in progress. >> I call to order the December 15, 2025 meeting of the Armouth Board of Health. Let's go with attendance. Eric, are you present? >> Present. >> I'm Hill. I'm present. Larry, >> present.
>> Present. Charlie, anybody there? No. Mary. >> Okay, three of us. We have a quorum. Let's move ahead to public comment. opportunity for uh residents, only
residents of Yarmouth to uh to speak and uh we encourage people to to do so. So, just introduce yourself and uh let us know what voting district you're in. Anybody waiting to come in or not?
>> Laura Rooney has her hand up. >> Okay. Hello. >> Hello. How are you? >> Uh we're we're well. Just >> Good. Good. Hey, I'm I'm actually not a resident, but I did want to reach out to
you. I have I've corresponded with you a few times. >> Yeah. I'm not I'm afraid we're not going to be allowing people to speak from out of town. it was getting out of hand >> uh the last the last meeting. So I apologize for that. >> Okay. Okay. I I appreciate that. Just
just again all I am asking is that you just check the email that um that I sent your board. So I really appreciate that. Thank you. >> Oh abs. Absolutely. We'll make sure that gets done. Thank you for your interest though. Okay. Be well. Anyone else out there?
>> Barry, you see anyone? >> Not see anybody else on that. >> Okay. Let's go on to uh number four here. It's the variance of the Yarmmouth Wastewater Pumping Station 280 Route 28. I think we have a guest star tonight. Uh Barry, maybe you could introduce us.
>> Yeah. Yes, Mr. Chair. Um this is for 28. It's the relocation of the pump station for the town of Arth outlet. They concern that to move it over to the tile shop that's just on
opposite side of the cranberry bug which is the site board voted on that. What it is where they want to put the pump station right now is currently their leeching facility is for their for the building.
>> Okay. >> Um it was brought to my attention that that's where it was and they asked if they can relocate the leing facility after some after some um review and everything.
There's only five employees at the at the tile shop and a couple delivery drivers there day. So from the title five regulations for an office building, it doesn't really apply to this because it's just a
temporary movement of the of the leashing uh field to be able to put in the pump station that's going to benefit the town of Yarmouth. Um so they I since it is a relocation and a reduction, um I
had him come in for a variance. Michael is here. He's going to kind of give you a quick overview of the project. >> Okay, >> great. Thank you, Barry. Um Mike Judicy from CDM Smith representing the town of Yarmouth. Uh as Barry indicated, and he
gave a very good overview. Um we're working on the design and implementation of the town's comprehensive wastewater management plan that includes a number of pumping stations in this particular phase. Uh this particular location is part of what we're calling contract six.
I'm sure you've all seen a lot of the active construction that's been going on for the last year and a half or so on the first several contracts. Contracts 2, three, and four, as well as construction under contract one, which is the water resource recovery facility.
Um there's also active construction right now on contract five. Uh so this pumping station, as Barry indicated, was originally designed to be at 316 uh Route 28, which is just to the east of this particular parcel at 280. Uh there
was some concerns by some of the general public. Uh the town had a special town meeting just about a year or so ago and there was a non-binding uh question that passed uh requesting that the town relocate the pumping
station. So we evaluated uh several different locations. As if you're aware with how these systems work, pumping stations have to be located in the low point of an area. Although you know we try to maximize gravity flow to the extent possible. So, uh, the gravity
flow brings the waste water to a low point and then from that point it has to be pumped up. So, we couldn't we couldn't very go out too far from where the original location was and that's how we ended up at at 280 um, Route 28. Uh,
and again, as Barry indicated, the particular location on the parcel falls within the limits of their existing leeching field. Um it has was oversized just based on the title five rags which was based on the square footage of the
retail facility. As Barry indicated there's not a lot of uh not a lot of employees there in terms of flow. So what we're proposing is in the interim while construction of this pumping station occurs which would in all
likelihood not be for probably around this time next year if I had to guess. Uh right now this particular contract that this con that this pumping station is in is in contract six. It's currently out to bid right now. Um so construction
on it probably wouldn't start until next fall or winter at the earliest by the time the contract is awarded and the contractor submits all the submitts that are required the shop drawings in order to get the pumping station approved. So from that point once they start
construction obviously uh the facility would lose their ability to discharge to their current leeching field. So what we've proposed is to just put in a 600galon leech pit for the temporary solution during construction for about a
year maybe a year and a half at the most. And then once the facility is completed and wa the water resource recovery facility is up and running and can accept flow uh then the flow from this building would be connected to the
pumping station itself. So that in perpetuity it would be able to get to the treatment plant via this pumping station. But it's just for that interimm period during construction as I said it should probably be you know a year a year and a half to the mo for the most
part. Um, we need a temporary solution to handle flow from the building and that was what the intent of the variance is. >> Hey, that was clear. Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Do you have any concerns, Barry, about that?
