LI Jersey Mike's worker tests positive for hepatitis A as officials warn customers could be at risk
A Jersey Mike's worker in Nassau County who 'directly handled food' has tested positive for hepatitis A, leaving customers who ate at the sandwich shop recently at risk, health officials warned.
County health officials confirmed late Friday that an employee at the Jersey Mike's in Oceanside tested positive for hepatitis A and said that anyone who ate or drank there — or visited the shop's bathroom — between April 5 and April 19 may have been exposed.
Officials also revealed the worker directly handled food at the sub store, potentially contaminating all of the ingredients and tableware. And they are urging anyone who visited the location to contact their doctor immediately.
An employee at a Jersey Mike's location in Nassau County tested positive for hepatitis A, according to health officials.
Christopher Sadowski
'Though the risk of transmission is considered low, out of an abundance of caution, individuals who may have been exposed are advised to speak to their healthcare provider,' the Nassau County Department of Health said in a statement.
It is unclear how the Jersey Mike's worker contracted the virus.
Hepatitis A — a liver infection — typically spreads when an infected person doesn't wash their hands properly after using the bathroom, leaving traces of fecal matter on food, drinks or anything they touch, officials said.
Antibiotics cannot treat someone once symptoms appear — generally between two to seven weeks after being exposed — although they can take up to a month to show up.
Symptoms may include the yellowing of your skin and eyes, nausea, stomach pain, joint pain or even dark urine and pale stools, according to the CDC.
The virus is typically mild and short-term, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — but can be deadly in rare circumstances, especially for people over 50 and those with preexisting conditions or compromised immune systems.
Anyone who's already had hepatitis A or received both doses of the vaccine is protected, according to the health department, although a single vaccine dose may help prevent infection if given within two weeks of exposure.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Bipartisan SEPSIS Act Reintroduced in U.S. Senate With Broad Support
Sepsis bill targets one of the nation's deadliest and most costly health crises with systemic solutions and backing of healthcare leaders WASHINGTON, June 6, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- END SEPSIS proudly announces the reintroduction of the SEPSIS Act (S.1929), a bipartisan bill that marks a significant step toward creating a comprehensive national response to the sepsis crisis. First introduced in September 2024, the legislation was officially reintroduced into the new Congress on Thursday, June 5, 2025. The bill is co-sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), and Senator Andy Kim (D-NJ)—underscoring growing bipartisan momentum. It also has the support of major healthcare leaders, including the American Hospital Association and the Federation of American Hospitals, further validating the urgent need for legislative action. About the SEPSIS Act. The SEPSIS Act addresses the massive human and financial toll sepsis imposes on American families and the healthcare system. The bill proposes a targeted federal investment of $20 million annually to accelerate the implementation of HHS, CDC, and CMS-led sepsis initiatives. Through key provisions, the bill would: Expand outreach and education to hospitals to encourage adoption of the CDC's comprehensive new sepsis guidelines, Hospital Sepsis Program Core Elements. Finalize and implement a sepsis outcome measure. A sepsis outcome measure would have significant, system-wide impacts on U.S. healthcare through: Standardizing sepsis care across hospitals Incentivize hospitals to improve, process that would lead to reductions in mortality and morbidity Lowering healthcare costs by implementing effective early interventions Drive Data Transparency and Quality Improvement by requiring hospitals to report sepsis outcomes publicly Strengthen sepsis programs nationwide by encouraging greater hospital investment in sepsis care Improve data collection on pediatric sepsis Create an incentive program for hospitals to improve sepsis outcomes Continued Advocacy on Capitol Hill To mark this important milestone, END SEPSIS returned to Capitol Hill this week to meet with key members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee. Discussions emphasized the staggering human and economic burden of sepsis, which leads to more than 350,000 deaths annually in the U.S. and over $60 billion in healthcare costs. "The SEPSIS Act is a turning point in our national effort to prevent avoidable sepsis deaths," said Ciaran and Orlaith Staunton, Co-Founders of END SEPSIS. "With bipartisan support and strong healthcare backing, we are closer than ever to a unified federal response that saves lives and reduces costs." END SEPSIS has long championed a comprehensive, collaborative approach involving Congress, the White House, federal agencies like CDC and CMS, research institutions, and patient advocates. With the reintroduction of the SEPSIS Act, the organization remains laser-focused on achieving legislative passage and real-world impact. About END SEPSIS: Sepsis deaths and disabilities devastate hundreds of thousands of families each year. It's our mission to end that. Through aggressive public policy initiatives and comprehensive sepsis education for adults and children, we fight to make sure that no more lives are lost to this preventable, treatable condition. Media Contact:(917) 251-0739cstaunton@ View original content: SOURCE END SEPSIS, the Legacy of Rory Staunton Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
