The Morning Drill: March 26, 2012

Good Monday morning!

On to today's dentistry and health headlines:

Members of Congress see ‘chilling precedent’ in FTC proceedings

Five bipartisan members of Congress urged the Federal Trade Commission March 2 “to cease any further intrusion in the state regulation of the practice of medicine or dentistry and withdraw from the actions you have already taken.”

The FTC issued an opinion and final order Dec. 2, 2011, asserting that the North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners “sought to, and did, exclude nondentist providers from the market for teeth whitening services.” The board Jan. 13, 2012, filed an application for “stay of order” pending review by the U.S. Court of Appeals, which the Commission granted Feb. 10, an action temporarily delaying the administrative proceedings for judicial review.

The five lawmakers from three committees of the House of Representatives cited this and other recent FTC actions “which we respectfully submit are a direct interference with the state regulation of the practice of medicine and dentistry. Specifically, the FTC’s targeting of state legislatures’ and state health regulatory boards’ decisions, proposed rules and legislation regarding who may provide certain services to patients are of serious concern,” they told Commission Chair Jonathan Leibowitz.

Dental Laboratories Association Launch 'The British Bite Mark'

NHS & Private dental patients in the UK who are about to have a new crown, implant, denture or veneer fitted are now being offered the opportunity to find out where their appliances have been made, following the launch of the 'British Bite Mark' by the Dental Laboratories Association.

In recent months, there have been a significant number of dentists looking to send their prescriptions to dental laboratories in the Far East to help reduce their overheads, rather than using the traditional route of dental laboratories based in the UK.

Dental Laboratories operating in the UK comply with strict regulations in terms of materials used; they also have to employ dental technicians that are registered with the General Dental Council. This level of regulation is in place to protect the patient; however, appliances imported are not manufactured by registered Dental Technicians nor do the UK regulators inspect the dental laboratories that manufacture the appliances in the Far East.

The Dental Laboratories Association appreciates that the different levels of regulation and professional requirements can be confusing and difficult for patients to understand and therefore have looked to design a logo that at a quick glance will help inform the patient that their dental appliance has been manufactured in the UK and meets the UK regulatory requirements.

US Supreme Court begins hearings on health care reform

The US Supreme Court opened blockbuster hearings Monday on President Barack Obama's signature health care reform law, a case with huge implications for the nation and the 2012 elections.

As the nine justices took their seats in a packed courtroom, hundreds of people were gathered outside, some chanting and marching for and against the Affordable Care Act, sometimes referred to -- usually by detractors -- as "Obamacare."

The law has been polarizing for the United States: it would provide health insurance to some 32 million Americans lacking coverage, a major social accomplishment for some, but also would force people to buy insurance -- an intrusion into civil liberties for others.

The justices have set aside an unprecedented three days to hear arguments from lawyers representing the government and 26 states who are challenging the law's constitutionality.

Monday's 90 minute hearing is devoted to the narrow question of whether the court has jurisdiction to hear the case before the law has fully gone into effect.

A ruling is not expected until June, but if the court decides it does not have jurisdiction, any action on the law would be set aside at least until 2015.

The government and the states both agree that the court does have jurisdiction, but the court has designated its own lawyer to argue that it does not.

The law's most controversial provision -- the so-called "individual mandate" requiring all Americans to buy insurance from 2014 or pay a fine -- is to be taken up Tuesday.

Bariatric Surgery May Outrank Standard Diabetes Treatment

Bariatric surgery performed considerably better than traditional medical therapy for obese patients with type 2 diabetes, independent of weight loss, according to findings from 2 randomized trials published online March 26 in the New England Journal of Medicine.

"The unique ability of surgery to improve blood sugar levels and cholesterol levels as well as reduce weight makes it an ideal approach for obese patients with type 2 diabetes," lead author of one of the studies Geltrude Mingrone, MD, chief of the Division of Obesity and Metabolic Diseases and professor of medicine at Catholic University in Rome, Italy, said in a news release.

According to the World Health Organization, approximately 8.3% of the global population worldwide had type 2 diabetes in 2010, with a projected increase in prevalence to 9.9% by 2030.

Nearly one quarter (up to 23%) of patients with morbid obesity also have type 2 diabetes, and treatment is particularly challenging in these patients because insulin and other hypoglycemic agents often cause additional weight gain. Bariatric surgery may be cost-effective for obese patients with diabetes because of the tremendous healthcare burden associated with this chronic disease.

Enjoy your morning!

