection, 1,431 patients had HBV co-infection for a prevalence of 1.4% (95% CI 1.3–1.5). The independent determinants for an increased risk of HBV co-infection were male sex, positive HIV status, a history of hemophilia, sickle cell anemia or thalassemia, history of blood transfusion, cocaine and other drug use. Age >50 years and Hispanic ethnicity were associated with a decreased risk of HBV co-infection. ^ Conclusions. This is the largest cohort study in the United States on the prevalence of HBV co-infection. Among veterans with HCV, exposure to HBV is common (∼35%), but HBV co-infection is relatively low (1.4%). There is an increased risk of co-infection with younger age, male sex, HIV, and drug use, with decreased risk in Hispanics.^