Laser hair removal professionals directory
Laser B
TIMELINE OF EVENTS RELATED TO LASER HAIR REMOVAL
REGULATIONS
Electrolysis was
first developed by an ophthalmologist in 1865 for the treatment of
ingrown eyelashes. Over the decades this service became more popular due
to its esthetic appeal, and practitioners desired a more professional
status with standards of training and sanitary conditions in place.
In Florida,
electrolysis was an unregulated business until 1991. Florida
electrologists had actively sought licensure for many years, but not
until the Florida Board of Medicine (BOM) addressed the issue of
AIDS/HIV and other blood borne diseases, did the importance of needle
type electrolysis capture their attention. Electrolysis is regulated
under the Board of Medicine due to the small number of practitioners in
the state who are unable to support their own board.
The current Florida
requirements for this invasive procedure of needle
electrolysis includes the use of a sterilizer which must have a monthly
spore test performed; proper bio-hazardous disposal of our sharps; use
of non-sterile, disposable gloves while performing treatment; and the
practice of universal precautions.
Before 1999, there was never any
discussion or attempt to impose physician supervision of any type for
needle electrolysis procedures, and no prescription from a physician
has ever been required or even discussed to obtain this treatment due to
its global safety record.
In the mid 1990’s,
lasers for hair removal were introduced into the market place.
Electrologists made the obvious move to incorporate this effective, new
technology into their licensed hair removal practices.
Florida
electrologists followed the proper channels of state government to
incorporate statute changes to allow the use of any new equipment that
would safely remove hair. The new laser technology is a
non-invasive procedure
that does not require any precautions for blood borne pathogens, has no
bio-hazardous disposal issues, and its accessories require only
sanitation rather than sterilization practices.
Electrologists
brought hair removal lasers to BOM meetings so the Board members could
participate in hands on demonstrations, and understand this safe, new
technology. They have complied with every requirement that has been
issued by the Board.
Following is the
history of the regulation of laser hair removal in Florida. You will see
that a group of physicians have imposed their opinions of how this
equipment should be regulated and have in fact insisted on regulating
electrologists according to the equipment that they use rather than the
service or procedures that they offer.
Timeline of Events
for Florida Electrologists & Laser Hair Removal
1999
q
June 1, Chapter 478.52(5) gets a statutory change to allow
the use of light based devices. Electrologists had tried unsuccessfully
to get this language changed for 3 years prior to this.
478.42 Definitions.--As
used in this chapter, the term:
-
"Board" means the Board of Medicine.
-
"Council" means the Electrolysis Council.
-
"Department" means the Department of Health.
-
"Electrologist"
means a person who engages in the practice of electrolysis.
-
"Electrolysis or
electrology"
means the permanent removal of hair by destroying the hair-producing
cells of the skin and vascular system, using equipment and devices
approved by the board which have been cleared by and registered with the
United States Food and Drug Administration and that are used pursuant to
protocols approved by the board.
History.--s. 3, ch. 92-172; s. 168, ch. 94-218; s. 144, ch. 97-264; s.
143, ch. 99-397.
q
August 6, Electrolysis Council submits rules for BOM
review and approval.
q
August 6, Chair of the Medical Physicist Council says hair
removal lasers are basically safe, and the equipment would pose no real
threat to consumers when operated by electrologists.
q November
12, (5 ½ months after our statute was passed and
implemented) MQA meets and discusses the issue at depth. There were
electrologists, physicians, and laser company representatives present to
testify. The committee then voted and recommended
general supervision with
a physician. (below) MQA’s primary
concern was about regulating intense pulsed light devices. The
committee was never concerned about imposing anything more than general
supervision.
Suggested Rules for the Implementation of HB 2125
as it pertains to the Practice of
Electrology:
64B8-56.002
Protocols for Permanent Removal or Reduction of Hair by Non-Laser
and Light-Based Hair Removal or Reduction Devices. Licensed
electrologists may not use laser or light-based hair removal or
reduction devices unless:
-
they have completed a continuing education training
course approved by the Council pursuant to Rule 64B8-52.004;
-
they have been certified in the use of lasers and
light-based devices for the removal or reduction of hair by a national
certification organization approved by the Council and Board;
-
they are using only the laser or light based hair
removal or reduction devices upon which they have been trained; and
-
they are operating under the
general supervision of a
physician licensed pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 458, Florida
Statutes.
q
December 3, the BOM tabled the developed rules when Dr.
Mark Nestor made his first appearance before the Board and demanded more
time for the dermatologists to be able to influence the Board’s
decision. He stated on record that these decisions had been made
without the knowledge of the dermatology association. Even though
electrologists had been working on this issue for 3 years, and all of
these meetings had been properly noticed, the Board put the
electrologists on hold in order for the Florida Society of
Dermatologists (FSD) to gather their troops together to forbid the use
of this non-invasive equipment which is safer than needle electrolysis.
o
Dr. Mark Nestor was
allowed to make his case and demand more time for research.
o
Guest physicians who were
flown in from other states at electrologists’ expense, along with
electrolysis attorneys, and Florida licensed electrologists were not
allowed to speak.
456.517 (4)(a) “Neither the department nor any
board may create unreasonably restrictive and extraordinary standards
that deter qualified persons from entering the various professions.
Neither the department nor any board may take any action that tends to
create or maintain an economic condition that unreasonably restricts
competition, except as specifically provided by law.”
q
Dermatologists quickly mailed a survey to its members
searching for evidence of consumer injury from electrologists. No
evidence was revealed.
CLICK HERE FOR TIMELINE PAGE
2
|
