Environmental Health -
Biodiversity and human health: mechanisms and evidence of the positive health effects of diversity in nature and green spaces
AbstractIntroduction. Natural environments and green spaces provide ecosystem services that enhance human health and well-being. They improve mental health
Human Health and Ocean Pollution
Background: Pollution – unwanted waste released to air, water, and land by human activity – is the largest environmental cause of disease in the world today. It is responsible for an estimated nine million premature deaths per year, enormous economic losses, erosion of human capital, and degradation of ecosystems. Ocean pollution is an important, but insufficiently recognized and inadequately controlled component of global pollution. It poses serious threats to human health and well-being. The nature and magnitude of these impacts are only beginning to be understood.Goals: (1) Broadly examine the known and potential impacts of ocean pollution on human health. (2) Inform policy makers, government leaders, international organizations, civil society, and the global public of these threats. (3) Propose priorities for interventions to control and prevent pollution of the seas and safeguard human health.Methods: Topic-focused reviews that examine the effects of ocean pollution on human health, identify gaps in knowledge, project future trends, and offer evidence-based guidance for effective intervention.Environmental Findings: Pollution of the oceans is widespread, worsening, and in most countries poorly controlled. It is a complex mixture of toxic metals, plastics, manufactured chemicals, petroleum, urban and industrial wastes, pesticides, fertilizers, pharmaceutical chemicals, agricultural runoff, and sewage. More than 80% arises from land-based sources. It reaches the oceans through rivers, runoff, atmospheric deposition and direct discharges. It is often heaviest near the coasts and most highly concentrated along the coasts of low- and middle-income countries. Plastic is a rapidly increasing and highly visible component of ocean pollution, and an estimated 10 million metric tons of plastic waste enter the seas each year. Mercury is the metal pollutant of greatest concern in the oceans; it is released from two main sources – coal combustion and small-scale gold mining. Global spread of industrialized agriculture with increasing use of chemical fertilizer leads to extension of Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) to previously unaffected regions. Chemical pollutants are ubiquitous and contaminate seas and marine organisms from the high Arctic to the abyssal depths.Ecosystem Findings: Ocean pollution has multiple negative impacts on marine ecosystems, and these impacts are exacerbated by global climate change. Petroleum-based pollutants reduce photosynthesis in marine microorganisms that generate oxygen. Increasing absorption of carbon dioxide into the seas causes ocean acidification, which destroys coral reefs, impairs shellfish development, dissolves calcium-containing microorganisms at the base of the marine food web, and increases the toxicity of some pollutants. Plastic pollution threatens marine mammals, fish, and seabirds and accumulates in large mid-ocean gyres. It breaks down into microplastic and nanoplastic particles containing multiple manufactured chemicals that can enter the tissues of marine organisms, including species consumed by humans. Industrial releases, runoff, and sewage increase frequency and severity of HABs, bacterial pollution, and anti-microbial resistance. Pollution and sea surface warming are triggering poleward migration of dangerous pathogens such as the Vibrio species. Industrial discharges, pharmaceutical wastes, pesticides, and sewage contribute to global declines in fish stocks.Human Health Findings: Methylmercury and PCBs are the ocean pollutants whose human health effects are best understood. Exposures of infants in utero to these pollutants through maternal consumption of contaminated seafood can damage developing brains, reduce IQ and increase children’s risks for autism, ADHD and learning disorders. Adult exposures to methylmercury increase risks for cardiovascular disease and dementia. Manufactured chemicals – phthalates, bisphenol A, flame retardants, and perfluorinated chemicals, many of them released into the seas from plastic waste – can disrupt endocrine signaling, reduce male fertility, damage the nervous system, and increase risk of cancer. HABs produce potent toxins that accumulate in fish and shellfish. When ingested, these toxins can cause severe neurological impairment and rapid death. HAB toxins can also become airborne and cause respiratory disease. Pathogenic marine bacteria cause gastrointestinal diseases and deep wound infections. With climate change and increasing pollution, risk is high that Vibrio infections, including cholera, will increase in frequency and extend to new areas. All of the health impacts of ocean pollution fall disproportionately on vulnerable populations in the Global South – environmental injustice on a planetary scale.Conclusions: Ocean