Connect with us

Science

California hospitals scramble on earthquake retrofits as state limits extensions

Published

on

California hospitals scramble on earthquake retrofits as state limits extensions

More than half of the 410 hospitals in California have at least one building that probably wouldn’t be able to operate after a major earthquake hit their region, and with many institutions claiming that they don’t have the money to meet a 2030 legal deadline for earthquake retrofits, the state is now granting relief to some while ramping up pressure on others to get the work done.

Gov. Gavin Newsom in September vetoed legislation championed by the California Hospital Assn. that would have allowed all hospitals to apply for an extension of the deadline for up to five years. Instead, the Democratic governor signed a more narrowly tailored bill that allows small, rural or “distressed” hospitals to get an extension of up to three years.

“It’s an expensive thing and a complicated thing for hospitals — independent hospitals in particular,” said Elizabeth Mahler, an associate chief medical officer for Alameda Health System, which serves Northern California’s East Bay and is undertaking a$25-million retrofit of its hospital in Alameda, on an island beside Oakland.

The debate over how seismically safe California hospitals should be dates to the 1971 Sylmar quake near Los Angeles, which prompted a law requiring new hospitals to be built to withstand an earthquake and continue operating. In 1994, after the magnitude 6.7 Northridge quake killed at least 57 people, lawmakers required existing facilities to be upgraded.

Advertisement

The two laws have left California hospitals with two sets of standards to meet. The first — which originally had a deadline of 2008 but was pushed to 2020 — required hospital buildings to stay standing after an earthquake. About 20 facilities have yet to meet that requirement for at least one of their buildings, although some have received extensions from the state.

Many more — 674 buildings, spread across 251 licensed hospitals — do not meet the second set of standards, which require hospital facilities to remain functional in the event of a major earthquake. That work is supposed to be done by 2030.

“The importance of it is hard to argue with,” said Jonathan Stewart, a professor at UCLA’s Samueli School of Engineering, citing a 2023 earthquake in Turkey that damaged or destroyed multiple hospitals. “There were a number of hospitals that were intact but not usable. That’s better than a collapsed structure. But still not what you need at a time of emergency like that.”

The influential hospital industry has unsuccessfully lobbied lawmakers for years to extend the 2030 deadline, though the state has granted various extensions to specific facilities. Newsom’s signature on one of the three bills addressing the issue this year represents a partial victory for the industry.

Hospital administrators have long complained about the steep cost of seismic retrofits.

Advertisement

“While hospitals are working to meet these requirements, many will simply not make the 2030 deadline and be forced by state law to close,” Carmela Coyle, president and chief executive of the California Hospital Assn., wrote in a letter to Newsom before he vetoed the CHA bill. A 2019 Rand Corp. study paid for by the CHA pinned the price of meeting the 2030 standards at $34 billion to $143 billion statewide.

Labor unions representing nurses and other medical workers, however, say that hospitals have had plenty of time to get their buildings into compliance, and that most have the money to do so.

“They’ve had 30 years to do this,” Cathy Kennedy, a nurse in Roseville and one of the presidents of the California Nurses Assn., said in an interview prior to the governor’s action. “We are kicking the can down the road year after year, and unfortunately, lives are going to be lost.”

In his veto message on the CHA bill, Newsom wrote that a blanket five-year extension wasn’t justified, and that any extension “should be limited in scope, granted only on a case-by-case basis to hospitals with demonstrated need and a clear path to compliance, and in combination with strong accountability and enforcement mechanisms.”

He also vetoed a bill directed specifically at helping several hospitals operated by Providence, a Catholic hospital chain.

Advertisement

But he signed a third bill, which allows small, rural and “critical access” hospitals, and some others, to apply for a three-year extension, and directs the Department of Health Care Access and Information to offer them “technical assistance” in meeting the deadline.

The state designates 37 hospitals as providing “critical access.” An additional 56 are considered “small,” meaning they have fewer than 50 beds, 59 are considered “rural,” and 32 are “district” hospitals, meaning they are funded by special government entities called “health care districts.” They can seek a three-year extension as long as they submit a seismic compliance plan and identify milestones for implementing it.

Debi Stebbins, executive director of the Alameda Health Care District, which owns the Alameda Hospital buildings, said small hospitals face a big challenge. Even though Alameda is close to San Francisco and Oakland, the tunnels, bridges, and ferries that connect it to the mainland could easily be shut in an emergency, making the island’s hospital a lifeline.

“It’s an unfunded mandate,” Stebbins said of the state’s 2030 deadline.

The Rand study estimated the average cost of a retrofit at more than $92 million per building, but the amount could vary greatly depending on whether it’s a building that houses hospital beds.

