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.

Understanding Lupus: Symptoms, Risks and New Advances in Treatment

News Feed
Tuesday, September 23, 2025

TUESDAY, Sept. 23, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), often simply called lupus, is a chronic autoimmune disease in which the body's immune system malfunctions and mistakenly attacks its own healthy tissues and organs.Lupus can involve almost every organ system, but it most commonly affects the skin, kidneys, joints and the linings of the heart and lungs. Types of lupusLupus can affect almost every organ system. Some patients only have skin disease, and this can be an intermittent rash that often flares during the summer months, as lupus is very sensitive to the rays of the sun. The rash of lupus can look like a sunburn on the face and upper chest, but can also be a deep, scarring rash (discoid lupus). The rash of discoid lupus can lead to permanent hair loss. SymptomsLupus can affect almost every organ system and, therefore, is often hard to diagnose. Additionally, lupus often isn’t the first condition that comes to mind with any of the symptoms a patient may have. It would be unusual for someone to present to a doctor suspecting lupus as a diagnosis, as it is more of a condition that explains multiple different symptoms and signs. It is a very difficult diagnosis to make without laboratory studies, as so many other conditions can cause similar symptoms, such as fatigue or heart or lung inflammation. Rash: The most obvious symptom is a rash, usually worsened by sun exposure. The rash can cause scarring, so it is important to avoid sun exposure, even in the winter months. It could present as a severe sunburn in someone who hasn’t had sunburns in the past or as deep scars in the scalp, ears or face. A fever and rash could be many diseases, and infection should be ruled out before considering lupus.  Inflammation of the kidney, heart or lung: Inflammation of the lungs and heart is usually something that brings patients to an emergency room. Kidney involvement is usually found with lab testing, and patients are often asymptomatic. Blood clots: Blood clotting issues are usually dramatic and life-threatening, such as losing a pregnancy near term or developing blood clots to the lungs. These episodes are not usually diagnosed at home, but with special tests and imaging.  Joint pain: Some patients have a pattern of disease that overlaps with rheumatoid arthritis and is mainly swollen, tender joints and morning stiffness. Many patients are referred to rheumatologists with “pain all over,” and this is very unlikely to be due to lupus. The morning is usually the worst time of the day, with pain and stiffness improving as the day proceeds.  Mental health: Lupus causes issues with mental health and thinking, due to a cognitive impairment commonly known as “brain fog.” Symptoms include difficulty concentrating, struggling with complicated tasks like schoolwork and increased rates of depression and anxiety. This effect of lupus is not well understood. Blood disorders: Lupus can make the blood cell counts for red cells (anemia), white blood cells and platelets lower than expected. These are usually asymptomatic, but an important laboratory finding in making the diagnosis of lupus. When to see a doctor about lupusLupus can cause a wide variety of symptoms. Rash is the most obvious sign, but it is not present in most patients. Other symptoms may include chest pain from inflammation in the heart or lungs; unexplained blood clots; arthritis at a young age; or unexplained kidney failure.It can be difficult to diagnose lupus, since these symptoms have more common causes, and lupus is usually not the first diagnosis considered. How is lupus diagnosed? Lupus is often diagnosed after laboratory testing. Tests showing kidney problems, low blood cell counts and signs of inflammation are helpful clues. A test called the anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) is invaluable.This antibody is found in many other diseases such as autoimmune liver disease, thyroid conditions and sometimes even healthy individuals, but it is always present in patients with active lupus. As such, a negative ANA excludes lupus as a diagnosis. Skin and kidney biopsies are also helpful for diagnosis. Not all patients will have all the symptoms and test results related to lupus, making diagnosis a challenge. Lupus can often be mistaken for an infection such as the flu, mononucleosis (“mono”) and pneumonia. The presence of a typical lupus rash often helps with making the diagnosis sooner, but the rash is not always present.How is lupus treated? Several recent medical advances in lupus research have occurred, especially in drug development. Hydroxychloroquine is an important medication that almost every patient with lupus should take regularly.It is safe and effective at treating many aspects of lupus such as arthritis, skin disease, hair loss and kidney disease. It can be taken during pregnancy and even during breastfeeding. One notable advancement is the development of anifrolimumab, a medication that targets the type I interferon pathway, which is overactive in many individuals with lupus. Anifrolimumab is a monoclonal antibody, a lab-created protein designed to mimic the body’s natural antibodies. This medication has shown promise in treating the skin manifestations of lupus.Another exciting area of research involves CAR-T cell therapy, which uses a patient's      immune cells (T cells) to fight disease. This innovative approach, which has shown some success in certain blood cancers, is now being explored for autoimmune diseases like lupus. Multiple clinical trials, including one at Boston Medical Center, are underway to evaluate the safety and efficacy of CAR-T cell therapy in patients with severe lupus who haven't responded adequately to conventional treatments.While still in the experimental phase, CAR-T cell therapy represents a potentially transformative treatment option for individuals living with lupus.Causes of lupus The exact cause of lupus is unknown, but a combination of genetic, hormonal and environmental factors are thought to trigger the immune system to attack itself. However, a study in the journal Nature showed that one cause is a genetic mutation in a gene called “toll-like receptor 7.”This mutation increased the chance that the immune system would be easily activated to attack healthy organs, even in the absence of infection. Risk factors Sex: Women between the ages of 15 and 45 are much more likely to develop lupus and make up about 90% of all cases.  Family history: Having a sibling with lupus increases a person’s risk by about 20-fold compared to the general population. Race: People who are African American/Black, Inuit and Native American have triple the risk of lupus compared to white people, and their disease severity is often worse, especially kidney disease and the risk of death. Non-white Hispanic and Arab patients have about double the lupus risk compared to white patients in Canada and the United States. Living with lupus Living with lupus can be challenging, but with the proper care and lifestyle adjustments, many people can lead full, active lives. Symptoms like fatigue, joint pain and skin rashes have treatments available to help manage discomfort and prevent flare-ups. It's important to work closely with your health care team, take medications as prescribed, and protect your skin from the sun. Even patients with dark skin who have never had issues with sunburns in the past need to use sunscreen regularly.Sun exposure can trigger flares of the disease (including kidney disease) and cause scarring skin and scalp lesions (discoid lupus).  Does lupus increase the risk of other diseases? Lupus can affect many body parts including the heart, kidneys and lungs. It can also raise the risk for infections, osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease. Some of these risks are related to the inflammation caused by lupus itself, while others may be linked to medications used to control the disease.Michael R. York, MD, is a rheumatologist at Boston Medical Center (BMC). Dr. York is also an assistant professor of medicine in the Department of Rheumatology at Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine. He has over 20 years of experience and is an expert in caring for patients with scleroderma (scleroderma), systemic sclerosis, morphea, lupus and psoriatic arthritis. Dr. York's research focuses on the role of the immune system on the development of systemic sclerosis, and other vascular and fibrotic diseases.Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

