Las Vegas to build new recuperative care center facility
LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — In just a few weeks, the Recuperative Care Center will transition to the Health and Wellness Center on Main Street while construction gets underway for their brand new facility.
Arcelia Barajas, the Director of Neighborhood Services for the City of Las Vegas, is pleased to see things moving forward.
'There is a significant need for this program and work here. We have a lot of folks who are homeless and who are discharged from the hospital, and they don't have anywhere to recuperate,' Barajas told 8 News Now.
While the location will stay the same, located on Main Street downtown, the current building will be completely demolished this year, with a new two-story facility built by 2027. The new building will have nearly 80 beds available for those.
Sharie McClellan is one of those people in need. McClellan is dealing with her own health struggles. She's been at the Recuperative Care Center for 5 months after a doctor referred her from the Courtyard Homeless Resource Center.
'Thank god this doctor happened to walk by me. He noticed I was out of breath, and I told him I was just released from the hospital and had a blood clot on my lung. He got me over to the facility within hours. It was a true blessing,' she said.
Those at the forefront in helping these individuals with their acute medical needs, like program manager Miguel Urena, have seen it all.
'We have 24-hour nursing care here. We do IV infusions to wound cares. We see a lot of burns during the summer. People are falling down or don't have the appropriate footwear and because of that get severely hurt,' Urena added.
Also, he said providing care for hospice patients is a main component in what they do.
'It's better for them to be here with us than for them to pass away in a park or behind a dumpster somewhere,' he added.
The renovation process of the new facility will take up to 18 months to complete. Those at the recuperative Care Center must be referred by a doctor to gain access.
Initially, the center was created to help homeless individuals suffering from COVID, but due to the dire need for basic healthcare services, it grew to more of a rehab facility for those who were previously admitted to the hospital.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bill Cassidy Blew It
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. It's easy to forget that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s assault on vaccines—including, most recently, his gutting of the expert committee that guides American vaccine policy—might have been avoided. Four months ago, his nomination for health secretary was in serious jeopardy. The deciding vote seemed to be in the hands of one Republican senator: Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. A physician who gained prominence by vaccinating low-income kids in his home state, Cassidy was wary of the longtime vaccine conspiracist. 'I have been struggling with your nomination,' he told Kennedy during his confirmation hearings in January. Then Cassidy caved. In the speech he gave on the Senate floor explaining his decision, Cassidy said that he'd vote to confirm Kennedy only because he had extracted a number of concessions from the nominee—chief among them that he would preserve, 'without changes,' the very CDC committee Kennedy overhauled this week. Since then, Cassidy has continued to give Kennedy the benefit of the doubt. On Monday, after Kennedy dismissed all 17 members of the vaccine advisory committee, Cassidy posted on X that he was working with Kennedy to prevent the open roles from being filled with 'people who know nothing about vaccines except suspicion.' [Read: The doctor who let RFK Jr. through] The senator has failed, undeniably and spectacularly. One new appointee, Robert Malone, has repeatedly spread misinformation (or what he prefers to call 'scientific dissent') about vaccines. Another appointee, Vicky Pebsworth, is on the board of an anti-vax nonprofit, the National Vaccine Information Center. Cassidy may keep insisting that he is doing all he can to stand up for vaccines. But he already had his big chance to do so, and he blew it. Now, with the rest of America, he's watching the nation's vaccine future take a nosedive. So far, the senator hasn't appeared interested in any kind of mea culpa for his faith in Kennedy's promises. On Thursday, I caught Cassidy as he hurried out of a congressional hearing room. He was still reviewing the appointees, he told me and several other reporters who gathered around him. When I chased after him down the hallway to ask more questions, he told me, 'I'll be putting out statements, and I'll let those statements stand for themselves.' A member of his staff dismissed me with a curt 'Thank you, sir.' Cassidy's