Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

What wildfire smoke means for your heath

News Feed
Wednesday, January 8, 2025

The fires burning across Los Angeles County have caused billowing dark plumes of smoke, posing a major health threat even as quick-moving flames blowtorched homes, schools and other buildings.As the fires continue to rage and air quality worsens, the risk of health problems escalate. That’s because wildfire smoke contains fine particulates, known as PM2.5, which are one-seventieth the width of a single human hair and can easily infiltrate the heart and lungs.While the fires are currently concentrated on the West Coast, the threat isn’t limited to that region. Residents around the country need to be cautious because wildfire smoke can travel, said Susan Anenberg, chair of environmental and occupational health department at George Washington University.“The smoke is not containable. The smoke goes where it goes,” Anenberg said.Here’s what you need to know about the health effects of wildfire smoke and how to protect yourself.What are the components of wildfire smoke?PM2.5 from wildfire smoke is an invisible, yet dangerous component of smoke and soot.Wildfire smoke is particularly harmful because it includes other hazardous chemicals produced from burning common household products such as electronics, plastics, aerosols and other items, Anenberg said. The mix of materials from homes, vehicles and buildings is enough to cause concerns about short- and long-term biological harm, she said.What are the health risks of smoke exposure?PM2.5 particulates are so small that they can be inhaled through your lungs and enter the bloodstream. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, PM2.5 “is the air pollutant of greatest concern to public health from wildfire smoke.”“Once [the particles are] in the bloodstream they can affect every organ of the body,” Anenberg said.And the harmful particles aren’t isolated to outdoor air: Both indoor and outdoor air can be affected by air pollution and can cause health damage.Exposure can trigger short-term respiratory problems such as coughing, wheezing, difficulty breathing and asthma exacerbation, according to the EPA. Breathing in smoke can also irritate your sinuses, throat and eyes, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Anenberg said black particles in your nose also indicate exposure.In more severe cases, exposure is linked to heart attacks and stroke, as well as lung cancer and damage to cognitive functions. There is also a growing body of research that links wildfire smoke to long-term neurological effects such as dementia and Alzheimer’s disease.“Whether or not those turn into some health outcome, some subset of people that have that exposure will experience effects and cardiovascular effects,” Anenberg said.Is it safe to breathe wildfire smoke? And in what quantities?The EPA strengthened its limits on fine particulate matter last February, lowering the annual soot standard to 9 micrograms per cubic meter of air, down 12 micrograms. The National Ambient Air Quality Standards still recommends 35 micrograms per cubic meter in a 24-hour period.But during wildfires and smoky conditions, concentrations tend to get higher than that. Anenberg said there can still be health effects at and below the EPA threshold.The Air Quality Index — a measure of outdoor air pollution — can also be a helpful tool in determining the safety of air. The index ranges from 0 to 500. Healthy or Code Green is considered below 50. Code Orange means that the AQI is between 101 and 150, meaning that sensitive groups may experience health effects but the general public is unlikely to be affected. Code Red, 151 to 200, means that the air is unhealthy for more members of the public. Code Purple, 201 to 300, means that everyone faces increased health effects. Code Maroon, 301 to 500, is considered hazardous for everyone and could trigger strong irritations and health effects for the general public.To Irva Hertz-Picciotto, director of the University of California Davis Environmental Health Sciences Center, the more particulate matter people breathe, the higher their risk for respiratory issues and other adverse health harms.“We know that the more particulate matter, the worse,” she said.How deadly is air pollution?PM2.5 smoke in general is associated with premature death, Anenberg said. “These fine particles are some of the worst offenders when it comes to global health risk factors,” she said.The World Health Organization states that indoor and outdoor air pollution is associated with 7 million premature deaths annually. Research published by the Lancet Planetary Health journal found that air pollution continues to be the world’s largest environmental health threat and accounted for 6.7 million premature deaths in 2019.Children, the elderly and those with preexisting conditions are most vulnerable to high levels of PM2.5, said Joel Kaufman, professor of environmental health and medicine at the University of Washington, and in some cases it can lead to death.What you can do to protect yourselfEveryone is vulnerable to the risks posed by wildfire smoke — even healthy people, according to the CDC.Here’s what experts suggest you do to keep yourself safe:Remove yourself from the threat. If you’re under an evacuation order and are able to evacuate, do it. Moving away from the flames could help reduce high levels of exposure. While you’re driving, put the air on the recirculate setting.Wear a mask. The type of mask matters. Because the particles from wildfire smoke are so fine, experts recommend wearing an N95 mask — ones that we are all familiar with from the pandemic — to block particles.Reduce your exposure. Close your windows and doors to protect the indoor environment. You can try to filter the particles before they enter your home by using an air filter or a heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) system with good-quality air filters. A portable air purifier can also help. “You want to be trying to remove the particles from the outdoor air before it gets into the indoor environment or remove it from the air once it’s within the indoor environment,” Anenberg said.Be aware of your local air quality. There are numerous apps and websites that provide real-time data on air quality.Allyson Chiu contributed to this report.