By Michael R. York, MD, Assistant Professor of Medicine at Boston University School of Medicine HealthDay ReporterTUESDAY, Sept. 23, 2025 (...

TUESDAY, Sept. 23, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), often simply called lupus, is a chronic autoimmune disease in which the body's immune system malfunctions and mistakenly attacks its own healthy tissues and organs.

Lupus can involve almost every organ system, but it most commonly affects the skin, kidneys, joints and the linings of the heart and lungs. 

Types of lupus

Lupus can affect almost every organ system. Some patients only have skin disease, and this can be an intermittent rash that often flares during the summer months, as lupus is very sensitive to the rays of the sun. 

The rash of lupus can look like a sunburn on the face and upper chest, but can also be a deep, scarring rash (discoid lupus). The rash of discoid lupus can lead to permanent hair loss. 

Symptoms

Lupus can affect almost every organ system and, therefore, is often hard to diagnose. Additionally, lupus often isn’t the first condition that comes to mind with any of the symptoms a patient may have. 

It would be unusual for someone to present to a doctor suspecting lupus as a diagnosis, as it is more of a condition that explains multiple different symptoms and signs. 

It is a very difficult diagnosis to make without laboratory studies, as so many other conditions can cause similar symptoms, such as fatigue or heart or lung inflammation. 

  • Rash: The most obvious symptom is a rash, usually worsened by sun exposure. The rash can cause scarring, so it is important to avoid sun exposure, even in the winter months. It could present as a severe sunburn in someone who hasn’t had sunburns in the past or as deep scars in the scalp, ears or face. A fever and rash could be many diseases, and infection should be ruled out before considering lupus. 

