2 hospitalized, 17 treated after possible chemical spill in Doral, authorities say
It happened in the area of NW 19th Street and 102nd Avenue.
The two people hospitalized were taken to Jackson Memorial Hospital.
In a statement, Miami-Dade Fire Rescue said units first responded to a medical call "possibly related to an electrocution."
Crews used a basket to lower one adult trauma-alert patient, who was transported by ground to a trauma center.
Minutes later, the department said the call was updated to a hazardous situation involving a possible chemical spill.
Firefighters began triage for patients inside the structure and worked to locate and mitigate the source of the leak.
Due to the number of people affected, the incident was upgraded to a Level 2 mass casualty event. Miami-Dade Fire Rescue said 17 patients were ultimately treated, all with non-life-threatening injuries.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Overturned court ruling clears way for WA to inspect immigrant detention center
A 'no trespassing' sign outside of Northwest ICE Processing Center. (Photo by Grace Deng/Washington State Standard) Washington state should be allowed to enforce health and safety standards at the embattled immigrant detention center in Tacoma, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday. The decision overturns a lower court order blocking a 2023 state law that sought to provide greater oversight of conditions at the facility, including through unannounced state inspections. The detention center is run by the Florida-based GEO Group under a contract with the federal government. With the state law, Democratic lawmakers looked to impose numerous new regulations on the facility, known as the Northwest ICE Processing Center. Among other requirements, the law mandated the detention center provide fresh fruits and vegetables, air conditioning and heat, free telecommunication services, weekly mental health evaluations and rooms with windows. Failure to comply could result in fines of up to $10,000 per violation. GEO says these standards go beyond requirements the company must follow under its contract. The law also required the state departments of Health and Labor and Industries to conduct routine, unannounced inspections of the for-profit detention center, which holds immigrant detainees before deportation or release back into the United States. Labor and Industries inspected the site last summer with authority under a separate state law, and found no violations. The policy followed an earlier effort to ban private detention facilities entirely statewide, but that statute was deemed unenforceable. So lawmakers turned to increasing oversight. The 1,575-bed facility has a history of allegations of mistreatment, abuse and neglect of detainees. Seven potential cases of tuberculosis were recently reported there, according to state health officials. Access to medical care has long been a concern inside the facility. It has come under renewed scrutiny as more detainees have been sent there with President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown. The state and GEO, one of the biggest private detention center companies in the nation, have been enmeshed for years in various legal battles over the facility. GEO's 2015 contract with the federal government awarded the company at least $700 million to operate the facility over the following decade. The state Department of Health celebrated the ruling from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, saying it allows the agency to investigate complaints of mistreatment and 'work toward safer, healthier conditions for everyone in these facilities.' 'We applaud the Ninth Circuit's decision affirming the Washington State Department of Health's authority to uphold basic health and safety standards in private detention facilities like the Northwest ICE Processing Center,' spokesperson Kara Kostanich said in an email. Kostanich didn't say if the agency now has imminent plans to inspect the facility. GEO and its attorney didn't respond to a request for comment. The case served as a test of state versus federal power. The legal doctrine of 'intergovernmental immunity' holds that state laws can't unduly regulate federal activities. One of the major controversies in whether the state had overstepped was determining the correct comparison for the Tacoma facility, the only private, for-profit detention center in Washington. GEO said prisons are an apt comparison. U.S. District Court Judge Benjamin Settle agreed, finding the law imposed an economic burden on GEO through standards the state doesn't apply to its own Department of Corrections. The state countered that involuntary treatment facilities are a better parallel, as they also hold people in civil, not criminal, proceedings. The three-judge appeals court panel sided with the state. The requirements Washington seeks to impose on GEO and these civil facilities are 'almost identical,' the judges found. But the judges will leave the comparison of mandated standards to the lower court. Washington has also run into legal roadblocks because the law only applied to the Tacoma facility. Lawmakers sought to address this problem this year by expanding the definition of private detention centers to include ones run by nonprofits. So state law now also covers the Martin Hall Juvenile Detention Facility, near Spokane. GEO moved to get the appeal dismissed in light of the new law, which took effect in May. The judges declined that request. The appeals court judges note states can treat contractors more stringently than if facilities are run by the federal government. 'A state has greater ability to regulate a contractor of the federal government than to regulate the government itself,' Judge William Fletcher wrote in the opinion. All three of the judges making Tuesday's decision were appointed by Democratic presidents, two by Bill Clinton and one by Barack Obama. The Department of Justice, which has sided with GEO under both former President Joe Biden and Trump, declined to comment on the ruling. The ruling is the second loss in as many weeks for GEO at the 9th Circuit. Last week, the court declined to reconsider an earlier decision affirming that the company needed to pay more than $23 million for violating Washington's minimum wage law. GEO plans to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on that case. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE Solve the daily Crossword
