Cyanobacteria bloom prompts warning about this Western Mass. pond
That's the message from the Easthampton Health Department, which issued a health advisory for the body of water behind the city's 50 Payson Ave. parking lot.
The pond is loaded with a visible bloom of cyanobacteria, or blue-green algae. Its blooms produce a toxin that's harmful to people and pets.
Advisory signs are posted at local access points.
The city Board of Health advises against people and their animals swimming where the bloom is visible. The city also warns not to allow pets to drink the water; to avoid contact with algae; to not let children or pets play near visible shoreline algae or scum; to rinse pets and people off immediately if they come into contact with the bloom; and to not swallow the affected water.
Water that's murky, green or paint-like, or like pea soup, is likely affected by a bloom. As of Tuesday, Rubber Thread Pond has a greenish-yellow floating scum on its surface.
'When in doubt, stay out,' Easthampton's advisory says.
The algae can cause skin and eye irritation; gastrointestinal symptoms; liver or neurological damage; or asthma-like symptoms. Small children and pets are more susceptible.
Dogs can suffer serious illness or death. Their symptoms include vomiting, staggering, drooling, and convulsions, often occurring soon after exposure.
If you or your pet are exposed, wash yourself or/pet immediately with clean water, and contact your doctor or veterinarian.
To report a potential algae bloom in another water body or to check the status of the pond, contact the city Health Department at health@easthamptonma.gov or 413-529-1430.
More information is available at mass.gov/dph/algae.
WMass community summits seek to counter Trump attack on diversity, equity, inclusion
How bad could mosquito season be in Mass.? For some, it's already itchy
Western Mass. man sentenced to 18 to 20 years in prison for raping 3-year-old
Read the original article on MassLive.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
4 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
20 states sue after the Trump administration releases private Medicaid data to deportation officials
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration violated federal privacy laws when it turned over Medicaid data on millions of enrollees to deportation officials last month, California Attorney General Rob Bonta alleged on Tuesday, saying he and 19 other states' attorneys general have sued over the move. Health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr .'s advisers ordered the release of a dataset that includes the private health information of people living in California, Illinois, Washington state, and Washington, D.C., to the Department of Homeland Security last month, The Associated Press first reported last month. All of those states allow non-U.S. citizens to enroll in Medicaid programs that pay for their expenses using only state taxpayer dollars. The unusual data sharing of private health information, including addresses, names, social security numbers, immigration status, and claims data for enrollees in those states, was released to deportation officials as they accelerated enforcement efforts across the country. The data could be used to help the Department of Homeland Security locate migrants in its mass deportation campaign, experts said. Bonta said the Trump administration's data release violates federal health privacy protection laws, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). 'This is about flouting seven decades of federal law policy and practice that have made it clear that personal healthcare data is confidential and can only be shared in certain narrow circumstances that benefit the public's health or the Medicaid program,' Bonta said during a news conference on Tuesday. The Trump administration has sought to arm deportation officials with more data on immigrants. In May, for example, a federal judge refused to block the Internal Revenue Service from sharing immigrants' tax data with Immigration and Customs Enforcement to help agents locate and detain people living without legal status in the U.S. The move to shore up the federal government's data on immigrant Medicaid enrollees appears to have been set in motion in May, when the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced it would be reviewing some states rolls to ensure federal funds have not been used to pay for coverage for people with 'unsatisfactory immigration status.' As part of the review, CMS asked California, Washington and Illinois to share details about non-U.S. citizens who have enrolled in their state's Medicaid program, according to a June 6 memo signed by Medicaid Deputy Director Sara Vitolo that was obtained by the AP. The memo was written by several CMS officials under Vitolo's supervision, according to sources familiar with the process. CMS officials attempted to fight the data sharing request from Homeland Security, saying that to do so would violate federal laws, including the Social Security Act and the Privacy Act of 1974, according to the memo. The legal arguments outlined in the memo were not persuasive to Trump appointees at HHS, which oversees the Medicaid agency. Four days after the memo was sent, on June 10, HHS officials directed the transfer of 'the data to DHS by 5:30 ET today,' according to email exchanges obtained by AP. HHS is 'aggressively cracking down on states that may be misusing federal Medicaid funds,' agency spokesman Andrew Nixon said in a statement. The agency has not provided details on DHS' role in the effort. Nixon also defended the legality of releasing the data to DHS. 'HHS acted entirely within its legal authority – and in full compliance with all applicable laws – to ensure that Medicaid benefits are reserved for individuals who are lawfully entitled to receive them,' he said in the statement. Dozens of Democratic members of Congress — in both the House and Senate — have sent letters to the involved agencies, demanding that data sharing cease and that Homeland Security destroy the information it has received so far. — Associated Press writer Olga R. Rodriguez in San Francisco contributed.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Senate megabill marks biggest Medicaid cuts in history