  • Inflammation of the kidney, heart or lung: Inflammation of the lungs and heart is usually something that brings patients to an emergency room. Kidney involvement is usually found with lab testing, and patients are often asymptomatic.

  • Blood clots: Blood clotting issues are usually dramatic and life-threatening, such as losing a pregnancy near term or developing blood clots to the lungs. These episodes are not usually diagnosed at home, but with special tests and imaging. 

  • Joint pain: Some patients have a pattern of disease that overlaps with rheumatoid arthritis and is mainly swollen, tender joints and morning stiffness. Many patients are referred to rheumatologists with “pain all over,” and this is very unlikely to be due to lupus. The morning is usually the worst time of the day, with pain and stiffness improving as the day proceeds. 

  • Mental health: Lupus causes issues with mental health and thinking, due to a cognitive impairment commonly known as “brain fog.” Symptoms include difficulty concentrating, struggling with complicated tasks like schoolwork and increased rates of depression and anxiety. This effect of lupus is not well understood.

  • Blood disorders: Lupus can make the blood cell counts for red cells (anemia), white blood cells and platelets lower than expected. These are usually asymptomatic, but an important laboratory finding in making the diagnosis of lupus.

When to see a doctor about lupus

Lupus can cause a wide variety of symptoms. Rash is the most obvious sign, but it is not present in most patients. Other symptoms may include chest pain from inflammation in the heart or lungs; unexplained blood clots; arthritis at a young age; or unexplained kidney failure.

It can be difficult to diagnose lupus, since these symptoms have more common causes, and lupus is usually not the first diagnosis considered. 

How is lupus diagnosed? 

Lupus is often diagnosed after laboratory testing. Tests showing kidney problems, low blood cell counts and signs of inflammation are helpful clues. A test called the anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) is invaluable.

This antibody is found in many other diseases such as autoimmune liver disease, thyroid conditions and sometimes even healthy individuals, but it is always present in patients with active lupus. 

As such, a negative ANA excludes lupus as a diagnosis. Skin and kidney biopsies are also helpful for diagnosis. Not all patients will have all the symptoms and test results related to lupus, making diagnosis a challenge. 

Lupus can often be mistaken for an infection such as the flu, mononucleosis (“mono”) and pneumonia. The presence of a typical lupus rash often helps with making the diagnosis sooner, but the rash is not always present.

How is lupus treated? 

Several recent medical advances in lupus research have occurred, especially in drug development. Hydroxychloroquine is an important medication that almost every patient with lupus should take regularly.

It is safe and effective at treating many aspects of lupus such as arthritis, skin disease, hair loss and kidney disease. It can be taken during pregnancy and even during breastfeeding. 

One notable advancement is the development of anifrolimumab, a medication that targets the type I interferon pathway, which is overactive in many individuals with lupus. Anifrolimumab is a monoclonal antibody, a lab-created protein designed to mimic the body’s natural antibodies. This medication has shown promise in treating the skin manifestations of lupus.

Another exciting area of research involves CAR-T cell therapy, which uses a patient's      immune cells (T cells) to fight disease. This innovative approach, which has shown some success in certain blood cancers, is now being explored for autoimmune diseases like lupus. 

Multiple clinical trials, including one at Boston Medical Center, are underway to evaluate the safety and efficacy of CAR-T cell therapy in patients with severe lupus who haven't responded adequately to conventional treatments.

While still in the experimental phase, CAR-T cell therapy represents a potentially transformative treatment option for individuals living with lupus.

Causes of lupus 

The exact cause of lupus is unknown, but a combination of genetic, hormonal and environmental factors are thought to trigger the immune system to attack itself. However, a study in the journal Nature showed that one cause is a genetic mutation in a gene called “toll-like receptor 7.”

This mutation increased the chance that the immune system would be easily activated to attack healthy organs, even in the absence of infection. 

Risk factors 

  • Sex: Women between the ages of 15 and 45 are much more likely to develop lupus and make up about 90% of all cases. 

  • Family history: Having a sibling with lupus increases a person’s risk by about 20-fold compared to the general population.

  • Race: People who are African American/Black, Inuit and Native American have triple the risk of lupus compared to white people, and their disease severity is often worse, especially kidney disease and the risk of death. Non-white Hispanic and Arab patients have about double the lupus risk compared to white patients in Canada and the United States.

