What we did was meaningful. I was drawn to start this publication because it presented an opportunity to break out of the typical crisis-driven flow and ebb of journalism about the field. Harvard wasn’t a publisher, but it was in the business of sharing knowledge, and I thought we could do for public health what Harvard Business Review does for business. I believed there was no public health without the public, and while it took some feints and half-steps to figure out what that meant for our journalism, we eventually settled on assessing every story idea with a simple question: “What would this story change?” Implicit was a corollary question: “And for whom?”

In the meantime, we relaunched the magazine as a digital publication, built out a social media presence, and launched a weekly newsletter. We co-sponsored a well-attended structural racism symposium and special issue, a series on public health data, a Public Health in Action collaboration with The Studio at the Harvard T.H. Chan School, and an event on artificial intelligence with Johns Hopkins Bloomberg’s Global Health Now. We had momentum—visitors to the site almost tripled in last year’s fourth quarter versus the prior year. Almost 15,000 people signed up for Harvard Public Health Weekly, close to 90 percent of them not connected to Harvard.

Readers ate up pieces on processed foods, the health effects of alcohol, and mental health. You also read our beautifully written and photographed narratives like the 10^th anniversary of the Flint water crisis or our look at Christian Happi’s bold aims for African science, and public health’s role in the recent Puerto Rican elections.

Our goal was to publish stories that would help improve health outcomes. That’s hard to measure in three-and-a-half years. But over 40 percent of you opened the newsletter in a typical week. In the last year, readers shared our articles more than 2 million times on social media. We’ve had at least 25 stories republished on other sites and 40 mentions in newsletters. Our stories have been cited in other publications and used in classrooms.

Public health outcomes change slowly, so it’s harder to measure real-world impact. I would love to hear from you about trying an idea you read about in HPH, or even if you just shared the idea with a colleague. Did you use an article from HPH in a class or a meeting? It would be great to hear from you at our inbox, magazine@hsph.harvard.edu. It will be live for a few more months. So will the site, and I encourage you to download articles you found useful.

The pandemic sparked a surge of public health journalism. These are the sites and newsletters I follow closely or scan regularly, and recommend to you:

• Axios Vitals
• Devex CheckUp
• The Examination
• Global Health NOW
• The Harvard Chan Studio
• KFF Health News
• MindSite News
• Public Health Watch
• The Healthiest Goldfish
• Your Local Epidemiologist
• ProPublica
• STAT Morning Rounds
• TradeOffs (podcast)

Also, the new Healthbeat is off to a promising start, focusing for now on Atlanta and New York City.

I have had a long and varied journalism career, much of it spent chronicling the vast impact of high technology. I have never done more meaningful and important work than what we were doing at Harvard Public Health. I am so thankful to the school, colleagues past and present and our fabulous advisory board, everyone who gave me informal counsel, and all the readers who reached out. I rue that we won’t be able to continue. But a wonderful thing about public health is its focus on the public. It is political with a small ‘p,’ rooted in communities.

What’s most important is that you in the public health community (and in the public) stay engaged in doing the good work you do. Keep telling your stories!

Onward,
Michael F. Fitzgerald

The post A farewell to HPH readers appeared first on Harvard Public Health Magazine.

The volunteers had prepared for more than a year with the Community Brigade Program, an experimental initiative launched in October 2023. Volunteers trained with firefighters, studied fire behavior and situational awareness, and learned how to communicate during an emergency. “The Community Brigade was instrumental in working alongside first responders against one of the most destructive natural disasters in Los Angeles County history,” Fire Chief Anthony C. Marrone told Harvard Public Health.

The program, prompted by another devastating Southern California blaze, the 2018 Woolsey fire, was designed to equip qualified residents to serve as force multipliers during wildfires. The driving force behind the effort is Brent Woodworth, chairman and CEO of Los Angeles Emergency Preparedness Foundation (LAEPF), a non-profit organization that helps government agencies work with businesses, academic institutions, and community members to mitigate disasters.