Advertisement

Small and rural hospitals can get some aid from the state through grants financed by the California Electronic Cigarette Excise Tax, but Andrew DiLuccia, spokesperson for the Department of Health Care Access and Information, said that would yield just $2 million to $3 million total annually. He added that the Small and Rural Hospital Relief Program also has received a one-time infusion of $50 million from a tax on health insurers to help with the seismic work.

Labor unions and critics of the extensions often point to the large profits that some hospitals reap: A California Health Care Foundation report published in August found that California’s hospitals made $3.2 billion in profit during the first quarter of 2024. The study notes that there “continues to be wide variation in financial performance among hospitals, with the bottom quartile showing a net income margin of -5%, compared to +13% for the top quartile.”

Stebbins has had to help her district figure out a plan.

After Newsom vetoed a bill in 2022 that would have granted an extension on the seismic retrofit deadline specifically for Alameda Hospital, the hospital system and its partner health care district used parcel tax money to help back a loan.

The cost to retrofit will be about $25 million, and the system is also investing millions more into other projects, such as a new skilled-nursing facility. The construction work is set to be completed in 2027.

Advertisement

“No one wants things crashing in an earthquake or anything else, but at the same time, it’s a burden,” Mahler of Alameda Health System said. “How do we make sure that they get what they need to stay open?”

This article was produced by KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Science

Solar storm could disrupt communications and display northern lights to parts of California

Published

on

Solar storm could disrupt communications and display northern lights to parts of California

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has issued a severe geomagnetic storm watch that could disrupt communications, the power grid, navigation, radio and satellite operations but also generate a nighttime light show.

The category G4 watch from NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center — the second such alert issued this year — warns of the possibility of a solar flare for Thursday and Friday, with a resulting coronal mass ejection from the sun that could disturb Earth’s electromagnetic field.

A sunspot group erupted Tuesday night that gave signs of a strong release of solar material and embedded magnetic fields, also known as a coronal mass ejection, which causes geomagnetic storms when they are directed at Earth, according to the prediction center.

The storm’s impact is an estimation, as scientists don’t know for certain the effect of this geomagnetic storm until it arrives near two satellites that are 1 million miles from Earth, said Sean Dahl, service coordinator for the Space Weather Prediction Center.

Advertisement

The coronal mass ejection is predicted to reach the satellites Thursday morning, Eastern time. Experts could not offer an exact time. When that happens, the geomagnetic storm is expected to reach Earth 15 to 30 minutes later.

A severe geomagnetic storm includes the potential for an aurora borealis — also known as the northern lights — visible as far south as Alabama and Northern California.

At this time, scientists couldn’t point to specific times or exact locations where the aurora might be visible.

If you want to catch a glimpse of the aurora, experts recommend that you follow along with the Prediction Center’s aurora dashboard and the 30-minute forecast online for updates.

NOAA experts say the best time for greater aurora visibility is between 10 p.m. and 2 a.m. from a high vantage point with minimal light pollution.

Advertisement

Experts say this severe geomagnetic storm won’t surpass the storm that occurred in May when a storm was caused by a series of coronal mass ejections. This time around there is only one coronal mass ejection and experts believe the duration of the event will be much shorter.

Continue Reading

Science

Study: Severe COVID raised risk of heart attack, stroke as much as having heart disease

Published

on

Study: Severe COVID raised risk of heart attack, stroke as much as having heart disease

People hospitalized for COVID-19 early in the pandemic suffered an increased risk of serious “cardiac events” such as heart attacks and strokes that was akin to people with a history of heart disease, a newly released study has found.

Researchers from USC, UCLA and the Cleveland Clinic analyzed more than 10,000 COVID cases tracked by the UK Biobank to examine how COVID affected the risk of heart attacks and other cardiac threats.

Their study, released Wednesday in the journal Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology, assessed outcomes for people sickened in the first year of the pandemic and followed for a period of nearly three years.

The findings underscore that among “people who don’t have any evidence of heart disease, having severe COVID put them at a significantly increased risk of heart attack, stroke and death,” said principal investigator Hooman Allayee, professor of population and public health sciences at USC’s Keck School of Medicine.

Advertisement

Among the most striking findings: Being hospitalized for COVID in 2020 amplified the risk of heart attacks and other cardiac events so much that it ended up being comparable to people who had a history of heart disease but who hadn’t gotten COVID, the study found.

Although the analysis showed that the added risk was especially stark among people with severe cases, researchers stressed it was still apparent for patients who had gotten any form of COVID.

Such risks were roughly twice as high in people who had gotten COVID at all levels of severity, and four times as high for hospitalized cases, compared with people who hadn’t gotten COVID, the study found.

The study indicates that the increased risk “shows no apparent signs of attenuation up to nearly three years after SARS-CoV-2 infection and suggest that COVID-19 continues to pose a significant public health burden with lingering adverse cardiovascular risk,” they wrote.