staff has declined repeated requests for an interview with the senator since the confirmation vote in January. With the exception of Mitch McConnell, every GOP senator voted to confirm Kennedy. They all have to own the health secretary's actions. But Cassidy seemed to be the Republican most concerned about Kennedy's nomination, and there was a good reason to think that the doctor would vote his conscience. In 2021, Cassidy was one of seven Senate Republicans who voted to convict Donald Trump on an impeachment charge after the insurrection at the Capitol. But this time, the senator—who is up for reelection next year, facing a more MAGA-friendly challenger—ultimately fell in line. Cassidy tried to have it both ways: elevating Kennedy to his job while also vowing to constrain him. In casting his confirmation vote, Cassidy implied that the two would be in close communication, and that Kennedy had asked for his input on hiring decisions. The two reportedly had breakfast in March to discuss the health secretary's plan to dramatically reshape the department. 'Senator Cassidy speaks regularly with secretary Kennedy and believes those conversations are much more productive when they're held in private, not through press headlines,' a spokesperson for Cassidy wrote in an email. (A spokesperson for HHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.) At times, it has appeared as though Cassidy's approach has had some effect on the health secretary. Amid the measles outbreak in Texas earlier this year, Kennedy baselessly questioned the safety of the MMR vaccine. In April, after two unvaccinated children died, Cassidy posted on X: 'Everyone should be vaccinated! There is no treatment for measles. No benefit to getting measles. Top health officials should say so unequivocally b/4 another child dies.' Cassidy didn't call out Kennedy by name, but the health secretary appeared to get the message. Later that day, Kennedy posted that the measles vaccine was the most effective way to stave off illness. ('Completely agree,' Cassidy responded.) All things considered, that's a small victory. Despite Kennedy's claims that he is not an anti-vaxxer, he has enacted a plainly anti-vaccine agenda. Since being confirmed, he has pushed out the FDA's top vaccine regulator, hired a fellow vaccine skeptic to investigate the purported link between autism and shots, and questioned the safety of childhood vaccinations currently recommended by the CDC. As my colleague Katherine J. Wu wrote this week, 'Whether he will admit to it or not, he is serving the most core goal of the anti-vaccine movement—eroding access to, and trust in, immunization.' [Read: RFK Jr. is barely even pretending anymore] The reality is that back channels can be only so effective. Cassidy's main power is to call Kennedy before the Senate health committee, which he chairs, and demand an explanation for Kennedy's new appointees to the CDC's vaccine-advisory committee. Cassidy might very well do that. In February, he said that Kennedy would 'come before the committee on a quarterly basis, if requested.' Kennedy did appear before Cassidy's committee last month to answer questions about his efforts to institute mass layoffs at his agency. Some Republicans (and many Democrats) pressed the secretary on those efforts, while others praised them. Cassidy, for his part, expressed concerns about Kennedy's indiscriminate cutting of research programs, but still, he was largely deferential. 'I agree with Secretary Kennedy that HHS needs reform,' Cassidy said. Even if he had disagreed, an angry exchange between a health secretary and a Senate committee doesn't guarantee any policy changes. Lawmakers may try to act like government bureaucrats report to them, but they have limited power once a nominee is already in their job. Technically, lawmakers can impeach Cabinet members, but in American history, a sitting Cabinet member has never been impeached and subsequently removed from office. The long and arduous confirmation process is supposed to be the bulwark against potentially dangerous nominees being put in positions of power. Cassidy and most of his Republican colleagues have already decided not to stop Kennedy from overseeing the largest department in the federal government by budget. Now Kennedy is free to do whatever he wants—senators be damned. Article originally published at The Atlantic
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Seed oils are toxic, says Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – but it's not so simple
