On Health Policy Archives

NCHR Comments on USPSTF Draft Screening Recommendations for Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD)

USPSTF, February 12, 2018. In order to more widely recommend ABI, we need more studies directly evaluating both the efficacy and harms. Most importantly, we encourage the USPSTF to review studies that analyze the accuracy of ABI and its effect on improving health outcomes in asymptomatic PAD patients.

Testimony of Dr. Diana Zuckerman before the Maryland House of Delegates Appropriations Committee on the Health Risks of Artificial Turf

February 8, 2018. It is essential that the State of Maryland stop paying for artificial turf fields and playgrounds that can clearly exacerbate our children’s existing health problems and cause new health problems. Let’s instead invest in safe, natural playing fields, unless any artificial alternatives are proven to be safer, more effective, and as cost-effective as grass.

NCHR Testimony to House Appropriations Committee Regarding Playground and Athletic Field Surfaces

February 8, 2018. Companies that make and install synthetic turf on these types of surfaces maintain that it is proven safe and cost-effective compared to grass. However, these materials are not required by any federal government agency to be proven safe. These surfaces can expose children to harmful chemicals and can put children at risk of injury. We appreciate the Committee’s close attention and legislative oversight of this important safety issue for our state’s children and their schools.

NCHR and WomenHeart Comments on USPSTF Draft Recommendation Statement Cardiovascular Disease Risk: Screening with Electrocardiography (ECG)

Jan 22, 2018, We commend the USPSTF for reviewing the evidence and developing evidence-based recommendations. There is substantial evidence to recommend against screening in low risk adults and is insufficient to support screening in higher risk adults.

NCHR Comments on the FDA’s Opioid Public Steering Committee (OPSC)

December 21, 2017. We applaud the FDA for addressing their role in developing strategies to “confront” the opioid crisis. We agree that the magnitude and scope of this crisis requires urgent action and agree that the FDA should consider patients’ and other relevant groups’ interests in developing effective approaches to reduce further harm from opioids.