Processed red meats—like bacon, deli meats, and hot dogs—are linked to a host of health ills. Now, the latest study finds that eating too much red meat may even harm the brain. In a study published in the journal Neurology, Dr. Daniel Wang, an assistant professor of medicine at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, and his team report that people who eat more processed red meat had a 14% higher risk of developing dementia over more than four decades that those who consumed minimal amounts. The study analyzed data from more than 130,000 health professionals enrolled in two major studies: the Nurses' Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study. Every two to four years, people filled out detailed dietary surveys asking about their intake of more than 150 foods. The researchers also collected health data on dementia diagnoses and asked people brief questions about their memory. “Based on this data, we see that if people have higher processed red meat intake, they have a higher risk of dementia, a higher risk of subjective cognitive decline, and worse cognitive function,” says Wang. The scientists saw increased risk of all of these outcomes with any consumption of processed red meat, and it continued to increase the more meat a person consumed. The 14% increased dementia risk was the upper threshold. It didn't take much meat to reach that upper limit. The 14% higher risk of dementia was linked to people who ate at least a quarter of a single 3-oz. serving of processed red meat daily—equivalent to two slices of bacon, one and a half slices of bologna, or a hot dog—compared to those who ate less than a tenth of a serving (less than a slice of bacon) a day. Read More: Why Are So Many Young People Getting Cancer? It’s Complicated Wang plans to keep studying these populations to better understand how processed red meat affects the brain, and possibly dementia. One theory is that processed meat, because of its high saturated fat and sodium, can increase the risk of diabetes and heart conditions, in part by raising blood pressure, and thus harming the brain. Another is based on the fact that that some of the compounds the body makes when it breaks down processed red meat can increase the risk of dementia; in the lab, for example, some of these compounds cause the clumping of amyloid protein that is a hallmark of Alzheimer’s disease. Finally, the nitrites found in processed red meats may damage DNA, injuring brain cells. More in Health The Scientific Search for Youth Why Do I Keep Having Recurring Dreams? Dermatologists Have a Dirty Little Secret The Best Longevity Habit You’re Not Thinking About Personal Trainers Share the No. 1 Tip That Has Changed Their Lives Previous studies of processed red meat and dementia have been inconsistent, with some finding a connection and others not. Wang says those studies were smaller and followed people for less time, without evaluating people's diets more than once. His team's approach, on the other hand, “captured changes in dietary intake during decades-long follow up, which is the strength our study has,” he says. The detailed dietary data also allowed them to estimate what effect replacing red meat would have on dementia risk. Substituting one serving a day of processed red meat with nuts or legumes contributed to a 19% lower risk of dementia over the study period; similarly, replacing red meat with fish was linked to a 28% lower risk of dementia. Eating chicken instead of red meat for one serving daily contributed to a 16% lower dementia risk. Read More: 9 Things You Should Do for Your Brain Health Every Day, According to Neurologists The data also allowed Wang’s team to compare people who ate more processed red meat to those who ate more unprocessed red meat. Those who ate more unprocessed red meat did show a slightly higher risk of dementia compared to people eating minimal amounts, but this association wasn’t statistically significant. However, on the scale that measured people’s own assessments of their cognitive function, those who ate unprocessed red meat had a 16% higher risk of having memory issues than those who ate minimal amounts. This subjective assessment included six to seven yes-or-no questions, including whether they had more difficulty remembering the names of close friends in the past year compared to the previous year, or whether they had problems finding their way home in the past year.

Despite President Joe Biden’s former directive that U.S. flags would be flown at half-staff during President-elect Donald Trump’s Inauguration Day—a continuation of mourning after the death of former President Jimmy Carter—several Republicans have pledged to fly their flags at full-staff. In honor of Carter—who died on Dec. 29, 2024, aged 100—Biden proclaimed that flags at government buildings should be flown at half-staff “as an expression of public sorrow” for 30 days—a period of time that would have included Trump’s inauguration on Monday, Jan. 20. In Oklahoma, the flags have already been raised to full-staff, as Gov. Kevin Stitt only ordered the flags to remain at half-staff until Carter’s funeral on Jan. 9. When George H.W. Bush died in 2018, the governor at the time— Gov. Mary Fallin—directed that all flags be flown at half-staff for 30 days. Read More: Trump Reacts to Order Issued About of U.S. Flags Several Republican Governors have made statements over the past week, ordering flags at state buildings to be flown at full-staff on Inauguration Day in their respective states, then returned to half-staff the day after. “While we honor the service of a former President, we must also celebrate the service of an incoming President and the bright future ahead for the United States of America,” Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a staunch Trump ally, wrote in his statement on Jan. 13. Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey also spoke out on that same day, announcing that she will raise the flags for the inauguration. Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson followed suit on Jan. 14, ordering for flags at the United States Capitol to be raised to their full height for the inauguration, and then lowered the day after. In his statement, Johnson said that it was "to celebrate our country coming together behind the inauguration of our 47th President, Donald Trump.” Throughout Jan. 14, other Republican governors issued similar orders, including Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen North Dakota Gov. Kelly Armstrong , Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee, Florida Gov Ron DeSantis, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, and Idaho Gov. Brad Little. DeSantis, who presides over Florida where Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home is based, said the decision was “to honor the tradition of our founding fathers and the sacrifices made by those who have served to ensure the torch of liberty continues to burn strong.” On Jan. 15, Utah Gov. Spencer J. Cox issued an order for "the flags of the United States of America and the great state of Utah to be flown at full-staff on all state facilities on Monday, Jan. 20, 2025, in observance of Inauguration Day." The flags will return to half-staff at sunset, in continuance of the tradition honoring Carter. That same day, South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster ordered the flags over the State Capitol and state buildings to fly at full-staff from sunrise to sunset on Jan. 20. Indiana Gov. Mike Braun, Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves, and Alaska's Gov. Mike Dunleavy later issued similar instructions. And it’s seemingly not only Republicans who are said to be taking the position. California Governor Gavin Newsom’s spokesperson Izzy Gardon has reportedly confirmed that the Democrat would join the fold of Republican governors in raising the flags on Inauguration Day, according to Associated Press. This comes after Trump complained in January about the flags on his social media app, Truth Social, saying that Democrats were “giddy” about the flag being flown at half-staff during his inauguration. “In any event, because of the death of President Jimmy Carter, the Flag may, for the first time ever during an Inauguration of a future President, be at half mast,” he wrote. “Nobody wants to see this, and no American can be happy about it. Let’s see how it plays out.”Several of the governors stated in their decisions to raise the flags during the mourning period that they are still within federal standards. Governors Lee and Ivey cited a section of the flag code that describes general times and occasions for displaying the U.S. flag, including Inauguration Day, But the code does not state that the flags must be at full-staff. The exact wording is “The flag should be displayed on all days, especially on…Inauguration Day, January 20”—the day included in a list of several other federal holidays. Biden’s proclamation, though, is in accordance with a section of the flag code which states that “The flag shall be flown at half-staff 30 days from the death of the President or a former President.”