As fires rage in the Los Angeles area, the health risks from air pollution mount. Here’s what to know.

The fires burning across Los Angeles County have caused billowing dark plumes of smoke, posing a major health threat even as quick-moving flames blowtorched homes, schools and other buildings.

As the fires continue to rage and air quality worsens, the risk of health problems escalate. That’s because wildfire smoke contains fine particulates, known as PM2.5, which are one-seventieth the width of a single human hair and can easily infiltrate the heart and lungs.

While the fires are currently concentrated on the West Coast, the threat isn’t limited to that region. Residents around the country need to be cautious because wildfire smoke can travel, said Susan Anenberg, chair of environmental and occupational health department at George Washington University.

“The smoke is not containable. The smoke goes where it goes,” Anenberg said.

Here’s what you need to know about the health effects of wildfire smoke and how to protect yourself.

What are the components of wildfire smoke?

PM2.5 from wildfire smoke is an invisible, yet dangerous component of smoke and soot.

Wildfire smoke is particularly harmful because it includes other hazardous chemicals produced from burning common household products such as electronics, plastics, aerosols and other items, Anenberg said. The mix of materials from homes, vehicles and buildings is enough to cause concerns about short- and long-term biological harm, she said.

What are the health risks of smoke exposure?

PM2.5 particulates are so small that they can be inhaled through your lungs and enter the bloodstream. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, PM2.5 “is the air pollutant of greatest concern to public health from wildfire smoke.”

“Once [the particles are] in the bloodstream they can affect every organ of the body,” Anenberg said.

And the harmful particles aren’t isolated to outdoor air: Both indoor and outdoor air can be affected by air pollution and can cause health damage.

Exposure can trigger short-term respiratory problems such as coughing, wheezing, difficulty breathing and asthma exacerbation, according to the EPA. Breathing in smoke can also irritate your sinuses, throat and eyes, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Anenberg said black particles in your nose also indicate exposure.

In more severe cases, exposure is linked to heart attacks and stroke, as well as lung cancer and damage to cognitive functions. There is also a growing body of research that links wildfire smoke to long-term neurological effects such as dementia and Alzheimer’s disease.

“Whether or not those turn into some health outcome, some subset of people that have that exposure will experience effects and cardiovascular effects,” Anenberg said.

Is it safe to breathe wildfire smoke? And in what quantities?

The EPA strengthened its limits on fine particulate matter last February, lowering the annual soot standard to 9 micrograms per cubic meter of air, down 12 micrograms. The National Ambient Air Quality Standards still recommends 35 micrograms per cubic meter in a 24-hour period.

But during wildfires and smoky conditions, concentrations tend to get higher than that. Anenberg said there can still be health effects at and below the EPA threshold.

The Air Quality Index — a measure of outdoor air pollution — can also be a helpful tool in determining the safety of air. The index ranges from 0 to 500. Healthy or Code Green is considered below 50. Code Orange means that the AQI is between 101 and 150, meaning that sensitive groups may experience health effects but the general public is unlikely to be affected. Code Red, 151 to 200, means that the air is unhealthy for more members of the public. Code Purple, 201 to 300, means that everyone faces increased health effects. Code Maroon, 301 to 500, is considered hazardous for everyone and could trigger strong irritations and health effects for the general public.

To Irva Hertz-Picciotto, director of the University of California Davis Environmental Health Sciences Center, the more particulate matter people breathe, the higher their risk for respiratory issues and other adverse health harms.

“We know that the more particulate matter, the worse,” she said.

How deadly is air pollution?