>> Um, I did not. They had a couple options that we were uh given to them. The first option was this this um plan um which is a simple straightforward title five system. The second option was a tight
tank. With being a tight tank, it would have cost the town a lot more money um of having it pumped regularly and monitoring stuff like that. Um through uh meetings with Jeff Colby, myself and
uh Mark Grills, the director, we've boiled it down to this is probably be the most feasible project for the town to go with this moving the the leeching system and not having a tight tank. >> Yeah. Originally when I first heard about this, I assumed it would be a
tank. So what exactly you tell us about a pit and how that functions where the waste goes? That's not usually what we hear um with these variances. So why don't you tell us some more about the positioning of it and certainly our concern >> health board is where does the waste go?
>> Right. So just to back up a little bit. So their existing system consists of a a pump chamber, you know, septic tank and a pumping chamber that pumps around the that's located in the back of the building, pumps around the building to their leeching field. So this leech pit would function essentially the same as
the current leech field. It just takes up a much smaller footprint. We can't we can't install the pumping station um without disrupting the existing leech field and and we have a small area to work in. Um so that this is just a a
pre-cast concrete structure. Um so the flow will get discharged into it and the then the uh waste will go into the ground just as it is now under the existing septic uh leech field. It's just more of a a vertical system rather than horizontal. Has much smaller
footprint so that the waste is just going down rather than spread out over a larger area. >> It is still a lot larger than their typical leeching pits that we see in older homes now that are usually just six feet wide. This is a little bit larger. So it does give a little bit
more distribution than than the So >> Okay, who's paying for this? How does this work to make sure that works smoothly? So this would be part of the contractor's work and to install this pumping station, having to manage the
disconnection of the existing leech field, you know, pulling out the existing field as necessary to install the pumping station and then reconnecting the uh waste pipe or the pressure sewer from the facilities uh
pump chamber to the pumping station once it's completed and everything is operational. also be included in the contractor's cost that's bidding on this contract six. Ultimately, the town pays the contractor, but it's contractor who's does the work, but you all will be
essentially paying for it. >> We paying for it. Yes. >> Now, what about the owner? Anything? Uh, >> they're very receptive. They were very open to the uh relocation of the project to onto their property. Um, they have no issues. they as long as it's done
correctly and right and they they like the idea of having this system versus a pit and having to monitor it and having extra alarm stuff on their property. >> So, what's the actual variance that is being requested?
>> Uh removing the old pit and they have to relocate it around to the front. It's a smaller um than what title five recommends and I think there's some setbacks too, >> but it's just the size of the system.
>> Do you know that the setbacks what the issues are there? I mean, what are we It's a good question, Eric. >> I I don't know what the specific setbacks are, but it it is further back than the existing leech field from the
abuing properties. And I know the main concern was the size of the system versus a title five. A regular title five system for this size of building would be much greater. >> Is that the 8 839?
That's the existing. >> Yes. >> And this is a >> right at six >> 600. So it's a reduction variance the reduction yeah of size >> but locationwise
um not just the size what else should be of concern to the board >> um there shouldn't be too much I I don't I know the setbacks from the street are good I don't have a actual plan in front of
me I apologize This it's 15 ft from there. It's like from route 28 14.5 ft should be 20. So just a 6 foot.