Woodworth and his team collaborated with professors from California State University-Long Beach to analyze what locals experienced during the Woolsey fire and teamed up with the LA County Fire Department to understand its needs. Before the Palisades fire, the volunteers helped their neighbors with recommendations to better fireproof their properties. People who took their advice still have their homes, Woodworth says.

“Nothing like our collaboration had happened in the country before,” says Woodworth. But in the aftermath, plenty of people in the United States and beyond want to see it happening where they live. Woodworth has heard from fire chiefs and elected officials from as close as Oregon and as far away as El Salvador. He’s eager to help them: “We’re developing a tool kit so other communities can replicate what we’ve done,” he says.

Woodworth talked to Harvard Public Health about choosing volunteers, supporting firefighters, and helping residents reduce fire risks.

This interview was condensed and edited.

Harvard Public Health: Did you have a hard time recruiting volunteers?

Brent Woodworth: We’d been building the program over a five-year period. We kept community members informed about where we were heading by way of meetings with leaders in public safety, former city council members, and so on. Some of the people who were interested had been involved with ad hoc brigades out of neighborhoods like Malibu West, Point Dune, Topanga—which had helped during the Woolsey Fire.

So the concept of a brigade wasn’t new, but [organizing it] under a government entity like the fire department hadn’t been done. People wanted to join— we had more than two hundred applicants.

We were looking for people with one of two possible qualifications. We wanted people who could operate in the field, which is physically taxing. At the same time, we need these people to abide by all of the rules that apply during field operations. We don’t act without specific requests from the fire department.

We [also] needed people who had experience on the operational or support side—doing communications, logistics, accounting, and so on. We had a lot of good people like that already working with LAEPF, and we found others through our connections.

Then we interviewed people. Those who wanted to work in the field had to do final interviews with our team and one or two fire captains. We [decided] with the fire captains who would be approved, pending background checks.  

HPH: What kind of training did you give the field volunteers?

Woodworth: They went through 60 or 70 days of training in the classroom and online. They had to pass a number of tests, physical and otherwise, including the Pack Test, [which consists of a 3-mile walk in 45 minutes or less while carrying a 45-pound pack]. 

Think of putting on every bit of clothing you could possibly wear and getting on your exercise bike and going into a sauna and peddling like crazy. If you can handle that kind of environment, we want you. We ended up with 47 people who were fully qualified.

They participated in a tabletop exercise [to discuss with first responders how they would handle an emergency, and] a deployment exercise on a 100-acre ranch in the Ventura area. We simulated the conditions [they might experience] so they could practice what they would have to do in real time.

HPH: Did the field volunteers have prior experience doing emergency work?

Woodworth: They come from a variety of backgrounds. We have a medical doctor, an EMT, a gentleman who competes in the world’s strongest man competition, and a superior court judge. We have architects, engineers, people from the entertainment industry, former city council members, and former firefighters. We have a woman—I believe she is a retired firefighter—who worked with a helicopter brush crew cutting fire lines through heavy chapparal [to help keep the fire from spreading]. We also have ex-military people and construction workers.

Before the Palisades Fire, our volunteers had responded to two other fires—The Broad Fire [in November 2024] and then a much bigger one, The Franklin Fire [in December 2024]. That was a test for our folks, and they did a great job.

HPH: What do you do to help the firefighters?

Woodworth: During the Palisades fire, we performed a lot of evacuation support: knocking on doors, trying to get people out. We did some last-minute triage—meaning, when the fire was heading towards particular communities, we worked to remove obvious things outside the house that would potentially burn, like cushions, mats, and so on. Moving highly flammable elements away from the house increases its chance of survival.

But saving lives is our number one concern. Because our folks live in the communities they serve, they can sometimes convince people who are not convinced by a general broadcast or message that they should evacuate. They know the streets and the neighborhood, which gives them a level of credibility. They can explain what the level of risk is and say, “It’s not worth losing your life over this.”

In addition to that, we get involved in what some people call mop operations—like extinguishing spot fires and ember fires.