PM2.5 smoke in general is associated with premature death, Anenberg said. “These fine particles are some of the worst offenders when it comes to global health risk factors,” she said.

The World Health Organization states that indoor and outdoor air pollution is associated with 7 million premature deaths annually. Research published by the Lancet Planetary Health journal found that air pollution continues to be the world’s largest environmental health threat and accounted for 6.7 million premature deaths in 2019.

Children, the elderly and those with preexisting conditions are most vulnerable to high levels of PM2.5, said Joel Kaufman, professor of environmental health and medicine at the University of Washington, and in some cases it can lead to death.

What you can do to protect yourself

Everyone is vulnerable to the risks posed by wildfire smoke — even healthy people, according to the CDC.

Here’s what experts suggest you do to keep yourself safe:

  • Remove yourself from the threat. If you’re under an evacuation order and are able to evacuate, do it. Moving away from the flames could help reduce high levels of exposure. While you’re driving, put the air on the recirculate setting.
  • Wear a mask. The type of mask matters. Because the particles from wildfire smoke are so fine, experts recommend wearing an N95 mask — ones that we are all familiar with from the pandemic — to block particles.
  • Reduce your exposure. Close your windows and doors to protect the indoor environment. You can try to filter the particles before they enter your home by using an air filter or a heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) system with good-quality air filters. A portable air purifier can also help. “You want to be trying to remove the particles from the outdoor air before it gets into the indoor environment or remove it from the air once it’s within the indoor environment,” Anenberg said.
  • Be aware of your local air quality. There are numerous apps and websites that provide real-time data on air quality.

Allyson Chiu contributed to this report.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Under Current Guidelines, Most Lung Cancer Patients Weren't Eligible for Cancer Screening

By Ernie Mundell HealthDay ReporterMONDAY, Nov. 24, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Under current screening guidelines, almost two-thirds of Americans with...

By Ernie Mundell HealthDay ReporterMONDAY, Nov. 24, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Under current screening guidelines, almost two-thirds of Americans with lung cancer would not have qualified for the CT chest scans that could have spotted tumors early and extended their lives, new research shows. The finding hits home for 38-year-old Carla Tapia, a mother of three from Beltsville, Maryland. She smoked a bit in her youth but had kicked the habit by 18. Nevertheless, Tapia first developed respiratory symptoms in 2018, and was diagnosed with inoperable stage 4 lung cancer in 2020. After numerous chemotherapies failed, Tapia received a life-saving double-lung transplant at Northwestern Medicine in Chicago in 2024. She’s now attending college back at home in Maryland.According to Tapia, it's an ordeal timely screening might have prevented.“I keep hearing stories about young people being diagnosed with lung cancer, and if we could expand the screening guidelines, I believe more lung cancers could be caught at earlier stages, and more lives would be saved,” she said in a Northwestern Medicine news release.Current guidelines from the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) advise annual CT chest scans for adults ages 50 to 80 who have a 20 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. According to study senior author Dr. Ankit Bharat, those eligibility guidelines are too restrictive and miss many people still at risk for the leading cancer killer.“We moved to universal age-based screening for breast and colon cancer with tremendous success, and we need to move to the same approach for lung cancer,” Bharat said in a Northwestern news release. “Chest screening offers something unique — with one low-dose scan, we can assess lungs, heart and bones comprehensively. This baseline scan becomes invaluable for monitoring their health over time,” said Bharat. He is chief of thoracic surgery and executive director of the Northwestern Medicine Canning Thoracic Institute.Lung cancer can strike anyone, including people who only smoked a short amount of time and even never-smokers. And, as happened in Tapia’s case, nearly 80% of the time lung cancers are first diagnosed in an advanced stage. The new study was published Nov. 20 in JAMA Network Open. It tracked nearly 1,000 consecutive patients whose lung cancers were treated at Northwestern Medicine.Based on their history of smoking (including never-smokers), Bharat’s group estimated that only 35% would have been eligible under USPSTF guidelines to be referred to annual lung CT scanning. Women and never-smokers made up a significant number of those who would have been excluded from eligibility for screening, the researchers said.They believe that moving to a universal screening approach — recommending lung screens for everyone ages 40 to 85 — could spot more tumors early, boost the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer care, and help level the playing field for disadvantaged Americans. According to the researchers, a typical lung CT scan takes less than 10 seconds and doesn’t require any intravenous imaging dyes. Bharat notes that the leftover effects of the COVID-19 pandemic could mean heightened risks of other lung illnesses among relatively young Americans."Nearly six years after the pandemic's start, we're seeing increasing numbers of patients with lung scarring and fibrosis from COVID-19, especially those who get reinfected with respiratory viruses," he said. “The damage compounds with each infection. Early detection through comprehensive screening can help us intervene before these conditions progress to requiring [lung] transplantation.”Northwestern’s Lung Health Center created a list of patient types who might want to consider lung screening:COVID-19 survivors who are having ongoing respiratory issues People exposed to contaminants such as wildfire smoke, industrial pollution or high radon levels People with family histories of lung disease or pulmonary fibrosis Those exposed to secondhand smoke, vaping or marijuana use Asian women and other demographics at elevated risk for lung conditions Anyone seeking baseline chest health assessment “We're seeing younger patients with respiratory problems from vaping, environmental exposures and COVID-19 who would never qualify for traditional screening,” said study co-author Dr. Scott Budinger, chief of pulmonary and critical care at the Canning Thoracic Institute.A more inclusive approach to screening “allows us to catch interstitial lung disease, pulmonary fibrosis, lung cancer and other conditions years before they'd typically be diagnosed,” he said in the news release.SOURCE: Northwestern Medicine, news release, Nov. 20., 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