Federal Trade Commission Issues a Stay in North Carolina Mall Teeth Whitening FLAP

You remember the FLAP. More posts are here.

On February 10th the Federal Trade Commission issued a stay in their enforcement of their finding against the North Carolina Dental Board. The stay is here.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has agreed to stay enforcement of its finding that the North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners' efforts to block nondentists from providing teeth-whitening services violate antitrust laws.

The stay, issued February 10, was granted to give the board a chance to have the case heard by an appellate court.

The board asserted that a decision issued last July by a FTC judge would cause "significant irreparable harm" to the board and public, prevent the board from enforcing the state's Dental Practice Act, limit the board's remedies for violations of the law, force the board to adopt a particular interpretation of the law and force the board to provide administrative hearings to unlicensed dentists, according to the stay.

The FTC found the board's arguments without merit but granted the stay in case their decision was overturned on appeal, which the commission felt would cause confusion and require more letters to be sent instructing nondentist teeth-whitening providers that they were practicing dentistry illegally and ordering them to stop.

The board has said it stopped sending such letters two years ago.

Off to federal court we go.

Moreover, remember the North Carolina Dental Board filed a federal lawsuit against the Federal Trade Commission in February of last year.

Eventually, the federal courts will have to decide whether the state's have the right to define what dentistry is, including teeth whitening/bleaching.

The case could become moot though, should President Obama not win re-election and different Federal Trade Commissioners are appointed.

Stay tuned...

The Morning Drill: December 21, 2011

Good Morning!

As most dental practices are in the process of closing for the holidays, I wish to take this opportunity to wiish the very best of the season to everyone and a happy new year.

On to today's dentistry and health headlines:

Dentist accused of groping KOP mall employees

An itinerant dentist accused of groping two women employees at King of Prussia Mall stores waived his preliminary hearing Thursday.

Vasanth Dharmaraj, 33, a former Upper Merion resident who relocated to Connecticut, is charged with indecent assault, harassment and disorderly conduct, according to court papers

When Dharmaraja lived in the Philadelphia region, he practiced dentistry in a variety of Pennsylvania cities and towns including Philadelphia, Gilbertsville, Phoenixville, York, Reading, Harrisburg and Temple, according to the Upper Merion police’s Detective Division.

The defendant is free on $25,000 unsecured bail. An arraignment is scheduled in Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas on Feb. 1 at 9:30 a.m.

FTC: Dental Board Cannot Order Nondentists to Stop Whitening

The North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners cannot order nondentists to stop whitening teeth, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has ruled.

The December 2 ruling could have implications for tooth whitening by nondentists in other states, and for the scope of dental boards in general.

The North Carolina board plans to appeal, board attorney Noel Allen told Medscape Medical News. "It's a very unique and radical position that the FTC is taking," said Allen. "It runs contrary to the way states protect their citizens."

At the heart of the case is a question about whether the board is acting more as an arm of the state government, enforcing the law, or as a trade association, to benefit its members.

“Painless” Plasma Brush Is Becoming Reality In Dentistry, MU Engineers Say

University of Missouri engineers and their research collaborators at Nanova, Inc. are one step closer to a painless way to replace fillings. After favorable results in the lab, human clinical trials are underway on the “plasma brush.”

In less than 30 seconds, the plasma brush uses chemical reactions to disinfect and clean out cavities for fillings. In addition to the bacteria-killing properties, the “cool flame” from the plasma brush forms a better bond for cavity fillings.  The chemical reactions involved with the plasma brush actually change the surface of the tooth, which allows for a strong and robust bonding with the filling material.

“There have been no side effects reported during the lab trials, and we expect the human trials to help us improve the prototype,” said Qingsong Yu, associate professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering of MU, and Meng Chen, chief scientist from Nanova, Inc., which holds a co-patent for the plasma brush with MU.

“200 million tooth restorations cost Americans an estimated $50 billion a year, and it is estimated that replacement fillings comprise 75 percent of a dentist’s work. The plasma brush would help reduce those costs,” said Hao Li, associate professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering in the MU College of Engineering. “In addition, a tooth can only support two or three restorations before it must be pulled. Our studies indicate that fillings are 60 percent stronger with the plasma brush, which would increase the filling lifespan. This would be a big benefit to the patient, as well as dentists and insurance companies.”

U.S. bill would create grant program for dental charities

A bill introduced to the U.S. Congress in November would make it easier for charitable programs such as Donated Dental Services (DDS) to provide necessary dental care to low-income children and adults with serious medical conditions.


