Perhaps the solution doesn't have to be so extreme and either/or. No need to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
If it is a test of disease, such as HIV or cancer, there is justification for having a doctor present to explain things during the release and make recommendations for care. There is a definite safety risk involved.
But what about routine maintenance checks? For instance, if I get a CBC plus Ferritin test every 2 or 3 months (My Ferritin was 6 at last count, so- Yikes), then I really don't need a doctor to explain it all to me with EVERY test update, any more than a doctor would need to release my weight or height numbers to me. I can handle seeing that brand of results directly.
In fact, taking this a step further, it irritates me that I even have to ask a doctor to order those simple kinds of tests for me. If I can be in charge of checking oil levels in my car, then I can be in charge of deciding when to check my Iron count. I'm that grown-up. I should be able to order myself a CBC, blood-glucose, lipid panel, and a few other things. Calling my doc to order those tests is a waste of time for them, and if they insist on a Visit before ordering one, it's a waste of money for me.
So maybe the new law should differentiate classes of test results, with the general principle that the most benign tests can be directly released, and maybe even self-ordered.
The biggest problem in American Healthcare is lack of preventative medicine. If access barriers to benign maintenance blood tests were lowered, and test cost and availability improved because of lowered regulation, people might test more and aim for optimized wellness-care instead of just sick-care.
Besides, if someone's white blood cell count spikes or drops drastically, they will most likely call a doctor right away. Or, an auto-alert could be set up with labs to auto-email one's designated doctor in case of suspicious results for those routine maintenance tests.