后大流行时代社区结核病隔离措施的权利法律考量。

IF 5 2区 医学 Q2 IMMUNOLOGY
Elizabeth J Bonomo, Maunank Shah
{"title":"后大流行时代社区结核病隔离措施的权利法律考量。","authors":"Elizabeth J Bonomo, Maunank Shah","doi":"10.1093/infdis/jiae479","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>State and local governments are free to enact infectious disease control laws to protect the public health but must conform those laws to right-based limitations imposed by the United States Constitution. Tuberculosis (TB) control laws that empower public health agencies and their representatives to institute restrictions on movement and activities for persons with TB have remained largely unchanged for decades and warrant review to ensure consistency with modern legal principles. During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, there was increased attention to the tension between nonpharmaceutical public health interventions (masking, isolation, lockdowns) intended to reduce transmission and improve community health and their potential negative consequences on learning, mental health, individual finances, and the economy at large. Increasing evidence suggests that much of TB transmission is likely to have occurred prior to diagnosis and treatment initiation, and there is limited scientific evidence for the efficacy of community-based isolation in reducing TB incidence or TB mortality; by contrast, there is evidence that treatment rapidly reduces infectiousness and that prolonged isolation may have deleterious health and financial effects for persons with TB. The postpandemic era presents an opportunity to reassess public health authorities' legal obligations in designing voluntary and involuntary isolation policies for persons with tuberculosis. In so doing, state and local governments can recalibrate the balance between respect for individual constitutional rights and achieving public health TB goals.</p>","PeriodicalId":50179,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Infectious Diseases","volume":" ","pages":"31-36"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rights-Based Legal Considerations for Tuberculosis Isolation Practices in Community Settings in the Postpandemic Era.\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth J Bonomo, Maunank Shah\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/infdis/jiae479\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>State and local governments are free to enact infectious disease control laws to protect the public health but must conform those laws to right-based limitations imposed by the United States Constitution. Tuberculosis (TB) control laws that empower public health agencies and their representatives to institute restrictions on movement and activities for persons with TB have remained largely unchanged for decades and warrant review to ensure consistency with modern legal principles. During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, there was increased attention to the tension between nonpharmaceutical public health interventions (masking, isolation, lockdowns) intended to reduce transmission and improve community health and their potential negative consequences on learning, mental health, individual finances, and the economy at large. Increasing evidence suggests that much of TB transmission is likely to have occurred prior to diagnosis and treatment initiation, and there is limited scientific evidence for the efficacy of community-based isolation in reducing TB incidence or TB mortality; by contrast, there is evidence that treatment rapidly reduces infectiousness and that prolonged isolation may have deleterious health and financial effects for persons with TB. The postpandemic era presents an opportunity to reassess public health authorities' legal obligations in designing voluntary and involuntary isolation policies for persons with tuberculosis. In so doing, state and local governments can recalibrate the balance between respect for individual constitutional rights and achieving public health TB goals.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50179,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Infectious Diseases\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"31-36\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Infectious Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiae479\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiae479","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

州政府和地方政府可自由制定传染病控制法以保护公众健康,但这些法律必须符合美国宪法规定的基于权利的限制。授权公共卫生机构及其代表对肺结核患者的行动和活动进行限制的肺结核控制法几十年来基本未变,因此有必要进行审查,以确保与现代法律原则保持一致。在 COVID-19 大流行期间,人们越来越关注旨在减少传播和改善社区健康的非药物公共卫生干预措施(掩蔽、隔离、封锁)与其对学习、心理健康、个人经济和整个经济可能产生的负面影响之间的矛盾。越来越多的证据表明,肺结核的大部分传播可能发生在诊断和开始治疗之前,而社区隔离在降低肺结核发病率或死亡率方面的科学证据有限;相比之下,有证据表明,治疗可迅速降低传染性,而长期隔离可能会对肺结核患者的健康和经济产生有害影响。后大流行时代为重新评估公共卫生当局在制定肺结核患者自愿和非自愿隔离政策方面的法律义务提供了机会。在此过程中,州政府和地方政府可以重新调整尊重个人宪法权利与实现结核病公共卫生目标之间的平衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rights-Based Legal Considerations for Tuberculosis Isolation Practices in Community Settings in the Postpandemic Era.

State and local governments are free to enact infectious disease control laws to protect the public health but must conform those laws to right-based limitations imposed by the United States Constitution. Tuberculosis (TB) control laws that empower public health agencies and their representatives to institute restrictions on movement and activities for persons with TB have remained largely unchanged for decades and warrant review to ensure consistency with modern legal principles. During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, there was increased attention to the tension between nonpharmaceutical public health interventions (masking, isolation, lockdowns) intended to reduce transmission and improve community health and their potential negative consequences on learning, mental health, individual finances, and the economy at large. Increasing evidence suggests that much of TB transmission is likely to have occurred prior to diagnosis and treatment initiation, and there is limited scientific evidence for the efficacy of community-based isolation in reducing TB incidence or TB mortality; by contrast, there is evidence that treatment rapidly reduces infectiousness and that prolonged isolation may have deleterious health and financial effects for persons with TB. The postpandemic era presents an opportunity to reassess public health authorities' legal obligations in designing voluntary and involuntary isolation policies for persons with tuberculosis. In so doing, state and local governments can recalibrate the balance between respect for individual constitutional rights and achieving public health TB goals.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Infectious Diseases
Journal of Infectious Diseases 医学-传染病学
CiteScore
13.50
自引率
3.10%
发文量
449
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Published continuously since 1904, The Journal of Infectious Diseases (JID) is the premier global journal for original research on infectious diseases. The editors welcome Major Articles and Brief Reports describing research results on microbiology, immunology, epidemiology, and related disciplines, on the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment of infectious diseases; on the microbes that cause them; and on disorders of host immune responses. JID is an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信