>> Yeah. As I indicated it is further back from the road than the existing leeching field. >> Yeah. has more to do with the location of the pressure sewer line that the discharge from the pump chamber from the back of the building. We're just trying to install
this chamber, the leech pit on top of the existing pressure s. >> Okay. So I do see on title five site plan variance listed variance requested
3.7 reduction and setback SAS to DVW 100 to 74.4 ft. So Barry um it's uh once the pumping station is operational the system this leech and fuel will be shut down. >> Yes.
>> You are aware of that? >> Yeah it it will be abandoned. >> Okay. >> And then this will be connected right to the pumping station >> and there's one butter. >> There's one above. It's the bog property
wraps around this parcel on three sides. >> East western. They're on board. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Anything else? If anyone want to move ahead and vote on this. >> Yeah. >> I move that we approve the variance for
97 Hellsman Drive, Yammersport, Massachusetts. >> Second. >> There's a second. Okay. Any further discussion? Anything? Mary, I know you just came in. Anything? >> Nope. >> Look pretty straightforward. >> Okay. Address >> just for clarification. Yeah. I don't
think the address was correct. It's 280 Route 28. >> Sorry, 280. >> Okay. Thank you. Sorry. >> Okay. So, let's vote. All in favor of granting the variance, just raise your hand, say I. Okay. It's all four of us. Great. Great. Thank you. That was very
clear. Appreciate that. >> Thank you all very much. I appreciate it. Thanks. Thanks. Okay. The agenda is number five. This is now we're up to uh stratum discussion. Okay. So
uh in the packet I guess there was just one item I guess was a draft for a potential regulation that we all received. So just discussion of what people had
some more thoughts. I'm sure everyone since the last meeting did some reading self-educated let's talk. I have a um I have a comment. Um we have a regulation against um canabonoids and
synthetic cababonoids. So I would prefer that we use the our existing regulation and just amend it to add theratom if we're going to do that rather than you know having a separate regulation. That's
>> good with that. We can uh I can bring up the regulation at the next meeting and we can review that and see where we can insert that right into it. >> I I I didn't have chance to access it
myself, but um I but but I don't think that that needs to take away from the ex the discussion about Kraton itself. I'm just saying I'd rather go with our own regulation and if we're going to do something about the
cron added to that meant it put it into our existing. >> Okay. >> Would you want to put it in as um allratom or the synthetic and then or or
both the natural leaf and the synthetic 7 H7? Yeah, there are two main ingredients. I would propose that both of them. >> Yeah, I I >> included >> include both. Okay. >> Yeah, >> I would too. >> Both. >> There's not enough.
>> I can give you those specific uh um products in a minute if you like. >> The two aloids that exactly Yeah, I can I don't worry about I can give it to Barry. Um I guess well first of all do we you know
it's only if we want to move ahead with this either to have this regulation you know to create it or it's should not uh be placed in town rags >> I'm curious Sarah had sent out an email
and she had included um the superintendent DY superintendent's com comments, but he didn't say anything about Kraton. And she noted that she she was sending him the email that she had sent to the police and the fire, but we didn't get that. So, I'm asking if that
that email asked those departments about Kraton specifically. >> Yes, we didn't hear back from fire police yet. >> So, we can follow back up with them again. Sarah was out today, so >> Okay. Um, just so you know, there's another town on the Cape that it's
adopting it at the beginning of the year. The ban on >> what's that? >> Nash. >> Nash. >> How about the substance abuse committee? Have they discussed it at all? >> Charlie was going to that. >> When was the last meeting? Because
>> they had their party, their holiday get together. >> We had our holiday get together here last Friday. Um, I don't know if they've talked about it. I can reach out to Annie on that also. >> Well, also Charlie, see see what he says. Hopefully he went. >> We do have a hand up, Mr. Chair. I don't
again I don't know if they're local or not. So, I just wanted to >> Well, we're beyond public comment right now. So, um I don't think we'll be taking calls at this point.
