GoGreenNation news

Access to Green Space May Help Reduce Kids' Screen Time

News Feed

Friday, January 10, 2025

By Denise Maher HealthDay ReporterSATURDAY, Jan. 11, 2025 (HealthDay News) -- Want to help your child cut back on their screen time?Make sure you live near parks and other open spaces where they can frolic outside.New research underlines the importance of green space access as an alternative to spending time on screens, described as watching television, playing video games, and non-school related computer use.“Neighborhood green spaces may draw children out of the house and give them an alternative space to engage in activities other than screen time," according to Ian-Marshall Lang, lead study author and researcher at University of Michigan's (U-M) School of Kinesiology.Published last year in the journal Health & Place, the study was inspired by earlier findings on the differences in the effectiveness of community programming and policies by race and ethnicity. National research shows racial and ethnic inequities in green space availability, so Lang and the other authors suspected access to green space was a key factor behind the trend.While programs aimed at reducing time spent on screens are more likely to be successful in green, park-filled areas, the reverse holds. Programs are less successful in neighborhoods where children have less access to green spaces, described by the study authors as areas such as forests, shrubland, open spaces and grassland.“This raises the question of who has access to high green space. Both our study and national data show green space is less common in communities with higher Hispanic and Black populations," Lang stated.All kids in the U.S. spend a lot of time in front of screens, and the amount of time increases year after year. About two-thirds of 6–17-year-olds exceed the recommended daily limit of 2 hours, authors noted.Too much time online increases the risk of childhood obesity while sedentary habits established early in life can persist into late childhood and adulthood, research shows. This emphasizes the need for childhood interventions to reduce and eliminate excessive screen time trends.What's more, there are significant racial and ethnic differences in who exceeds this limit, with African American/Black and Hispanic/Latino children the most likely to exceed time limits.“These unfair differences in green space access might explain why community programs and policies are less effective in reducing screen time among different racial groups. To address screen time inequities, we need solutions that create fair, just and healthy environments for all communities,” to Lang explained.The U-M study suggests that simply increasing the intensity of community programming may not be a solution.In other words, they've learned what doesn't work to reduce screen time. Short of green space, problems will likely persist. Other features that strengthen programs cannot compensate for the absence of opportunities for outdoor play.In background notes, the authors explained that environmental justice data consistently demonstrates people of color have lower access to greenspace and other urban vegetation.Research shows that in the U.S., greenspace inequities are rooted in decades of systemic racism.“Simply increasing the intensity of screen-time reduction programs may not be effective in environments that do not support behavior change," Lang explained.On the positive side, spending time in nature has been linked to stress relief as well as to better mental health.“This work is particularly important for organizations that have the responsibility and power to make equitable investments in green spaces to support the health of children,” Lang concluded. “Our findings provide evidence-based support for initiatives like the 10-Minute Walk Program that calls on city mayors to address inequities in green space access by ensuring that everyone in U.S. cities has access to a quality park within a 10-minute walk of their home.”UC Health offers families ideas and inspiration to get outside and explore nature.SOURCE: University of Michigan, press release, Jan. 6, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

By Denise Maher HealthDay ReporterSATURDAY, Jan. 11, 2025 (HealthDay News) -- Want to help your child cut back on their screen time?Make sure you...

By Denise Maher HealthDay Reporter

SATURDAY, Jan. 11, 2025 (HealthDay News) -- Want to help your child cut back on their screen time?

Make sure you live near parks and other open spaces where they can frolic outside.

New research underlines the importance of green space access as an alternative to spending time on screens, described as watching television, playing video games, and non-school related computer use.

“Neighborhood green spaces may draw children out of the house and give them an alternative space to engage in activities other than screen time," according to Ian-Marshall Lang, lead study author and researcher at University of Michigan's (U-M) School of Kinesiology.

Published last year in the journal Health & Place, the study was inspired by earlier findings on the differences in the effectiveness of community programming and policies by race and ethnicity. National research shows racial and ethnic inequities in green space availability, so Lang and the other authors suspected access to green space was a key factor behind the trend.

While programs aimed at reducing time spent on screens are more likely to be successful in green, park-filled areas, the reverse holds. Programs are less successful in neighborhoods where children have less access to green spaces, described by the study authors as areas such as forests, shrubland, open spaces and grassland.