In a hearing that centered on whether she would stand up to President-elect Donald Trump as the nation’s top law enforcement officer, Pam Bondi said she wouldn't weaponize the Justice Department while also vowing to “Make America Great Again” and refusing to answer whether Trump lost the 2020 election. While the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee appeared satisfied with Bondi’s answers, Democrats pressed her on whether she can be trusted as attorney general to safeguard the independence of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and uphold the rule of law if Trump were to initiate politically motivated investigations. Bondi, a Trump ally who served two terms as Florida’s attorney general, vowed to uphold "one tier of justice for all" and suggested she would steer the department away from any partisan agendas. While Bondi will likely garner all Republican support on the committee and in the wider Senate, which would ensure her confirmation, Democrats on the committee raised concerns about her support for Trump as his personal lawyer during his first impeachment trial in 2020 and her central role in advancing his post-election challenges. “At issue in this nomination hearing is not your competence, nor your experience,” said Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, the top Democrat on the committee. “At issue is your ability to say no.” Holiday inbound tourism thrives Branded Content Holiday inbound tourism thrives By China Daily Asked if Trump lost the 2020 election, Bondi twice said, “I accept the results,” while claiming that she saw evidence of potential election interference when she visited Pennsylvania after President Joe Biden won. Her loyalty to Trump became the main focus of the hearing, particularly the question of whether she would allow political influence to steer DOJ decisions. Democrats noted that Trump has expressed a desire for retribution against perceived enemies, potentially including the prosecutors who investigated him or the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot, and had indicated that it would be up to Bondi to decide whether to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate those individuals. “No one has been prejudged, nor will anyone be prejudged, either,” Bondi said. Read More: Pete Hegseth Faces Tough Questions on Women in Military Bondi claimed to have never heard Trump’s widely reported call with Georgia’s secretary of state after the 2020 election in which he repeatedly pressured him to “find 11,780 votes.” She said she was not familiar with several of Trump’s comments, mostly from the campaign trail, such as his claim that Jan. 6 defendants are “hostages” and “patriots” or that illegal immigration is “poisoning the blood of our nation.” Trump has said that one of his first acts after taking office on Jan. 20 will be to pardon most, if not all, of the defendants charged in relation to the attack on the Capitol. “It’s going to start in the first hour,” he recently told TIME. “Maybe the first nine minutes.” While the pardon power lies exclusively with the President, the attorney general would have to defend Trump’s actions in court if they are challenged. Bondi told senators that she would look at requests from the White House to grant pardons to Jan. 6 rioters, but “condemned” any violent attacks on law enforcement officers. Bondi denied any intention to politicize the DOJ, insisting that her legal experience made her qualified to bring a fair, professional approach to the position of attorney general. “The partisanship, the weaponization, will be gone,” Bondi said in her opening statement. But despite her insistence that she would not be political, Bondi at times sounded like a Trump campaign surrogate. She repeatedly lauded Trump’s 2024 electoral victory and pledged to “Make America Safe Again,” a slogan often used by the Trump campaign. At one point, she taunted Senator Adam Schiff of California, a prominent Trump antagonist who was on the House Jan. 6 committee and led Trump’s first impeachment trial, saying, “Look at the map of California, Senator Schiff. It's bright red!” (Trump won 38.3% of the vote in California). “We have got to work together to Make America Safe Again, and that, in turn, will Make America Great Again,” Bondi added. “I don't know where that phrase has become a bad word, because I think that's a great one—Making America Great Again.” Her exchange with Schiff was the tensest of the hearing. They were on opposite sides of Trump’s first impeachment trial, and Trump has called Schiff the “enemy from within.” Schiff asked if Bondi would investigate special counsel Jack Smith or Liz Cheney, the former Republican congresswoman who investigated Trump’s role in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. “Senator, that’s a hypothetical, and I’m not going to answer. We’re all so worried about Liz Cheney,” Bondi said. “You know what we should be worried about, Senator? The crime rate in California is through the roof.” Asked by Senator Chris Coons of Delaware, a Democrat, if she would drop a case if the White House asked her to—which Trump had requested of his then-FBI director James Comey in his first administration in a situation involving then-National Security Advisor Michael Flynn—Bondi said, “If I thought that would happen, I wouldn’t be here.” Bondi also faced several questions from Democrats over what role she would play as attorney general to be a check on Kash Patel, a polarizing Trump loyalist who was nominated for FBI director and has promised to pursue Trump’s perceived rivals. Patel, if confirmed, would work closely with the attorney general. Bondi defended Patel’s pledge to target a list of people he views as “government gangsters” but said she won’t use her power to pursue a so-called “enemies list.” “I have known Kash, and I believe that Kash is the right person at this time for this job,” she said. Bondi was asked to explain her comments in a 2023 Fox News appearance that “prosecutors will be prosecuted” and “the investigators will be investigated” under a Trump DOJ, to which she responded that they would only be prosecuted “if bad.” Pressed further on the extent of prosecutions, Bondi would not promise that she wouldn’t prosecute journalists. “None of us are above the law,” she said, adding that she “believes in freedom of speech.” Asked in the second round of questions to clarify those comments, given that Patel has suggested he would investigate news reporters, Bondi said that “going after the media just because they are the media is wrong, of course.” In a question about news that is at the top of many Americans’ minds this week, Bondi did not commit to enforcing a new law enforcing a TikTok ban. In addition to questions about her political independence, Bondi is expected to face scrutiny over her post-public service work as the hearings continue. After leaving the Florida attorney general’s office in early 2019, she joined Ballard Partners, a lobbying firm with close ties to the first Trump Administration. Critics argue that her lobbying work—especially her representation of foreign governments and large corporations—could undermine her credibility as a champion of the rule of law. Trump nominated Bondi for the position after his initial pick for attorney general, former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, withdrew amid sexual misconduct allegations.