FOIA Friday: Connolly questioned public health agency FOIA accessibility before his death
(Photo by Getty Images) One of the less noticed features of the Virginia Way is the long-running tendency of the commonwealth's leaders to conduct their decision-making behind closed doors. While the Virginia Freedom of Information Act presumes all government business is by default public and requires officials to justify why exceptions should be made, too many Virginia leaders in practice take the opposite stance, acting as if records are by default private and the public must prove they should be handled otherwise. In this feature, we aim to highlight the frequency with which officials around Virginia are resisting public access to records on issues large and small — and note instances when the release of information under FOIA gave the public insight into how government bodies are operating. Shortly before his late-May death, U.S. Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Fairfax, expressed concern about the termination of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention staffers who handled Freedom of Information Act requests. It was one of his final acts as a member of Congress before passing away following an extended battle with cancer. In his letter to the CDC's acting director, Connolly said that 'the elimination of staff responsible for facilitating FOIA strongly implies an effort by the administration to prevent the public from obtaining information about their government that they are entitled to request.' The staff cuts come as FOIA officers at the Food and Drug Administration, National Institutes of Health, and other agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services were also let go. Connolly also pointed out that several outbreaks of infectious disease have been reported across the country. 'Now more than ever, maintaining transparency about the operations of the broader HHS — and CDC in particular — is crucial to understanding the government's capacity to respond to such crises.' Some outbreaks are currently noted on CDC's website, but with no FOIA-dedicated staff to handle records requests, it may be harder for journalists and citizens to seek further information that could aid public health. Records obtained by the Richmond Times-Dispatch show that a former Richmond Fire Department employee spent over $800,000 at a company registered to his home between 2017 and 2024. Reginald Thomas, a former analyst for RFD, used his city credit card, purchase orders and invoices to spend money at RPM Supply Co., LLC. The entity is registered to a house in Henrico County that he and his wife own. Though Richmond city officials did not say how much, if any, of the total was spent on legitimate products or services, they did confirm that he is no longer an employee. His conduct has since become the subject of two investigations — one by Richmond's auditor and another by the city's inspector general. The investigation into Thomas is among the latest actions the city has taken to address a history of funding issues tied to card misuse by employees. This spring, Mayor Danny Avula announced restrictions on employees' use of purchasing cards for several months while leaders re-evaluate how employee spending is handled overall. Last year, the inspector general found that nearly $500,000 in RIchmond tax dollars were wasted or misused through use of employees' cards. The Mercury's efforts to track FOIA and other transparency cases in Virginia are indebted to the work of the Virginia Coalition for Open Government, a nonprofit alliance dedicated to expanding access to government records, meetings and other state and local proceedings. Recently, Virginia's Department of Corrections announced and celebrated low recidivism rates, but not mentioned in the agency's news release was a note from the department's research team suggesting the achievement was due to the effects of COVID-19 on Virginia's court system. Recividism — when former prisoners reoffend and end up back in prison — is a metric law enforcement agencies often use to measure the success of rehabilitation programs or other efforts to lower crime rates. Prison reform advocates and rehabilitation advocates also view these metrics as either calls to action or reasons to celebrate programs that may benefit incarcerated people, their families, and the communities to which they return. The latest announcement from the state focuses on recidivism among former prisoners released between July 2020 and June 2021 and only examines people who returned to prison within three years of release — not those who were rearrested during the same time period, Richmond Times-Dispatch reported. About 17% of released prisoners landed back in prison, while 44% were rearrested, according to the report. While rearrests were higher, those numbers aren't counted as recidivism. Because the state's definition ties recidivism to reincarceration, it is influenced by how quickly courts deliver verdicts — and Virginia's courts were under emergency orders that slowed proceedings until the summer of 2022. 'Re-incarceration rates are lower during follow-up years impacted by COVID-19 due to court closures and sentencing delays,' the research team wrote in its report. Kyle Gibson, a spokesperson for VADOC, acknowledged that recidivism rates were lower due to COVID-19, 'but VADOC cannot conclusively say that the pandemic was the sole cause of the lower rates.' Attorney General Jason Miyares, who is seeking reelection this year, has emphasized on social media that the low recidivism rate supports his tough-on-crime approach as the state's top lawyer. In a post to X, he said there are two approaches to lowering the rate: 'hold violent repeat offenders accountable or let them out early.' 