Before Robert F. Kennedy Jr. became Secretary of Health and Human Services in the Trump Administration, he joined a whole host of health influencers in proclaiming that widely used cooking oils such as canola oil and soybean oil are toxic. T-shirts sold by his 'Make America Healthy Again' campaign now include the slogan, 'make frying oil tallow again' – a reference to the traditional use of rendered beef fat for cooking. Seed oils have become a mainstay of the American diet because unlike beef tallow, which is comprised of saturated fats that increase cholesterol levels, seed oils contain unsaturated fats that can decrease cholesterol levels. In theory, that means they should reduce the risk of heart disease. But research shows that different seed oils have varying effects on risk for heart disease. Furthermore, seed oils have also been shown to increase risk for migraines. This is likely due to their high levels of omega-6 fatty acids. These fats can increase inflammation, a heightened and potentially harmful state of immune system activation. As a family physician with a Ph.D. in nutrition, I translate the latest nutrition science into dietary recommendations for my patients. When it comes to seed oils, the research shows that their health effects are more nuanced than headlines and social media posts suggest. Seed oils — often confusingly referred to as 'vegetable oils' — are, as the name implies, oils extracted from the seeds of plants. This is unlike olive oil and coconut oil, which are derived from fruits. People decrying their widespread use often refer to the 'hateful eight' top seed oil offenders: canola, corn, soybean, cottonseed, grapeseed, sunflower, safflower and rice bran oil. These oils entered the human diet at unprecedented levels after the invention of the mechanical screw press in 1888 enabled the extraction of oil from seeds in quantities that were never before possible. Between 1909 and 1999, U.S. consumption of soybean oil increased 1,000 times. This shift fundamentally changed our biological makeup. Due to increased seed oil intake, in the past 50 years the concentration of omega-6 fatty acids that Americans carry around in their fatty tissue has increased by 136%. Omega-6 and omega-3 fatty acids are essential nutrients that control inflammation. While omega-6s tend to produce molecules that boost it, omega-3s tend to produce molecules that tone it down. Until recently, people generally ate equal amounts of omega-6 and omega-3 fatty acids. However, over the past century, this ratio has changed. Today, people consume 15 times more omega-6s than omega-3s, partly due to increased consumption of seed oils. In theory, seed oils can cause health problems because they contain a high absolute amount of omega-6 fatty acids, as well as a high omega-6 to omega-3 ratio. Studies have linked an increased omega-6 to omega-3 ratio to a wide range of conditions, including mood disorders, knee pain, back pain, menstrual pain and even preterm birth. Omega-6 fatty acids have also been implicated in the processes that drive colon cancer. However, the absolute omega-6 level and the omega-6 to omega-3 ratio in different seed oils vary tremendously. For example, safflower oil and sunflower oil have ratios of 125:1 and 91:1. Corn oil's ratio is 50:1. Meanwhile, soybean oil and canola oil have lower ratios, at 8:1 and 2:1, respectively. Scientists have used genetic modification to create seed oils like high oleic acid canola oil that have a lower omega-6 to 3 ratio. However, the health benefit of these bioengineered oils is still being studied. Part of the controversy surrounding seed oils is that studies investigating their inflammatory effect have yielded mixed results. One meta-analysis synthesizing the effects of seed oils on 11 inflammatory markers largely showed no effects – with the exception of one inflammatory signal, which was significantly elevated in people with the highest omega-6 intakes. To complicate things further, genetics also plays a role in seed oils' inflammatory potential. People of African, Indigenous and Latino descent tend to metabolize omega-6 fatty acids faster, which can increase the inflammatory effect of consuming seed oils. Scientists still don't fully understand how genetics and other factors may influence the health effects of these oils. A review of seven randomized controlled trials showed that the effect of seed oils on risk of heart attacks varies depending on the type of seed oil. This was corroborated by data resurrected from tapes dug up in the basement of a researcher who in the 1970s conducted the largest and most rigorously executed dietary trial to date investigating the replacement of saturated fat with seed oils. In that work, replacing saturated fats such as beef tallow with seed oils always lowers cholesterol, but it does not always lower risk of death from heart disease. Taken together, these studies show that when saturated fats such as beef tallow are replaced with seed oils that have lower omega-6 to omega-3 ratios, such as soybean oil, the risk of heart attacks and death from heart disease falls. However, when saturated fats