“This raises the question of who has access to high green space. Both our study and national data show green space is less common in communities with higher Hispanic and Black populations," Lang stated.

All kids in the U.S. spend a lot of time in front of screens, and the amount of time increases year after year. About two-thirds of 6–17-year-olds exceed the recommended daily limit of 2 hours, authors noted.

Too much time online increases the risk of childhood obesity while sedentary habits established early in life can persist into late childhood and adulthood, research shows. This emphasizes the need for childhood interventions to reduce and eliminate excessive screen time trends.

What's more, there are significant racial and ethnic differences in who exceeds this limit, with African American/Black and Hispanic/Latino children the most likely to exceed time limits.

“These unfair differences in green space access might explain why community programs and policies are less effective in reducing screen time among different racial groups. To address screen time inequities, we need solutions that create fair, just and healthy environments for all communities,” to Lang explained.

The U-M study suggests that simply increasing the intensity of community programming may not be a solution.

In other words, they've learned what doesn't work to reduce screen time. Short of green space, problems will likely persist. Other features that strengthen programs cannot compensate for the absence of opportunities for outdoor play.

In background notes, the authors explained that environmental justice data consistently demonstrates people of color have lower access to greenspace and other urban vegetation.

Research shows that in the U.S., greenspace inequities are rooted in decades of systemic racism.

“Simply increasing the intensity of screen-time reduction programs may not be effective in environments that do not support behavior change," Lang explained.

On the positive side, spending time in nature has been linked to stress relief as well as to better mental health.

“This work is particularly important for organizations that have the responsibility and power to make equitable investments in green spaces to support the health of children,” Lang concluded. “Our findings provide evidence-based support for initiatives like the 10-Minute Walk Program that calls on city mayors to address inequities in green space access by ensuring that everyone in U.S. cities has access to a quality park within a 10-minute walk of their home.”

UC Health offers families ideas and inspiration to get outside and explore nature.

SOURCE: University of Michigan, press release, Jan. 6, 2025

Read the full story here.

Photos courtesy of

Related News

Biden let California get creative with Medicaid spending. Trump is signaling that may end

California uses Medicaid to pay for a range of nontraditional health care services, including housing. The Trump administration wants to scale back those programs.