>> Yeah. I think it's important to point out though that neither of these products, both the synthetic and the hemp derived products are regulated at all. There's really no regulation whatsoever. And that's that pretty scary. I think
I said I could pull up that section of the uh our tobacco regulations, Mary, for us, and get those out to everybody. >> It's not tobacco. It's a separate regulation for canabonoids and synthetic >> synthetic. Okay. >> So, do you had you spoken to someone in
MASHP? any background to why they are um >> it was brought up quickly in a um health relations meeting I was in on Thursday and I asked him if he's had much push back. He said he hasn't had much push
back and they're planning on they they have a meeting I think this week and then they're going to on the agenda for the first of the year to get it through. So >> do we know if any of our retail establishments are selling it? Yes, I've been to a couple and they are selling it.
>> Not a lot, but some of them are. >> Yeah, it's it's not gotten big yet. I don't think >> the the synthetic version that I looked at, I didn't see any natural >> uh the emergency departments are are
seeing cases. I mean people with decreased respiratory rates um and some cardiac problems and need you know some life support um and just that's generally the treatment of it
there sort of mixed uh reviews on whether norcan works or not >> um >> seem to not from what I was reading and what we had >> part of it some of it because it's not regulated of what's in it. So maybe uh
the response is only based upon if there's some opiate in them a different kind. Yes. I I don't know. But that's not the answer. It's really just maintaining vital signs. >> Um there are cases where people are seem to
be in withdrawal to nature also if they've been using it. I agree Larry. It's the lack of regulation is is the scariest part of it. You don't really know the
where it was made in sense of how how clean it is. Uh I guess concentration of it, what else is in it. Uh there I was reading about some cases that have elevated nickel in it, lead. There was
one that somebody wrote up in one of the uh pharmaceutical journals. It was Salmonella, a bacterial infection. So, it really who knows where it's made. Um, you know, I I don't know whether or not any health providers are using it or
recommending. I don't know that >> Mary. You know, >> do not know. >> I mean, that would be unlikely, right? >> Consider it's possible. It is possible because we've heard some pros about using the product that sound like
they're coming from medical advice. >> So my my question I I guess in that regard is do healthc care providers have is it practice to prescribe or recommend products that are not
um approved and regulated by the FDA? Yeah, they that they would they could I mean like they do with >> um um >> the counter medication. >> Well, I'm trying to think of the um
derivative to marijuana CBD that you can get that they a lot of medical people do recommend it and there you know they they say use as if it works fine you know. So there are some recommendations for use. I
mean, we're not we're basically what we're doing here is we're talking about eliminating it from um sale for sale with um and you know there are no um reports that I could read that
there was any fatalities or anything like that. It's just there are lots of reports about dysphoria and that sort of issue that could really present a an issue in certain situations like driving
>> uh you know uh u sociability you know there are some real issues that it does create if it if it's abused so I I I think that it's something we really should give some pretty serious serious
consideration or at least until they get some sort of regulations or you know at least until some um regulatory board gets involved in quality control. >> Right now there's none. >> It is being reviewed in the state level
also. >> Right. >> So, >> but that could take who knows how long. You know how that goes. >> Right. >> Yeah. So I I propose that we move forward with a um
>> I agree. >> Okay. I I support that. Eric, what's your feeling on this? >> Um yeah, I would support it. Um, as for a different draft, it means
pulling relevant things, I guess, Mary, from what we're looking at tonight here. >> Um, sorry, >> from the Bourne one that we were sent to in our package. >> Yeah. Well, I I what I this is I actually came up with this. I combined
using Northampton's as well as Bourne's what would be most relevant to Yarmouth. As you can see there, lots of it was kind of crossed out that I didn't think was made sense for for us. So that's where this came from.
>> So should we ask um to take what you have and incorporate it into our existing regulation? See then what we come up with. >> Yeah. >> If you think that covers everything it should.
>> Yeah. So there no redundancies and there may be some things that are specific um to this product that is not Yeah, it's just combining with what we have now, I guess. So, um
so I can do it again if that's what you're suggesting and write up a different one. Well, no. I mean, I thought you said you had already done that. >> Well, that's what this >> one right here. >> That's That's what's on >> the Bourne Yarmouth one. The Bourne one.
