SEIZE THE $50 BILLION SITE-OF-CARE SHIFT OPPORTUNITY
Get the tools, data, and insights to drive growth.
Learn more
RECALIBRATE YOUR HEALTHCARE STRATEGY
Learn 4 strategic pivots for 2025 and beyond.
Learn more

Daily Briefing

Around the nation: EPA limits 'forever chemicals' in drinking water


The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently issued the first-ever national rule to limit highly toxic "forever chemicals" in drinking water, in today's bite-sized hospital and health industry news from California, the District of Columbia, and New York. 

  • California: Prime Healthcare recently completed its $350 million purchase of five hospitals from Medical Properties Trust. The purchase agreement, which was originally announced in February, includes $250 million in cash and a $100 million interest-bearing mortgage note due in nine months. The hospitals that are part of the purchase include Saint Francis Medical Center in California and four Saint Clare's Health facilities in New Jersey. According to Modern Healthcare, Prime Healthcare currently has 44 hospitals in 14 states. Most recently, it expanded its network with a $360 million acquisition from Medical Properties Trust in 2022. This acquisition included nine hospitals across California, Indiana, Nevada, and Pennsylvania. (Kacik, Modern Healthcare, 4/10)
  • District of Columbia: Earlier this month, EPA issued a new rule limiting the presence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) or "forever chemicals" in drinking water. The new rule sets the first-ever national enforceable limits on PFAS in drinking water. According to research from the U.S. Geological Survey, at least 45% of U.S. tap water has been contaminated with PFAS chemicals, which have been linked to different cancers and immune/developmental damage in children. Under the rule, public water systems are required to monitor PFAS levels and have five years to reduce PFAS in their water. Starting in 2029, water systems with PFAS levels that violate the rule will be required to notify the public and take action to reduce the levels. According to EPA, it will cost water companies an estimated $1.5 billion each year to comply with the regulation. However, the agency said the benefits will equal or exceed the costs of reducing cancer rates, heart attacks, strokes, and birth complications among individuals impacted by PFAS chemicals. To help water companies conduct initial testing and treatments, EPA announced $1 billion in funding through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. (Saric, Axios, 4/10; Huang, "Shots," NPR, 4/10; Phillis, Associated Press, 4/10)
  • New York: The World Health Organization (WHO) updated its definition of airborne pathogens to include respiratory droplets that spread through the air and land on a person, regardless of their size. WHO's new report aims to reduce confusion about how to "describe the transmission of pathogens through the air that can potentially cause infection in humans." Previously, WHO only considered pathogens that could travel in small droplets and spread across long distances, such as tuberculosis, to be airborne. During the COVID-19 pandemic, WHO initially said the virus was likely spreading either by contact or droplet transmission over short distances — even as growing evidence showed that COVID-19 droplets were lingering in the air. WHO eventually acknowledged COVID-19 as airborne and asked a group of advisors to update the organization's guidelines on how pathogens spread. "This report is important because it will enable better, clearer communication with the public about transmission of pathogens and how to reduce the risk of transmission," said Linsey Marr, an aerosol scientist and professor at Virginia Tech and a member of the advisory group behind the new report. (Howard, CNN, 4/18; Zimmer, New York Times, 4/18)

The 5 most common pushbacks to ESG (and how to answer them)

With all the priorities demanding board room attention, it's justified to be skeptical if ESG is among the most pressing issue to address. We do some of the work for you by assuming a skeptic's perspective to ask "is ESG really worth your time right now?"

Read on to discover five of the most common reasons for not moving on ESG, and what our research indicates are the answers.


SPONSORED BY

INTENDED AUDIENCE

AFTER YOU READ THIS

AUTHORS

TOPICS

INDUSTRY SECTORS

RELATED RESOURCES

Don't miss out on the latest Advisory Board insights

Create your free account to access 1 resource, including the latest research and webinars.

Want access without creating an account?

   

You have 1 free members-only resource remaining this month.

1 free members-only resources remaining

1 free members-only resources remaining

You've reached your limit of free insights

Become a member to access all of Advisory Board's resources, events, and experts

Never miss out on the latest innovative health care content tailored to you.

Benefits include:

Unlimited access to research and resources
Member-only access to events and trainings
Expert-led consultation and facilitation
The latest content delivered to your inbox

You've reached your limit of free insights

Become a member to access all of Advisory Board's resources, events, and experts

Never miss out on the latest innovative health care content tailored to you.

Benefits include:

Unlimited access to research and resources
Member-only access to events and trainings
Expert-led consultation and facilitation
The latest content delivered to your inbox
AB
Thank you! Your updates have been made successfully.
Oh no! There was a problem with your request.
Error in form submission. Please try again.