Capacity of public health surveillance to comply with revised international health regulations, USA.

Public health surveillance is essential for detecting and responding to infectious diseases and necessary for compliance with the revised International Health Regulations (IHR) 2005. To assess reporting capacities and compliance with IHR of all 50 states and Washington, DC, we sent a questionnaire to respective epidemiologists; 47 of 51 responded. Overall reporting capacity was high. Eighty-one percent of respondents reported being able to transmit notifications about unknown or unexpected events to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) daily. Additionally, 80% of respondents reported use of a risk assessment tool to determine whether CDC should be notified of possible public health emergencies. These findings suggest that most states have systems in place to ensure compliance with IHR. However, full state-level compliance will require additional efforts.

COVID-19 healthcare demand projections: Arizona.

Beginning in March 2020, the United States emerged as the global epicenter for COVID-19 cases with little to guide policy response in the absence of extensive data available for reliable epidemiological modeling in the early phases of the pandemic. In the ensuing weeks, American jurisdictions attempted to manage disease spread on a regional basis using non-pharmaceutical interventions (i.e., social distancing), as uneven disease burden across the expansive geography of the United States exerted different implications for policy management in different regions. While Arizona policymakers relied initially on state-by-state national modeling projections from different groups outside of the state, we sought to create a state-specific model using a mathematical framework that ties disease surveillance with the future burden on Arizona's healthcare system. Our framework uses a compartmental system dynamics model using a SEIRD framework that accounts for multiple types of disease manifestations for the COVID-19 infection, as well as the observed time delay in epidemiological findings following public policy enactments. We use a compartment initialization logic coupled with a fitting technique to construct projections for key metrics to guide public health policy, including exposures, infections, hospitalizations, and deaths under a variety of social reopening scenarios. Our approach makes use of X-factor fitting and backcasting methods to construct meaningful and reliable models with minimal available data in order to provide timely policy guidance in the early phases of a pandemic.

Characterizing Direct-to-Consumer Stem Cell Businesses in the Southwest United States.

There are currently hundreds of businesses across the United States offering direct-to-consumer stem cell treatments that have not been through regulatory approval by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Here, we provide a detailed characterization of nearly 170 stem cell businesses operating in the Southwest United States. We draw specific attention to two as-yet understudied facets of these businesses. First, we identify differences in the degree to which a given business focuses their practice on stem cell treatments. Second, we compare the stated expertise of the care providers in stem cell businesses with the range of conditions they purport to treat. These findings deepen our knowledge of the growing industry around unapproved stem cell treatments, and are used here to offer suggestions for how the FDA might target its resources with respect to regulatory oversight.

Carol Anne Bond v the United States of America: how a woman scorned threatened the Chemical Weapons Convention.

The case of Carol Anne Bond v the United States of America stemmed from a domestic dispute when Ms. Bond attempted to retaliate against her best friend by attacking her with chemical agents. What has emerged is a much greater issue--a test of standing on whether a private citizen can challenge the Tenth Amendment. Instead of being prosecuted in state court for assault, Ms. Bond was charged and tried in district court under a federal criminal statute passed as part of implementation of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). Ms. Bond's argument rests on the claim that the statute exceeded the federal government's enumerated powers in criminalizing her behavior and violated the Constitution, while the government contends legislation implementing treaty obligations is well within its purview. This question remains unanswered because there is dispute among the lower courts as to whether Ms. Bond, as a citizen, even has the right to challenge an amendment guaranteeing states rights when a state is not a party to the action. The Supreme Court heard the case on February 22, 2011, and, if it decides to grant Ms. Bond standing to challenge her conviction, the case will be returned to the lower courts. Should the court decide Ms. Bond has the standing to challenge her conviction and further questions the constitutionality of the law, it would be a significant blow to implementation of the CWC in the U.S. and the effort of the federal government to ensure we are meeting our international obligations.