Living with lupus 

Living with lupus can be challenging, but with the proper care and lifestyle adjustments, many people can lead full, active lives. Symptoms like fatigue, joint pain and skin rashes have treatments available to help manage discomfort and prevent flare-ups. 

It's important to work closely with your health care team, take medications as prescribed, and protect your skin from the sun. Even patients with dark skin who have never had issues with sunburns in the past need to use sunscreen regularly.

Sun exposure can trigger flares of the disease (including kidney disease) and cause scarring skin and scalp lesions (discoid lupus).  

Does lupus increase the risk of other diseases? 

Lupus can affect many body parts including the heart, kidneys and lungs. It can also raise the risk for infections, osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease. Some of these risks are related to the inflammation caused by lupus itself, while others may be linked to medications used to control the disease.

Michael R. York, MD, is a rheumatologist at Boston Medical Center (BMC). Dr. York is also an assistant professor of medicine in the Department of Rheumatology at Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine. He has over 20 years of experience and is an expert in caring for patients with scleroderma (scleroderma), systemic sclerosis, morphea, lupus and psoriatic arthritis. Dr. York's research focuses on the role of the immune system on the development of systemic sclerosis, and other vascular and fibrotic diseases.

Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

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

RFK Jr.’s Miasma Theory of Health Is Spreading

The agency is picking up Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s argument that a healthy immune system can keep even pandemic germs at bay.