Medscape
7 hours ago
- Medscape
Nodal Clues Shift NSCLC Treatment Path
This transcript has been edited for clarity. Hi. My name is Dr Coral Olazagasti. I am a medical oncologist from the University of Miami, and today I want to walk you through one of the cases that I had. I had this 40-year-old patient. He is a Hispanic man, with a 30 pack-year history of smoking, who initially presented to his pulmonary clinic with complaints of shortness of breath and a cough that just didn't go away. The pulmonary doctor sent him for a CT scan of the chest, and that revealed a 5-cm right middle lobe mass. The patient was sent to interventional radiology for biopsy, and unfortunately, that biopsy revealed non-small cell lung adenocarcinoma. The pulmonary doctor then sent him for a PET scan for clinical staging. The PET scan revealed the mass in the right middle lobe, which we are already aware of, but also an ipsilateral FDG-avid hilar lymph node. According to this PET scan imaging, how would you stage this patient? The primary mass was 5 cm, so T2, and the PET scan revealed only one hilar, FDG-avid lymph node, so technically T2N1 disease. This patient has a clinical staging of stage IIB disease. How would you proceed now? Would you proceed with surgery? Would you send this patient to interventional pulmonology for mediastinal and hilar pathologic staging, or would you give this patient systemic therapy? I know what I would do. I would send this patient to interventional pulmonology because we want to make sure that we have the right pathologic staging. Not only that, not only do we get to sample the mediastinum and the hilum, but we also get to have enough tissue to send for molecular testing, which is very important, if not one of the most important steps in this discussion today. The patient went for pathologic staging, and in this case, he turns out to have not only the positive ipsilateral hilar lymph node but also an ipsilateral positive mediastinal lymph node. At this point, what do you think the staging for this patient is? Unfortunately, the patient now has T2N2 disease, so he was upstaged to stage IIIA. Why is this important? As we see, even though the PET scan is great imaging to have an idea of what the baseline clinical staging is, it is always important to get pathologic staging if we are considering surgical resection, because if the patient turns out to have N3 disease, then they're not considered a surgical candidate. It is important to have all the information necessary in order to proceed with appropriate treatment. The other thing that we need to know, and we need to wait for, prior to starting the discussion for this patient is molecular this case, the patient did not have any targetable mutations. What would you do next? Would you proceed with neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy? Would you take this patient straight to surgery? Would you take this patient and present them at the tumor board? I think either option is my case, we always want to bring these cases into a multidisciplinary approach, and so we present them at our multidisciplinary clinic and also tumor board. After discussing the case with the surgeons, the radiologists, and all of our colleagues, we decided that because this patient has a tumor that is greater than 4 cm, and because he has N2 disease, our treatment approach will be induction chemoimmunotherapy for three or four cycles, followed by repeat of the scans, followed by surgery, and then potentially followed by adjuvant immunotherapy. Thank you. I hope you enjoyed this case.
E&E News
7 hours ago
- E&E News
Enviros sue EPA over delay on Florida water standard updates
The Trump administration has failed to update Florida's outdated water pollution standards as required by law, putting people at risk of consuming toxins through shellfish and other aquatic animals, environmental groups said Tuesday. EPA concluded in 2022 that Florida's water quality standards for dozens of pollutants did not reflect the latest science and proposed new, more protective standards the following year. But the agency withdrew that proposal in January, shortly after President Donald Trump took office. That decision likely violated the Clean Water Act and could leave Floridians exposed to high levels of mercury, benzene and other harmful pollutants, according to a new lawsuit. The state is home to major recreational fisheries and seafood industries and has been described as the 'fishing capital of the world' by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R). Advertisement 'The goal of the Clean Water Act is to ensure that all U.S. waterways are 'fishable and swimmable,' but lax enforcement from our state and federal environmental protection agencies has prevented that goal from becoming a reality,' Jen Lomberk, chair of Waterkeepers Florida, said in a statement. 'Floridians deserve water that is clean and safe enough to swim in and fish from.'
