Flu activity elevated across the US with at least 18 million cases: CDC

(NEW YORK) — Nearly half of Americans — 152.3 million people — now live in places with unhealthy levels of ozone or particle pollution (PM2.5), two of the most dangerous air pollutants.

The American Lung Association’s 2026 “State of the Air” report finds that more than 129 million people live in counties with failing grades for ozone pollution. This type of pollution forms when sunlight interacts with compounds emitted from cars, industry and chemicals, creating harmful ground-level ozone in the air.

About 62 million people live in counties with failing grades for daily particle pollution spikes, which consist of tiny particles in the air produced by sources like car exhaust, power plants, construction, fires and dust, according to the report.

Exposure to dirty air was not equal, the report found.

People of color were more than twice as likely to live in areas failing all major pollution measures, according to the report.

“[In] areas where people have fewer socioeconomic resources … there’s a snowball effect because many of these areas may have less access to healthy food, less safe places to work out outside and less access to health care,” Dr. Afif El-Hasan, a board-certified pulmonologist and an American Lung Association spokesperson, told ABC News.

Many of these areas with high pollution are also underserved areas or have lower socioeconomic means, El-Hasan said.

Breathing in contaminated air not only makes people sicker; it affects family dynamics, finances and just about every other aspect of life, the report’s authors say.

Children are disproportionately affected as well. About 33.5 million of them are living in counties that received failing grades for at least one major air pollutant.

“Children who grow up in areas with polluted air are going to have decreased lung development compared to children who grow up having been exposed to clean air,” El-Hasan said. “Ultimately that leads to adults who have lower lung capacity than they would otherwise have — and that’s not reversible.”

And because the pollution compromises the body’s defenses, infections like the cold, flu and even COVID may be more severe in people who live in high-pollution areas, the findings suggested.

Despite decades of progress under the Clean Air Act, which was signed into law in 1970, the report found that air pollution is intensifying in many parts of the country.

Ozone pollution has worsened and now affects more people than in the past.

Climate change helps drive this trend by fueling extreme heat, drought and wildfires, the study suggested. And, while particle pollution has shown slight improvements, it still exposes far more people than historic low levels seen in the mid-2010s.

If you live in a place with poor air quality, there are steps you can take to protect your health, according to the American Lung Association.

Limit time outdoors on poor air quality days and check daily conditions. Use a high-quality mask like an N95 respirator and keep indoor air clean with filtration when pollution levels are high. Exercise indoors on bad air quality days.

Studies have also shown that staying up to date on vaccines, including flu and COVID shots, can also offer some protection.

Additionally, it’s critical the U.S. maintains the gains it has made on air quality over decades of stronger public health policies, El-Hasan said.

“Air does not respect borders — it will go everywhere,” El-Hasan said. “People should understand that what they do in terms of making sure policies are protecting air locally — it doesn’t just help you. If we are all helping keep our local air clean, it will help the rest of the nation as well.”

Grace Hagan M.D., is an internal medicine resident at Mayo Clinic and a member of the ABC News Medical Unit.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Several countries, including Thailand and Nepal, have increased their surveillance after cases of the deadly Nipah virus were detected in India.

So far, just two cases have been confirmed among 25-year-old nurses, a woman and a man, in West Bengal, according to the World Health Organization.

A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services told ABC News earlier this week that Indian health authorities have deployed an outbreak response team and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is in contact with local officials. The CDC said it is “monitoring” the situation.

Despite the virus’s high fatality rate, experts have said it’s very unlikely it will lead to a global emergency.

Here’s what you need to know about the virus, including signs and symptoms, how the virus is transmitted and what treatments are available.

What is Nipah virus?

Nipah virus is a type of zoonotic disease, meaning it’s primarily found in animals and can spread between animals and people.

It was first discovered in 1999 after a disease affected both pigs and people in Malaysia and Singapore, according to the CDC.

The virus is most often spread by fruit bats, and can spread through direct or indirect contact.

The virus can also spread from person to person by being in close contact or coming into contact with the bodily fluids of an infected person.

What are the symptoms?

Symptoms typically occur between four and 14 days after exposure. The most common symptom is fever followed by headache, cough, sore throat, difficulty breathing and vomiting.

Diagnosing the virus in the early stages is often difficult because the symptoms resemble many other illnesses, the CDC has said.

The virus can lead to severe symptoms, including disorientation, drowsiness, seizures or encephalitis, which is inflammation of the brain. These can progress to a coma within 24 to 48 hours, according to the CDC.

Deaths range anywhere between 40% and 75% among all cases, the federal health agency said. Some permanent changes among survivors have been noted, including persistent convulsions.

What are the treatments available?

Currently there are no specific treatments available for Nipah virus other than managing symptoms with supportive care, including rest and fluids.

Experts said there are treatments currently under development. One is a monoclonal antibody, a treatment that uses immune system proteins manufactured in a lab. They mimic the antibodies the body naturally creates when fighting the virus.