From a humanitarian standpoint, we helped people who needed food, water, or fuel.

We don’t do the job of the firefighters. So we’re not ever, ever, ever entering a house. We don’t put out [burning] cars.

HPH: Will your team play a role in rebuilding after the Palisades Fire?

Woodworth: We want to help individuals, builders, and communities assess their fire risk. We have top-certified experts who can help. They spend an hour or more at a single home, taking photographs, walking the property with the owner, and educating them as to what would catch fire.

We’ve done over 400 of these assessments. We got the word out by going to city council meetings [and talking] to homeowners’ associations. Once we started, people would talk to their neighbors. Many of the suggestions we make about how to mitigate risks are not expensive.

It can be challenging because people will have a beautiful bush growing under their window. But if it catches fire, the window could go—and once a window is gone, your house is pretty much gone. By taking a few precautions, you can reduce the risk of your house burning down by up to 40 percent in some cases.

Woodworth: Terri Lynn Pond

The post The new kind of volunteer firefighter appeared first on Harvard Public Health Magazine.

The book has been lauded for its refreshing optimism. Johnson, a marine biologist, draws on her experiences as a Black woman, her research on coral reef ecosystems, overfishing, and marine biodiversity, and her contributions to international climate policy to craft a deeply inclusive narrative. She largely succeeds at an ambitious task: broadening the conversation about climate beyond science and technology to include environmental justice, culture, and public health. Her writing is engaging, accessible, and often urgent, blending research with real-world examples and community voices.

The book’s greatest strength lies in how Johnson makes responding to climate change available to everyone. Rather than presenting a rigid set of solutions, she offers a framework for thinking about climate response as a set of systemic changes rather than isolated interventions. When she does propose solutions, they are often practical, if currently underutilized. The approach she offers, as much as the connections between climate and health that she illuminates, makes the book essential reading for public health professionals grappling with the multifaceted challenges of climate change.

Climate action, she writes in a deeply personal introduction, is not an abstract endeavor but a tangible necessity for the lives and well-being of communities worldwide. “We are not separate from the systems we aim to protect; we are part of them.”

For example, ocean conservation isn’t just about preserving ecosystems. It’s about safeguarding cultural heritage, livelihoods, and ways of life that are vital to community health. Vivid examples throughout the book illustrate how ecological degradation directly threatens human health, particularly in vulnerable populations who depend on marine resources for nutrition and economic stability. Overgrown reefs left behind by vanishing urchins, she writes, are smothered by unchecked algal growth, reducing fish populations that coastal communities rely on for protein.

Further, she observes, racial disparities in the United States point to a pattern of exclusion of Black people and other marginalized communities from decisions that affect their lives and health. These communities are disproportionately vulnerable to rising seas and flooding. Getting it right means ensuring that their voices and their interests are included in the response.

Her critique of the systemic roots of climate and health inequities will not surprise readers who are familiar with the structural determinants of health. For example, she writes that by popularizing the carbon footprint, fossil fuel companies have shifted blame for greenhouse gas emissions to individuals and diverted attention from industrial-scale emissions as the primary driver of global warming. These emissions are linked to public health crises, including respiratory and cardiovascular disease, along with climate-driven health inequities. Extreme heat, food insecurity, and displacement from housing due to environmental conditions affect marginalized communities disproportionately. Toxic pollution, including microplastics and chemical runoff, infiltrates food systems and water supplies and endangers human health.

Some of her proposed solutions will be familiar to readers who follow political debates about climate change, as will her call for policymakers, public health institutions, and activists to step up. She wants to see more regulation of fossil fuel industries and more enforcement of corporate responsibility. But she also emphasizes grassroots action, advocating for community-led health and environmental justice efforts.