In summary California uses Medicaid to pay for a range of nontraditional health care services, including housing. The Trump administration wants to scale back those programs. In 2022, California made sweeping changes to its Medi-Cal program that reimagined what health care could look like for some of the state’s poorest and sickest residents by covering services from housing to healthy food. But the future of that program, known as CalAIM, could be at risk under the Trump administration. In recent weeks, federal officials have signaled that support for creative uses of Medi-Cal funding is waning, particularly uses that California has invested in such as rent assistance and medically tailored meals. Medi-Cal is California’s name for Medicaid. The moves align with a narrower vision of Medicaid espoused by newly confirmed Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services head Dr. Mehmet Oz, who said during his swearing-in ceremony that Medicaid spending was crowding out spending on education and other services in states with the federal government “paying most of the bill.” “This one really bothers me. There are states who are using Medicaid — Medicaid dollars for people who are vulnerable — for services that are not medical,” Oz said. It also fits with broader GOP calls to slim down the federal government. Medicaid is under scrutiny as part of a GOP-led budget process in the House of Representatives that calls for $880 billion in cuts over 10 years to programs including Medicaid. “The messaging that we want to go back to the basics of Medicaid puts all of these waiver programs in jeopardy,” said John Baackes, former chief executive of L.A. Care, the state’s largest Medi-Cal health insurer. CalAIM is authorized under a federal waiver that allows states to experiment with their Medicaid programs to try to save money and improve health outcomes. Under the waiver, California added extra benefits for high-cost users to help with food insecurity, housing instability, substance use and behavioral health challenges. Roughly half of all Medi-Cal spending can be attributed to 5% of high-cost users, according to state documents. But in March, the federal government rescinded guidelines supporting Medi-Cal spending for social services. It also sent states a letter in April indicating that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services would no longer approve a funding mechanism that helps support CalAIM, although that money will continue until 2026. Together, these moves should worry states that operate programs like CalAIM, said Kathy Hempstead, senior policy officer at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. “Under the Biden administration states were encouraged to experiment with things like that: To prescribe people prescriptions to get healthy food, to refer people to community-based services,” Hempstead said. “This administration is not receptive at all to … that vision of the Medicaid program.” In a press release, CMS said it is putting an end to spending that isn’t “directly tied to health care services.” “Mounting expenditures, such as covering housekeeping for individuals who are not eligible for Medicaid or high-speed internet for rural healthcare providers, distracts from the core mission of Medicaid, and in some instances, serves as an overly-creative financing mechanism to skirt state budget responsibilities,” the press release states. These signals from the federal government apply to future applications for Medicaid changes, and do not change California’s current programs or funding. The state’s CalAIM waiver expires at the end of 2026, and another similar waiver that supports California’s efforts to improve behavioral health care expires in 2029. According to a statement from the Department of Health Care Services, the agency that oversees Medi-Cal, all programs “remain federally approved and operational.” “We appreciate our Medi-Cal providers and community partners, and together we will push full steam ahead to transform our health system and improve health outcomes,” the department said. Physician assistant Brett Feldman checks his patient, Carla Bolen’s, blood pressure while in her encampment at the Figueroa St. Viaduct above Highway 110 in Elysian Valley Park in Los Angeles on Nov. 18, 2022. Photo by Larry Valenzuela, CalMatters/CatchLight Local Paul Shafer, co-director of the Boston University Medicaid Policy Lab, said decades of public health research show that people have worse health outcomes that require more expensive treatment when their social needs aren’t met. “We’ve spent the last few decades in public health and health policy, arguing that so much of health and medical costs is driven by environmental factors — people’s living conditions, income, etc.” Shafer said. But, Shafer said, programs like CalAIM are relatively recent and the research hasn’t had enough time to show whether paying for non-traditional services saves money. For example, California’s street medicine doctors who take care of people who are homeless say that their patients often cycle in and out of the emergency room — the most expensive point of service in the health care system. They have no place to recover from medical procedures, no address to deliver medications, and the constant exposure to the elements takes years off of their lives, doctors say. CalAIM gives them options to help their clients find housing. The federal government’s decision not to fund programs like this in the future is a “step backward,” Shafer said. “I think we can all read the tea leaves and say that that means they’re sort of unlikely to be renewed,” he said. Supported by the California Health Care Foundation (CHCF), which works to ensure that people have access to the care they need, when they need it, at a price they can afford. Visit www.chcf.org to learn more. more on california health care They live in California’s Republican districts. They feel betrayed by looming health care cuts March 11, 2025March 12, 2025 California has big plans for improving mental health. Medicaid cuts could upend them April 7, 2025April 7, 2025

Health

Education

Government

Chattanooga Just Became North America's First National Park City. Here's What That Means

The designation was awarded by a London-based charity that aims to make cities more like national parks: "greener, healthier and wilder"