Scientists also found that the risk differed by blood type: Being hospitalized for COVID ramped up the risks among people with blood types A, B or AB more than it did among people with type O blood.

Advertisement

“Your genetics actually plays a role in this increased risk of developing future heart attacks and stroke,” said James Hilser, a Keck doctoral candidate in biochemistry and molecular medicine who helped write the paper.

Researchers said their findings could help shape how doctors try to head off such health problems in the future. Doctors routinely offer preventative treatment to patients with medical conditions such as cardiovascular disease or diabetes that put them at a higher risk of heart attack or stroke.

Allayee said that if someone walks into a doctor’s office and is newly diagnosed with diabetes, “it doesn’t matter what their cholesterol is … They get put on a lipid-lowering medication. They get put on a baby aspirin.”

But when physicians think about preventing heart attacks, “nobody is taking into consideration COVID — whether it’s severe or otherwise — in how to manage a patient,” Allayee said. In light of the findings, he said, “this is something that doctors should be discussing,” as should regulatory bodies for cardiac care.

The study, which was funded by the National Institutes of Health, had some limitations: It examined only COVID cases early in the pandemic before vaccines became available. (Another study published earlier this year, which also relied on the UK Biobank data, found that the incidence of heart attacks and strokes was generally lower after each dose of a COVID vaccine.)

Advertisement

Researchers also cautioned that some COVID patients may have had undiagnosed heart disease when they were hospitalized, which would not be evident in the UK Biobank data.

Continue Reading

Science

Scientists long urged NASA to search for signs of life near Jupiter. Now it's happening

Published

on

Scientists long urged NASA to search for signs of life near Jupiter. Now it's happening

In 2015, Bill Nye was on Marine One with President Obama.

The television personality and science advocate was officially there for an Earth Day event, but he took the opportunity to talk to the president about space exploration, and specifically, a mission still in its infancy at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in La Cañada Flintridge that desperately needed funds.

After a decade of advocacy from scientists, the mission is expected launch as early as Friday, and will investigate Jupiter’s icy moon Europa, which is suspected of harboring a vast ocean capable of supporting life.

“There are two questions: Where did we come from? And, are we alone in the universe?” Nye said. “If you meet somebody who says he or she never asks those questions, they’re not being honest with you.”

Advertisement

Engineered by JPL, the $5-billion Europa Clipper spacecraft is the largest interplanetary probe ever built by the space agency. The probe will launch on a SpaceX rocket, built in Hawthorne.

“If we find life on another world, it will change life on this one,” Nye said. “It’s the people who live and work in Los Angeles County who do this work that potentially will change the course of human history.”

On the heels of the James Webb Space Telescope and Perseverance Mars Rover, Clipper is one of the last multibillion-dollar “flagship” projects to squeeze through development this decade as NASA faces budget tightening and project management issues.

“I often talk about these missions as modern cathedrals. They are generational quests,” said NASA JPL Director Laurie Leshin at a news conference for the Clipper launch. “I’m really proud that, as humanity, we choose to undertake these difficult and long-term goals — things like exploring the unknown out at Jupiter.”

NASA has until Nov. 6 to launch the probe and is currently waiting for Hurricane Milton to pass over Florida’s Space Coast.

Advertisement

Once the spacecraft leaves its Cape Canaveral launchpad, it begins a five-and-a-half-year odyssey — first sling-shotting around Mars in early 2025, and then boomeranging back around Earth in late 2026 before it speeds toward the solar system’s largest planet and an incredibly dynamic moon.

Europa orbits Jupiter in just three and a half days, traveling 10 times faster than our moon. The intense gravitational forces from the gas giant constantly crush and strain the moon’s core, heating it up

Scientists believe hydrothermal water vents blast the core’s heat upward, thawing an expansive ocean that sloshes roughly 15 miles below the moon’s icy crust — far deeper than humans have ever dug on Earth.

Observations from Earth and orbiting probes suggest that some of this water works through fissures in the ice and blasts through in geysers over a hundred miles high.

With liquid water and a source of energy in the form of heat, Europa has fascinated scientists for decades. If it also harbors organic compounds such as amino acids, which form the proteins that make up cells, then Europa could be home to alien life-forms.

Advertisement

Clipper will search for light signatures of these compounds on Europa — and any that may be blasted into space by meteorites or geysers.

“If there is something alive — imagine a Europanian microbe, let alone Europanian fish people — these things would be shot into space,” Nye said. “If you sample water in any pond anywhere on Earth, anywhere there’s moisture, you’ll find all these viruses and bacteria and microbes, writ tiny, and so it’s reasonable we’d at least find organic compounds.”