Public health practitioners will find the chapter titled “Disasterology” especially compelling. Extreme weather due to climate change has intensified natural disasters such as hurricanes and wildfires. Johnson critiques the “limited intervention model” of disaster recovery in the United States, which she observes leaves marginalized communities to navigate complex aid systems with little government support. Having made the diagnosis, Johnson advocates for reforms such as fully funding local emergency management departments, improving flood insurance policies, and shifting to community-led disaster preparedness. These proposals, though seemingly straightforward, challenge entrenched bureaucratic structures and could transform how public health systems integrate disaster readiness.

Johnson also stresses the effectiveness of community-led solutions, pointing to grassroots and mutual aid networks that have proven essential in disaster response and recovery. For public health practitioners, this insight is particularly valuable: It underscores how localized responses can improve health equity and why investments in community resilience are essential for mitigating the long-term health impacts of climate-related disasters. Her analysis serves as a compelling call for public health to engage not only in emergency response but also in structural policy advocacy and equitable preparedness planning.

In the concluding section, “Transformation,” Johnson challenges readers to redefine hope as “a propellant”—driving a commitment to act—rather than a passive sentiment. A better world is in reach through what she calls “leaderful” movements—where leadership is distributed across society. “We need many leaders to accelerate the transformation from an extractive economy to a regenerative one,” she writes, emphasizing the importance of collective action over individuals or communities acting alone.

Her call to action—a “Climate Oath”—asks readers to consider their ethical responsibility to integrate climate justice into their practices. She is inspired by this key part of the Hippocratic Oath: “I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.”

Because the book largely focuses on the United States, it may have limited relevance for a global audience. For example, she does not deeply explore how low- and middle-income countries are navigating climate-related health challenges or how global health partnerships could be leveraged to do so.

But Johnson achieves her primary goal. She broadens readers’ perspectives beyond a narrow, science-driven view of climate solutions. By framing climate action as a pathway to healthier, more equitable communities, she makes it possible to stop fixating on averting disaster. Her work is not just a roadmap but an invitation to see climate action as deeply interconnected with social transformation.

Book cover: One World

The post Hope as a catalyst for change in <em>Climate Futures</em> appeared first on Harvard Public Health Magazine.

—Paul Adepoju

(Study in PNAS, September 2024)

The post Cities, health, and the big data revolution appeared first on Harvard Public Health Magazine.

Expand Image”>

Expand Image”>

Expand Image”>

Expand Image”>

More editorial cartoons from Harvard Public Health:

• “A sound idea,” by Jenna Luecke
• “Post-pandemic paranoia,” by Jenna Luecke
• “Climate change bites,” by Jenna Luecke
• “Environ-mental shift,” by Jenna Luecke
• “Artificial opinion,” by Natasha Loder
• “It ain’t over when it’s over,” by Natasha Loder
• “(Climate) change of plans,” by Natasha Loder

The post New year, new world appeared first on Harvard Public Health Magazine.

—Leah Rosenbaum

(Study in Nature Medicine, July 2024)

The post Exposure to air pollution leads to racial health disparities appeared first on Harvard Public Health Magazine.

The poor air quality both frustrates and motivates Siddhartha Mandal, a senior research scientist at the Centre for Chronic Disease Control, an Indian non-governmental organization. Mandal lives in Gurugram, south of Delhi, and during the recent pollution emergency, he found himself hunkered inside with an air purifier.

Mandal is in his eighth year working on GEOHealth India, a research grant from the U.S. National Institutes of Health in its second phase of mapping levels of particulate matter throughout the country, focused on PM 2.5—particles less than 2.5 microns in diameter, too small to see with the human eye.

Mandal’s team shares the grant with researchers at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health who are providing training to the research team and to other Indian scholars both at Harvard and in India. The team also works to demonstrate pollution’s effect on the rate of cardiovascular disease and diabetes.

Mandal spoke with Felice J. Freyer for Harvard Public Health. The interviews were edited and condensed.

Harvard Public Health: Your research expands understanding of pollution in India. Can you tell more about what you measure, and how?

Siddhartha Mandal: We need estimates of PM 2.5—how much pollution is there at a particular space. Usually that is done through air pollution monitors on the ground. In India we have [just] a few monitors, mostly located in urban areas. So we make air pollution estimates from a statistical model that is calibrated against the ground monitoring observations.

