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.

Wildfire smoke increases dementia risk more than other forms of air pollution, landmark study finds

News Feed
Monday, July 29, 2024

Exposure to wildfire smoke increases the odds of being diagnosed with dementia even more than exposure to other forms of air pollution, according to a landmark study of more than 1.2 million Californians. The study — released Monday at the Alzheimer’s Assn. International Conference in Philadelphia — is the largest and most comprehensive review of the impact of wildfire smoke on brain health to date, according to its authors.“I was expecting for us to see an association between wildfire smoke exposure and dementia,” said study author Dr. Holly Elser, an epidemiologist and resident physician in neurology at the University of Pennsylvania. “But the fact we see so much stronger of an association for wildfire as compared to non-wildfire smoke exposure was kind of surprising.” Aggressive and impactful reporting on climate change, the environment, health and science. The findings have big health implications, particularly in Western states, where air pollution produced by wildfires now accounts for up to half of all fine-particle pollution — a figure that’s been trending upward as wildfires grow larger and more intense due to climate change and legacies of fire suppression and industrial logging that have altered the composition of many Western forests.The researchers looked at a type of particulate-matter pollution called PM2.5. These particles are 30 times smaller than the width of a human hair — tiny enough to penetrate deeply into the lungs and cross over into the bloodstream, where they can cause inflammation. Exposure has been shown to raise the risk of dementia and a host of other conditions, including heart disease, asthma and low birth weight.“We increasingly see that PM2.5 is tied to virtually every health outcome we look at,” said study author Joan Casey, associate professor of public health at the University of Washington.Elser, Casey and fellow researchers analyzed the health records of more than 1.2 million Kaiser Permanente Southern California members 60 or older between 2009 and 2019. None had been diagnosed with dementia at the beginning of the study.They estimated each person’s exposure to PM2.5 based on their census tract of residence and then separated that into wildfire and non-wildfire pollution using air quality monitoring data, satellite imagery and machine learning techniques.They then looked at how many participants were eventually diagnosed with dementia. Unlike past studies, the researchers were able to determine this using patients’ full electronic health records, rather than relying on hospitalizations as a proxy for such diagnoses.Looking at participants’ average wildfire PM2.5 exposure over three years, the researchers found a 23% increase in the odds of a dementia diagnosis for each increase of 1 microgram of particulate matter per cubic meter of air. When it came to non-wildfire PM2.5 exposure, they documented a 3% increased risk of dementia diagnoses for each increase of 3 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic meter of air.“That’s what it comes down to, is what’s so different about wildfire smoke?” Casey said.More research is needed to learn exactly what that is. Possibilities include the fact that wildfire particles are produced at higher temperatures, contain a greater concentration of toxic chemicals and are, on average, smaller than PM2.5 from other sources.These ultrafine particles can translocate from people’s noses into their brains via the olfactory bulb, Casey said. “Normally the brain is protected by the blood-brain barrier, but here there’s actually a direct route for ultrafine particles to get into the brain and possibly cause some of the problems that we’re seeing in folks living with dementia,” she said.The way in which people are exposed to wildfire smoke also differs from other types of fine-particle pollution, the researchers said. Background or ambient fine-particle pollution levels are usually relatively constant in a given place over time. But wildfire particulate matter tends to fluctuate wildly, resulting in more exposure over shorter periods of time, which may overwhelm the body’s defenses.Of some 5,500 abstracts submitted to the Alzheimer’s Assn. International Conference, this one stood out due to its novelty, importance and impact, said Dr. Claire Sexton, senior director of scientific programs and outreach for the Alzheimer’s Assn.“There have been other studies looking at different types of pollution, but this was unique in terms of the extent and the way in which it was able to do these analyses,” she said.The researchers found the effects to be stronger on Asian, Black and Latino people, as well as those living in high-poverty areas. The most heavily impacted group was one that researchers classified as “other” because it didn’t contain enough people to differentiate further, Casey said. That group included Indigenous people, Pacific Islanders and people whose race was unknown. “So these disparities are playing out again, as we unfortunately often see with environmental exposures,” she said. “But the level at which we observed it here was fairly striking.”Casey believes those disparities are due to differential exposure based on where populations are located, noting that her previous research has shown that Indigenous people in California have by far the highest levels of wildfire particulate exposure. Other factors could include poorer housing quality, lack of access to air filtration devices, jobs that prevent people from staying indoors during wildfire events and disparate responses to the same amount of pollution due to preexisting hypertension or diabetes, she said.“All those things are driven by social determinants of health,” she said. “The fact that we need to allocate additional resources to these people and places to protect health and to try to reduce health disparities going forward is really important.”The researchers did not differentiate between dementia subtypes like Alzheimer’s, the most common form, because they relied on diagnostic codes rather than using brain imaging or postmortem studies. That’s important to know — and a key area for future study — because in order to best protect people, clinicians need to have an understanding of what’s underpinning the relationship between wildfire smoke and different dementia subtypes, Elser said.Still, the study is notable for its massive sample size and careful approach, taking into account sociodemographics like comorbidities and census tract poverty, said Rachel Whitmer, the director of the UC Davis Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center who was not involved in the research.The prevalence of dementia is on the rise as the baby boomer generation ages, but environmental factors may also be contributing to the increase, she said.Research like this lays the groundwork for future studies, she said.“With the increase in wildfires, this is a really important question and I think they did a really rigorous job in exploring it,” she said.Levels of PM2.5 had been declining since the Clean Air Act took effect in 1970. But wildfires have reversed those trends in California, undercutting efforts to reduce emissions. In recent years, wildfire smoke has also affected the Midwest and East Coast. In 2023, smoke from Canadian wildfires blanketed the Atlantic seaboard, triggering air quality alerts and forcing the cancellation of outdoor events.“It’s a big problem in places where wildfires are endemic,” Elser said. “And I worry that as we continue to experience increasingly frequent wildfire events, this could affect more people over a larger geographical distribution, more of the time.”