are replaced with seed oils with a higher omega-6 to omega-3 ratio, such as corn oil, risk of death from heart disease rises. Interestingly, the most highly purchased seed oil in the United States is soybean oil, which has a more favorable omega-6 to 3 ratio of 8:1 – and studies show that it does lower the risk of heart disease. However, seed oils with less favorable ratios, such as corn oil and safflower oil, can be found in countless processed foods, including potato chips, frozen dinners and packaged desserts. Nevertheless, other aspects of these foods, in addition to their seed oil content, also make them unhealthy. A rigorous randomized controlled trial – the gold standard for clinical evidence – showed that diets high in omega-3 fatty acids and low in omega-6 fatty acids, hence low in seed oils, significantly reduced the risk of migraines In the study, people who stepped up their consumption of omega-3 fatty acids by eating fatty fish such as salmon experienced an average of two fewer migraines per month than usual, even if they did not change their omega-6 consumption. However, if they reduced their omega-6 intake by switching out corn oil for olive oil, while simultaneously increasing their omega-3 intake, they experienced four fewer migraines per month. That's a noteworthy difference, considering that the latest migraine medications reduce migraine frequency by approximately two days per month, compared to a placebo. Thus, for migraine sufferers — 1 in 6 Americans — decreasing seed oils, along with increasing omega-3 intake, may be even more effective than currently available medications. Overall, the drastic way in which omega-6 fatty acids have entered the food supply and fundamentally changed our biological composition makes this an important area of study. But the question of whether seed oils are good or bad is not black and white. There is no basis to conclude that Americans would be healthier if we started frying everything in beef tallow again, but there is an argument for a more careful consideration of the nuance surrounding these oils and their potential effects. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Mary J. Scourboutakos, University of Toronto Read more: Ultraprocessed foods – like cookies, chips, frozen meals and fast food – may contribute to cognitive decline How Crisco toppled lard – and made Americans believers in industrial food Migraine sufferers have treatment choices – a neurologist explains options beyond just pain medication Mary J. Scourboutakos does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
4 Nutrients You Should Be Eating to Help Lower Dementia Risk, According to a New Study
Reviewed by Dietitian Annie Nguyen, M.A., RDA new study suggests that several nutrients are linked with a lower risk of dementia. These nutrients include vitamins and minerals that act as antioxidants, plus fiber. High sugar intake was related to an increased risk of we age, it's natural to become more forgetful. But when the occasional 'Where did I leave my keys?' becomes forgetting loved ones' names and your own address, it may be a sign of something more serious. Dementia is a general term for loss of memory, language, problem-solving and other thinking abilities, severe enough to interfere with everyday life. Alzheimer's disease is the most common type of dementia. Unfortunately, dementia cases are expected to double by the year 2060. And the economic burden of unpaid dementia caregiving in the U.S. is expected to skyrocket from an average of $172 billion in 2020 to over $1.5 trillion by 2060. And this doesn't take into account the emotional toll on families, friends and caregivers. Since there is currently no cure for dementia, taking preventative measures can be a wise move. Columbia University researchers wanted to know which nutrients were related to a reduced risk of dementia—and which ones might increase the risk. They recently published their findings in Nutrients. Let's break down what they found. Related: 6 Things You Should Do After 5 P.M. to Support Healthy Aging, According to Experts Researchers drew data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), an ongoing U.S. study conducted biennially since 1992 that includes adults 50 years and older. In 2013, food consumption and nutrition intake was collected from a subset of the HRS called the Healthcare and Nutrition Study (HCNS). To evaluate diet, participants completed a food frequency questionnaire that asked how frequently they consumed 163 different foods and beverages over the past 12 months. From this, the research team calculated nutrient intake based on participants' responses for 101 nutrients. Individual nutrients were assessed regarding their relationship to dementia. In addition, researchers calculated composite scores for some groups of nutrients. Participants' cognitive