S.1878, the "Coordination of Pro-Bono Medically Recommended Dental Care Act," was introduced November 16 by Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ). The bill would create a grant program that will support national dental programs such as DDS to coordinate medically recommended dental care for these patients.

The care would be provided by volunteer dentists at no cost to patients with medical conditions such as diabetes, cancer, autoimmune disease, and kidney disease or who need heart or joint replacements or transplants.

Enjoy your morning!

The Morning Drill: October 31, 2011

A collection of dentistry and health related links/comments for your day.

FTC mulls NC dental board teeth-whitening appeal

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is considering the North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners' appeal of a July ruling that the board's efforts to block nondentists from providing teeth-whitening services constitute an illegal anticompetitive conspiracy.

The dental board's actions violated the law, according to a decision issued July 14 by Chief Administrative Law Judge D. Michael Chappell, who concluded it was "unreasonable restraint of trade and an unfair method of competition."

Chappell determined that "dentist members of the dental board had a common scheme or design, and hence an agreement, to exclude nondentists from the market for teeth-whitening services and to deter potential providers of teeth-whitening services from entering the market," the FTC said.

The board filed an appeal of that decision on August 25 that, among other things, claimed that Chappell "engaged in a cherry-picking exercise to consider only evidence of potential economic harm caused by exclusionary conduct" and "did not consider the context in which such conduct occurred, i.e., as an enforcement mechanism by a state agency charged by statute with regulating the practice of dentistry in North Carolina."

On October 28, during the appeal hearing, three FTC commissioners heard testimony from both sides.

"There were some good questions," Noel Allen, attorney for the dental board, told DrBicuspid.com. "But my every instinct is that this is a foregone conclusion because the heart of the matter is about state action and public protection, and they indicated early on that those are not considerations. They made up their minds a long time ago."

Boy's death at dentist ruled accidental; no charges filed

The death of 5-year-old Dylan “Dilli Man” Shane Stewart after being sedated for dental work in 2010 has been ruled accidental by the Alachua County Sheriff’s Office.

Dylan died in April 2010 after going into cardiac arrest shortly after being sedated during an appointment with longtime Gainesville-area pediatric dentist Dr. Ronnie Grundset.

In a final report on the death that was made public Friday, Detective Sheryl Strickland wrote: “It was determined that the death of Dylan Stewart was accidental. … The State Attorney’s Office has determined that criminal charges will not be pursued in this case.”

Chicago dentist says Iowa murder suspect seduced, drugged him in extortion plot

Chicago oral surgeon Joseph A. LaSpisa says he hasn't spoken to Tracey Richter in a decade. During those years, he's tried to get past an evening in a dentist's chair that he says mixed seduction, laughing gas and forged documents to create an extortion plot for which he still feels angry and stupid.

His history with Richter is in some ways more bizarre than the stories emerging from testimony at her trial on charges that she shot and killed a 20-year-old neighbor, which resumes Monday in a courtroom in Fort Dodge.

LaSpisa spoke recently with detectives investigating the 2001 death of Dustin Wehde, but a week into the trial, his name hasn't yet come up. Neither has the long and nasty civil lawsuit in which Richter accused LaSpisa of sexual assault and he accused her of extortion. It's possible jurors will never hear the story and details of the four-year legal feud that followed, which LaSpisa said embarrassed him and set back his career.

He's now watching the murder trial with interest, thinking about what sentence Richter might face should she be found guilty. Iowa doesn't have the death penalty, but LaSpisa said an execution "wouldn't bother me one bit."

"She set me up from day one," LaSpisa, 53, told The Associated Press in a phone interview. "Maybe I was just an easy target, I don't know. A dumb target."

Richter is charged with first-degree murder in Wehde's death, a slaying she insists was an act of self-defense during a home invasion but one that prosecutors describe as a convoluted plot to frame her ex-husband. Authorities argue she forced Wehde to write a diary claiming her ex-husband hired him to kill her. They argue Richter then shot the 20-year-old Wehde to keep him quiet.

Scott Bandstra, who is defending Richter on the murder charge, noted LaSpisa has been sanctioned by state regulators for misconduct and "there was a settlement" in the civil lawsuit. He declined further comment.

Dentists collecting extra Halloween candy for troops

Two local dentists have decided to keep kids a bit healthier and make things a little sweeter for U.S. troops this Halloween season.

The dental office of Michael Z. Hopkins has teamed up with Operation Gratitude to exchange excess candy from trick-or-treaters for toys, cool orange-and-black toothbrushes and coupons from participating sponsors in the area. There will also be a drawing to win a Sonicare toothbrush.