New Flu Variant Could Bring Another Severe U.S. Season

By I. Edwards HealthDay ReporterTHURSDAY, Nov. 20, 2025 (HealthDay News) — A new flu variant spreading overseas may set the stage for another tough...

THURSDAY, Nov. 20, 2025 (HealthDay News) — A new flu variant spreading overseas may set the stage for another tough winter in the United States, experts warn.The strain, called subclade K, has caused a rise in flu cases in the United Kingdom, Canada and Japan. And now signs suggest it is beginning to take hold across the United States as flu activity rises.According to the latest U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) FluView report, reported flu activity in the United States remains low but is climbing quickly.Last year’s flu season was the worst the United States had seen in nearly 15 years and led to at least 280 child deaths, according to the CDC.Most cases this year are from the H3N2 virus and about half of those belong to the subclade K variant, the same strain that fueled a difficult flu season in the Southern Hemisphere.Because it wasn’t circulating widely when strains were selected for the vaccine update, this year’s flu shot targets close strains of the virus."It’s not like we’re expecting to get complete loss of protection for the vaccine, but perhaps we might expect a little bit of a drop-off if this is the virus that sort of dominates the season, and early indications are that’s probably going to be the case," Richard Webby, a researcher at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, told CNN.Early findings from the UK Health Security Agency suggest the variant carries seven genetic changes on a major part of the virus, making it a bit harder for the body's immune system to recognize.Even so, they found that the flu shot has reduced the risk of hospitalization or emergency care by about 75% in children and 30% to 40% in adults so far this season.What worries experts even more is that fewer Americans appear to be getting the flu shot.Data from IQVIA shows that pharmacies gave 26.5 million flu vaccinations from August through October, down from 28.7 million during the same period last year."I’m not surprised," Jennifer Nuzzo, professor of epidemiology and director of the Pandemic Center at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, said.She said recent debates about vaccine safety have "left people confused but possibly at the worst have left people worried about getting vaccinated."Australia’s flu shot rates also fell this year and the country went on to record more than 443,000 cases."What they saw in Australia is that they had a bad season. And so it’s concerning for you and us, what’s coming," Dr. Earl Rubin, division director of infectious disease at Montreal Children’s Hospital, told CNN.Several early indicators already show flu levels rising in the U.S.The WastewaterSCAN network found type A flu in 40% of samples in November, up from 18% in October, according to Marlene Wolfe, an assistant professor in the department of environmental health at Emory University in Atlanta.Only four U.S. monitoring sites in Maine, Vermont, Iowa and Hawaii have officially crossed the threshold for declaring flu activity high, but experts say the trend is clear.While it’s not yet clear whether subclade K could cause more severe illness, a rise in infections alone could cause hospitalizations to skyrocket, Rubin noted."It’s not too late. Go and get your flu shot," Dr. Adam Lauring, chief of the division of infectious diseases at the University of Michigan Medical School, in Ann Arbor, said.These results are preliminary and have not yet been peer-reviewed.The Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) has more on the flu vaccine.SOURCE: CNN, Nov. 18, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Thousands of US Hazardous Sites Are at Risk of Flooding Because of Sea Level Rise, Study Finds