abilities were assessed using two different methods. One method was via a telephone interview with participants and the other was via a proxy respondent. For the proxy method, someone close to the participant answered questions about the participant's memory levels, limitations in instrumental activities of daily living and status of cognitive impairment. Researchers would use this information to look for associations between nutrient intake and dementia risk. This current study included 6,280 HCNS participants who met the researchers' criteria, which included full diet information and cognitive assessments. Researchers also adjusted for demographic information like age, race, sex, BMI, education level, smoking status, alcohol intake and physical activity. After running statistical analyses, the results suggest that several nutrients were connected with a reduced risk of dementia. The five with the strongest association were: Isorhamnetin, a type of flavonol Manganese, a mineral Dietary fiber Beta-tocopherol and beta-tocotrienol, both forms of vitamin E This study also adds to the mounting evidence that high sugar intake is linked with a higher risk of dementia. With that said, it also showed some controversial associations between some other nutrients and higher dementia risk. We say controversial because they conflict with previous research or add to mixed results. For example, this study suggests a link between certain components in milk and an increased risk of dementia, including glycerophosphocholine and vitamin D, both of which have been shown to support brain health in other studies. Researchers note that more research needs to be done, and that it could be due to other components in the food, not necessarily these nutrients. This study has several limitations. First, asking people to estimate how much they ate of certain foods over the last year leaves lots of room for bias, forgetfulness and guessing. Also, cognitive abilities and dementia were not clinically evaluated, which also leaves room for bias. Lastly, researchers did not adjust for factors like genetics and environmental factors that play a role in dementia. Related: The #1 Nutrient for Brain Health as You Age, According to a Dietitian Isorhamnetin is a flavonol found in fruits and vegetables, including onions, almonds, berries, cherries, pears, apples and green grapes. It's also found in ginkgo biloba, an herb touted for its brain health benefits. You'll find manganese in nuts, legumes, whole grains and leafy greens. Maple syrup and maple water are also rich sources of this trace mineral. Manganese plays a role in many bodily processes, including metabolism and immunity. While it's a mineral, manganese plays a dual role and acts like an antioxidant, protecting cells from damage from free radicals. Like manganese, vitamin E also has antioxidant properties, protecting cells from damage. Nuts, seeds, wheat germ, and sunflower and safflower oils are good sources of vitamin E. You'll also get some in spinach and broccoli. A whopping nine out of 10 Americans don't have enough fiber in their diets. Fiber-rich foods include fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds, whole grains and legumes. If you're concerned that you're not including enough of these nutrients in your day-to-day routine, consider shaking things up. An easy (and painless) way to do it is to swap out your typical snacks for nutrient-rich ones. For example, if you typically reach for chips, soda or a candy bar mid-afternoon, consider a handful of nuts and berries. Or how about some hummus and veggie sticks? If you're ready to go all in and want some guidance, check out our MIND diet meal plans. The MIND diet is a fusion of the Mediterranean and DASH diets, and is loaded with brain-healthy foods that are also good for your heart. There is recent evidence that following this healthy eating pattern may reduce your risk of dementia by up to 25%. In addition to food, physical activity, managing your stressors and getting plenty of quality sleep also influence brain health. And make sure you're also spending time with loved ones, as loneliness has also been shown to increase dementia risk. Related: 6 Habits That May Be Aging Your Brain, According to Experts This study suggests that certain nutrients, like vitamin E, manganese and isorhamnetin, all of which act like antioxidants, plus fiber, are linked with a lower risk of dementia. It also adds to existing evidence that high sugar intake may raise dementia risk. If possible, get these brain-protecting nutrients from food. If you have difficulty doing so, seek the advice of a registered dietitian or a healthcare professional who can help you integrate foods rich in these nutrients and determine if supplementation is a viable option for you. Read the original article on EATINGWELL