Exposure to wildfire smoke increases the odds of being diagnosed with dementia even more than exposure to other forms of air pollution, according to a landmark study of more than 1.2 million Californians unveiled at the Alzheimer's Association International Conference.

Exposure to wildfire smoke increases the odds of being diagnosed with dementia even more than exposure to other forms of air pollution, according to a landmark study of more than 1.2 million Californians. The study — released Monday at the Alzheimer’s Assn. International Conference in Philadelphia — is the largest and most comprehensive review of the impact of wildfire smoke on brain health to date, according to its authors.

“I was expecting for us to see an association between wildfire smoke exposure and dementia,” said study author Dr. Holly Elser, an epidemiologist and resident physician in neurology at the University of Pennsylvania. “But the fact we see so much stronger of an association for wildfire as compared to non-wildfire smoke exposure was kind of surprising.”

Aggressive and impactful reporting on climate change, the environment, health and science.

The findings have big health implications, particularly in Western states, where air pollution produced by wildfires now accounts for up to half of all fine-particle pollution — a figure that’s been trending upward as wildfires grow larger and more intense due to climate change and legacies of fire suppression and industrial logging that have altered the composition of many Western forests.

The researchers looked at a type of particulate-matter pollution called PM2.5. These particles are 30 times smaller than the width of a human hair — tiny enough to penetrate deeply into the lungs and cross over into the bloodstream, where they can cause inflammation. Exposure has been shown to raise the risk of dementia and a host of other conditions, including heart disease, asthma and low birth weight.

“We increasingly see that PM2.5 is tied to virtually every health outcome we look at,” said study author Joan Casey, associate professor of public health at the University of Washington.

Elser, Casey and fellow researchers analyzed the health records of more than 1.2 million Kaiser Permanente Southern California members 60 or older between 2009 and 2019. None had been diagnosed with dementia at the beginning of the study.

They estimated each person’s exposure to PM2.5 based on their census tract of residence and then separated that into wildfire and non-wildfire pollution using air quality monitoring data, satellite imagery and machine learning techniques.

They then looked at how many participants were eventually diagnosed with dementia. Unlike past studies, the researchers were able to determine this using patients’ full electronic health records, rather than relying on hospitalizations as a proxy for such diagnoses.

Looking at participants’ average wildfire PM2.5 exposure over three years, the researchers found a 23% increase in the odds of a dementia diagnosis for each increase of 1 microgram of particulate matter per cubic meter of air. When it came to non-wildfire PM2.5 exposure, they documented a 3% increased risk of dementia diagnoses for each increase of 3 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic meter of air.

“That’s what it comes down to, is what’s so different about wildfire smoke?” Casey said.

More research is needed to learn exactly what that is. Possibilities include the fact that wildfire particles are produced at higher temperatures, contain a greater concentration of toxic chemicals and are, on average, smaller than PM2.5 from other sources.

These ultrafine particles can translocate from people’s noses into their brains via the olfactory bulb, Casey said.

“Normally the brain is protected by the blood-brain barrier, but here there’s actually a direct route for ultrafine particles to get into the brain and possibly cause some of the problems that we’re seeing in folks living with dementia,” she said.

The way in which people are exposed to wildfire smoke also differs from other types of fine-particle pollution, the researchers said. Background or ambient fine-particle pollution levels are usually relatively constant in a given place over time. But wildfire particulate matter tends to fluctuate wildly, resulting in more exposure over shorter periods of time, which may overwhelm the body’s defenses.