Chattanooga Just Became North America’s First National Park City. Here’s What That Means The designation was awarded by a London-based charity that aims to make cities more like national parks: “greener, healthier and wilder” Sarah Kuta - Daily Correspondent April 23, 2025 4:20 p.m. Chattanooga was once one of the most polluted cities in the country. Now, it's North America's first National Park City. larrybraunphotography.com via Getty Images Chattanooga has been named North America’s first National Park City, a designation that acknowledges the city’s abundant green spaces and commitment to environmental stewardship. The city in southeast Tennessee, home to roughly 190,000 residents, is now the third National Park City in the world, following behind London and Adelaide, Australia. The title comes from the National Park City Foundation, a London-based charity that envisions a better future by thinking of cities more like national parks. The movement is not connected to the National Park Service, the federal agency that manages America’s national parks, monuments, historic sites and other protected lands. “[National parks] are special places where we have a better relationship with nature, culture and heritage and can enjoy and develop ourselves,” according to the foundation. “Combining the long-term and large-scale vision of national parks with cities has the potential to shift our collective understanding of what and who a city is for.” In Chattanooga, city leaders have used the initiative to encourage residents to “think about Chattanooga as a city in a park, rather than a city with some parks in it,” says Tim Kelly, the mayor of Chattanooga, in a video announcing the designation. “The outdoors is our competitive advantage,” he adds. “It’s at the heart of our story of revitalization, and it’s at the core of our identity as Chattanoogans. We’ve always known how special Chattanooga’s connection to the outdoors is, and now it’s going to be recognized around the world.” Chattanooga has been working toward the designation for nearly two years, per a statement from the city. In late 2023, officials collected more than 5,600 signatures of support and created a National Park City charter. Then, they filed an application describing how Chattanooga met the nonprofit’s criteria—such as being “a place, vision and community that aims to be greener, healthier and wilder.” Last month, delegates from the foundation visited Chattanooga to experience it first-hand. They toured an urban farm, explored several parks and met with various community leaders, per NOOGAtoday’s Haley Bartlett. The foundation’s experts were impressed by Chattanooga’s “culture of outdoor activity,” its “unrivaled access to nature,” its commitment to “inclusive and sustainable development” and its food and agriculture scene, among other factors. “We saw first-hand the extraordinary breadth and depth of engagement with the Chattanooga National Park City vision informed by outstanding experts in design, ecology, culture and arts,” says Alison Barnes, a trustee of the foundation, in a statement. “National Park City status introduces a new chapter for a city with a long history of revitalization and renewal through connecting its unique landscape and the history of its people.” Chattanooga has come a long way since 1969, when the federal government declared it the worst city in the nation for particulate air pollution. Hazy skies were the norm back then, as factories and railroads spewed unregulated emissions into the air, according to the Chattanooga/Hamilton County Air Pollution Control Bureau. Air pollution was so bad that residents sometimes had to drive with their headlights on in the middle of the day. But the pollution was more than just an eyesore. It was also causing the city’s residents to become sick—and sometimes die—from diseases like tuberculosis. Eventually, voters approved aggressive new rules to reduce emissions. By 1989, Chattanooga’s air quality had improved so much that it met all federal health standards. Today, it’s a vibrant, outdoorsy city with more than 100 parks and more than 35 miles of trails—plus many more within a short drive. The once-neglected riverfront downtown has been revitalized, and Chattanooga has experienced steady population growth in recent years. What does the National Park City designation mean for the city’s future? That remains to be seen. But officials hope it will help guide policy decisions and “help city government and community partners prioritize connecting more people to the outdoors that have long defined our identity,” according to a statement from the Chattanooga Area Chamber. It will also encourage citizens and leaders to embrace “all aspects of outdoor life,” from forests and lakes to native plants, according to the chamber. Mark McKnight, who serves as the president and CEO of Chattanooga’s Reflection Riding Arboretum and Nature Center, hopes that the new status will “yield some really cool stuff that we can’t even imagine today.” “Hopefully, we’re having this conversation in ten years, and it’s like, ‘Oh, wow, we never knew we would get to there,’” he tells the Chattanooga Times Free Press’ Sam Still. Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

Health

Agriculture

Food

Despite progress, Los Angeles is nation's smoggiest city for 25th time in 26 years

An annual report from the American Lung Assn. showed that Los Angeles has improved its air quality but still deserves its reputation for unhealthy air.