The sky was clear over Los Angeles on Tuesday, a welcome respite after acrid smoke from wildfires choked the region last week. In Santa Monica’s waterfront Palisades Park, the air was fresh enough for people to jog. Air quality, measured on a scale from good to hazardous, was good to moderate on Monday and mostly good across Los Angeles County on Tuesday, according to data from the South Coast Air Quality Management District. A smoke advisory issued by the agency expired at 10 p.m. Sunday. Similar conditions are expected Wednesday, as long as wildfires do not flare up again and no new blazes break out. Los Angeles residents might be breathing easier when they step outside, but Dr. Scott Epstein, the air quality assessment manager for the Air Quality Management District, warned that conditions can suddenly change and that windblown dust and ash continue to be concerns. The lightest of winds can pick up the ash from burned areas and carry it across the county. “We know that this ash has a lot of toxic, carcinogenic material in it,” Dr. Epstein said. “The instruments that typically measure air quality don’t measure ash. However, it tends to be big enough to be able to see with the naked eye.” A Los Angeles County Public Health Department advisory about windblown ash and dust is in effect through 7 p.m. Wednesday. The National Weather Service expects winds to pick up again, with the strongest gusts likely Wednesday morning and afternoon in Ventura and northern Los Angeles Counties. An N95 or P100 mask can help provide protection from the ash, according to health officials. The Palisades and Eaton fires, the biggest in the region, were no longer pumping out massive amounts of smoke on Tuesday. The strong winds that were forecast to develop Monday night into Tuesday morning and further spread the two fires never arrived. That enabled firefighters to put out actively burning sections and keep addressing the remaining hot spots, an effort that will continue for days. “We have smoldering hot material within the burn perimeter, but there’s no active fire that’s producing smoke,” said Brian Newman, who analyzes blazes for Cal Fire. “We’re in a slow, creeping, minimal-active burning phase.” Dr. Epstein said that if people step outside and smell smoke, it is best to go back inside and close their windows, and wear a mask when outdoors. They can also monitor air quality conditions on the South Coast Air Quality Management District website.

The Texas Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday in a battle over whether Southern Methodist University can separate from the United Methodist Church. The university, founded in Dallas by Methodists in the early 20th century, has been trying to extricate itself since 2019 amid turmoil in the denomination over gay clergy and gay marriage. At stake is the question of who ultimately controls the university: its own board, or the church that founded it more than a century ago and wrote its ownership into the school bylaws. The case will determine whether one of the flagship institutions of Methodism will remain connected to the church, the country’s second-largest Protestant denomination. In Austin on Wednesday morning, the justices sounded wary of allowing the school to sever the relationship. The court’s new chief justice, Jimmy Blacklock, concluded the hearing by saying the court should be “very, very hesitant to undermine what seems to be over 100 years of settled expectations.” He called the school’s case “clever lawyering.” “I have difficulty imagining, just in equity, that it would be proper for the courts to vindicate that kind of a maneuver,” he said. In 2019, the private university abruptly changed its articles of incorporation and named its own board as its “ultimate authority.” That displaced a regional governing body of the church that oversees congregations in Texas and seven other states. The university’s articles of incorporation previously stated that the school would be “forever owned, maintained and controlled” by the conference. In response, the conference sued Southern Methodist, arguing that the university did not have the authority to declare independence without the church’s approval. A Texas district judge ruled in favor of the university in 2021, but an appeals court reversed the decision. A lawyer for the university, Allyson N. Ho, argued on Wednesday that the case was an “extraordinarily clear case” under Texas corporate law; the school had simply acted to bring its bylaws into compliance with state law around nonprofit structures. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT But publicly, the university has suggested that the separation was a response to conflicts in the United Methodist Church over issues related to sexuality.The university’s president, R. Gerald Turner, said in 2019 that the school needed a formal separation from the church because of turmoil over its stance on gay rights — which the university argued impeded its ability to attract students from all denominations. At the time, the denomination approved a plan strengthening bans on same-sex marriages and gay and lesbian clergy. That plan put the church out of step with the university’s nondiscrimination statement, which includes “sexual orientation and gender identity and expression.” Dr. Turner told The Dallas Morning News that year that the school wanted to sever formal ties before the church splintered. In the years since then, the dynamics in the church have changed. In 2024, the church overturned its longstanding ban on “self-avowed practicing homosexuals” serving as clergy members, and it officially allowed same-sex marriage. By that time, more than a quarter of the denomination’s churches had already departed over their disagreements with those moves. Some of those churches have remained independent, and others have joined the new Global Methodist Church, a rival denomination that says it will not ordain or marry gay people. One justice, Debra Lehrmann, suggested from the bench on Wednesday that since the dispute over sexuality between the university and the church conference had been resolved, the litigation might not need to proceed. A lawyer for the conference, Sawnie McEntire, replied that the school had “shut the door” on the church, regardless. “We disagree very much with their attempt to mask their justification in some kind of doctrinal dispute,” Mr. McEntire said. A spokeswoman for the university, Megan Jacob, said the school does not comment on pending litigation. Southern Methodist University was founded in the early 20th century by Southern Methodists who wanted to establish a flagship institution west of the Mississippi River. Today, the university and the church’s conference have relatively few practical entanglements. But the relationship is important to the church, and its dissolution risks “diminishing the distinct Methodist character that has shaped the university’s identity,” the Rev. Dr. Derrek Belase, chairman of the South Central Jurisdiction Mission Council, said in a statement.In a brief filed on behalf of the church, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty argued that if the court were to allow the university to unilaterally separate itself from the church, it would violate the legal principle of church autonomy, overriding church-written bylaws and essentially letting the government interfere in ecclesiastical affairs. Many prominent American universities were founded with distinctly religious missions, but later shed their formal ties and Christian identities.Vanderbilt University, another school founded by Southern Methodists, declared itself independent of the church before Southern Methodist University was founded, and that severance was eventually supported by the Tennessee Supreme Court. Church leaders enshrined the church’s connection to Southern Methodist in the school’s bylaws in response to the Tennessee decision. Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT In the century that followed its founding, Southern Methodist grew in the direction its founders imagined. It now has 12,000 students and an endowment of more than $2 billion. Dr. Turner, who became president in 1995, landed George W. Bush’s presidential library for the campus in 2008. The school joined the Atlantic Coast Conference last year, and its football team made the playoffs. The board announced last week that Jay Hartzell, currently president of the much larger University of Texas at Austin, will be Southern Methodist’s next president.