Last week, the two top officials at the National Institutes of Health—the world’s largest public funder of biomedical research—debuted a new plan to help Americans weather the next pandemic: getting everyone to eat better and exercise.The standard pandemic-preparedness playbook “has failed catastrophically,” NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya and NIH Principal Deputy Director Matthew J. Memoli wrote in City Journal, a magazine and website published by the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, a conservative think tank. The pair argue that finding and studying pathogens that could cause outbreaks, then stockpiling vaccines against them, is a waste of money. Instead, they say, the United States should encourage people to improve their baseline health—“whether simply by stopping smoking, controlling hypertension or diabetes, or getting up and walking more.”On its own, Bhattacharya and Memoli’s apparently serious suggestion that just being in better shape will carry the U.S. through an infectious crisis is reckless, experts told me—especially if it’s executed at the expense of other public-health responses. In an email, Andrew Nixon, the director of communications at the Department of Health and Human Services—which oversees the NIH—wrote that the agency “supports a comprehensive approach to pandemic preparedness that recognizes the importance of both biomedical tools and the factors individuals can control.” But more broadly, Bhattacharya and Memoli’s proposal reflects the spread of a dangerous philosophy that Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the secretary of HHS, has been pushing for years: a dismissal of germ theory, or the notion that infectious microbes are responsible for many of the diseases that plague humankind.In his 2021 book, The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health, Kennedy, a longtime anti-vaccine activist, argues that modern scientists have blamed too much of infectious disease on pathogens, which he suggests are rarely problematic, unless the immune system has been compromised by poor nutrition, toxins, and other environmental stressors. He credits sanitation and nutrition for driving declines in infectious-disease deaths during the 20th century; vaccination, he has baselessly claimed, was largely ineffective and unnecessary. In his view, germs don’t pose a substantial threat to people who have done the work of “fortifying the immune system”—essentially, those who have taken their health into their own hands.In terms of general health, most Americans would benefit from improvements in diet and exercise. A strong emphasis on both has been core to the Make America Healthy Again movement, and in one important aspect, Kennedy and his allies are correct: The immune system, like other bodily systems, is sensitive to nutritional status, and when people are dealing with chronic health issues, they often fare less well against infectious threats, Melinda Beck, a nutrition and infectious-disease researcher who recently retired from the University of North Carolina, told me. Conditions such as obesity and diabetes, for instance, raise the risk of severe COVID and flu; malnutrition exacerbates the course of diseases such as tuberculosis and measles.But applied to widespread infectious outbreaks, the MAHA prescription is still deeply flawed. Being generally healthy doesn’t guarantee survival, or even better outcomes against infectious diseases—especially when an entire population encounters a pathogen against which it has no immunity. Although some evidence suggests that the 1918 flu pandemic strongly affected certain groups of people who were less healthy at baseline—including undernourished World War I soldiers—“relatively healthy people, as far as we could understand, were the main victims,” Naomi Rogers, a historian of medicine at Yale, told me. Smallpox, too, infected and killed indiscriminately. HIV has devastated many communities of young, healthy people.In his book, Kennedy relies heavily on the term miasma theory as a shorthand for preventing disease “through nutrition and by reducing exposures to environmental toxins and stresses.” He’s employing that phrase incorrectly: Historically, at least, miasma theory referred to the notion that epidemics are caused by bad air—such as toxic emanations from corpses and trash—and was the predominant way of describing disease transmission until scientists found definitive proof of infectious microbes in the late 19th century. But his choice of words is also revealing. In pitting his ideas against germ theory, he plays on a centuries-old tension between lifestyle and microbes as roots of illness.In its early days, germ theory struggled to gain traction even among physicians, many of whom dismissed the idea as simplistic, Nancy Tomes, a historian at Stony Brook University, told me. After the idea became foundational to medicine, scientists still had to work to convince some members of the public that microbes could fell healthy people, too. In the early days of polio vaccination, when the virus still ran rampant in the U.S., some vaccine-skeptical Americans insisted that children were falling seriously ill primarily because their parents weren’t managing their kids’ nutrition well and “had disrupted the child’s internal health,” Rogers told me.Over time, as pharmaceutical companies made global businesses out of selling antibiotics, vaccines, and antivirals, the products became a symbol, for some people, of how germ theory had taken over medicine. Accepting vaccines came to represent trust in scientific expertise, Rogers said; misgivings about the industry, in contrast, might translate into rejecting those offerings. In that skeptical slice of the American public and amid the rise of alternative-wellness practitioners, Kennedy has found purchase for his ideas about nutrition as a cure-all.Since taking over as health secretary, he has on occasion made that distrust in germ theory national policy. In his book, he wrote that “when a starving African child succumbs to measles, the miasmist attributes the death to malnutrition; germ theory proponents (a.k.a. virologists) blame the virus.” Earlier this year, when measles raged through undervaccinated regions of West Texas, the secretary acted out his own miasmist theory of the outbreak, urging Americans to rely on vitamin-A supplementation as a first-line defense, even though deficiency of that vitamin is rare here.But germ theory is key to understanding why outbreaks become pandemics—not because people’s general health is wanting, but because a pathogen is so unfamiliar to so many people’s immune systems at once that it is able to spread unchecked. Pandemics then end because enough people acquire sufficient immunity to that pathogen. Vaccination, when available, remains the safest way to gain that immunity—and, unlike lifestyle choices, it can represent a near-universal strategy to shore up defenses against disease. Not all of the risk factors that worsen disease severity are tunable by simply eating better or working out more. For COVID and many other respiratory diseases, for instance, old age and pregnancy remain some of the biggest risk factors. Genetic predispositions to certain medical conditions, or structural barriers to changing health habits—not just lack of willpower—can make people vulnerable to disease, too.In their article, Bhattacharya and Memoli purport to be arguing against specific strategies of pandemic preparedness, most prominently the controversial type of gain-of-function research that can involve altering the disease-causing traits of pathogens, and has been restricted by the Trump administration. But the pair also mischaracterize the country’s current approach to pandemics, which, in addition to calling for virus research and vaccine development, prioritizes measures such as surveillance, international partnerships, and improved health-care capacity, Nahid Bhadelia, the director of the Center on Emerging Infectious Diseases at Boston University, told me. And Bhattacharya and Memoli’s alternative approach cuts against the most basic logic of public health—that the clearest way to help keep a whole population healthy is to offer protections that work on a societal level and that will reach as many people as possible. Fixating on personal nutrition and exercise regimens as pandemic preparedness would leave many people entirely unprotected. At the same time, “we’re basically setting up society to blame someone” in the event that they fall ill, Jennifer Nuzzo, the director of the pandemic center at the Brown University School of Public Health, told me.Kennedy’s book bemoans that the “warring philosophies” of miasma and germ theory have become a zero-sum game. And yet, at HHS, he and his officials are presenting outbreak preparedness—and the rest of public health—as exactly that: The country should worry about environment or pathogens; it should be either pushing people to eat better or stockpiling vaccines. Over email, Nixon told me that “encouraging healthier habits is one way to strengthen resilience alongside vaccines, treatments, and diagnostics developed through NIH-funded research.” But this year, under pressure from the Trump administration, the NIH has cut funding to hundreds of vaccine- and infectious-disease focused research projects; elsewhere at HHS, officials canceled nearly half a billion dollars’ worth of contracts geared toward developing mRNA vaccines.The reality is that both environment and pathogens often influence the outcome of disease, and both should be addressed. Today’s public-health establishment might not subscribe to the 19th-century version of miasma theory, but the idea that environmental and social factors shape people’s health is still core to the field. “They’re saying you can only do one thing at a time,” Bhadelia told me. “I don’t think we have to.”