Despite decades of progress in reducing air pollution, Los Angeles is still the nation’s smoggiest city, according to a report released Wednesday by the American Lung Assn.The association’s annual “State of the Air” report noted that Los Angeles held on to the infamous title for the 25th time even though the number of unhealthy ozone days has dropped nearly 40% since 2000. Particle pollution metrics told a similar story, where Los Angeles saw improvement but still had the dubious honor of being the nation’s seventh-most polluted city by that measure.California is home to five of the country’s 10 smoggiest places, as defined by levels of ozone pollution, and also to five of the worst 10 cities by particle pollution, according to the report. Los Angeles, Visalia, Bakersfield, Fresno and San Diego were among the list of cities most polluted by ozone. Bakersfield, Visalia, Fresno, Los Angeles and Sacramento were in the top 10 for worst particle pollution. The report comes roughly a month after the Environmental Protection Agency, under the Trump administration, announced its plan to loosen or eliminate a wide swath of environmental regulations that many experts worry could negatively effect air quality, reversing decades of progress in California.“Nobody wants to go back to the kinds of skies that triggered our clean air laws in the first place,” Mary D. Nichols, a UCLA law professor and former chair of the California Air Resources Board, said during a news conference Tuesday.At the EPA, the Trump administration seeks to “roll back existing rules that have been effective in protecting public health” she said, as well as eliminating staff positions and removing science and research functions. If the EPA is dismantled, “we’ll have more sick kids. We’ll have more people going to the hospital with asthma attacks,” Nichols said. “We’ll see people dying sooner than they should have just because of the poison in the air.”The “State of the Air” report tracks two main types of air pollution: ozone pollution, largely a factor of tailpipe emissions and heat, and particle pollution, driven primarily by drought and wildfires. The report found that more than 34.3 million Californians live in a community with at least one failing air quality grade and 22.9 million live in a community with three failing air quality grades.Southern California has been choked by smog since the mass adoption of the automobile. Millions of cars and trucks in the region release a vast amount of vehicle exhaust, which forms smog when it’s cooked in the perennially sunny climate. The mountain ranges restrict airflow and prevent pollution from dispersing.State and local regulators have adopted a number of nation-leading rules to reduce emissions from vehicles and industrial facilities, including Senate Bill 32 in 2014 and Assembly Bill 398 in 2017, which enacted strict greenhouse gas emission limits and a cap-and-trade system.While electric vehicles and cleaner car engines have significantly reduced pollution, transportation remains the largest source in California’s major cities. Heavy-duty trucks, cargo ships and trains are some of the biggest contributors to regional pollution.Despite the lackluster results, a dozen California cities including Los Angeles posted their best-ever reports on either ozone or particle pollution, said Mariela Ruacho, a senior clean air advocacy manager at the American Lung Assn. Fresno improved across the board, registering its lowest ever number of ozone days and particle days and its lowest annual particle levels since tracking began in 2000.Meanwhile, Bakersfield earned the title of the city in America with the least healthy air. The San Joaquin Valley town ranked as the most particle-polluted city in the nation, both for short-term and annual levels, according to the report.“Phasing out agricultural burning, maintaining state investments in cleaning up heavy-duty trucks, and off-road agricultural equipment incentives are critical to ongoing local progress,” the American Lung Assn. wrote in a news release.Though California’s air quality has improved significantly since the first “State of the Air” report in 2000, concerns over climate change and new legislation abound. California Senate Bill 712, which would fully exempt collector cars at least 35 model years old from smog check requirements, would “set our progress back decades,” Ruacho said.“Unhealthy air is inequitable and unaffordable,” Ruacho said. “To protect against these costly health emergencies, California must double down on investments to reduce wildfire risk, spur zero-emission transportation and energy sources, and align transportation funding with pollution reduction needs.”Times staff writer Tony Briscoe contributed to this report.