pollution is a global problem. It arises from multiple sources and crosses national boundaries. It is the consequence of reckless, shortsighted, and unsustainable exploitation of the earth’s resources. It endangers marine ecosystems. It impedes the production of atmospheric oxygen. Its threats to human health are great and growing, but still incompletely understood. Its economic costs are only beginning to be counted.Ocean pollution can be prevented. Like all forms of pollution, ocean pollution can be controlled by deploying data-driven strategies based on law, policy, technology, and enforcement that target priority pollution sources. Many countries have used these tools to control air and water pollution and are now applying them to ocean pollution. Successes achieved to date demonstrate that broader control is feasible. Heavily polluted harbors have been cleaned, estuaries rejuvenated, and coral reefs restored.Prevention of ocean pollution creates many benefits. It boosts economies, increases tourism, helps restore fisheries, and improves human health and well-being. It advances the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). These benefits will last for centuries.Recommendations: World leaders who recognize the gravity of ocean pollution, acknowledge its growing dangers, engage civil society and the global public, and take bold, evidence-based action to stop pollution at source will be critical to preventing ocean pollution and safeguarding human health.Prevention of pollution from land-based sources is key. Eliminating coal combustion and banning all uses of mercury will reduce mercury pollution. Bans on single-use plastic and better management of plastic waste reduce plastic pollution. Bans on persistent organic pollutants (POPs) have reduced pollution by PCBs and DDT. Control of industrial discharges, treatment of sewage, and reduced applications of fertilizers have mitigated coastal pollution and are reducing frequency of HABs. National, regional and international marine pollution control programs that are adequately funded and backed by strong enforcement have been shown to be effective. Robust monitoring is essential to track progress.Further interventions that hold great promise include wide-scale transition to renewable fuels; transition to a circular economy that creates little waste and focuses on equity rather than on endless growth; embracing the principles of green chemistry; and building scientific capacity in all countries.Designation of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) will safeguard critical ecosystems, protect vulnerable fish stocks, and enhance human health and well-being. Creation of MPAs is an important manifestation of national and international commitment to protecting the health of the seas.
Safeguarding human health in the Anthropocene epoch: report of The Rockefeller Foundation–Lancet Commission on planetary health
Far-reaching changes to the structure and function of the Earth's natural systems represent a growing threat to human health. And yet, global health has mainly improved as these changes have gathered pace. What is the explanation? As a Commission, we are deeply concerned that the explanation is straightforward and sobering: we have been mortgaging the health of future generations to realise economic and development gains in the present. By unsustainably exploiting nature's resources, human civilisation has flourished but now risks substantial health effects from the degradation of nature's life support systems in the future.
Delayed discovery, dissemination, and decisions on intervention in environmental health: a case study on immunotoxicity of perfluorinated alkylate substances
Identification and characterization of environmental hazards that impact human health must rely on the best possible science to inform and inspire appropriate public health intervention. The perfluorinated alkylate substances (PFASs) are persistent emerging pollutants that are now being recognized as important human health hazards. Although the PFASs have been produced for over 60 years, academic research on environmental health aspects has appeared only in the most recent 10 years or so. In the meantime, these persistent chemicals accumulated in the global environment. Some early studies e.g., on population exposures and toxicity, were not released to the public until after year 2000. Still, the first PFAS risk assessments ignored these reports and relied on scant journal publications. The first guidelines and legal limits for PFAS exposure, e.g., from drinking water, were proposed 10 years ago. They have decreased substantially since then, but remain higher than suggested by data on human adverse effects, especially on the immune system, that occur at background exposure levels. By now, the best-known PFASs are being phased out, and related PFASs are being introduced as substitutes. Given the substantial delays in discovery of PFAS toxicity, in dissemination of findings, and in regulatory decisions, PFAS substitutes and other persistent industrial chemicals should be subjected to prior scrutiny before widespread usage.