[The model encompasses] the relationship between what is measured by the monitoring station and other variables, like, let’s say, the road density around that monitor, or the temperature at that day. We also have satellite measurements to figure out other features around that monitor. We can get an estimate of how much PM 2.5 is there even in places where there are no monitors.

HPH: What do you learn from the satellites?

Mandal: If you have a lot of air pollution near the surface, a lot of sunlight would be absorbed in the ground, and the amount of light that gets reflected back would be less. The satellite can capture that, as well as how much greenery there is.

HPH: Have you mapped the entire country?

Mandal: Yes. Every square kilometer. We published it in February—all the predictions for PM 2.5 from January 2008 till December 2020. Currently, we are updating those models for the next four years.

HPH: How are you using this data?

Mandal: We can figure out the air pollution exposure for a particular one-square-kilometer grid and link it with health outcomes. We have used it for linking PM 2.5 exposures with hypertension and diabetes incidence. We have just recently published a paper on ambient air pollution and daily mortality in 10 cities in India, showing that seven percent of daily deaths could be attributed to PM 2.5 exposure.

In another study, we showed that if we reduce PM 2.5 in Delhi from 120 micrograms per meter cubed to 40, which is the Indian air quality standard for annual PM2.5, that is going to reduce hypertension prevalence by 15 percent.

Even if we reduce it 20 micrograms per meter cubed, it would reduce the hypertension prevalence by 5 percent, approximately. That is a lot, given the size of Delhi’s population [almost 34 million].

The usefulness of this is to generate an evidence base to inform policy actions. We are providing the Ministry of Health with the information that we are getting, so that they can create pressure within the government and induce some action.

HPH: How does particulate matter lead to heart disease and diabetes?

Mandal: When you breathe in PM 2.5, it is so small that it enters your bloodstream and starts creating inflammation, a long-term low-grade inflammation. Also there is a direct toxicity from metals which enter your bloodstream.

HPH: Has there been any progress in addressing this problem?

Mandal: Yes. There has been a lot of conversation around air pollution which was not there 10 years back. Delhi didn’t have these ring roads, built to prevent the trucks from entering the city. There has been a stress on improving public transport in most of the cities. We have a lot more subway lines now.

[As for the crop burning], the government is putting in efforts to help farmers transition from the traditional ways of getting rid of crop residues and giving them technology that would help farmers sell it to generate biofuel or remove the crop residue instead of burning.

HPH: What are you working on in the second phase of the grant, which ends in 2026? 

Mandal: We are looking at a finer-scale spatial resolution, trying to develop a 200-meter-by-200-meter model in six cities in India. PM 2.5 levels vary, and the finer the resolution, the better the health effects estimates will be.

We are also looking at other outcomes—pregnancy outcomes and adolescent health.

HPH: As someone who studies air pollution, how do you feel each year when the smog emergency occurs?

Mandal: It’s frustrating. I’ve seen a lot of people here complaining of respiratory issues. Most people are not aware that air pollution causes long-term damage to the heart or its arteries. People don’t realize what’s happening to the brain, to the heart, to the kidneys.

It’s not a winter problem; it’s not a one- or two-month problem. It’s a yearlong problem, and people still don’t realize that. If you’re not concerned about it at any other time other than these two, three months, that’s not going to solve the problem.

The post Mapping every square kilometer of air pollution in India appeared first on Harvard Public Health Magazine.

—Leah Samuel

(Study in Nature Communications, September 2024)

The post Conserving reefs for nutrition appeared first on Harvard Public Health Magazine.

–Jeremy Berger

(Study in Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, November 2024)

The post Improving public health messaging on heat stroke appeared first on Harvard Public Health Magazine.

—Leah Rosenbaum

(Study in International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, July 2024)

The post Factory farms pose health risks for workers and people who live nearby appeared first on Harvard Public Health Magazine.