A new study finds that thousands of hazardous sites across the U.S. are at risk of flooding due to sea level rise that could pose public health threats to neighboring communities

If heat-trapping pollution from burning coal, oil and gas continues unchecked, thousands of hazardous sites across the United States risk being flooded from sea level rise by the turn of the century, posing serious health risks to nearby communities, according to a new study.Researchers identified 5,500 sites that store, emit or handle sewage, trash, oil, gas and other hazards that could face coastal flooding by 2100, with much of the risk already locked in due to past emissions. But more than half the sites are projected to face flood risk much sooner — as soon as 2050. Low-income, communities of color and other marginalized groups are the most at risk.With even moderate reductions to planet-warming emissions, researchers also determined that roughly 300 fewer sites would be at risk by the end of the century. “Our goal with this analysis was to try to get ahead of the problem by looking far out into the future," said Lara J. Cushing, associate professor in the Department of Environmental Health Sciences at the University of California, Los Angeles who co-authored the paper published in the science journal Nature Communications.“We do have time to respond and try to mitigate the risks and also increase resilience," she added, speaking at a media briefing Wednesday ahead of the study's release. The study was funded by the Environmental Protection Agency and builds on previous research from California. Climate change is driving and accelerating sea level rise. Glaciers and ice sheets are melting, and the sea's waters are expanding as they warm. In many places along the coastal U.S., sea level rise is accelerating faster than the global average because of things like erosion and land sinking from groundwater pumping, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Thomas Chandler, managing director at the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University who was not involved in the research, said it’s “a really important study” that the public, policy makers and government agencies “need to make note of.” Derek Van Berkel, an associate professor in the school for environment and sustainability at University of Michigan who was also not involved in the study, wasn't surprised to learn about the disproportionate risks. What was “alarming” was considering the magnitude of “feedback effects” from flooding, he said. How researchers approached the data The study's researchers started by identifying and classifying tens of thousands of hazardous sites near the coasts of Puerto Rico and the 23 states with coastline. Next, they wanted to know each site's projected future flood risk. They did this by calculating how likely each year coastal flooding could inundate a site using historical sea level measurements and projected sea level rise in 2050 and 2100 under low and high emissions scenarios. Lastly, they identified and classified communities as being at-risk if homes are located within 1 kilometer (0.62 miles) of a hazardous site with a high threat of future flooding, and compared those communities' characteristics with other coastal neighborhoods with no at-risk sites nearby. But researchers did not include all types of hazardous facilities, such as oil and gas pipelines, nor did they account for groundwater upwelling or more intense and frequent storms in the future, which could lead to underestimates. On the other end, the flood-risk model they used could have overestimated the number of threatened sites. “It is important to note that previous disasters, such as hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Harvey, did result in a lot of toxic contamination from oil and gas pipelines,” Chandler said. The 5,500 at-risk sites includes 44% that are fossil fuel ports and terminals, 30% power plants, 24% refineries and 22% coastal sewage treatment facilities. Most of the sites — nearly 80% — are in Louisiana, Florida, New Jersey, Texas, California, New York and Massachusetts. Potential health impacts from exposure to hazards People exposed to flood waters near industrial animal farms or sewage treatment plants could be exposed to bacteria like E. coli, said Sacoby Wilson, professor of global, environmental and occupational health at the University of Maryland during the briefing. Symptoms can include bloody or watery diarrhea, severe stomach cramps or vomiting and fever. Those living near industrial sites like refineries could be exposed to heavy metals and chemicals that can cause rashes, burning of the eyes, nose and throat, headaches or fatigue, added Wilson, who was not involved in the study. “For folks who are vulnerable, maybe have an underlying health condition, those health conditions could be exacerbated during those flood events.” Longer term, some of these exposures could contribute to cancer, liver, kidney or other organ damage, or have reproductive effects, he said. For Chandler, the Columbia University director, the study highlights the need to heavily invest in hazard mitigation. “It's really important for federal, state and local governments in the United States to address these factors through multi-stakeholder resilience planning and encouraging local governments to integrate climate risk assessments into their mitigation strategies.”The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Nov. 2025

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

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

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.