'For four years, I've fought to put violent criminals behind bars while leftist politicians demanded leniency and reduced sentences,' he added. 'We see which approach works.' While the recidivism rates have declined over the past decade, according to a Richmond Times-Dispatch analysis, the time frame that VADOC recently celebrated occurred prior to Miyares taking office. Without city council approval, the city of Roanoke overspent by $5 million last year, WSLS reported. A recent audit of expenditures found that the city's general fund exceeded the final budget. 'We are stewards of taxpayer dollars,' said newer council member Nick Hagen, who joined the city's legislative body after the issues occurred. 'They're not ours — they're the people's.' He suspected staff turnover might be part of the problem with lack of budget oversight. This is because the former city manager had stepped down, a successor was appointed, and a new city council took office. The audit also revealed that much of the overspending came from the Children's Services Act — which funds services for at-risk youth — and the city's fire department, which faced rising overtime costs and implemented pay increases. Still, to ensure spending is justified and remains within budget, WSLS reported that the city claimed to be implementing reforms. There will be more frequent budget reviews going forward, new staff will be hired, and stricter internal protocols will be put in place. Have you experienced local or state officials denying or delaying your FOIA request? Tell us about it: info@ SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
RFK Jr. has promoted 'freedom of choice' while limiting vaccines, food
Prior to becoming Health and Human Services Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had espoused the idea of "medical freedom," the ability of people to make personal health decisions for themselves and their families without corporate or government coercion. It's an idea supported under Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement to reduce the prevalence of chronic disease in the U.S. by making healthier lifestyle choices. On topics, such as vaccines, Kennedy has said he wouldn't prevent children from being able to receive vaccines but would leave the choice up to parents. MORE: CDC official who oversaw COVID vaccine recommendations resigns "I'm a freedom-of-choice person," Kennedy told Fox News host Sean Hannity during an interview in March. "We should have transparency. We should have informed choice, and if people don't want it, the government shouldn't force them to do it." Some public health experts told ABC News, however, that the HHS has been limiting choices on some products for many Americans despite Kennedy's talk about "freedom of choice." Just last week, Kennedy announced the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would no longer recommend the COVID-19 vaccine for certain groups. Additionally, Kennedy has called on states to ban recipients of food stamps from being able to use them to purchase soda. He has also praised states for banning fluoride from public drinking water and indicated he will change federal guidance on recommending adding fluoride. The public health experts said Kennedy's actions are setting up a dichotomy on public health. "I think that RFK Jr. has done a really good job of identifying some of the problems [in public health], but it's the solutions that are problematic," Dr. Craig Spencer, an associate professor of the practice of health services, policy and practice at Brown University School of Public Health, told ABC News. "What you're seeing with RFK Jr. and his approach to health is an individualization of public health. It's this idea that you can make decisions for your health, and that's always been true." He went on, "We need to be able to follow their guidance, not just have them tell us, 'Follow your own science.' As the focus shifts from community to individuals, we're losing a lot of that underpinning, which has led to a lot of the gains in public health." Kennedy has repeatedly stated that he is not anti-vaccine and that he supports vaccination. Shortly after Trump's election, Kennedy said in an interview with NBC News that "if vaccines are working for somebody, I'm not going to take them away. People ought to have choice, and that choice ought to be informed by the best information." MORE: CDC official who oversaw COVID vaccine recommendations resigns During his confirmation hearings, Kennedy said he supported the childhood vaccination schedule and that he would not do anything as head of HHS that "makes it difficult or discourages people from taking vaccines." Separately, in an opinion piece Kennedy wrote for Fox News in March on the nationwide measles outbreak, he said the measles vaccine helps protect individuals and provides "community immunity" but also called the decision to vaccinate a "personal one." However, last week, Kennedy announced the removal of the COVID-19 vaccine from the CDC's immunization schedule for "healthy children and healthy pregnant women." The CDC's immunization schedule is not just a guide for doctors but also determines insurance coverage for most major private plans and Medicaid expansion programs. Following Kennedy's announcement, the schedule was updated noting all children would be eligible for COVID vaccines, but now under a shared-clinical decision-making model -- allowing parents to choose whether their children are vaccinated alongside advice from a doctor. "Regarding the vaccines, HHS is restoring the doctor-patient relationship," HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon told ABC News in