(NASA is virtually certain it won’t find fish people, but it hasn’t stopped scientists from dreaming.)

Although previous missions to Jupiter have given scientists a rough sketch of the moon, Clipper will help paint a detailed portrait.

Once Clipper arrives at Jupiter, it will orbit the gas giant 80 times over the course of four years, making 49 Europa flybys, as close as 16 miles from the surface, to collect data from pole to pole.

Advertisement

Within its first few flybys, scientists should be able to confirm the existence of the ocean — all by reading the magnetic field produced by the moon and measuring its gravity by determining how much it pulls the spacecraft.

They’ll also get some of the highest-resolution images ever taken of the moon and the first readings of which molecules lie near the surface.

Throughout the rest of the mission, Clipper will study the complex dynamics of how the ocean interacts with the icy crust and heated mantle below. This will slowly come into view as the probe uses penetrating radio waves to peer beneath the icy crust — much like an X-ray machine.

“Clipper is going to be the first in-depth mission that will allow us to characterize habitability on what could be the most common type of inhabited world in our universe,” said Gina Dibraccio, the acting director of NASA HQ’s Planetary Science Division, at a news conference.

On Sept. 3, 2034, Europa Clipper will intentionally slam into Jupiter’s rocky moon Ganymede, ensuring the spacecraft doesn’t accidentally strike one of the planet’s more scientifically interesting moons.

Advertisement

That is, unless NASA decides to extend the mission, which has frequently happened in the past

Clipper isn’t the first mission to explore the icy moon. The Galileo probe flew past it in the 1990s, confirming scientists’ initial hopes that the moon was more than the quiet rocky ball orbiting Earth.

The excitement led scientists to formally ask NASA for a dedicated Europa mission in the early 2000s.

But NASA always has to weigh the potential scientific discoveries of bold flagship missions against the risk of cost overruns, and back then, the agency had cold feet.

By 2013, NASA had just finished dealing with cost overruns on the Curiosity Mars Rover and the agency was focused on getting the James Webb Space Telescope into space. All while Congress had slashed its planetary science budget almost in half compared with a decade prior.

Advertisement

So, the Science Guy got involved.

“We realized that this [mission] would be possible 10 years ago at the Planetary Society,” Nye said, “and so we just got on it: ‘look, everybody, write letters, write emails, talk with your congressmen, come to our days of action.’”

The Planetary Society, a Pasadena-based nonprofit of which Nye is the chief executive and a longtime member, decided to throw its weight behind a Europa mission. Its leadership testified before Congress and spoke on Capitol Hill. Planetary Society members wrote over 375,000 messages of support to Congress and the White House.

In 2014, the agency explicitly told scientists and Congress that it would not fund a Europa mission in its budget request.

“That never happens,” said Casey Dreier, the chief of space policy at the Planetary Society. “They never just put in a budget request, ‘We’re not going to do something. There’s no money. Basically, please stop asking.’”

Advertisement

But by the next year, NASA asked Congress for $15 million to start the multibillion-dollar probe. A congressman from Texas who was a champion for space funding — and also held power in the budget process — decided to give the agency $100 million.

NASA selected JPL to design and build the spacecraft.

“It’s not too surprising to see JPL win a contract for a planetary mission,” said Matthew Shindell, planetary science and exploration curator at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum.
“They really do have an incredible track record,” he said. “So, they’re one of NASA’s most trusted centers when it comes to developing large robotic missions.”

Today, with inflation further flattening NASA’s budget and the high cost of its current focus — human spaceflight — there’s another slump in large, strategic science missions. That has also created hardships for JPL.

In September, an investigation ordered by Congress found that NASA was neglecting critical long-term investments in infrastructure and workforce to instead fund expensive missions.

Advertisement

With Clipper leaving Earth, the remaining future flagship missions are either in their infancy or embroiled in financial and management woes.

That leaves JPL with few major projects to keep funding flowing to its more than 5,000 employees. Clipper engineering operations are winding down and NASA HQ severely shuttered its other flagship program, the Mars sample return, due to high projected costs and delays.

Flagship funding and concerns about cost overruns have ebbed and flowed at NASA for decades — and JPL’s future along with it.

In the 1980s, JPL was barely clinging to life as the Reagan administration pondered spinning off the lab as a private institution and canceling its only flagship mission: Galileo.

The ordeal inspired the founding of the Planetary Society.

Advertisement

Luckily, a trustee at Caltech, which manages JPL, knew the U.S. Senate majority leader, effectively saving the lab and the Galileo mission that would go on to revolutionize scientists’ understanding of Europa and inspire the Clipper mission.

“Sometimes it really comes down to finding a champion” — not only a supporter, but someone with the power to actually move money, Dreier said. “And right now JPL doesn’t have one.”

Continue Reading

Trending