The candy will be collected at 1706 S. Elena Ave., Suite B, in Redondo Beach from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. starting Tuesday and continuing the same hours through Thursday. The loot will be shipped to troops overseas.

For more information, call 310-378-9241.

At Torrance Dental Arts, Dr. Steve Sutherland will collect unwanted candy at the third annual Halloween Candy Buy Back, designed to promote healthy living for local children. Children will be given prizes that include electric glowing toothbrushes for every pound of candy they turn in.

The candy will be shipped to the troops as a gift of appreciation.

The unopened candy will be collected from

10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Tuesday at 23326 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 190, Torrance. Call 310-378-8209 for more information.

Enjoy your morning and Happy Halloween!

Federal Trade Commission Rules Against the North Carolina Dental Board Over Teeth Bleaching Services

Remember last year that the Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint against the North Carolina Dental Board regarding teeth whitening services? I covered the flap in this post.and others.

Well, the Administrative Law Judge assigned to the case has finally rendered a decision.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has ruled that the North Carolina dental board's efforts to block nondentists from providing teeth-whitening services constitute an illegal anticompetitive conspiracy.

The North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners' actions violated the law, according to a decision by Chief Administrative Law Judge D. Michael Chappell, who concluded it was "unreasonable restraint of trade and an unfair method of competition."

The dental board lacks the authority to order nondentists to discontinue providing teeth-whitening goods or services, Chappell ruled. He also forbid it from engaging in the same anticompetitive conduct in the future. In addition, the order requires the board to send follow-up letters to nondentists whom it had previously warned would or might be violating state law by providing teeth-whitening services, the FTC statement said.

Chappell determined that "dentist members of the dental board had a common scheme or design, and hence an agreement, to exclude nondentists from the market for teeth-whitening services and to deter potential providers of teeth-whitening services from entering the market," the FTC said

The entire decision in Pdf format is here.

Other states like Connecticut have taken the same approach to Kiosk and Mall teeth bleaching And, in fact, have banned them.

New Jersey has similar cases.

So, off to court we go.

The federal courts and ultimately, the United States Supreme Court will have to decide these different cases, and the applicability of FTC rule making on the soverignity of the states to make their own dental practice laws.

This will take time and this overreach by the Federal Trade Commission could very well be reversed should President Obama not be re-elected in 2012.

Look for a protracted constitutional legal battle though.

Connecticut Dental Board Reviewing Whether Teeth Whitening Should Be Classified as "Dentistry"

The Connecticut Dental Board is about to run afoul of the Federal Trade Commission - just like the North Carolina Dental Board.

State dentists could get a monopoly on the lucrative business of tooth whitening pending action by a commission they control.

The State
Dental Commission held a hearing in December to review whether tooth
whitening should be classified as ‘’dentistry’’ – a move that would
result in the procedure being done only under a dentist’s supervision. 
  The commission is set to vote on the issue at its May 11 meeting.  If
the panel rules that it is dentistry – others who provide the service
in shopping malls, salons and spas could be put out of business.

“I’m running a business in the state helping the economy,” said
Stephen Barraco, owner of Smile Bright, a Branford company employing
five people that sells whitening products in salons.

Three of the six dentists on the state commission advertise that they
offer tooth whitening in their practices, including the commission
chair, Jeanne P. Strathearn, a West Hartford dentist.  She declined
through her staff to talk with C-HIT for the story. The commission also
has three slots for non-dentist “public members.”  But two of those
seats are vacant.

The commission’s ruling would not affect the over-the-counter sale of
whitening products.  Commissioners’ questions were focused on vendors
offering the service outside the dental offices.

Department of Public Health spokesman William Gerrish said that the
commission had received complaints that tooth whitening was being done
without a dentist’s supervision.  But he could not specify the nature of
those complaints or whether consumers had been harmed.

The move could bring legal problems for the state. North Carolina
recently prohibited non-dentists from performing whitening and is being
sued by the Federal Trade Commission as a result. The FTC maintains that
North Carolina’s dental board violated anti-trust laws by limiting
competition for whitening customers. As in North Carolina, the state
body overseeing dentistry in Connecticut is predominately made up of
dentists, a key point in the FTC’s complaint.

Mitchell J. Katz of the FTC’s Office of Public Affairs refused to
speculate on whether similar action would be taken against Connecticut
if the commission rules that whitening is dentistry.

Regardless of whether the FTC acts, Barraco said that he and others
in the industry would take legal action if the commission passes a
measure that forces them out of business. He maintains he is selling a
product, just as pharmacies that stock whitening strips do.