Forget catching big air on the ski slope or staying upright on an ice rink. If there’s any such thing as a winter superpower, it’s knowing how to dress to stay warm. “When we dress appropriately, it allows us to enjoy the outside weather,” says Dr. Cheyenne Falat, assistant medical director of the adult emergency department at the University of Maryland Medical Center, who specializes in environmental emergency medicine. “But beyond just comfort and being able to enjoy activities outside, there are very serious health risks if your body fails to stay warm.” The most sinister threat is hypothermia, which occurs when the body loses heat faster than it can produce it, leading to up to 1,500 deaths in the U.S. each year. Falat has also treated lots of patients who experience cold-weather injuries like frostbite, which can cause significant pain, skin blisters, or complete freezing of a body part. The worst cases—when your body’s tissue loses its blood supply—require amputation, she says. Plus, winter weather can lead to heart problems, trigger asthma attacks, and spike blood sugar levels, among other potential hazards. Dressing appropriately can help insulate you from the elements and create a “microclimate” says John Castellani, a research physiologist with the U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine. The goal is to feel slightly cool, but not cold—so when you start moving around, you won't get too sweaty and uncomfortable. “You want to feel the same way you would if you were in your house and had the temperature at 70°F,” he says. That will help you fend off potential health threats and make winter more palatable. We asked experts to share the best science-backed ways to dress during the winter to keep your whole body warm. What to look for in winter gear The two most important properties to look for in cold-weather gear are thermal insulation and wind resistance, says Khubab Shaker, chairman of the department of materials at the National Textile University in Pakistan. “Clothing with high thermal insulation keeps you warm by trapping heat inside it,” says Shaker, who has researched the subject, “while wind resistance helps block wind and protect from its chilling effect.” There’s a fancy formula that experts like Shaker use to calculate thermal insulation, but the average shopper can simply check labels and closely examine the product to predict how warm it’ll be. Does that shirt you might wear hiking have a thick fleece lining? Does your potential jacket have multiple layers and a down fill power somewhere between 500 and 900? All are indicators that the product has good insulation. Read More: The Psychology of the Cold-Weather Shorts Guy It’s also important to make sure your clothing is moisture-wicking (meaning it draws sweat away from the skin and into the outer layer of your clothes, so it can evaporate) and breathable (allowing vapor to escape back into the environment, so you don’t start to feel sticky). That’s why wool rules: “It provides excellent insulation, resists odors naturally, and regulates temperature well,” Shaker says. It’s also fire resistant. The main drawbacks, he says, are itchiness and, sometimes, a heftier price than other materials. Merino wool isn’t as itchy, but it can be even pricier. On the flipside, there are several materials he recommends avoiding. Plant fibers like cotton and linen are a poor choice for cold weather, Shaker says: “They have a tendency to absorb moisture and lose their insulating properties when they get wet.” Silk has the same limitations, while denim—despite its durability and the fact that it seems like it should be warm—is heavy, takes forever to dry, and provides inadequate insulation. The best way to layer Layering is essential on cold days—but you need the right technique. Fabrics like polyester, nylon, and wool work nicely for the base layer, which is closest to your skin, since they’re moisture-wicking and breathable. “When you sweat, it should take that sweat and pull it away from your body, so your body doesn't cool by evaporation,” Falat says. The second layer is all about insulation, which is where you get most of your warmth. Falat recommends opting for wool or fleece. Cashmere also does the trick. “These are all materials that trap air,” she says. “Air is a very poor conductor of heat, so if you trap these micro-pockets of air in between your base layer and outer layer, that will prevent heat loss away from the body, and allow you to keep that trapped warm air around you.” Your top layer, meanwhile—usually a jacket—ought to have a windproof or waterproof shell, typically made out of tightly woven synthetic fibers like polyester or nylon, as well as a layer of insulation. Its job is to create a barrier against the wind, reduce heat loss, and protect you from rain, snow, or whatever else the environment hurls at you. “The outer shell helps those inner layers stay dry and allows them to keep insulating you,” Falat says. Torn between down and synthetic insulation? There are pros and cons to each: Down (made out of the soft undercoat of feathers from waterfowl, like geese or ducks) is highly compressible and lightweight; however, it tends to be on the pricier side and requires careful cleaning, or the material will degrade with use. Synthetic insulation, meanwhile, is great for damp conditions since it dries quickly, and it’s less expensive and easier to care for. Though research suggests it provides a warmth-to-weight ratio comparable to down, it can be heavier and bulkier, which is why some people don’t prefer it. You’ll do fine opting for whichever you find most comfortable, experts agree. Read More: Why People Love Snow So Much Falat gravitates toward natural materials like goose down, but that's based on personal preference rather than science. “If someone is planning on doing manual labor outside or outdoor activities, and they’re going to repeatedly get dirty, then maybe synthetic material is a better choice,” she says. Her ski jacket, for example, has synthetic insulation—and it keeps her as warm as she could hope. “But I do have a few down jackets I use more for walking in town and just enjoying myself outside, and doing non-physical activities,” she says. If you’re spending an active day outdoors—hiking or skiing or shoveling mountains of snow—keep in mind that the goal is to be able to easily add and shed layers. Otherwise, if sweat dries on your body, it will remove heat, which could make your body temperature plummet before you even realize what’s happening. “The last thing you want to do is truly get very sweaty in the afternoon, and then have those colder, sweatier layers still on as it starts to get colder again,” Falat says. “We often see people suffering from mild to moderate hypothermia because they do some activities and sweat during the day, and then those layers cool them.” The more layers you wear, the more versatility you have, which heightens your ability to adapt. If the sun is shining while Falat is skiing, for example, and it’s not windy or wet out, she often tosses her outer shell into a backpack, and then puts it back on when it gets colder. Or, if it's relatively warm but windy and rainy, she’ll shed her mid layer—ensuring she doesn’t get too hot—before reuniting with it when the temperature drops. Ideally, you’ll have a friend with you whenever you’re spending a lot of time outside in winter weather, Falat adds. That way, you can keep an eye on how the other person is responding to the temperature. Some people with hypothermia experience "paradoxical undressing,” which refers to a false sense of warmth that leads them to remove layers of clothes—worsening their condition. “I'm all about shedding that mid layer if you need to, if it's 35° and sunny outside,” she says. “But maybe have someone remind you, ‘Hey, it's 20° degrees, and it's cloudy and overcast and rain is coming. Maybe it's not the time to start undressing.’” How to accessorize well Your head is one of the fastest ways you lose body heat. To prevent that, opt for a hat made from wool, fleece, or acrylic—all of which offer excellent insulation—and make sure it has a snug fit. Or, if it’s especially cold, consider a balaclava that covers much of your cheeks, nose, chin, and neck. If you're planning to be active, your forehead and scalp might start sweating, in which case a headband that covers your ears can work well, Castellani says. “That gives you a place to get rid of some of the heat,” he notes. “Then you won't be sweating in your hat.” The best way to warm up cold hands is to be physically active, Castellani says. In general, though, he recommends opting for mittens over gloves: “Gloves protect your hands and reduce heat loss, but it’s with your fingers separated,” he says. “There's a lot of area of skin that radiates out to the environment.” Separated fingers get rid of heat faster than the alternative, he adds; if you're wearing mittens, your fingers will be pressed together, and that facilitates warmth. A bonus tip: Castellani likes balling his hands into a fist inside his mittens. “I’m basically reducing the area of heat loss within that protection,” he says. Read More: 9 Ways to Embrace Winter—Even if You Think You Hate It Don’t forget about your feet, either. Falat recommends socks made out of a wool blend (natural wool blended with stretchy synthetic fibers, like polyester and nylon), which has moisture-wicking properties in addition to providing warmth. Your feet won’t sweat in your shoes, but they’ll stay nice and warm, she says. She always carries an extra pair with her, so if her feet get wet, she can sub in the backups. And make sure your shoes are waterproof and wind resistant. “It's not the time to be wearing your Crocs or cotton tennis shoes,” she says. Pull them out of your closet again in the spring—a reward for making it through the winter thanks to the warmest possible wardrobe.

