Pat
Wood
August
11, 2002
Executive Assistant
Texas State Board of Medical Examiners
PO Box 2018
Austin, TX 78768-2018
Dear Ms. Wood:
Thank you for your letter of August 1 with the enclosed Proposed Rules
Regarding Laser Hair Removal. Please consider this letter the
submission of the American Electrology Association (AEA) for presentation
to the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners (TSBME) for the public
hearing on August 16.
On March 13, 2002, I submitted a great deal of information substantiating
the concerns the AEA has been expressing regarding the use of laser
hair removal devices by non medical personnel. It was not my intention
to overwhelm the Board of Medical Examiners, but rather to build a case
by documenting the need for public safety in the use of laser hair removal.
§ 193.11. Use of Lasers. (a) cites "Surgery is the practice of
medicine" and (b) states it is "the practice of medicine and
cannot be delegated to non-physician employees without the delegating/supervising
physician being onsite and immediately available, with the exception
of laser hair removal as provided in Section 193.12 of this title."
I had expressed that the 30-50 hour course of study that is being offered
is not adequate training for placing the use of this powerful prescription
medical device in the hands of anyone other than a dermatologist.
I would respectfully point out that §193.12 does not allow or afford
any public protection with a required course of 24 hours of training
and very loose medical supervision. Specifically, §193.12. Delegated
Laser Hair Removal Treatment. (c) Delegation. (1) - (d), (7) would allow
the "Rent a Medical Director" program to flourish in the state
without a safeguard for public safety.
If the proposed rules are enacted into law, you will be placing a powerful
prescription medical device, that has more than 30 laser burn/injury
related instances reported to the Texas Department of Health, in the
hands of individuals with insignificant training. With the mounting
burn/injuries that continue to be reported, numerous TV newscasts, magazine
and newspaper articles, documenting the horrors of placing this device
in the hands of non-physicians, have been aired/published since February
of this year.
The December 7 Dallas Morning News article, State board to consider
laser hair-removal safety stated that the "Association for Aesthetic
Advancement, spa owners and electrologists specified monetary concerns
if they were no longer allowed to continue the use of laser hair removal."
Public health, safety and welfare should be the primary concern.
The AEA shares the concerns of the American Society for Dermatologic
Surgery (ASDS) about the proliferation of non-physicians practicing
medicine and its impact on patient safety. In their report to
state medical boards, they cited "thousands of consumers have suffered
disastrous results
after enduring a variety of procedures gone wrong."
Laser manufacturers' workshops are now featuring "package deals"
which include laser devices for: hair removal, vascular lesion and microdermabrasion.
Promotional material cites: "Remove unwanted hair and vascular
lesions" with the same laser. Will the Board of Medicine
continue to allow laser use by non-physicians for other applications?
Once a precedent is established by allowing laser for hair removal by
non-physicians, how do you stem the tide and at what cost to public
safety?
Laser is surgery. Surgery is the practice of medicine. It
is paramount to public safety and welfare that the use of laser
hair removal devices be placed in the hands of physicians . . . where
it belongs.
Respectfully,
Teresa
E. Petricca, CPE
Executive Director
|