Environmental epidemiology in a crossfire
Two tendencies have emerged in environmental epidemiology that hamper the translation of research findings into prevention of environmental hazards. One is the increased focus on highlighting weaknesses of epidemiology research that is clearly meant to explain away the research conclusions and weaken their possible implications for interventions to control environmental hazards. Another is the voluminous amount of information sharing that involves a substantial amount of misinformation, as part of the ongoing infodemic. In this light, the appearance of the catalogue of doubt-raising strategies, indeed the worst practices of scientific inference, is good news. Collected under the auspices of the International Network for Epidemiology in Policy, it serves to illustrate the range of possible (and impossible) forms of critique that may be raised on behalf of vested interests or other groups who for some reason disagree with the epidemiological conclusions. We believe that this systematic list will be useful in our field and help to identify critiques of policy options that are hidden and sometimes suppressed in weighing the epidemiological evidence.
Emerging contaminants: A One Health perspective
Environmental pollution is escalating due to rapid global development that often prioritizes human needs over planetary health. Despite global efforts to mitigate legacy pollutants, the continuous introduction of new substances remains a major threat to both people and the planet. In response, global initiatives are focusing on risk assessment and regulation of emerging contaminants, as demonstrated by the ongoing efforts to establish the UN’s Intergovernmental Science-Policy Panel on Chemicals, Waste, and Pollution Prevention.
Emerging questions in exposure, regulation, and remediation of PFAS
My research is highly interdisciplinary and includes exposure and risk analysis. Many of our colleagues have diverse backgrounds and work together to address the interdisciplinary challenges associated with PFAS contamination …I think one of the largest gaps right now is understanding the importance of different exposure pathways for the general population.Given the tremendous physical and mental toll affected communities have experienced due to their exposure to PFAS, there is an unusually strong connection between citizens and scientists, and I hope that bond will strengthen over time.
Anthropic Risk Report: August 2026
I am grateful that Anthropic is producing periodic Risk Reports.
Characteristics of ‘early adopters’ of water treatment capacity needed to remove PFAS and other emerging contaminants in the United States
Larger CWS were 7–8 times more likely than smaller systems to adopt advanced treatment processes over 2004–2022. , Past work shows exposures to drinking water contaminants can differ among regions with varying sociodemographic composition, in part due to disparities in siting of pollution sources. Drinking water treatment by reverse osmosis, ion exchange, or activated carbon has been recommended by United States (US) regulatory agencies for community water systems (CWS) with elevated concentrations of emerging chemical toxicants such as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). However, barriers faced by CWS in implementing such technologies are not well understood. Here we used a national scale ( n = 36 611 CWS) Kaplan–Meier “survival” analysis, as well as adjusted piecewise logistic regression models, to retrospectively examine characteristics of CWS that were “early adopters” of these treatment technologies between 2004–2022. Results showed the largest CWS serving >100 000 customers adopted the treatment technologies considered here 7–8 times faster than small and very small CWS serving <3300 customers from 2004–2022. Nationally and for a case study of CWS with elevated PFAS concentrations, the odds of CWS adopting the treatment technologies considered in this study between 2004–2022 were significantly lower (10–25%) for each 10% higher proportion of non-Hispanic Black residents. Results were generally consistent when focusing on CWS with prior MCL violations and in CWS across different US regions , system sizes, and source water types. The proportion of American Indian and Alaskan Native residents was also inversely associated with adoption of the treatment technologies for certain groups of CWS. These results suggest managerial and financial barriers to removal of high levels of emerging contaminants in drinking water may be most pronounced for some small CWS and those serving selected historically marginalized communities.
Toxins and Health Impacts: Health Effects of 9/11 - WTC Health Program
This online exhibition, developed by the World Trade Center (WTC) Health Program in partnership with the David J. Sencer CDC Museum, examines the ongoing health effects linked to 9/11 exposures and the emergence of WTC-related health conditions. It also explores the events and advocacy that established the WTC Health Program and research achievements that have led to improvements in medical treatment and knowledge.
