{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04115586690017513, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009632224168126095, 'mean_word_length': 6.012269938650307, '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}}
What should we do about HIV-positive health professionals?

Despite evidence that a human immunodeficiency virus—positive (HIV + ) dentist infected several patients, governmental or institutional efforts to discover HIV + professionals and to routinely restrict them from "invasive procedures" arenotjustified. This was the general, although not unanimous, consensus at a recent conference attended by 200 physicians, nurses, dentists, health care attorneys, ethicists, and public health officials from all over America. The conference, entitled "The HIV+ Health Professional: Policy Options for Individuals, Institutions, and States" was held December 7-8, 1990, in New Brunswick, NJ. It was sponsored by the Regional AIDS (AcquiredImmunodeficiencySyndrome) Education and Training Center at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ), Newark, UMDNJ-New Jersey Medical School, and the New Jersey Board of Medical Examiners. A distinguished national faculty of 28 speakers and panelists contributed perspectives from epidemiology, surgery, infectious disease, dentistry, nursing, law, and ethics. Other points of widespread