>> No, >> no, the the other one. The Dartmouth. >> This one. They shouldn't have just crossed off Borage. >> No, that's that's what I'm >> right. But I thought you said you had already done that with the Dartmouth one or Northampton one. And
>> so this is your editing doc. >> No, I had combined the two. You know, I use material from Borne and Northampton to create the one that we we're looking at right now. >> Okay. Okay. So, >> but that's very different than trying to
combine it with what we already have in in in our regulations and just adding this on picking and choosing relevant parts. This is what you're suggesting to >> Well, it's just adding the parts that that pertain toraton. I mean, I would be it would be a separate section unless
you want to just do a separate crate on one, but I don't think we should have one like this as well as our own cabonoid synthetic cabonoid regulation because then you've got regulation that says this and one that says this. >> Okay? >> See what I'm saying? I mean,
>> this is this one combines both. And I'm fine with combining as long as it's what we have stands unless we want to take a look at that regulation again and make changes to it. Um and that it only
adds the things that pertain to crayon. >> Can you lift up your microphone a little bit? >> Yes. Well, maybe just keep it um for the one new chemical we're addressing um and delete
all the issues of uh of what we already have in the separate rag to the uh canabonoid. So, we can do with that either way. I'm I'm open for doing either way. >> What do you think, Barry? I'm not
familiar with the other regulation for for the canboy uh synthetic one. I'd have to review that. I think that's before my time, but I'd be more than happy to >> bring that up and >> look at it and see how we can move from there.
>> Part of me is leaning towards just having it separate only. This is a product most people don't know anything about, >> right? >> I didn't know anything about it, >> right? >> Um most health providers don't. I I mean I made a couple calls out to people um actually in city or people I know people
don't know much about it. >> Public doesn't know that to have it more concise and just um create them is should be the topic and it'll just be one rig and I'm fine with that. >> We'll clean that up. So >> we don't touch our say anything that
would cross with our existing cabin regulation. >> All right. So I'll let me go a little do some editing again. I'll be happy to do that. you. This is your edited version here. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, I I read it. I I thought it was perfectly acceptable to me.
>> Okay. But Mary is saying we can then just uh make it only relevant to crayon. >> Yep. I think so. I think that makes it >> pretty uh it's pretty >> brief and to the point >> trying to do. So, um and it should be a
little uh more concise after I edit it again. is what we're going to do. It's a good idea, mayor. Thank you. Um, >> definitely put it on the agenda for the next meeting. >> Yeah. Um, I'll get it to you so it could
be in the packets for the next meeting. >> We'll we need to post that at at the public before we >> um it'll be a discussion again next one and then we'll decide to put it on for a vote at the following one after that. And then it will be have to get posted
in the paper and upstairs and everything prior to >> okay on that. >> Yeah, that's great. >> Oh, okay. >> We got to review and approve the minutes. This just wouldn't >> uh one um concern I had before we get
into the minutes. I don't know if it's appropriate for me to bring it up at this point, but you know, we had the discussion about the nicot uh nicotine free generation discussion. >> Really like to pursue that. I think it's a really important discussion to have. I
think that from my perspective, you know, I've never talked to anybody that's taken that's been a smoker or been involved with nicotine products for an extended period of time that wished they hadn't started. And I think that's a that's something people aren't aware
of to a great extent. And also, you know, the two issues that I've heard um about um not approving this um uh discussion is one it's affects business.
