Federal Trade Commission And Dental Examiners

The National Dental Association is an association that is focused on providing oral health care to minorities and the underserved. They believe that oral health care is a right, not a privilege. It represents more than 7,000 minority dentists nationally and abroad. The National Dental Association is the largest and oldest organization of minority oral health professionals in the world. It’s mission statement is “The National Dental Association promotes oral health equity among people of color by harnessing the collective power of its members, advocating for the needs of and mentoring dental students of color, and raising the profile of the profession in our communities” (About NDA, 2016).

The regulations that dictates the scope of practice, the supervision, and the licensure requirement of a dental hygienist, are made by the state dental boards of each state. In most of the states, the dental boards are composed of dentist, one or two dental hygienists, and one or two public members. The fact that dentists are usually the majority of the board members, has prohibited the career of dental hygiene to become more independent, and provide its services to a broader group of people. The state of California, is the only state that has a state board formed by four consumers, one general practice or public health dentist, and four dental hygienists. This allows the dental hygienists to have full authority to make rules and regulations

accused of overcharging consumers. Which federal law would have allowed the United States government to investigate this unfair method of competition?

As previously mentioned, actors can only be liable under antitrust law if they engage in unreasonable restrictions of trade. A FTC Commissioner confirmed this principal stating “if a board is not engaging in conduct that is a violation of the antitrust laws, it need not even address the issue of active supervision.” The FTC Commissioner suggested that “simply being more cognizant of, and hopefully minimizing, the competitive effects of a board’s regulatory decisions would go a long way toward eliminating any antitrust exposure.” Part of the reason for this is that antitrust laws are only concerned with regulations that are “unreasonably restrictive of competitive conditions.” This makes sense in the context of Dental Examiners. In Dental Examiners, the Supreme Court was concerned with the nature of the Dental Board’s actions. For example, the Court was concerned that there was a direct financial interest in teeth whitening services for the board members, and thought it important to quote one board official saying the board was “going forth to do battle” with the teeth whitening industry. So the nature and way boards handle these types of actions may provide protection in antitrust suits.

The purpose of the Maine Board of Dental Examiners is to provide protection of the health and safety of the citizens of Maine. There is a multitude of topics covered during monthly board meetings from acting as a judicial branch for cases involving dental professionals to approving licensures applications. The January meeting consisted of a variety of topics that precipitated the use of the codes of ethics to make decisions. Subjects discussed at the meeting that involve ethical decision making pertained to licensure renewals/interviews for licensures and

There are many concepts from our course related to this case. The effectiveness of any law depends on how the courts interpret it and on the vigor of government enforcement (McConnell, et al., 2012). While the jury found that Marshfield clinic and Security had monopoly power, that they engaged in anticompetitive conduct to obtain or maintain that power, and found that Marshfield had illegally entered into agreements with competitors or potential competitors to allocate customers, allocate territories, allocate markets, and to fix fees or prices, the judge subsequently found much of the jury’s decision not reflective of the evidence and over-turned much of the antitrust violations. If this made Marshfield price makers then they could only be characterized as, at the very least, a monopolistic competition all the way up to a monopoly. If a large fraction of the population of Wisconsin could not find “independent” physicians to offer a competitive HMO product, then this clearly would put them as an oligopoly or even monopoly.

The violations seem to imply a state, Indiana, attempt to create a monopoly for an Indiana

In this case, a plaintiff, Nemphos, brought a product liability case against Nestle Waters North America, Nestle USA, The Dannon Company and Gerber Products. The claim from the plaintiff, Nemphos on behalf of her minor daughter, was that these manufactures of bottled water, infant formula, and baby food her daughter consumed over a period of time caused her daughter to develop dental fluorosis. “The complaint alleged that the manufacturers had failed to warn about the risks of dental fluorosis for children who consume large amounts of fluoride, and that they had misleading marketed their fluoride-containing products as especially beneficial to children” (Nemphos vs. Nestle Waters, 2015)

An action brought by foreign plaintiffs under United States antitrust law to recover damages caused by the activities of a global price-fixing cartel. It describes the jurisdictional issues raised by conduct that affects the global market for a particular good, and analyzes the Court's reliance on notions of comity to restrain the reach of U.S. antitrust law. It argues, however, that the decision does not in fact undermine the

Your dental professional is not only the individual the one who cleans the teeth. Your dental professional is a vital partner inside your family's healthcare team. A great dental professional will help you prevent dental issues, place dental cancers, which help improve your state of health by upholding your gums and teeth healthy. This is exactly why you need to find the best family dental professional.

Salon owners have recently started offering teeth whitening services to clients in addition to their more standard services. In a number of states, regulators have ordered the salon owners to stop, claiming that this service constitutes the practice of illegal dentistry. What group would you expect to be behind the state's efforts to ban salons from providing teeth whitening services? Why? Probably the national dental association. By making the state enforce that it is illegal dentistry this allows them to reduce competition in the industry to slow the erosion of profitability.

In the dental office every day certain things happen to make a patient's visit enjoyable or unpleasant. It is our job as the staff to wow them in certain ways throughout there visit. It can be a big wow or a small wow but the patients like to be wowed. Any type of wow can go a long way as long as you try hard enough. The patient will appreciate any nice thing you do for them.

One of the best ways to keep your teeth as healthy as possible is to find a dental care provider like Orchard Dental Group to perform routine cleanings and thorough examinations. Serving the Corona and Riverside Counties, we take pride in offering comprehensive dental care to patients of all ages. Whether you're in need of dental implants or your child needs orthodontic treatment, we're here to help.

So what happens when need a dental specialist and your very own dental specialist is out of the workplace or on vacation? What happens if you endure serious damage that includes your head, jaw, or mouth and you require proficient restorative consideration? What happens if there is an issue with the work you've had done on your teeth or mouth and you can't get to your own dental specialist sufficiently quick?

In 1890, the US Congress passed the Sherman Act. Further, the Clayton Act was enacted in 1912. This was followed by the Robinson-Patman Act of 1936. These antitrust laws prohibit agreements in restraint of trade, monopolization and attempted monopolization, anticompetitive mergers and tie-in schemes, and, in some circumstances, price discrimination in the sale of commodities.