Health

Climate

Mountains

Regulators are underestimating health impacts from air pollution: Study

Health impacts are likely being underestimated by traditional risk models used by regulators, according to a new study that has found a different way to measure the cumulative risk air pollution poses to health. The new method, which accounts for the ways numerous chemical exposures impact the entire body, found increased risks to people’s brains, hearts, lungs, kidneys, and hormonal systems from air pollution in a community near Philadelphia. Traditional methods found no increased health risks based on the same level of pollution exposure in that community.“I think this [is a] holistic approach,” Pete DeCarlo, study co-author and a Johns Hopkins University associate professor who studies atmospheric air pollution, told EHN. “The cumulative burdens across multiple health systems for every chemical that we measure is really, really important, because we breathe everything all at once.” Multiple chemical exposures impact multiple body partsThe study, conducted by researchers at Johns Hopkins University and Aerodyne Research Inc., a company that creates software and sensors for environmental research, differs from traditional risk models by accounting for simultaneous exposures to multiple chemicals and their potential impacts on multiple parts of the body. Traditional regulatory approaches to analyzing health impacts from air pollution consider each chemical individually, rather than cumulatively. Limits are set based on the level of daily exposure to a chemical over a lifetime that is unlikely to cause harm. A chemical may harm different parts of the body at different concentrations, so this method uses the lowest harm-inducing concentration to begin regulation and then assumes other parts of the body won’t be affected, according to Keeve Nachman, study co-author and professor of environmental health and engineering at Johns Hopkins University. “If we were exposed to one chemical at a time, that would be totally logical, right?” Nachman told EHN. “But the reality is that we are not exposed to one chemical at a time.” The research team created an expanded method that would be able to better account for exposures to multiple chemicals by adding together their impacts to all parts of the body, not just the most sensitive. The research team collected air samples from a mobile air monitor over a three-week period from communities along the Delaware River near Philadelphia that experience pollution from petrochemical refineries, municipal waste incinerators, and other industrial facilities. Using this data, they conducted a non-cancer risk analysis for 32 volatile organic compounds, including formaldehyde, benzene, toluene, and xylenes (while some of these chemicals can cause cancer, analyzing cancer risk requires a different process).“If we use the traditional approach to risk assessment, we don't find an elevated risk of any health endpoint in this community, nothing,” Nachman said. “So the result of using that risk assessment for making decisions would mean no change needed. We wouldn't need to intervene at all.” But using their revised method, the researchers found increased risk of damage to the people’s brains, hearts, lungs, kidneys, and hormonal systems from the same level of air pollution exposure, which they say should prompt regulators to think differently about how industrial sites are permitted and regulated in communities across the country. Empowering polluted communitiesHeather McTeer Toney, former EPA Region 4 administrator and executive director of the environmental group Beyond Petrochemicals said this study confirms the experience of those who have been impacted by the petrochemical industry in Texas, Louisiana, and Appalachia for decades.“We are validating what they have been saying, and that in and of itself is hope because it allows us to identify the problem,” Toney said. “And for so long people have been in and living in these spaces where people didn’t believe them.The cumulative impact of these chemicals is “not only devastating, but generationally crushing,” Toney said. “[This discovery] should be a part of the decision-making process when we are thinking about what plant [to permit], where it’s going to go, and why we even need it in the first place.”In an effort to make their research accessible and replicable, the researchers created a public database of the risk assessments for the chemicals they analyzed and plan to develop a tool to share in the future. DeCarlo and Nachman noted that the study has a few limitations, including the fact that they may not have a full picture of chemicals existing in the atmosphere and cannot accurately account for additional health stressors like poverty, social issues, or preexisting health conditions.“While we think this paints a much more complete picture than the current way of looking at things, we still know that there's more things to add,” DeCarlo said. “There's more things to measure, and that would likely mean more health burden, but we're doing what we can with the data that we have right now.”With the data they have right now, the research team believes they can make a positive impact.“It’s a challenging time for cumulative risk research, people experiencing cumulative risk, [and] environmental injustices, but don’t lose hope,” Nachman said, reflecting on the Trump administration's efforts to roll back clean air protections, industry regulations, and public health research. “Because I am confident that what we are helping contribute to…is a better set of methodologies that will account for these things, and that when that window opens back up for making smart policy that actually protects fenceline communities, we’re going to be ready with ways to do it.”Editor’s note: The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Beyond Petrochemicals, and Environmental Health News receive funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies.

Health

Pollution

Waste

Wildfire Survivors Still Struggle With Basic Needs and Support

By I. Edwards HealthDay ReporterSATURDAY, April 19, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Three months after wildfires tore through Los Angeles, a new study...