But to me, I really don't think that that's a good kind of business. It for for what what it what it is, you know? I think that at some point we need to acknowledge the fact that the health repercussions of it
far outweigh any business setbacks that we might experience. The other thing that I think it's really important to to point out is, you know, people the the other uh uh issue I hear is well it should be somebody's free choice to
smoke and I tend to agree with that but the problem is with smoking is that creates so much morbidity in later years. It puts a tremendous stress on the health care system and that isn't
most citizens free choice. I mean they're they have to fund that morbidity because obviously the people involved in the illness caused by smoking aren't able to afford the repercussions of of their smoking. So I think it from that
perspective just from a um a health perspective and the impact of our health system I think it's another reason to really consider um this proposal. So uh you know I I think that it's been shown
that that um 50% of the uh people that smoke chronically die from uh smoking related issues. And I mean that's compelling enough to me to feel like anybody that with that kind of data available, anybody that takes up smoking
is probably misinformed about the effects of smoking. And I think at this point maybe we need to take it into our own hands to try to impress on people that it's just not good for their health. >> They've been called coffin nails for a
long time. >> Yeah. When we had our other um uh tobacco related regulations come up, the um retail community, the this convenience stores were well represented out in the audience talking and several
of them them said we don't smoke ourselves, you know, >> um but it is a big part of their business, >> right? But I agree that that it should not be our um compelling reason for doing or not.
>> Not when there's so much evidence to the contrary. And the other thing is the way this is written, it does minimize the impact of the retailers on tobacco. It it you know it it it does it it it
allows it to come into effect over a slower period of time. It's not an all ornone kind of thing. So >> I don't think the impact will be as great as they anticipate it would be. >> Changing long-term business plan is very
>> well you know if your business I think is predicated on that kind of a product I think we need to find another market maybe another product to to that would have a lot more promise of being a constructive um retail item
>> than cigarette. Well, that's another issue, but that's beyond our purview. >> Next agenda, >> right? >> I'm up for it. >> Yeah. No, you mentioned, you know, government and control and so on. I mean,
I agree. Uh but, you know, first thing I thought of is about seat belts. Um, that's what the law about putting your seatelt on >> is >> how many lives it saved. >> Go back to the cost issue. >> Yeah. you know, if it's $20,000 in the
ICU, you know, society is paying for all that >> of the accidents, you know, the outcomes of it. So, um, >> really like to pursue that is the reason I brought it up. It's I think it's a a constructive
um view for us to take. You know, I I think it's important that we acknowledge that, you know, this is this has a lot a lot of merit >> and we are not leaders in it this time. >> Pardon? >> And we are not leaders in it this time. There are >> right
>> many municipalities that have already done it now. >> It's like 17 19 as of today. >> Okay. >> They went over the legality of it all and it did go to court and it went through.
>> We were sent the the decision right? >> Affirming Brookline's regulation. So, it's already been tested, right, in the courts and and more and more diseases are or cancers are being um
blamed on on smoking. It's the first question, one of the first questions your doctor asks you every year when you go in for your physical, do you smoke? You know, >> one of the reasons I didn't put it on this uh this meeting's agenda is because
we we had the cratom. I I'd like to do that one and then move forward with the I definitely we're not putting it on the back. I I would definitely like to put it on in the future. >> It's a constructive >> Yeah. >> issue for us. >> Yep. 100%. I just I thought with the
cratom discussion and the we were getting a lot of influx from a lot of outside people. I just kind of wanted to break it up for the for you guys >> just so we could focus on one issue fully >> at a time >> at a time. >> Sure.
>> No problem with that. So we we'll be more than happy to put on the agenda for >> and even if it's a just a you know brief discussion like we're having right now instead of doing it in new business uh
the agenda anything that the next meeting about it >> that's something we would make public again so we can Okay back to your question about the board of health meetings I reviewed them and
accept move that we accept them as read as they are. >> Second. >> I think uh Riley did a nice job putting that together. >> Yeah. No, it looks great. Any edits? Anyone on it? All in favor of passing minutes say I Okay, John.
