Does the New Law Against Too-Thin Models Violate the Basic Law?

The JPost had an article stating that: 

Starting on Tuesday, female and male models who have a body mass index (BMI) of less than 18.5 may not be shown in the media or on Israeli websites or go down the catwalk at fashion shows...

The law, also sponsored by Likud-Beytenu MK Danny Danon and believed to be the first of its kind in the world, does make violations a criminal offense bearing a fine. But violators can be sued in court by interested citizens, including families whose relatives have suffered or died due to eating disorders encouraged by images of overly thin models.While the media that publish or present illegal images are not liable, they will get a bad image for doing so; the company that produced the ad, ran the fashion show or used the overly skinny presenter can be taken to court.

In addition, any advertisement made to look with Photoshop or other graphics programs as if the model has a BMI under 18.5 has to be labeled with the warning that the image was distorted. The warning must be clear and prominent, covering at least 7 percent of the ad space.

Even the Wall Street Journal has picked up the story.

I wonder, however, whether this law is against the Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation which states that: Every Israel national or resident has the right to engage in any occupation, profession or trade. What if there is a model who naturally has a BMI of less than 18.5? Is she going to be forced to give up her career?

The Basic Law does have two provisions which might protect the law from being overturned:

Section 4: There shall be no violation of freedom of occupation except by a law befitting the values of the State of Israel, enacted for a proper purpose, and to an extent no greater than is required, or by regulation enacted by virtue of express authorization in such law.

Section 8: A provision of a law that violates freedom of occupation shall be of effect, even though not in accordance with section 4, if it has been included in a law passed by a majority of the members of the Knesset, which expressly states that it shall be of effect, notwithstanding the provisions of this Basic Law; such law shall expire four years from its commencement unless a shorter duration has been stated therein.

We'll have to wait and see if this law is challenged in court.

Do We Need a Law Clarifying the Duties of a Paramedic?

The JPost reported on a story where the family of a man is blaming Magen David Adom, the Israeli paramedics, for not transporting the individual to the hospital after he apparently suffered a stroke. The paramedics say that the patient refused to be transported to the hospital.

From the article: 

[MK Rachel] Adatto [a physician] said that MDA paramedics are often in a dilemma. About 20 percent of all patients who need to be evacuated to hospital refuse to be taken. Thus, if the patient needs urgent medical care and refuses to be hospitalized, the paramedic is on the one hand exposed to lawsuits regarding inadequate treatment if he does not evacuate the patient, and on the other hand may be exposed to lawsuits if he acts against the patient’s will.

The Patients’ Rights Law (1996) gives the individual autonomy over his body and health. If the patient is unconscious and unaware of his condition, he can be hospitalized without permission being granted.

I think a law like this is probably a good idea. I'm surprised they don't have one already.

Here is an article from Australia about this topic and one from the US.