Just as I said many weeks ago, this issue is destined to be decided in a Federal Appellate Court or even at SCOTUS - eventually. At issue is more than teeth whitening but the constitutional issue of state sovereignty.

I imagine there will be more states regulating teeth whitening and why?

Complaints of harm from the public.

Previous:

Federal Trade Commission Denies North Carolina Dental Board's Motion to Dismiss Complaint

Updated: North Carolina Dental Board Files Suit Against the Federal Trade Commission

North Carolina Dental Board files Suit Against the Federal Trade Commission

Federal Trade Commission Denies North Carolina Dental Board's Motion to Dismiss Complaint

Remember last year that the Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint against the North Carolina Dental Board regarding teeth whitening services.

The Federal Trade Commission issued an administrative complaint June 17 charging that the North Carolina dental board "has acted in various ways to eliminate the provision of teeth whitening services by non-dentists."

"Dentists in North Carolina, acting through the instrument of the North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners ('Dental Board'), are colluding to exclude non-dentists from competing with dentists in the provision of teeth whitening services," the FTC complaint said. "The actions of the Dental Board prevent and deter non-dentists from providing or expanding teeth whitening services, increase prices and reduce consumer choice without any legitimate justification or defense, including the 'state action' defense."

The complaint says teeth-whitening services are offered by dentists and non-dentists in North Carolina and that dentist members of the board "can and do control the operation of the dental board" and have financial interest in board decisions. The dental board consists of six licensed dentists, one licensed hygienist and one consumer member who is neither a dentist or a hygienist.

"The conduct of the dental board constitutes concerted action by its members and the dentists of North Carolina," the complaint asserts.

The FTC gave the board 14 days to respond to the allegations and scheduled a hearing on the complaint for Feb. 17, 2011, before an administrative law judge. The administrative complaint begins a proceeding "In the Matter of The North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners," FTC Docket No. 9343, but is neither a finding nor a ruling that the dental board violated the law.

The North Carolina Dental Board's response to the FTC complaint is here (Pdf).

Apparently, the North Carolina Dental Board filed a motion for dismissal of the complaint on constitutional grounds in November 2010. This motion was denied today by the Federal Trade Commission.

The Federal Trade Commission denied a motion by the North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners to dismiss a complaint filed by the FTC’s staff which charges that the Dental Board stifled competition by blocking non-dentists from providing teeth-whitening services.

The Commission issued an Opinion and Order unanimously rejecting the Dental Board’s argument that the “state action doctrine” exempts it from antitrust scrutiny under the FTC Act. The state action doctrine exempts from antitrust liability conduct by private actors if their conduct is pursuant to a clearly articulated state policy to displace competition and if that conduct is supervised by the state. Because of the ruling, the case against the Dental Board will move forward as scheduled, with a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge on February 17, 2011.

The Commission wrote that “because the Board is controlled by practicing dentists, the Board’s challenged conduct must be actively supervised by the state for it to claim state action exemption from the antitrust laws. Because we find no such supervision, we hold that the antitrust laws reach the Board’s conduct.” The Dental Board consists of eight members, including six licensed dentists, that regulate the practice of dentistry in North Carolina.

FTC’s staff sued the Dental Board in June 2010, alleging that the state regulatory agency violated federal law by blocking non-dentists from providing teeth-whitening services.

The Board filed a motion in November 2010 seeking to dismiss the FTC’s charges based on the state action doctrine. At the same time, complaint counsel filed a motion for partial summary decision, asking the Commission to rule that the state action defense was unavailable to the Dental Board. The Commission considered these motions together under the FTC’s revised Rules of Practice. In its Opinion, the Commission concluded that the state action doctrine did not exempt the Dental Board from antitrust scrutiny, and granted complaint counsel’s motion for partial summary decision.

The Commission vote approving the Opinion and Order was 4-0, with Commissioner Julie Brill recused. More information on the FTC’s complaint against the Dental Board can be found here.

Today's FTC opinion is here (Pdf) and the FTC order is here (Pdf).

I suppose this means the February 17, 2011 hearing or trial on the original complaint will proceed, unless the North Carolina Dental Board is able to win an injunction from a federal court. Remember they filed suit against the Federal Trade commission last week alledging violations of the U.S. Constitution.

This is yet another legal step in what will be a case that will be decided most probably years from now in a federal appeals court or at the Supreme Court of the United States.

Stay tuned.....