Thank you. Okay. New and old business. >> All very >> uh so as you know we are in full swing with our giving tree. We have 35 kids. Um I would say 33 of the all of the
packages have been delivered here. We are going to be delivering them all on Wednesday to the uh to the local schools. It's amazing what people are doing for these kids. What they're people are going all out for for these kids. It's these are some lucky kids and
they they're going to need it. It's going to be nice. Um >> I think that was a great >> Yep. >> idea. I had so much fun. First time I've been in the mall in 20 years. It was great. >> Yeah. You have to thank uh Sarah and Deborah and Riley for this. It was all
It was them that put it together. I I big kudos to those three. >> So, >> same experience. Some of the stores I >> I generally don't go. >> I was surprised how many aren't there that used to be. I mean, God, when I was in college, I worked at the friendlies
that was in there. We were busy. It was a line out the door with friendlies back in the 70s when they first opened >> and they let you go there. >> Pardon? >> They let you go. They didn't keep you on staff. >> No, they they didn't. I I I left
voluntarily. My I I I don't think I I I don't think they had a 401k at that time. >> Health benefits. >> No, no health benefits. I scream. >> Okay. Um even though we are all out of uh kids
they if anybody in the audience or the public the public library is still have it has some kids left if anybody wants to go there to get them. The next thing next uh in January it's the blood drive we're having with the
VNA. Um that's going to be good. It's on our website. It's on the VNA website. You can sign up for that. Highly recommend it. Blood is needed this time of year. Lots of uh low occup low doses
of them. And then in February is our fall risk assessment, which I'm very proud that Hillary brought that up. We kind of started moving with that. So with our population in the town of Yarmouth, it's uh very needed. as
Hillard said, uh, it's just not fall. It's showers, it's stairs, it's handrails, stuff like that. So, that's going to be a great one that's going to be Is that going to be at the senior center? Is that It's going to be right here in this room. Perfect. So, anybody feels that they're a fall risk, they
have a relative, parent, child, they feel it's going to be at a fall risk, please sign up for it and come on in. >> And it said that there were limited spaces. How many people can you accommodate? >> Like there's 17 spaces. I don't know if there's any left. Are there >> not sure because I know they had a wait list.
>> Yeah. >> From another town. >> Yeah. I think it went pretty quick. >> What number you have? It probably could be tripled quadruple >> easily. So, we'll repeat it. >> If it goes good, we can always open it up. I depend on uh budget funds and stuff like that. What we have for
>> in our budget to do it again. So, >> yeah. >> So, Barry, are we going to have a recommended age limit for going up a ladder? That's up to them. I don't like going up them right now. And that's about all I have for new and
old business. So, oh, and I did tell most of you I did pass my certified health officer exam. So, >> congratulations. Excellent. >> What's next? >> My registered sanitarian. >> I just finished school last week. So, I as I get my grades, I'm gonna reapply to
take that test and start studying for that one. So >> good. >> My hats off to you. That's great. >> Thank you, sir. It was a tough test. So, >> yeah. >> Um I just another word again here which um concern is our our youngest
residents, the ones who are haven't haven't been born yet and that is back to vaccines again. Um right now there are it's around 1,900 cases of measles okay in the country and
this was a disease that was declared eliminated um the year 2000 and that first case is now in Connecticut here there was a big outbreak in Carolina so it's Connecticut
now so it's getting closer here to us And the other concern I personally have dealing with vaccines and certainly with all the young people, our youngest residents again is hepatitis B vaccine. Um, and the recommendation was just
changed from the Centers of Disease Control. Uh, not by group of physicians, clinical ones. And just let people know a real brief synopsis on I guess hepatitis B. It's a
virus. Okay. Um it's transmitted through bodily fluids, through blood, um sexual activity. Um the virus
can stay uh rather uh viable. I mean it it can be on a toothbrush. you could transmit hepatitis B that way. Cutting nails for instance um one of the bigger concerns is it uh hepatitis B that virus can be
transmitted during birth. Okay. And what the recommended schedule was it's given the first dose is given within 24 hours of birth. Okay. And then there's what the schedule had
been and this is going on for decades is um it's around a couple months maybe two months and then there's a third dose that's around a year. The child's a year old. Um the the
people who are carriers of this virus may not know it. Most of the time people aren't symptomatic. Um and very often it can can come pretty quickly where they start to show signs of disease and most of it is is liver
people come down with a chronic infection of the liver. It could be so it's really liver failure and there's a high rate of um liver cancer also associated with people who are carrying