Of some 5,500 abstracts submitted to the Alzheimer’s Assn. International Conference, this one stood out due to its novelty, importance and impact, said Dr. Claire Sexton, senior director of scientific programs and outreach for the Alzheimer’s Assn.

“There have been other studies looking at different types of pollution, but this was unique in terms of the extent and the way in which it was able to do these analyses,” she said.

The researchers found the effects to be stronger on Asian, Black and Latino people, as well as those living in high-poverty areas. The most heavily impacted group was one that researchers classified as “other” because it didn’t contain enough people to differentiate further, Casey said. That group included Indigenous people, Pacific Islanders and people whose race was unknown.

“So these disparities are playing out again, as we unfortunately often see with environmental exposures,” she said. “But the level at which we observed it here was fairly striking.”

Casey believes those disparities are due to differential exposure based on where populations are located, noting that her previous research has shown that Indigenous people in California have by far the highest levels of wildfire particulate exposure. Other factors could include poorer housing quality, lack of access to air filtration devices, jobs that prevent people from staying indoors during wildfire events and disparate responses to the same amount of pollution due to preexisting hypertension or diabetes, she said.

“All those things are driven by social determinants of health,” she said. “The fact that we need to allocate additional resources to these people and places to protect health and to try to reduce health disparities going forward is really important.”

The researchers did not differentiate between dementia subtypes like Alzheimer’s, the most common form, because they relied on diagnostic codes rather than using brain imaging or postmortem studies. That’s important to know — and a key area for future study — because in order to best protect people, clinicians need to have an understanding of what’s underpinning the relationship between wildfire smoke and different dementia subtypes, Elser said.

Still, the study is notable for its massive sample size and careful approach, taking into account sociodemographics like comorbidities and census tract poverty, said Rachel Whitmer, the director of the UC Davis Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center who was not involved in the research.

The prevalence of dementia is on the rise as the baby boomer generation ages, but environmental factors may also be contributing to the increase, she said.

Research like this lays the groundwork for future studies, she said.

“With the increase in wildfires, this is a really important question and I think they did a really rigorous job in exploring it,” she said.

Levels of PM2.5 had been declining since the Clean Air Act took effect in 1970. But wildfires have reversed those trends in California, undercutting efforts to reduce emissions. In recent years, wildfire smoke has also affected the Midwest and East Coast. In 2023, smoke from Canadian wildfires blanketed the Atlantic seaboard, triggering air quality alerts and forcing the cancellation of outdoor events.

“It’s a big problem in places where wildfires are endemic,” Elser said. “And I worry that as we continue to experience increasingly frequent wildfire events, this could affect more people over a larger geographical distribution, more of the time.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

EPA urged to classify abortion drugs as pollutants

It follows 40 other anti-abortion groups and lawmakers previously calling for the EPA to assess the water pollution levels of the drug.

(NewsNation) — Anti-abortion group Students for Life of America is urging the Environmental Protection Agency to add abortion drug mifepristone to its list of water contaminants. It follows 40 other anti-abortion groups and lawmakers previously calling for the EPA to assess the water pollution levels of the abortion drug. “The EPA has the regulatory authority and humane responsibility to determine the extent of abortion water pollution, caused by the reckless and negligent policies pushed by past administrations through the [Food and Drug Administration],” Kristan Hawkins, president of SFLA, said in a release. “Take the word ‘abortion’ out of it and ask, should chemically tainted blood and placenta tissue, along with human remains, be flushed by the tons into America’s waterways? And since the federal government set that up, shouldn’t we know what’s in our water?” she added. In 2025, lawmakers from seven states introduced bills, none of which passed, to either order environmental studies on the effects of mifepristone in water or to enact environmental regulations for the drug. EPA’s Office of Water leaders met with Politico in November, with its press secretary Brigit Hirsch telling the outlet it “takes the issue of pharmaceuticals in our water systems seriously and employs a rigorous, science-based approach to protect human health and the environment.” “As always, EPA encourages all stakeholders invested in clean and safe drinking water to review the proposals and submit comments,” Hirsch added. Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Trump’s EPA' in 2025: A Fossil Fuel-Friendly Approach to Deregulation

The Trump administration has reshaped the Environmental Protection Agency, reversing pollution limits and promoting fossil fuels