It’s not easy to become a taxi driver in London. Since 1865, to operate a taxi, drivers have had to pass what’s known as “the Knowledge,” a grueling test of a person’s memory of the thousands of streets, landmarks, and driving routes within the city. Students typically study for years to prepare for the Knowledge test, which is considered one of the most difficult examinations a human being can undertake. The end result is London claiming, with good reason, “the best and most qualified cabbies in the world.” Some London neuroscientists saw in cab drivers an opportunity to study how the brain might change in response to the heavy demand for navigational and spatial memory. In a famous study published in 2000, a group of 16 London cabbies underwent MRI brain scans, which showed that compared to people with other jobs, the cabbies had changes in their hippocampus: the brain region dedicated to memory and navigation. The more years people spent on the job, the larger their hippocampus. The hippocampus is a part of the brain implicated in the development of Alzheimer’s disease, the most common form of dementia, which primarily affects the elderly and results in memory loss and navigational difficulties, among other symptoms. The study of London cabbies thus begged the question: might taxi drivers be more protected from developing Alzheimer’s disease than the average person? With an aging global population, rates of Alzheimer’s disease on the rise, high costs of care for those with dementia, and an unpromising landscape for effective drugs, questions of how to prevent or slow progression of the disease are important for all of us—not just taxi drivers. Enterprises eye China’s huge consumer market Branded Content Enterprises eye China’s huge consumer market By China Daily Read More: 9 Things You Should Do for Your Brain Health Every Day, According to Neurologists In a new study published in The BMJ, we and our colleagues Vishal Patel and Michael Liu, also at Harvard, set out to study rates of Alzheimer’s deaths among taxi drivers and ambulance drivers, who rely on their memory to navigate on the fly. We did so by taking advantage of newly available data linking death records of Americans to their occupation. In addition to studying Alzheimer’s deaths among taxi drivers and ambulance drivers, we looked at bus drivers, ship captains, and aircraft pilots: jobs that, while transportation-based, require people to mostly stick to a predetermined route, which might not lead to the same kind of changes in the hippocampus. For more than 400 occupations, we measured the rate of death from Alzheimer’s disease. Importantly, we accounted for the age at which someone died. Alzheimer’s is predominantly a disease of old age, which means that occupations with lower life expectancies would be anticipated to have fewer Alzheimer’s related deaths, simply because people may not live to be old enough to develop the disease. Our findings surprised us. We found that the two occupations with the lowest rate of Alzheimer’s death among all occupations studied were taxi drivers and ambulance drivers. Taken together, their risk of dying from Alzheimer’s disease was 56% lower than the general population at any given age. Taxi and ambulance drivers did not have lower rates of death from other forms of dementia for which the hippocampus may be less involved. Read More: These Are the Best Ways to Improve Your Memory In addition, bus drivers, aircraft pilots, and ship captains—the jobs with less spontaneous decision-making—had Alzheimer’s death rates typical of the rest of the population. This suggests that routine navigation along highly frequented routes might not act on the brain the same way. In fact, a 2006 follow-up study by the London researchers of both taxi and bus drivers found that years of experience led to enlargement of the hippocampus in taxi drivers, but not bus drivers. While striking, our study is unable to establish that driving a taxi itself causes reduced rates of death from Alzheimer’s disease—it simply establishes a link, albeit a highly curious one. It may be, for example, that taxi and ambulance driving attract people who have naturally different hippocampi or have lower baseline risk of Alzheimer’s disease to begin with. After all, one might need a good memory to pass the Knowledge exam or make a career of driving a taxi or ambulance in traffic-ridden cities. We don't think this explanation is likely to explain the entire difference, however. Taxi drivers, for example, have lower life expectancy than most other occupations, and particularly good memory early in one’s life might be expected to be positively correlated with education, lifetime income, and life expectancy. Although our study and the London cabbies study raise more questions than they answer, they point to avenues for research into Alzheimer’s disease prevention. In the absence of highly effective treatments for Alzheimer’s disease, are there changes we could make to our daily lives to help reduce our risk? After all, the human brain is “plastic”: it adapts to the demands placed on it, which is how we are able to learn. Could we also force our brains to make adaptations that lower the risk for Alzheimer’s disease? Read More: You Can Now Treat Depression With an App We don’t know the answer to this question, but our study raises this as a hypothesis. You might wonder: what if we stopped using GPS navigation in our cars, forcing us to rely more heavily on memory to get around? Or more generally, might other cognitive activities that focus on improving navigational and spatial memory help? Current research suggests there may be some cognitive activities, like games and simulations, that could help slow cognitive decline in the elderly, and research is ongoing. But many studies—even high-quality randomized trials—will inevitably fall short because no short-term intervention could possibly replicate the brain changes that may be brought on by a career where navigational and spatial memory are as important as they are in taxi or ambulance driving. Despite the claims of various smartphone games, there’s no activity that, if done over a lifetime, has been shown to reduce the risk of Alzheimer’s. Confronting Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia is a pressing public-health priority, both in the U.S. and abroad. The past several decades have seen a rapid expansion in the research community’s understanding of the brain and dementia, but highly effective treatments or prevention strategies for Alzheimer’s disease remain elusive. We don’t know yet whether deleting your map apps does your brain any favors. But, as we’re learning from cabbies, it probably won’t hurt to flex your brain’s navigation muscles a little more—and maybe let yourself get lost every now and then.