a statement. "We are encouraging those groups to consult with their health care provider to help them make an informed decision. This is freedom of choice." "If you restrict access, you necessarily restrict choice," Dr. Matthew Ferrari, a professor of biology and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Dynamics at Pennsylvania State University, told ABC News. "Those two things are antithetical. You can't do both. You can't say you're allowing choice if you're restricting access." Ferrari said the idea of "medical freedom" is catchy, but public health recommendations are made based on how to protect the most vulnerable individuals. "If you look at the outcomes, if you look at the consequences of that movement, it has been to disproportionately restrict access to -- and restrict support and infrastructure to allow people to access -- preventive medicine," he said. "It's sort of easy to say, 'Well, take the vaccine away. But [vaccines] prevent a future outcome of illness for yourself and for others in the community." Traditionally, the CDC's Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices decides if there is a benefit to a yearly vaccine and who should get it. The independent advisory committee then makes recommendations to the CDC, which has the final say. The committee was set to meet in late June to vote on potential changes to COVID vaccine recommendations. Spencer said Kennedy's bypassing of traditional avenues when it comes to changing vaccine recommendations is also taking away choice from people. "This did not go through the normal process that it should have, and he basically just made a decision for people while at the same time saying that he's going to let people make a decision," Spencer said. Kennedy has also campaigned to prevent Americans from using food stamps -- provided under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program -- to buy candy and soda. "It's nonsensical for U.S. taxpayers to spend tens of billions of dollars subsidizing junk that harms the health of low-income Americans," Kennedy wrote in an opinion piece for The Wall Street Journal last September. MORE: RFK Jr. to tell medical schools to teach nutrition or lose federal funding At a MAHA event in late May, Kennedy said the governors of 10 states have submitted waivers to the United States Department of Agriculture requesting permission to ban SNAP recipients from using benefits to buy candy and soft drinks. "The U.S. government spends over $4 trillion a year on health care," Nixon said in a statement. "That's not freedom -- it's failure. Secretary Kennedy is unapologetically taking action to reverse the chronic disease epidemic, not subsidize it with taxpayer dollars. Warning Americans about the dangers of ultra-processed food isn't an attack on choice -- it's the first step in restoring it." Nutrition experts agree that sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are unhealthy. Frequent consumption of SSBs is linked to health issues such as weight gain, obesity, type 2 diabetes, tooth decay, heart disease and kidney diseases, according to the CDC. Kristina Petersen, an associate professor in the department of nutritional sciences at Pennsylvania State University, told ABC News there is a crisis of diet-related diseases in the U.S., which increase the risk of disability and reduces lifespan. However, she said there needs to be strong evidence of the benefits of restrictive policies if they are to be put in place. "In terms of limiting people's choices, it is important to consider all the different roles that food plays in someone's life, and so obviously we want people eating nutritious foods, but also we need to acknowledge that food is a source of enjoyment," Petersen said. "A lot of social situations revolve around food. So, when we're thinking about reducing people's access to given foods, we need to think about the consequences of that." One unintended consequence could be an eligible family not signing up for SNAP benefits because of the restrictions, she said. Even if a ban on buying candy and soda with SNAP benefits does occur, Petersen said she is not aware of any evidence that shows banning certain foods leads to healthier diets. She added that the nation's dietary guidelines are written to emphasize healthy foods like fruits and vegetable rather than telling people to avoid or restrict less healthy foods. "All foods can be consumed as part of a healthy dietary pattern. It's really just the amount and the frequency that determines whether that pattern is helpful overall or less helpful," Petersen said. "People can have small indulgences, but really, we're interested in what is their pattern over a period of time." Providing incentives for purchasing healthier foods may be more effective and still allow people to have choice, Petersen said. A 2018 study used a model simulation to study the effects of food incentives, disincentives or restrictions in SNAP. One of the simulations involving incentives for foods such as fruits, vegetables, nuts, whole grains, fish and plant-based oils found to have the most substantial health benefits and be the most cost-effective. "Things like fruits and vegetables, they do tend to be more expensive, so if you incentivize them by providing more benefits … that's making the dollar go further, and it's kind of making the economic piece of this a bit stronger," Petersen said. "A lot of this is framed around personal choice. Rather than restricting access to, how can we give people more access to healthy foods? I think that's going to have the greatest benefit here." ABC News' Youri Benadjaoud and Cheyenne Haslett contributed to this report. RFK Jr. has promoted 'freedom of choice' while limiting vaccines, food originally appeared on
