GBH⁠64%

Mass. health officials see uptick in cyclospora cases ⁠8%

By Marilyn Schairer⁠0%

8/5/2026, 10:33:28 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Anchoring Bias, Availability Heuristic, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 12.7% saturation with 74 hits. Analysis detected 634 faulty-reasoning hits from 581 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 16.7% and a BS Rank of ⁠8% (28,383 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 92.80% of the article peer group.

The Massachusetts Department of Public Health said it’s seeing an uptick in the number of cyclospora cases — more than anytime in the past six years — but stopped short of calling it an outbreak. 
The latest DPH data on Wednesday coincided with a surge of cases linked to a large national outbreak reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 
The national outbreak has spread to six states, including New Hampshire, according to the CDC. 
Dr. 
Catherine Brown, epidemiologist with the state DPH, said in the broader context of the outbreaks in other states, the data in Massachusetts indicates an increase in the number of seasonal cases of the foodborne illness that’s higher than usual, but not yet as high as what was reported in 2019. 
“I’m never in favor of panicking, I don’t think it’s helpful,” she said, “I think what’s happening this year in the United States with cyclospora is really interesting. 
I certainly want people to be aware of the fact that we are seeing this broad increase across the United States,” she said. 
The DPH data shows the number of new cyclospora cases in the state have grown from nine in May to 32 in June to 104 in July. 
That brings the total number of cases this year to 147. 
In 2019, state officials reported an outbreak of 211 cases in the state. 
The DPH said seasonal increases in cyclospora cases are common at this time of year. 
While this year’s cases are higher, the number of cases remain within the state’s historical range. 
Between 2016 and 2025, the annual number of cases ranged from 23 to 211. 
Last month the Food and Drug Administration linked the most recent outbreak of cyclospora to iceberg lettuce supplied by Taylor Farms and grown in central Mexico. 
Brown said the cases this year in the state are not geographically isolated, but we still could see a further jump in reported cases. 
“I will go so far as to say I wouldn’t be surprised if we eventually exceed our most, the last 10-year peak, which was in 2019, but we are not seeing thousands of cases at this point the way many parts of the Midwest are,” she said. 
Cyclosporiasis is a microscopic intestinal parasite that is spread by eating contaminated raw produce or water. 
It does not spread directly from person to person. 
It can be treated with antibiotics. 
Those most at risk are people with weakened immune systems. 
Brown said cyclospora is more challenging than other food-borne illnesses to detect and prevent because it is a “sticky parasite,” and hard to wash off. 
She recommends strict food handling precautions. 
“You want to make sure you’re washing everything with soap and water if you are preparing anything that’s fresh produce or fresh fruit. 
Anything that you can peel — that improves safety,” Brown said. 
If cook the food to 158 degrees that would kill the organism. 
Peak cyclospora season in the U.S. is May 1 to the end of August. 
Brown said some data sources suggest that we may already be past the peak. 
“We can’t identify the exposure for every single one of our cases, right? 
But the ones we can, those exposures happened a month ago, and so, history suggests that we’re on the downward side of this,” she said. 
The next state case count update will be the monthly update in the first week of September. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 4.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 3.1%Confirmation Bias4.0%This article: 11.2%Marilyn Schairer: 4.3%GBH: 0.5%Anchoring Bias11.2%This article: 10.3%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 2.6%Availability Heuristic10.3%This article: 2.8%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic2.8%This article: 4.3%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.1%Hindsight Bias4.3%This article: 4.8%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 1.5%Overconfidence Bias4.8%This article: 1.4%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 3.3%Framing Effect1.4%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 5.5%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.8%Status Quo Bias5.5%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.6%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 12.7%Marilyn Schairer: 1.2%GBH: 2.6%Optimism Bias12.7%This article: 8.1%Marilyn Schairer: 6.1%GBH: 2.4%Pessimism Bias8.1%This article: 4.8%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 7.4%Negativity Bias4.8%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 1.9%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 1.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.8%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.7%Recency Bias3.8%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 1.9%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 4.5%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 2.2%Appeal to Authority4.5%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 1.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 8.1%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 1.1%Slippery Slope8.1%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 2.2%GBH: 4.8%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 6.8%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 9.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 1.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)9.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.7%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 1.5%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.2%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.2%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.5%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 4.8%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 2.7%Biased Writer Voice4.8%This article: 6.9%Marilyn Schairer: 2.9%GBH: 1.5%Indoctrination6.9%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.6%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Marilyn Schairer: 0.0%GBH: 0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S
0.0%

581 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers72%attributed speech161writer words
Selected voice

Catherine Brown

100%flagged-word coverage
289 attributed words69% of attributed speech66% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Indoctrination+13.8 ptsWriter: 0.0%Catherine Brown: 13.8%13.8%Biased Writer Voice+9.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Catherine Brown: 9.7%9.7%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading

Loading

Loading

Loading


Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.