In late 2022, Erin, a 43-year-old from Pennsylvania, agreed to spend six weeks in a psychiatric ward, getting intensive treatment for an illness she knew she didn’t have. That decision was a last resort for Erin, who asked to be identified only by her first name for privacy. Her health had deteriorated after she caught COVID-19 nearly a year earlier; the virus left her with pain, fatigue, rapid weight loss, digestive problems, and vertigo. After another bout with a virus months later, Erin only got sicker, developing heart palpitations, muscle spasms, hoarseness, and pain in her neck, throat, and chest. Erin was no stranger to chronic illness, having coped with a connective-tissue disorder her whole life. This was different. She became unable to work and rarely left her home. Her usual doctors were stumped; others said her litany of symptoms could be manifestations of anxiety. When it became too painful to eat and swallow, Erin grew severely malnourished and was hospitalized at a large academic medical center. “I felt at the time like this was my last hope,” says Erin, who has since been diagnosed with Long COVID. “If I didn’t get any answers there, I didn’t know where to go afterward.” Grottoes bear the enduring touch of Tang Branded Content Grottoes bear the enduring touch of Tang By China Daily Once again, however, she was disappointed. The only physical diagnosis her doctors landed on was vocal-cord dysfunction, which Erin felt did not explain her wide range of symptoms. When her doctors began to discuss discharging her, Erin panicked and said she could not manage her excruciating symptoms at home—a sentiment that she says contributed to concerns of self-harm among her doctors and kicked off conversations about a stay in the psychiatric ward. Eventually, seeing no other way forward, Erin agreed to go. “I just got increasingly defeated over time,” she says. “I didn’t know what to do.” She was admitted for a six-week stay and given diagnoses she knew were wrong: an eating disorder and anxiety. Read More: Long COVID Doesn’t Always Look Like You Think It Does The vast majority of Long COVID patients will not land in psychiatric wards, but Erin is far from the only one who has. “Emergency rooms are dangerous places for people with Long COVID,” says David Putrino, who studies and treats the condition as director of rehabilitation innovation for the Mount Sinai Health System in New York. Numerous patients, he says, are told that inpatient mental-health care is their best or only option. He has worked with at least five patients who were ultimately admitted—and says some of his patients’ stories sound a lot like Erin’s. “Imagine you go to an emergency department, you wait 13 or 14 hours, your condition actually deteriorates, and then you’re told, ‘Hey, good news, everything is normal and we’re sending you home,’” Putrino says. “Going home doesn’t sound like a survivable outcome. So at that point you might break down...and often that gets reinterpreted as ‘Let’s put this person on a psych hold.’” Such experiences fit into a long, troubling tradition in medicine. Because there often aren’t conclusive tests for these types of complex chronic conditions, and because many patients do not outwardly appear unwell, they’re frequently told that they aren’t physically sick at all—that symptoms are all in their heads. “Mainstream medicine really isn’t geared toward treating conditions and diseases that it cannot see under a microscope,” says Larry Au, an assistant professor of sociology at the City College of New York who has studied one of the consequences of that disconnect: medical gaslighting of Long COVID patients. The chronic illnesses that make doctors doubt their patients often start after what “should” be a short-lived sickness. And it’s not just COVID-19; many diseases, from Lyme to mono to the flu, can lead to mysterious, lingering symptoms that are often ruinous but difficult to explain. Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), for example, can follow a variety of viral or bacterial infections, leading to cognitive problems and extreme fatigue made worse by physical or mental exertion. (There is so much overlap between the symptoms of Long COVID and ME/CFS that many people now meet diagnostic criteria for both.) Today, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) calls ME/CFS a “serious, debilitating” biological illness—but for decades, it was written off as psychosomatic. A 1988 paper by researchers from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) suggested that it could be related to “unachievable ambition” and “poor coping skills.” And in 1996, a CDC researcher told a journalist that the condition has no viral cause, results in no immune abnormalities, and could be summed up as “hysteria.” Because the disease was for so long dismissed as psychological, many clinicians to this day try treatments like cognitive behavioral therapy that, at best, do nothing to address the condition’s physical symptoms—and, at worst, exacerbate them. Elizabeth Knights, who is 40 and lives in Massachusetts, went through even more intensive mental-health treatment. She spent several weeks in a psychiatric ward in 2006 before finally being diagnosed with ME/CFS and finding care that dramatically improved her health. During her senior year of high school, Knights caught a mono-like illness that never fully went away. Once at the top of her academic class and an avid skier and rock climber, Knights eventually had to withdraw from college and move in with her parents because she couldn’t function under the strain of persistent fatigue, flulike symptoms, and cognitive dysfunction—all of which her doctors chalked up to depression. “I kept insisting, ‘There’s something else going on here,’” Knights remembers. But she didn’t know about ME/CFS at that time, and her doctors were adamant that her problems were psychological. So when physicians recommended she try inpatient psychiatric care, she went along with it. “That was the only path that was presented to me,” Knights remembers, and she took it. Read More: The Relentless Cost of Chronic Diseases The experience made things worse. She was given numerous medications to which she had bad reactions and went through electroconvulsive therapy, which she says damaged her memory to the point that she had to relearn how to talk and navigate her hometown. “Nobody was listening to me, and people were not informed enough to make a correct diagnosis,” she says. “I was being misdiagnosed and treated for something that I didn’t have.” Rivka Solomon, a longtime ME/CFS patient advocate, says she hears this story a couple times a year: a patient, like Knights, has been wrongly admitted to or threatened with inpatient psychiatric care. And those are just the instances she learns about. “I worry about who is, right now, lying in a bed in a psych ward, too sick to function, left with no one to properly care for them, left with no one to advocate for them,” she says. Erin’s hospitalization left her with medical trauma that required therapy Erin’s hospitalization left her with medical trauma that required therapyLauren Lancaster for TIME The problem is larger than individual doctors, says Mount Sinai’s Putrino. People with conditions like Long COVID and ME/CFS may benefit from inpatient rehabilitative care, for example—but if they don’t meet admission criteria set by hospitals, state regulatory boards, or insurance plans, even well-meaning clinicians may be stuck. Sometimes, “there’s no administrative way to admit these people,” Putrino says. A psychiatric diagnosis is, in some cases, the simplest way to get a patient in. Another complicating factor: there is no validated medical test for detecting Long COVID, ME/CFS, or similar conditions like chronic Lyme disease, another post-infection illness that remains controversial. Although studies have identified biological signs of these illnesses, researchers have not yet found clear biomarkers that lead to definitive diagnoses. “The medical profession loves cold, hard diagnostic tools and evidence-based medicine. They want randomized controlled trials and an easy test that tells you yes or no,” says Dr. Monica Verduzco-Gutierrez, who runs a Long COVID clinic and is chair of physical medicine and rehabilitation at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio. When those tools aren’t available, clinicians sometimes deem patients’ symptoms psychological. Ruth, a 32-year-old who asked to use only her first name for privacy, recently had that experience, even though she is a mental-health professional herself and already knew she had Long COVID. One morning in 2024, she woke up in pain, struggling to breathe and unable to control her bladder. When she visited an emergency room, hoping for medication that might help, she says she was told by a doctor that she was experiencing anxiety. “I was like, ‘I am fading away here. I am slowly dying. I need help,’” she says. But despite her repeated requests for care and her own psychological training, she says she was turned away. These dismissals can also be damaging, Solomon says. “The extreme examples of patients being admitted to psych hospitals are