Improving and Expanding Estimates of the Global Burden of Disease Due to Environmental Health Risk Factors
Abstract Background: The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study, coordinated by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), produces influential, data-driven estimates of the burden of disease and premature death due to major risk factors. Expanded quantification of disease due to environmental health (EH) risk factors, including climate change, will enhance accuracy of GBD estimates, which will contribute to developing cost-effective policies that promote prevention and achieving Sustainable Development Goals. Objectives: We review key aspects of the GBD for the EH community and introduce the Global Burden of Disease–Pollution and Health Initiative (GBD-PHI), which aims to work with IHME and the GBD study to improve estimates of disease burden attributable to EH risk factors and to develop an innovative approach to estimating climate-related disease burden—both current and projected. Methods: We discuss strategies for improving GBD quantification of specific EH risk factors, including air pollution, lead, and climate change. We highlight key methodological challenges, including new EH risk factors, notably evidence rating and global exposure assessment. Discussion: A number of issues present challenges to the scope and accuracy of current GBD estimates for EH risk factors. For air pollution, minimal data exist on the exposure–risk relationships associated with high levels of pollution; epidemiological studies in high pollution regions should be a research priority. For lead, the GBD’s current methods do not fully account for lead’s impact on neurodevelopment; innovative methods to account for subclinical effects are needed. Decisions on inclusion of additional EH risk–outcome pairs need to be guided by findings of systematic reviews, the size of exposed populations, feasibility of global exposure estimates, and predicted trends in exposures and diseases. Neurotoxicants, endocrine-disrupting chemicals, and climate-related factors should be high priorities for incorporation into upcoming iterations of the GBD study. Enhancing the scope and methods will improve the GBD’s estimates and better guide prevention policy. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP5496
Combining Social Science and Environmental Health Research for Community Engagement
Social science-environmental health (SS-EH) research takes many structural forms and contributes to a wide variety of topical areas. In this article we discuss the general nature of SS-EH contributions and offer a new typology of SS-EH practice that situates this type of research in a larger transdisciplinary sensibility: (1) environmental health science influenced by social science; (2) social science studies of environmental health; and (3) social science-environmental health collaborations. We describe examples from our own and others’ work and we discuss the central role that research centers, training programs, and conferences play in furthering SS-EH research. We argue that the third form of SS-EH research, SS-EH collaborations, offers the greatest potential for improving public and environmental health, though such collaborations come with important challenges and demand constant reflexivity on the part of researchers.
The “Anthropocene”
Human activities are exerting increasing impacts on the environment on all scales, in many ways outcompeting natural processes. This includes the manufacturing of hazardous chemical compounds which are not produced by nature, such as for instance the...
Press Releases | Congressman Jerry Nadler
Rep. Nadler charged that the EPA has abrogated its responsibility to protect public health by proclaiming lower Manhattan “safe” without comprehensive data to support that statement. And the Congressman revealed that the EPA had its own office building at 290 Broadway extensively tested and properly cleaned, in stark contrast to EPA directives which told Manhattan residents to follow NYC Department of Health (NYCDOH) guidelines that advise cleaning with “wet rags.” The Congressman stated that these guidelines may be in violation of the federal law that EPA is responsible for overseeing. As a result of these findings, the Congressman made a number of immediate demands of the EPA and called for the continued, unfettered and independent investigation by the EPA National Ombudsman and for Congressional Hearings. EPA Region II officials have claimed in multiple public statements that they have no responsibility for indoor testing and cleaning of residences in lower Manhattan. In a November 20th New York Daily News article, Region II Counsel Walter Mugdan said, “They [the federal regulations] were never contemplated to apply to someone cleaning an apartment.” Another spokesperson for Region II, said in a recent St. Louis Post-Dispatch article, “That’s not our job and we have no policies or procedures for doing that type of testing.” She also stated, “We are not a health agency.” However, today Congressman Nadler said that he had spoken with EPA officials who dispute the accuracy of those statements. The EPA National Ombudsman, Robert Martin, confirmed that the agency is, in fact, currently doing indoor testing and removal of hazardous materials in Herculaneum, Missouri, and has also done so in McFarland, California, and Kellog, Idaho. “The EPA has failed to uphold its own mission – ‘to protect human health and to safeguard the natural environment – air, water and land – upon which life depends.’ It is absurd that the EPA has claimed publicly that it doesn’t have the legal authority to do necessary environmental tests and remediation in response to the World Trade Center attacks when it has clearly done residential work throughout the country,” said Congressman Nadler. “Why is New York being treated differently?” “And given that the EPA has not tested inside people’s homes, despite my repeated requests for it to do so, I find it deeply troubling that Administrator Whitman said she was ‘glad to reassure the people of New York. . .that their air is safe to breathe, and their water is safe to drink.’ She clearly did not have comprehensive data to support that claim either way,” he added. Congressman Nadler also revealed today that the Federal buildings at 290 Broadway and 26 Federal Plaza were tested inside and outside for high levels of hazardous materials and, when some were found, the areas were cleaned (HEPA vacuumed) by properly trained personnel. Some sources have also indicated that even greater cleanup measures were taken. However, even when the EPA received test results from a study commissioned by the Task Force that indicated serious levels of asbestos and other materials inside downtown apartments, the EPA continued to guide residents to the NYC Department of Health (NYCDOH) for direction. The NYCDOH directed residents who are the same distance away from Ground Zero as the Federal buildings, to clean asbestos-laden dust “with wet rags and mops” or “wet brooms.” "We must ask why is what the EPA says is good enough for New York residents not good enough for the EPA itself? Either the cleanup measures taken at the EPA office were necessary to protect its workers or the EPA wasted tax-payer dollars on an unnecessary cleanup,” stated Congressman Nadler. Moreover, the Congressman argued, that by delegating authority to the more lenient City standard, the EPA may have violated the law, as the agency is compelled to ensure that such City standards are at least as stringent as Federal law. “Today, I have leveled some serious charges at the EPA because I believe I have the moral responsibility to do so. However, I want to make perfectly clear that we still do not know the extent of the presence of hazardous materials in some areas downtown. It may or may not be dangerous in some indoor areas of lower Manhattan. I believe that given that we don’t have all of the facts, we cannot conclude anything. I do know that we must get the proper facts and act swiftly and appropriately to get the job done right,” said Rep. Nadler. CALLS FOR ACTION Rep. Nadler and the Ground Zero Elected Officials Task Force called for four actions by the EPA: 1) Expedited testing of lower Manhattan residences and workspaces for hazardous materials levels. If shown to be necessary by test results, the proper cleaning of such indoor spaces by the EPA or appropriate government agency or its designated contractors. Such a testing and cleanup effort must be coordinated by a single agency utilizing the strictest Federal guidelines. 2) The full, independent and unfettered investigation by the EPA National Ombudsman into EPA’s response to the September 11th attacks in New York. 3) The release of all documents detailing the justification of the cleanup of 290 Broadway and 26 Federal Plaza, how that cleanup was conducted, by whom, and at whose expense; 4) An immediate explanation from EPA of why it didn’t utilize or enforce strict, Federal guidelines regarding hazardous testing and cleanup downtown, in favor of more lenient City standards. In addition, Congressman Nadler called for immediate Congressional hearings into all of these matters. Rep. Nadler has served in Congress since 1992. He represents the 8th Congressional District of New York, which includes parts of Manhattan and Brooklyn, including the area surrounding 'Ground Zero.' He is the Chair of the Ground Zero Elected Officials Task Force.
We Need More Research on how CO2 Affects Cognition
A growing body of research indicates there are potentially large health benefits to improving indoor air quality.
Sasha Luccioni, PhD 🦋🌎✨🤗 on Twitter / X
Man, this preprint is really the gift that keeps on giving.In case people missed my previous PSA : you can't compare the carbon emissions of people and objects. Humans are more than just the work that they do. (Also, that paper makes a lot of false assumptions in general) https://t.co/bZA414J9YI— Sasha Luccioni, PhD 🦋🌎✨🤗 (@SashaMTL) September 19, 2023