the virus. So I just encourage um parents to speak to the health care providers okay about uh the issue of vaccinating their their new child um to prevent hepatitis B. There's no
treatment for hepatitis B for that virus. It's only preventative. So thank you. A couple of points I've made this point before about in my career as a
veterinarian I've seen feline distemper canine distemper lived through canine parvo virus uh feline leukemia virus and realize I've actually seen the impact
that vaccines make on these diseases to the point where they basically completely eliminate them unless the patient wasn't vaccinated. And I've seen it clinically. It's just incontrovertible that these vaccines
have saved so many animals lives. I mean, when I lived through back in 1980, I can remember it was the summer of 1980, living through the parvo epidemic and the devastation that that disease caused to unvaccinated animals. The
other thing that people bring up is that, okay, well, vaccinations are good for other others, but maybe I don't need to vaccinate. But the thing is that I've found from my career for vaccinations to
really be effective, you need a a lot of the population vaccinated to pro because what happens is these viruses really gain in varilance as they spread from one patient to another. And if there isn't a population
of unvaccinated animals, I can't speak for people, but I mean the the physiology is the same, the immune systems the same. in a in a given population of animals, the more animals
that are vaccinated, it serves to attenuate that virus considerably because um that it well just as a matter of fact going in the COVID case in people, the uh impact on these um meat
packing plants was incredible because one, the people weren't vaccinated. Not only that, they were all in close proximity to each other for the whole day. And it's no question that the more you're exposed, the more quantity of a virus
you get, the more likely you are to get a a worst case of the the disease. If you're transiently exposed to a virus, you may just build up natural immunity. But if you're exposed to it in a massive dose, very unlikely that you're going to
uh not get a real serious disease from from the virus. So, I mean, I just can't imagine if if anybody has seen the efficacy of vaccines how they could possibly not recommend their
effectiveness. It's just beyond me. And that just to me, anybody that doesn't recommend vaccines is unaware of how they work, the immune system, the efficacy of the vaccines, etc., etc. and the safety.
>> The safety. Yeah, absolutely. The safety is, you know, there there's so much effort put into to producing safe vaccines that that there's no reason really, no compelling reason whatsoever not to be vaccinated in my opinion. I
mean, there are some diseases that, you know, you could take your chances on, I think, but these diseases that you're talking about, they're not diseases there's no reason to take advant uh to to skip them. you know, they're safe, they're very effective, and the
consequence of the disease itself is so um so severe that, you know, it just doesn't make sense to me how how how people could even think about not getting vaccinated. That's just my my opinion. And like I said, I'm speaking
from 50 years of veterinary experience, thousands of patients. I just um saw the headlines for an article that I I I didn't find to pursue that said that for the first time this year the death rate of children in the United States is going up, young
children. So I don't know if there's any cause and effect there, but certainly could be some um >> I think more >> to me it's malpractice. I mean, you know, I think a doctor would be liable for malpractice if he didn't recommend
these vaccines. Um just to go back to that um handout that I I provided last week, the state public health commissioner has said that they are going through their own websites and taking out any links to the
center disease control that provides misinformation such as the the vaccine uh information misinformation. So I would suggest that people go to mass.gov gov and pursue it through the
Massachusetts Department of Public Health for themselves and also speak with their own physicians. >> Yeah. Can you can you anybody tell me what the rationale is of these proposals from from the the the health and human services? I mean, what is the what's the
motivation? I I don't know. Doesn't make sense to me. >> I think it comes down from the leadership >> comes down to not believing science. I guess they're not not respecting expertise.
>> I mean, evidence is that they're closing labs and all the grants to the NIH. So, it's very anti-ressearch. That's for sure. >> Coming down, I guess. >> So, the future of vaccines is certainly not looking very good right now either in terms of new ones that were in the
pipeline being developed. And >> anyway, Okay. >> So, are we ready for it? Can I make a motion we adjourn or you have to make that proposal? >> I don't know, Eric. What do you think on this one? >> Like, we can we can we can allow it.
>> You're welcome to make that proposal. >> We can do this. It's >> This might be a new record. >> Hey, guys. Look at this. Okay. Why don't you do what you said? I'd like to make a motion that we adjourn. >> A second. >> Thank you. Since there's not going to be
any discussion, all in favor for it is >> everybody have a wonderful holiday. Recording stopped.