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration has transformed the Environmental Protection Agency in its first year, cutting federal limits on air and water pollution and promoting fossil fuels, a metamorphosis that clashes with the agency’s historic mission to protect human health and the environment.The administration says its actions will “unleash” the American economy, but environmentalists say the agency’s abrupt change in focus threatens to unravel years of progress on climate-friendly initiatives that could be hard or impossible to reverse.“It just constantly wants to pat the fossil fuel business on the back and turn back the clock to a pre-Richard Nixon era” when the agency didn’t exist, said historian Douglas Brinkley.Zeldin has argued the EPA can protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. He announced “five pillars” to guide EPA’s work; four were economic goals, including energy dominance — Trump’s shorthand for more fossil fuels — and boosting the auto industry.Zeldin, a former New York congressman who had a record as a moderate Republican on some environmental issues, said his views on climate change have evolved. Many federal and state climate goals are unattainable in the near future — and come at huge cost, he said.“We should not be causing … extreme economic pain for an individual or a family” because of policies aimed at “saving the planet,” he told reporters at EPA headquarters in early December.But scientists and experts say the EPA's new direction comes at a cost to public health, and would lead to far more pollutants in the environment, including mercury, lead and especially tiny airborne particles that can lodge in lungs. They also note higher emissions of greenhouse gases will worsen atmospheric warming that is driving more frequent, costly and deadly extreme weather.Christine Todd Whitman, a Republican who led the EPA for several years under President George W. Bush, said watching Zeldin attack laws protecting air and water has been “just depressing.” “It’s tragic for our country. I worry about my grandchildren, of which I have seven. I worry about what their future is going to be if they don’t have clean air, if they don’t have clean water to drink,” she said.The EPA was launched under Nixon in 1970 with pollution disrupting American life, some cities suffocating in smog and some rivers turned into wastelands by industrial chemicals. Congress passed laws then that remain foundational for protecting water, air and endangered species.The agency's aggressiveness has always seesawed depending on who occupies the White House. Former President Joe Biden's administration boosted renewable energy and electric vehicles, tightened motor-vehicle emissions and proposed greenhouse gas limits on coal-fired power plants and oil and gas wells. Industry groups called rules overly burdensome and said the power plant rule would force many aging plants to shut down. In response, many businesses shifted resources to meet the more stringent rules that are now being undone.“While the Biden EPA repeatedly attempted to usurp the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law to impose its ‘Green New Scam,’ the Trump EPA is laser-focused on achieving results for the American people while operating within the limits of the laws passed by Congress,” EPA spokeswoman Brigit Hirsch said. Zeldin's list of targets is long Much of EPA’s new direction aligns with Project 2025, the conservative Heritage Foundation road map that argued the agency should gut staffing, cut regulations and end what it called a war on coal on other fossil fuels.“A lot of the regulations that were put on during the Biden administration were more harmful and restrictive than in any other period. So that’s why deregulating them looks like EPA is making major changes,” said Diana Furchtgott-Roth, director of Heritage's Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment.But Chris Frey, an EPA official under Biden, said the regulations Zeldin has targeted “offered benefits of avoided premature deaths, of avoided chronic illness … bad things that would not happen because of these rules.”Matthew Tejada, a former EPA official under both Trump and Biden who now works at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said of the revamped EPA: “I think it would be hard for them to make it any clearer to polluters in this country that they can go on about their business and not worry about EPA getting in their way.”Zeldin also has shrunk EPA staffing by about 20% to levels last seen in the mid-1980s. Justin Chen, president of the EPA’s largest union, called staff cuts “devastating.” He cited the dismantling of research and development offices at labs across the country and the firing of employees who signed a letter of dissent opposing EPA cuts. Relaxed enforcement and cutting staff Many of Zeldin's changes aren't in effect yet. It takes time to propose new rules, get public input and finalize rollbacks. It's much faster to cut grants and ease up on enforcement, and Trump's EPA is doing both. The number of new civil environmental actions is roughly one-fifth what it was in the first eight months of the Biden administration, according to the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project. “You can effectively do a lot of deregulation if you just don’t do enforcement,” said Leif Fredrickson, visiting assistant professor of history at the University of Montana.Hirsch said the number of legal filings isn't the best way to judge enforcement because they require work outside of the EPA and can bog staff down with burdensome legal agreements. She said the EPA is “focused on efficiently resolving violations and achieving compliance as quickly as possible” and not making demands beyond what the law requires.EPA's cuts have been especially hard on climate change programs and environmental justice, the effort to address chronic pollution that typically is worse in minority and poor communities. Both were Biden priorities. Zeldin dismissed staff and canceled billions in grants for projects that fell under the “diversity, equity and inclusion” umbrella, a Trump administration target.He also spiked a $20 billion “green bank” set up under Biden’s landmark climate law to fund qualifying clean energy projects. Zeldin argued the fund was a scheme to funnel money to Democrat-aligned organizations with little oversight — allegations a federal judge rejected. Pat Parenteau, an environmental law expert and former director of the Environmental Law School at Vermont Law & Graduate School, said the EPA's shift under Trump left him with little optimism for what he called “the two most awful crises in the 21st century” — biodiversity loss and climate disruption.“I don’t see any hope for either one,” he said. “I really don’t. And I’ll be long gone, but I think the world is in just for absolute catastrophe.”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-environmentCopyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – December 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.