Senate Republicans on Tuesday passed the largest cuts to Medicaid since the program began in the 1960s, a move that would erode the social safety net and cause a spike in the number of uninsured Americans over the next decade. The tax and spending bill is projected to cost more than $3 trillion during that time, but it would be partially paid for with about $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid. Almost 12 million lower-income Americans would lose their health insurance by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). It still needs to pass the House again, where some moderate Republicans have expressed concerns about the cuts. The CBO was still analyzing the bill after it was released late Friday, and many last-minute changes meant a more exact forecast on coverage losses wasn't possible before the Senate rushed to vote on it. President Trump and most congressional Republicans say the reductions aren't true cuts. They argue nobody who should be on Medicaid will lose benefits. 'We're cutting $1.7 trillion in this bill, and you're not going to feel any of it,' President Trump said at the White House last week. Still, experts and health advocates say the CBO analysis confirms that despite Trump's repeated pledges to only cut waste, fraud and abuse in Medicaid, the legislation would enact an unprecedented reduction in the program currently used by more than 70 million low-income Americans. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) made an impassioned speech on the Senate floor Sunday night warning that Trump was breaking his promise not to cut Medicaid. 'The people in the White House advising the president, they're not telling him that the effect of this bill is to break a promise,' Tillis said the day after announcing he would not seek reelection. 'I'm telling the president, you have been misinformed. You supporting the Senate mark will hurt people who are eligible and qualified for Medicaid.' Over time, the losses will blunt the significant coverage gains made under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), signed by then-President Obama in 2010. 'This bill isn't being crafted to improve health care in America, or to improve the Medicaid program, or to improve the [ACA]. The purpose of these cuts in the bill is to try to find savings to pay for tax cuts,' said Andrea Ducas, vice president of health policy at the Democratic-aligned Center for American Progress. 'It's treating these health care programs as a [piggy bank]. It's just, how do we extract as much from these programs as humanly possible so that we can find the savings to pay for tax cuts,' Ducas said. The effects of the cut could be devastating, beyond coverage losses. People who lose their Medicaid would have to pay more out of pocket, driving up medical debt and leading to them likely delaying needed treatment or medication. Hospitals would see a spike in uncompensated care and overcrowding of emergency rooms. Even people who still have insurance may not have anywhere to go for care. Hospitals, nursing homes and other providers operating on thin margins warn they could close. 'Seniors will struggle to afford long-term care. People with disabilities will lose critical healthcare coverage that allows them to work and live independently. Rural communities across America will be decimated from hospital closures, and people will lose their lives,' said Richard Besser, president and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and former acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in a statement. 'It is unfathomable to see policymakers intentionally inflict so much damage on the people they represent.' Experts said it's nearly impossible to take almost $1 trillion out of Medicaid without impacting the entire health system, not just the people who lose insurance. By design, the group that would be hit the hardest are people who gained insurance when their states expanded Medicaid under ObamaCare. 'The bill particularly attempts to undermine the Medicaid expansion,' said Jennifer Tolbert, deputy director of the program on Medicaid and the Uninsured at health policy research organization KFF. 'It doesn't exactly repeal it, but many of the provisions target both expansion states and the expansion population.' The bill would achieve its savings in various ways, but the bulk of the cuts come from a strict national work requirement and new restrictions on state-levied taxes on health providers. The provider taxes were the second-largest Medicaid cut in the House bill, after the work requirements. The cuts are even larger under the Senate design. Those changes would reduce spending by nearly $191 billion over a decade, according to the CBO estimate. States impose taxes on providers to boost their federal Medicaid contributions, which they then redirect to hospitals in the form of higher reimbursements. Limiting provider taxes is a long-held conservative goal, as they argue states are gaming the current system and driving up federal Medicaid spending. But senators representing states with poorer, rural populations have objected to the scale of the provider tax cuts, including Sens. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Tillis. The House bill would freeze the tax rate for most states, but the Senate version would require many states to lower their existing rates. As an incentive for senators uncomfortable with the provision, the bill includes a $25 billion fund to aid rural hospitals. Overnight Monday, senators voted down an amendment from Collins to double the size of the fund and increase taxes on the ultra-wealthy, but the final version ultimately included $50 billion for the fund. Hospitals said the relief fund isn't enough to make up for the impacts of the bill, and they urged lawmakers to reject it in favor of the House version — which also would have enacted unprecedented Medicaid cuts, but was less damaging to rural providers. Even some Republicans sounded the alarm. Tillis focused his ire on the provider taxes and state-directed payments, arguing they were simply too harmful to his constituents. He warned his fellow Republicans that their support for the bill could boomerang and cost them politically. Hawley condemned the provider tax cuts and other Medicaid changes but voted for the bill anyway. Part of his reasoning, he said, was that the bill was changed to delay implementation of the cuts for another year. He also touted 'tax cuts for working families' and an extension of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act. Hawley in a statement after the vote urged the House to pass the bill quickly, while sounding a warning on Medicaid. 'Let me be clear, I will continue to do everything in my power to reverse future cuts to Medicaid. If Republicans want to be the party of the working class, we cannot cut health insurance for working people.' The other major Medicaid change in the bill is work requirements. For the first time in the history of the Medicaid program, the bill would require beneficiaries to prove they are working or in school at least 80 hours a month to keep their health insurance starting Dec. 31, 2026. The Senate version extends the requirement to low-income parents of children older than 14, in addition to childless adults without disabilities. States can apply for a 'good faith' exemption to delay the start until 2029, but it's up to the discretion of the Trump administration to grant it. Advocates said giving the administration power to delay coverage losses has the potential to politicize the work requirements, as the White House could grant waivers to important states Republicans need to win. The work requirements are projected to save about $325 billion over a decade, because millions of people would be moved off Medicaid rolls. Nearly six million people would eventually lose Medicaid for not meeting the House bill's work requirements, according to CBO. Work requirements 'are only money savers if people lose coverage. Otherwise they wouldn't be in this bill,' Ducas said. 'I think that's pretty clearly the intent.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Planned Parenthood closes Cleveland facility; Cleveland Department of Public Health to fill gaps
[In the player above, watch previous FOX 8 News coverage on the Ohio Prenatal Equal Protection Act, which is legislation that would effectively ban abortion in the state.] CLEVELAND (WJW) — Planned Parenthood has closed its Cleveland Health Center facility at 7997 Euclid Ave., a move local officials said was 'driven by federal pressure and the Trump administration's freeze on Title X funding.' Now, the Cleveland Department of Public Health is stepping up to provide the 'essential' health services lost in the closure, 'to ensure that patients do not fall through the cracks,' according to a Tuesday news release from the health department. Browns' dome deal done: New stadium ready by 2029 'No one should have to go without essential reproductive and preventive health services,' department Director Dr. David Margolius said in the release. 'Our team is committed to making sure that everyone — regardless of income, ZIP code or insurance status — has access to the health care they need.' The department's neighborhood-based clinics and mobile health units 'stand ready' to provide services including: Birth control and family planning STD testing and treatment Pregnancy testing and counseling Wellness exams Tuberculosis testing Immunizations HPV and Gardasil vaccinations Same-day appointments are available and patients can also walk in. Anyone affected by the Planned Parenthood closure is urged to call 216-624-2324 or visit to find a clinic or schedule a visit. What the state's new flat income tax will mean for Ohioans Title X Family Planning Program funding has been disbursed to family planning clinics like Planned Parenthood for more than 50 years, according to the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services website. But in March 2025, President Donald Trump's administration ordered that funding to be reduced or withheld entirely from providers in 23 states, including Ohio. 'While political decisions in Washington continue to threaten public health infrastructure, CDPH remains steadfast in our mission: to protect and promote the health and well-being of every Cleveland resident,' the release said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