SATURDAY, April 19, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Three months after wildfires tore through Los Angeles, a new study offers insight into the lasting needs of fire survivors. Researchers from UC Davis School of Medicine said their findings from earlier wildfires may help with support efforts in this and future disasters. They surveyed 2,208 households in the aftermath of a series of Northern California wildfires in 2017 and found that months later, 1,461 had major needs. The study identified four key areas in which survivors needed help: Physical needs: food, water, shelter, clothing, electricity, internet access, gas, money and cell phone service Clean air: including access to air filters and masks Health: access to care, including mental health care) Information access: wildfire status, where to obtain shelter or supplies, the location and well-being of loved ones and navigating insurance paperwork “Understanding the community needs and impacts that arise during and after wildfires is crucial to identifying the timing, extent and types of assistance that are most needed during response and recovery efforts,” Kathryn Conlon, an associate professor in the UC Davis Department of Public Health Sciences and senior author of the study, said in a news release.Physical needs were the most common, both right after the fires and months later. 1 in 2 households had these needs. Housing and financial help were among the most enduring problems. One in six households reported a health-related need months after the fires. More than 25% of respondents needed clean air or supplies like masks and filters immediately after the fires. People wanted updates during the fire but later had questions about environmental health. Mental health issues were especially common. Of the 177 households that mentioned health issues, most said they needed mental health support."Unaddressed mental health concerns can have a significant impact on a person’s health and well-being,” Conlon said in a news release. “Integrating support for mental health and health information should be part of any needs assessments during wildfires.”Conlon recommends tools like "psychological first aid" to help survivors process trauma in the immediate aftermath of a disaster. It emerged as an intervention in the early 2000s.“Respondents want to know the health impacts of urban wildfires and whether it is safe to return to the burn areas,” Conlon added. “When these fires burn, they are not just burning biomass. They are also burning everything in the home. And we don’t know all the health impacts. We still have so much to learn.”Study co-author Mira Miles noted how many survivors wanted to support their neighbors, showing a strong sense of community. “While this is a remarkable social phenomenon, it is important that we strive to meet community needs as best we can following a disaster,” she said.SOURCE: UC Davis Health, news release, April 9, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Health

Food

Water

Suggested Viewing

The Connection Between Bats and Coronavirus: Wildlife is not to blame

What exactly is the connection between bats and coronavirus? And how has sheltering-in-place disrupted field research in California and beyond? State and local governments have set restrictions on bat research and rescue in an effort to curtail the spread of the coronavirus. Dr. Winifred Frick, chief scientist of Bat Conservation International, describes how the new restrictions have affected conservation efforts.

Animals

Science

Health

Lead in the Land

Lead in the Land is a documentary focusing on the harsh reality and far-reaching effects of lead poisoning, an invisible and insidious threat afflicting thousands of children in the United States. The film sheds light on the circumstances around lead poisoning, examining its causes, effects and potential solutions.

Chemicals

Social Justice

Health

Red Bean

An individual who is suffering from the obsessive-compulsive disorder and forced to migrate to outer space, he misses his mother and homeland. However, the only response to his calling his mother is an endless busy tone.

Cosmos

Health

Culture

Unacceptable Risk: Dr. Margaret Kripke on Cancer and the Environment

Unacceptable Risk tells the story of a prominent cancer researcher who rethinks her assumptions about the causes of cancer and the true burden of environmentally-induced cancers.

Chemicals

Science

Health

Again, Together - The Cumulative Impact of Environmental Racism in Houston

"Again, Together" is a film created in partnership with Ronald L. Jones, bringing stories from communities across Houston that have been impacted by environmental racism — namely redlining, segregation, underinvestment, exposure to pollution, gentrification, inequitable disaster recovery resources and freeway development.

Social Justice

Pollution

Health

Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

GoGreenNation news

Access to Green Space May Help Reduce Kids' Screen Time

Related News

Biden let California get creative with Medicaid spending. Trump is signaling that may end

Chattanooga Just Became North America's First National Park City. Here's What That Means

Despite progress, Los Angeles is nation's smoggiest city for 25th time in 26 years

Regulators are underestimating health impacts from air pollution: Study

Wildfire Survivors Still Struggle With Basic Needs and Support

Suggested Viewing

The Connection Between Bats and Coronavirus: Wildlife is not to blame

Lead in the Land

Red Bean

Unacceptable Risk: Dr. Margaret Kripke on Cancer and the Environment

Again, Together - The Cumulative Impact of Environmental Racism in Houston

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

Access to Green Space May Help Reduce Kids' Screen Time

Related News

Biden let California get creative with Medicaid spending. Trump is signaling that may end

Chattanooga Just Became North America's First National Park City. Here's What That Means

Despite progress, Los Angeles is nation's smoggiest city for 25th time in 26 years

Regulators are underestimating health impacts from air pollution: Study

Wildfire Survivors Still Struggle With Basic Needs and Support

Suggested Viewing

The Connection Between Bats and Coronavirus: Wildlife is not to blame

Lead in the Land

Red Bean

Unacceptable Risk: Dr. Margaret Kripke on Cancer and the Environment

Again, Together - The Cumulative Impact of Environmental Racism in Houston

Join us to forgea sustainable future

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Join us to forge
a sustainable future