just the tragic tip of the iceberg,” she says. Patients who aren’t believed may struggle to get any medical care at all, or get pushed toward therapies that don’t work. They may also face an uphill battle when trying to secure insurance coverage for treatments, disability benefits, or workplace accommodations. Read More: Long Waits, Short Appointments, Huge Bills: U.S. Health Care Is Causing Patient Burnout Without the backing of a doctor or diagnosis, patients often find that other people in their lives don’t believe them, either. Doug Gross, chair of the department of physical therapy at the University of Alberta, has studied how hard it is for Long COVID patients to find medical care. He says patients often talk about “disbelief from not only the health care system...but more broadly in their social sphere: family members, employers, supervisors at work.” Psychiatric care is not always inappropriate for patients with Long COVID or similar conditions, Verduzco-Gutierrez says. Some do develop depression, anxiety, and other mental-health symptoms, potentially including severe neuropsychiatric complications related to inflammation in their brains or other physiological issues, Putrino says. “Some folks can really benefit from skilled psychological care, even if it’s not their primary or underlying, driving cause of their illness,” he says. Some clinicians, however, fail to differentiate between side effects and root causes, or use screening techniques that aren’t well suited for people with chronic conditions, Verduzco-Gutierrez says. For example, asking someone whether they struggle to get out of bed in the morning—a common question when screening for depression—isn’t all that useful if the clinician doesn’t differentiate between physical and mental exhaustion. “The only way to solve this is more education,” Putrino says, “so the next generation of clinicians are not looking at these patients and saying, ‘A couple of antidepressants and a day off will fix you.’” Katiana Mekka, a 26-year-old Long COVID patient from Greece, says education is especially needed outside the U.S. Last fall, she says, she was involuntarily committed to a psychiatric ward and held for three days, until she passed a thorough screening test for mental-health disorders. The ordeal worsened her already severe illness, leaving her virtually unable to eat, move, or talk for days after. “These illnesses are so mistreated and misdiagnosed,” Mekka says, adding that so few doctors in Greece know about Long COVID that she has been forced to seek virtual support from specialists in other countries. “The patients that I know, we all have so much will to live and so many dreams. This is not a mental issue. We have severe symptoms.” Read More: 11 Ways to Respond When Someone Insults a Loved One’s Disability There are signs that the medical community might be getting better at treating people with Long COVID and diseases like it. The sheer volume of Long COVID patients who have emerged in the wake of the pandemic—nearly 20% of U.S. adults have experienced symptoms at some point—has forced a reckoning with the medical system’s history and sparked new research interest in these conditions. The federal government now has an office dedicated to Long COVID research, and the NIH earmarked an estimated $110 million for Long COVID research in 2024. (Federal research funding for ME/CFS is still paltry in comparison: an estimated $13 million in 2024.) Solomon says more research on not just Long COVID but all infection-associated illnesses is critical, so scientists can develop reliable tests and effective treatments. There’s a long way to go. Putrino says he’s been advocating for systemic changes that would make it easier for hospitals to admit patients with complex conditions and for patients to secure reimbursement for in-home care, but progress is slow. Stigma and denial also still persist. And to this day, most U.S. medical schools do not teach trainee doctors about conditions like ME/CFS. Despite all she’s been through, Erin, the Long COVID patient who spent time in a U.S. mental hospital, considers herself lucky. She found a silver lining to her stay: in the psychiatric ward, she met a clinician—a speech pathologist she saw because of her vocal dysfunction—who knew about Long COVID and referred her to a specialist. She met with that specialist after leaving inpatient care and in 2023 was diagnosed with both Long COVID and ME/CFS. Under proper care, and after plenty of rest, she’s been able to manage her symptoms well enough to return to work and a mostly normal life. “That took me a long time, but I was lucky and found someone who actually helped,” Erin says. “Some people never figure it out.”

The Los Angeles wildfires have killed at least two dozen people and decimated thousands of structures. Yet even in areas that aren’t burning, plumes of smoke remain a serious and ongoing public health threat—especially as the region braces for dangerous winds that could fuel the spread of ash and smoke. “Certainly air pollution problems are nothing new for people who live in Los Angeles and Southern California, but this is a little bit different,” says Dr. Jeremy A. Falk, a pulmonologist and associate professor of medicine at Cedars-Sinai in Los Angeles. “What we’re really worried about is the PM2.5 levels,” or the fine particles in wildfire smoke, which have a diameter of less than 2.5 micrometers. In order for particles to enter your lungs’ air sacs, he says, they have to be just the right size; if they’re too tiny, you’ll breathe them in and out without experiencing any problems, and if they’re too big, they’ll get stuck in your nose or mouth. PM2.5 particles, meanwhile, can settle deep in the lungs, causing a variety of health effects. “If this was all organic smoke—meaning things like trees and vegetation that was burning—we’d have a general sense of what people were inhaling,” Falk says. “But with all the buildings and houses and plastics and chemicals, there’s all sorts of stuff in the air, and the particle sizes that are in that 2.5 range are the ones most likely causing most of the problems.” Read More: What Wildfire Smoke Does to the Human Body Over the short term, elevated PM2.5 exposure can cause a runny nose, coughing and wheezing, eye and throat irritation, and even bronchitis and pneumonia, Falk says. Research suggests high levels can increase the risk of heart attacks, strokes, and arrhythmias, while also raising blood pressure. Certain populations—including young children, the elderly, and people with preexisting heart and lung conditions—are most at risk, though anyone can be affected. It’s too soon to say exactly how the winds forecast to hit Los Angeles will affect the situation. What kind of impact they have depends on their exact patterns. They could “help or hurt,” Falk says. “If most of this gets blown out to uninhabited areas or the ocean, it’s going to do less harm. But it’s certainly, unfortunately, been quite unpredictable.” Here’s how experts advise people in affected areas to take steps to protect themselves. Check your local air-quality report Websites like AirNow.gov offer a real-time status update on the air quality in your neighborhood. Check the Air Quality Index first thing every morning, and again throughout the day, says Dr. John Belperio, interim chief and professor of medicine in the division of pulmonary, critical care, sleep medicine, clinical immunology and allergy at The David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA. Levels can change rapidly, depending on how fires are progressing and what the weather is like, which is why it’s important to make yourself a repeat visitor. Then adapt your behavior accordingly: If you’re in a green zone (under 50—and parts of LA have registered there at varying times over the past week), it’s generally OK to proceed with your day in normal fashion. Once the air quality level is over 101, however, people with underlying lung disease should take extra precautions and stay indoors as much as possible. “Once the levels start getting above 150”—as was the case in Central LA last week—“everyone can be affected,” he says. “Everybody can have a little bit more inflammation in their lungs.” In those cases, it’s best to rethink any outdoor activities—skip your outdoor bike ride or jog, for example, and hit your home gym instead. One caveat: Falk doesn’t always blindly trust air-quality reports. “With these maps that are readily available on pretty reputable websites, you don’t necessarily know for sure what they're measuring," he says. So if you look outside and it seems really smoky, but you’re allegedly in a green zone, proceed cautiously. “Until the fires really die down, I would recommend continuing masking while you’re outside.” Wear a specific type of face mask Over the last four or five years, we’ve all become self-proclaimed mask experts. But it’s important to understand why the kind of mask you wear during a wildfire might be different from what you wore to protect yourself from COVID-19, Falk notes. “COVID spreads from person to person through respiratory droplets, and while you can't see those droplets—they’re still microscopic—they’re