Search

This article reports on an assessment of the value of 4 widely recognized standards of health sector emergency preparedness as predictors of effective preparedness for, and response to, the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. The standards are sponsored by the National Health Security Preparedness Index (NHSPI), the Trust for America's Health (TFAH), the Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP), and the Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB). The measure of effectiveness was states' cumulative COVID-19 deaths per 100,000 population, from January 21, 2020, through January 20, 2022. Linear regression analysis found no statistically significant associations when controlling for 3 intervening variables. Cross-tabulation of states' preparedness status with their COVID-19 death rates found that high NHSPI and TFAH preparedness scores were generally, but not uniformly, associated with lower death rates. EMAP and PHAB accreditation had negligible association with low or high death rates. Lack of accreditation was associated with lower death rates. Higher prior state public health spending related to COVID-19 preparedness and higher state household income, an indicator of state economic strength, were associated with lower death rates. States with Democratic control of the legislative and executive branches of government generally had substantially lower death rates than states with Republican control. A science-based, practice-oriented research initiative is recommended to improve the predictive power of health sector preparedness standards and to enhance protection for US residents from large-scale future health threats. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author calls for a U.S. initiative led by the U.S. Congress and public health officials to enable the U.S. health sector to adapt in order to have the capabilities to protect American citizens from what is identified as the threat of climate change to human health.

Well-designed and effectively implemented school health policies and programs can improve students' health-related behaviors and outcomes, as well as their educational outcomes. Health promotion programs in the school setting are [...]

Abstract: The prevalence of new cases of diabetes continues to increase, and the health burden for those with diabetes remains high. This is attributable, in part, to low adoption of evidence-based interventions for diabetes prevention and control. Law is a critical tool for health improvement, yet assessments reported in this paper indicate that federal, state, and local laws give only partial support to guidelines and evidence-based interventions relevant to diabetes prevention and control. Public health practitioners and policymakers who are concerned with the human, fiscal, and economic costs of the epidemic can explore new ways to translate the evidence base for diabetes prevention and control into effective laws and policies. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Model public health laws (public health laws or private policies publicly recommended by at least 1 organization for adoption by government bodies or by specified private entities) are promoted as exemplary. We assessed the information sponsors of model public health laws provide on the methods used in developing their models and on their models' adoption and effectiveness. Through a systematic search, we identified 107 model public health laws published from 1907 to 2004. As of our assessment in 2005, only 18 (44%) of the sponsors presented any information on the procedures and evidence used in developing their model public health laws; information on adoption was provided for only 7 (6.5%) model laws. No sponsors provided information on model effectiveness. We recommend sponsors improve their disclosure of information about the methods and evidence used in developing model public health laws and about their adoption and effectiveness. (Am J Public Health. 2007;97:S56-S61. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2005.082057) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Describes the building of the legal foundation for an effective public health system in the U.S. Improvement of the system's capacity in the context of evolving health challenges; Factors affecting the delivery of essential public health services; Provision of public health services to state residents.

The article discusses legal aspects of U.S. state public health responses to climate change impacts. Topics include the draft legislation Comprehensive Climate Change Health Protection Act, the role of U.S. federal public health agencies in addressing health impacts of climate change, and U.S. state policies addressing greenhouse gas mitigation and climate change adaptation.

The author argues that the U.S. public health community should develop comprehensive climate change adaptation strategies in 2016 that will embed population health as a main issue in the domestic and global response to climate change. The Paris Agreement international pact to limit global climate warming and greenhouse gas emissions is examined, along with the 1997 Kyoto Protocol environmental protection accord. A right to health, the U.S. government, and global responsibilities are assessed.

The article provides information on the 2006 Health Care Reform Act of Massachusetts as discussed by John E. McDonough and Anthony D. Moulton. Moulton gives an insight of McDonough's life and career as a legislative officer in Massachusetts. On the other hand, McDonough presents an overview of the 2006 Health Care Reform Act of Massachusetts which enacts mandatory health insurance coverage for all of its citizens.

Comments on the article "A Model State Law for Morbidity Reports," published in the 1913 issue of the periodical "Public Health Reports," which presented a model public health law for morbidity reporting in the U.S. Importance of standardized reporting of preventable disease cases to public health protection; Recommendation received by the law from the Annual Conference of State and Territorial Health Authorities in 1913; Significance of the role of the state law to public health in the U.S.

Abstract: Cardiovascular diseases are major contributors to death, disability, disparities, and reduced quality of life in the United States. Successful prevention and control of these diseases requires a comprehensive approach applied across multiple public health settings and in all life stages. Individual lifestyle and behavior change, as well as the broader social, environmental, and policy changes that enable healthy lifestyles, are necessary. Legal strategies can be powerful tools in this endeavor. This review presents seven such strategies applicable at the federal, state, and local levels that can be employed by healthcare providers, public health practitioners, legislators, and other policymakers. They include direct regulation, economic incentives and disincentives, indirect regulation through private enforcement, government as information provider, government as direct provider of services, government as employer and landlord, and laws directed at other levels of government. These strategies may be accomplished through legislation or administrative changes in practices or procedures. Effective use of these strategies requires a broader understanding of the advantages and limitations of legal frameworks and the importance of tailoring strategies to local conditions and resources. Examples of key roles that health professionals can play in advancing such an understanding are presented. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Law, which is a fundamental element of effective public health policy and practice, played a crucial role in many of public health's greatest achievements of the 20th century. Still, conceptual legal frameworks for the systematic application of law to chronic disease prevention and control have not been fully recognized and used to address public health needs. Development and implementation of legal frameworks could broaden the range of effective public health strategies and provide valuable tools for the public health workforce, especially for state and local health department program managers and state and national policy makers. In an effort to expand the range of effective public health interventions, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will work with its partners to explore the development of systematic legal frameworks as a tool for preventing chronic diseases and addressing the growing epidemic of obesity, heart disease, stroke, and other chronic diseases and their risk factors.