Update:

Here is a link to all of the legal documents/pleadings in the case:

Docket No. 9343
In the Matter of The North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners
FTC File No. 081-0133

Previous:

Updated: North Carolina Dental Board Files Suit Against the Federal Trade Commission

North Carolina Dental Board files Suit Against the Federal Trade Commission

Updated: North Carolina Dental Board Files Suit Against the Federal Trade Commission

Now, wait a minute. The Feds have already imposed themselves over Georgia and the hygienists supervision flap. But, now the Federal Trade Commission is telling the sovereign state of North Carolina they cannot regulate who practices dentistry (tooth whitening) in their state?

North Carolina's dental regulatory board filed suit Tuesday to enforce a state law that allows only dentists to perform teeth-whitening procedures.

The state Board of Dental Examiners alleges that the Federal Trade Commission overstepped its authority in trying to determine who can whiten teeth. Last year, the FTC accused the dental board of improperly trying to shut down businesses like day spas and tanning booths that also offer whitening services.

The board wants a federal judge to issue an order upholding its right to determine who can offer whitening services and requiring the FTC to remove all derogatory references to the state board and North Carolina dentists from the FTC website.

North Carolina will win this suit.

If the Obama Administration was smart they would back off their attempt to take over the state regulation of dentistry via federal regulation. Either they will lose in the federal courts or be voted out of office in 2012.

Update:

Here is a good summary of the case the North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners has brought against the Obama Administration's Federal Trade Commission.

The North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners sued the Federal Trade Commission today in Raleigh federal court, accusing the federal agency of multiple violations of the US Constitution and the sovereignty of North Carolina. The State Board asked Chief US District Judge Louise W. Flanagan to halt an FTC trial scheduled for later this month on charges that the State Board violated federal antitrust law. The State Board argued it is immune from such claims and the FTC has abused its own power in seeking to nullify the acts of a state government agency.

As reported earlier today, the FTC has objected to the State Board’s decision to classify teeth-whitening services as a form of “dentistry” subject to the Board’s licensing requirements. The FTC issued an administrative complaint claiming the State Board exceeded its authority. The Commission ordered a trial before one of its own judges, which is scheduled to begin on February 17. The FTC also appointed the prosecutors trying the case.

In the lawsuit filed today, the State Board said that as “an agency of the sovereign State of North Carolina,” it cannot be tried under federal antitrust law for its official acts: “The Tenth Amendment does not allow, the Sherman Antitrust Act does not authorize, and Article I, § 8 of the U.S. Constitution does not provide the FTC antitrust jurisdiction over the State Board’s enforcement of the [North Carolina] Dental Practice Act against the unauthorized practice of dentistry.”

The State Board went on to note that North Carolina has not waived its sovereign immunity against lawsuit, the FTC is not a lawful court under Article III of the US Constitution, and accoringly, “The FTC is barred by the U.S. Constitution, Article III, § 2, Clause 2 from forcing the State of North Carolina to be tried in a tribunal that is not either the U.S. Supreme Court or a lesser tribunal established by Congress as part of the federal judiciary.”

The lawsuit detailed numerous allegations of due process violations by the FTC in the course of its ongoing administrative proceedings, which the State Board characterized as an attempt to “unilaterally and forcibly expand [the FTC's] jurisdiction despite the contrary will of Congress, seven decades of adverse court precedent, and even Presidential orders.”

Read it all.

A copy of the lawsuit is here.

Again, North Carolina and each state has every right to regulate its own practice of dentistry. This case will most likely be decided in the federal appellate courts.

North Carolina Dental Board files Suit Against the Federal Trade Commission

Now, wait a minute. The Feds have already imposed themselves over Georgia and the hygienists supervision flap. But, now the Federal Trade Commission is telling the sovereign state of North Carolina they cannot regulate who practices dentistry (tooth whitening) in their state?

North Carolina's dental regulatory board filed suit Tuesday to enforce a state law that allows only dentists to perform teeth-whitening procedures.

The state Board of Dental Examiners alleges that the Federal Trade Commission overstepped its authority in trying to determine who can whiten teeth. Last year, the FTC accused the dental board of improperly trying to shut down businesses like day spas and tanning booths that also offer whitening services.

The board wants a federal judge to issue an order upholding its right to determine who can offer whitening services and requiring the FTC to remove all derogatory references to the state board and North Carolina dentists from the FTC website.

North Carolina will win this suit.

If the Obama Administration was smart they would back off their attempt to take over the state regulation of dentistry via federal regulation. Either they will lose in the federal courts or be voted out of office in 2012.