{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021352313167259787, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.53953488372093, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A review of selected blood-borne pathogen position statements and federal regulations.

One response to the AIDS epidemic has been the formation of blood-borne pathogen policy statements by medical associations, athletic governing bodies, and the federal government. The policy statements by medical associations and athletic governing bodies discuss a wide range of issues, including the eligibility of infected athletes and the right of infected health care workers to practice. In contrast, federal regulations are limited to employees in the work environment. Despite the apparent comprehensiveness of these documents, major deficiencies in the documents do exist. For example, employees exposed to body fluids are entitled to free, employer-provided HIV testing. Similarly, athletes exposed to body fluids also are entitled to voluntary HIV testing. However, it is unclear who should pay for this testing. Furthermore, AIDS testing of student athletic trainers is never discussed. Although there are deficiencies, these documents provide guidelines for resolving the deficiencies. For example, because student athletic trainers act as employees of their institution, it is reasonable to suggest that they receive the same protections that federal regulations provide to employees. Thus, the athletic trainer should find these documents useful for developing policies related to blood-borne pathogens.