much, much larger than the particles we’re talking about from smoke,” he says. “Because the [virus] particles are bigger, you could get away with using relatively unsophisticated masks. But for this, because the particles are so tiny, they'll pass right through a cloth mask.” He recommends that people in LA wear a tight-fitting N95 or KN95 mask any time they go outside; P-100 respirators also work well and filter out 99.97% of airborne particles. Make some changes inside your home If you live in an area affected by wildfire smoke, keep your windows and doors shut, and seal any obvious cracks, Falk advises. It can also be helpful to keep your air conditioner on (or at least its fan)—though ideally, it won’t be the kind that brings in outdoor air. “You’re much better off recirculating air that's already inside because it's a lot cleaner,” he says. The same goes for your car AC. It’s also smart to change the filters in your air-conditioning system regularly, since they might be getting dirty from wildfire smoke. Air filtration systems can elevate indoor air quality, too. “HEPA filters are great,” Falk says. “The higher the MERV rating, the better, because what that means is it’s basically filtering out smaller particles.” MERV—which stands for “minimum efficiency reporting value”—measures how well an air filter traps particles; the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recommends using MERV 13 filters to make sure you’re removing very small particles, like those in wildfire smoke. Read More: ‘Completely Overwhelming’: L.A. Fire Victims Describe Their Devastating Losses If you have an air purifier, turn it on, Belperio says. These machines vary greatly in quality, and “there’s not the greatest of data—it hasn't been rigorously studied,” he adds. “But if you're in a bad area, I think it can actually be somewhat helpful.” While the EPA doesn’t recommend specific brands of air purifiers, the American Lung Association suggests making sure yours is a mechanical air cleaner that filters out particles using HEPA filters; you should also check to see if it’s certified by the California Air Resources Board. Consider the size of the room where you’ll be using it, too: According to the American Lung Association, use a purifier with a clean air delivery rate (CADR) of up to 200 cubic feet per minute (CFM) for a small room, 200-300 CFM for a medium-sized room, and at least 300 CFM for a large room. Don’t add extra chemicals to the mix Avoid turning on your fireplace, burning a candle, or frying food during the wildfire crisis. All can release chemicals and contribute to air pollution, says Jun Wu, professor of environmental and occupational health at the UC Irvine Joe C. Wen School of Population and Public Health. “It’s already hard for us to clean out the air because of all the fires, and all these particles penetrating into the indoors,” she says. “Think about your lungs and your body as a system that can handle a certain amount of environmental stressors and insulating chemicals.” By generating additional air pollutants, you’ll be putting an even greater burden on your systems, she says, which can take a toll on health. Clean off ash-covered surfaces with a damp mop Sometimes during wildfires, ash—or particulate residue that remains or is deposited on the ground after a fire—might settle in a layer on even indoor surfaces. If there’s ash inside your home, wear an N-95 or P-100 mask while you’re cleaning up. It’s also a good idea to put on goggles, gloves, a long-sleeved shirt, and long pants, according to the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD). That way, your skin won’t come into contact with ash. Read More: What to Say to Someone Who Lost Everything in the California Wildfires If you’re sweeping up ash inside your home, mist it with water first, and then use a damp cloth or mop to clean surfaces, Wu advises. Bag it up before throwing it away, the AQMD suggests. Avoid vacuums unless they have a HEPA filter. “Dry vacuum cleaning can actually rouse these particles,” Wu says. “Normally when you ‘dry’ clean your house, you would get a high amount of fine particle exposure around you, like with dust,” she says. “You’re creating a personal cloud of fine particle matter in your home.” Shower liberally If you live in close proximity to the fires and have to go outside, you could end up with particulate matter on your clothing and skin. “It can be secondary pollution,” Wu says. “It can be carried indoors and spread to others.” That’s why she suggests taking a shower as soon as you get back inside—and washing your dirty clothes. Go to the doctor when you need to If you experience severe coughing, shortness of breath, chest pain, or heart palpitations, you should see a doctor. But it’s also important to pay attention to seemingly less dire symptoms. As everyone in California focuses on the fires, there’s a tendency to ignore other potential health ailments. “We’re in winter,” Belperio says. “There’s a lot of winter viruses. We’re seeing plenty of rhinovirus and influenza, and we’re still seeing some COVID. Don’t just think that this is all fire-related, and that you don't have to do anything.” If you feel like something is off, call your doctor, he advises—they may tell you to put a mask on and come in, or set up a telehealth appointment you can join from home.

After announcing in March 2024 that she had been diagnosed with cancer, Kate Middleton, Princess of Wales, has again spoken out about her illness—this time, with good news. “It is a relief now to be in remission and I remain focused on recovery,” Middleton announced on X on Jan. 14. The remission announcement comes a few months after she revealed in September that she had completed chemotherapy treatment. There's still a lot we don't know about the Princess's case, including what type of cancer she had. Here's what it means to be in remission from cancer. Defining "remission" Cancer remission means that doctors have successfully reduced the signs and symptoms of cancer—in some cases, to undetectable levels. "Remission quite simply means that at that point, there is no detectable sign that cancer is in the body on all of the tests we have done," says Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi, an oncologist and professor of medicine at Mayo Clinic. That doesn’t necessarily mean the cancer is completely gone, but it does mean that doctors can't find it after thoroughly testing for it. "The word remission is a very, very tricky word," says Dr. Marleen Meyers, professor of medicine and director of the survivorship program at the Perlmutter Cancer Center of NYU Langone Health. "The common use of the word—even among oncologists, if they say someone is in remission—is that it means we have knowledge that it could come back, but at the moment, there is no evidence of cancer." The way the term "remission" is used can vary "from person to person and, really, physician to physician," says Dr. Christopher Flowers, chair of the department of lymphoma and myeloma and head of the division of cancer medicine at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Read More: Why Are So Many Young People Getting Cancer? It’s Complicated The National Cancer Institute, for example, defines two types of remission: partial and complete. In complete remission, all signs and symptoms of cancer have disappeared, the agency says, while in partial remission, the cancer may be reduced but remain in the body. (It's not clear from Middleton's post which kind of remission her cancer is in.) If people remain in complete remission for at least five years, it could mean they have been cured of their cancer. "You have to have complete remission to be cured," says Dr. Larry Norton, an oncologist and medical director of the Evelyn H. Lauder Breast Center at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, "but complete remission doesn't guarantee that you're cured." Can cancer return after remission? Cancer is notorious for recurring—even after remission—and some types are more likely to do so than others. "Certain kinds of cancers, such as glioblastoma multiforme [a brain cancer]—even if it's gone, it's going to come back very soon," says Ailawadhi. "Similarly, pancreatic cancer, bladder cancer, and ovarian cancers have a very high risk of coming back—despite treatment, despite complete responses, despite remission." Small numbers of cancerous cells that doctors can’t detect may start growing at any time. Most patients will continue to work with their doctors to monitor for any signs of these recurrences. "I tell my patients that remission is an important milestone on the cancer journey to know you are on the pathway to cure," says Flowers. "It's the most positive first step to be in remission." For now, the Princess says she is “looking forward to a fulfilling year ahead,” and thanked the staff at the Royal Marsden Hospital, where she was treated, for “looking after me so well during the past year.” The Princess has limited her royal duties since her diagnosis, but recently appeared at the family’s annual Christmas Day service in Sandringham and hosted the “Together at Christmas” carol service at Westminster Abbey in early December.