Clinicians can help address environmental toxics in reproductive health, international experts say

In a recent opinion paper published in the International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, the International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) addresses how exposures to environmental toxics — including endocrine disrupting chemicals — have a wide range of impacts on reproductive health, and how clinicians can play a role in addressing this issue.In short: Extensive research has linked exposure to environmental toxics with an increased risk of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), endometriosis, uterine fibroids, hormonally mediated cancers, menopause, and both female and male infertility. The key mechanisms behind these impacts include hormone disruption, oxidative stress, inflammation, and epigenetic changes that can affect multiple generations.FIGO emphasizes that harm from environmental toxics can be addressed, and that clinicians play a crucial role in ensuring environmental factors are meaningfully considered as a part of patient care. Key quote: “As trusted health advisors, obstetricians and gynecologists (OBGYNs) have an essential role in integrating environmental health into routine gynecologic and fertility care.” Why this matters: In this opinion paper, FIGO argues that clinicians should incorporate environmental health into routine care, and provides practical strategies to do so. Some of these strategies include taking environmental histories, counseling patients on risk reduction and healthy lifestyles, recognizing high-risk settings (e.g., occupational exposures), and advising patients on simple steps to reduce exposure — particularly during sensitive windows like preconception, pregnancy, puberty, and menopause. Clinicians should be aware of regional environmental health alerts, such as air quality advisories or contamination events. In addition, clinicians can advocate for policy change.Related EHN coverage: Chemical mixtures may impact fertility and IVF success, new study findsUnderstanding how the environment affects pregnant people’s healthMore resources: Additional International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) statements and opinions relating to the environment:FIGO opinion on reproductive health impacts of exposure to toxic environmental chemicalsFIGO calls for removal of PFAS from global useRemoval of glyphosate from global usageClimate Crisis and HealthStatement on Draft Strategy on health, environment and climate changeToxic chemicals and environmental contaminants in prenatal vitaminsDeNicola, Nathaniel et al. for International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. Sept. 26, 2025

In a recent opinion paper published in the International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, the International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) addresses how exposures to environmental toxics — including endocrine disrupting chemicals — have a wide range of impacts on reproductive health, and how clinicians can play a role in addressing this issue.In short: Extensive research has linked exposure to environmental toxics with an increased risk of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), endometriosis, uterine fibroids, hormonally mediated cancers, menopause, and both female and male infertility. The key mechanisms behind these impacts include hormone disruption, oxidative stress, inflammation, and epigenetic changes that can affect multiple generations.FIGO emphasizes that harm from environmental toxics can be addressed, and that clinicians play a crucial role in ensuring environmental factors are meaningfully considered as a part of patient care. Key quote: “As trusted health advisors, obstetricians and gynecologists (OBGYNs) have an essential role in integrating environmental health into routine gynecologic and fertility care.” Why this matters: In this opinion paper, FIGO argues that clinicians should incorporate environmental health into routine care, and provides practical strategies to do so. Some of these strategies include taking environmental histories, counseling patients on risk reduction and healthy lifestyles, recognizing high-risk settings (e.g., occupational exposures), and advising patients on simple steps to reduce exposure — particularly during sensitive windows like preconception, pregnancy, puberty, and menopause. Clinicians should be aware of regional environmental health alerts, such as air quality advisories or contamination events. In addition, clinicians can advocate for policy change.Related EHN coverage: Chemical mixtures may impact fertility and IVF success, new study findsUnderstanding how the environment affects pregnant people’s healthMore resources: Additional International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) statements and opinions relating to the environment:FIGO opinion on reproductive health impacts of exposure to toxic environmental chemicalsFIGO calls for removal of PFAS from global useRemoval of glyphosate from global usageClimate Crisis and HealthStatement on Draft Strategy on health, environment and climate changeToxic chemicals and environmental contaminants in prenatal vitaminsDeNicola, Nathaniel et al. for International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. Sept. 26, 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.