Dr. Diana Finkel, an associate professor of medicine in the division of infectious disease at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, previously told ABC News that the drug has already completed phase I clinical trials and is currently being used on a compassionate basis.

Researchers are also studying the potential benefit of remdesivir — the intravenous medication used to treat COVID-19 — which has been shown to work well in nonhuman primates with Nipah virus.

What is the likelihood of Nipah virus spreading?

Experts said that while anything is possible, it’s very unlikely that cases in India will lead to global spread.

“The world is small, but the likelihood that somebody’s infected, or an infected fruit bat with Nipah virus would be here, right now, is very unlikely,” Finkel previously told ABC News.

She said when people are exposed in health care settings, it’s often because proper standard precautions were not followed, such as not wearing gloves or masks.

Experts have said Nipah virus cases are also a reminder of the potentially devastating effects of habitat destruction and climate change, possibly leading to more interaction between infected animals and humans.

“You have to think about why are fruit bats that harbor this Nipah virus, why are they coming into contact with people?” Dr. Peter Rabinowitz, director of the University of Washington Center for One Health Research, previously told ABC News. “What is changing in terms of the movement of the bat populations? Are they leaving [a] habitat where there were not very many people? Are they now spending more time close to people?”

ABC News’ Youri Benadjaoud contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — Last week, the Trump administration announced it was banning the use of human fetal tissue from some abortions in federally funded medical research. 

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) said the policy would go into effect immediately and advance “science by investing in breakthrough technologies more capable of modeling human health and disease,” NIH director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya said in a statement.

Scientists told ABC News that research using human fetal tissue has contributed to understanding diseases better, such as HIV and Ebola, and helped in the development of some vaccines and drugs.

Some scientists worry the ban could prevent groundbreaking discoveries about the behaviors of certain diseases and stop the development of life-saving therapies.

“It’s not a scientific decision,” Dr. Lawrence Goldstein, a professor emeritus of cellular and molecular medicine at the University of California, San Diego, told ABC News. “It’s a moral decision that places the rights of fetal tissue that would be discarded above the rights of sick people who will benefit from that research.”

How human fetal tissue has been used

Human fetal tissue has been used to study serious diseases and disorders, including AIDS, cancer, Parkinson’s disease, dengue, Ebola, hepatitis C, diabetes and spinal cord injuries.

Cell lines have been created from human fetal tissue that have led to the development of vaccines for rubella, rabies, chickenpox, shingles and hepatitis A. Research has also led to the development of drugs to treat HIV, hemophilia and sepsis.

President Donald Trump himself benefited from the research: the experimental antibody treatment he took to treat COVID-19 was developed using cells derived from human fetal tissue. At the time, Trump praised the treatment as a “cure.”

The tissue has been also used in reproductive medicine research to study fertility issues, pregnancy issues, and pregnancy conditions such as pre-eclampsia.

Goldstein said that human fetal tissue research also helps create humanized mouse models to study human immune systems.

“Using fetal tissue, you can make mice that have human blood-forming and immune systems,” Goldstein said. “And that’s valuable because a lot of the viruses that trouble human health don’t grow properly in mice. But if you can make mice with human blood and immune systems, those viruses will frequently grow, and you can learn how to make therapies to block them.”

There are very strict guidelines that researchers have to follow when using human fetal tissue, ensuring they are in compliance with federal and sometimes state requirements.

Additionally, the research must be reviewed and approved by the NIH’s Institutional Review Board (IRB), which specifically assesses federally funded research that uses human subjects.

The IRB assures that donation and reception of human fetal tissue were done with consent and not coercion and that there were no enticements provided to the participant, the clinic or the research team.

A researcher with knowledge of the matter, who asked that their name not be used due to fears of retribution, told ABC News that federal law states that donation cannot be even brought up to a pregnant individual deciding to terminate their pregnancy before the decision to terminate.

“These are extremely important guardrails that are in place to ensure that everything is handled properly,” the researcher with knowledge of the matter said.

Impacts of ending NIH funding

The Trump administration first instituted a ban ending all human fetal tissue research at NIH in 2019, but it was reversed by the Biden administration in 2021.

The current ban stops NIH funds from supporting all “grants, cooperative agreements, other transaction awards and research and development contracts,” the agency said in a statement.

Some groups praised the Trump administration’s new policy, including the Independent Medical Alliance, a group that promoted unproven treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“There is no ethical justification for performing experiments on tissue derived from aborted human beings,” Dr. Joseph Varon, president and chief medical officer of the Independent Medical Alliance, said in a statement. “The fact this practice continued for years within federally funded research institutions shows just how far removed parts of HHS had become from foundational medical ethics. This correction is long overdue.”

However, some scientists say the ban will affect ongoing and future work.

Dr. Anita Bhattacharyya, an associate professor of cell and regenerative biology in the school of medicine and public health at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said she was hoping to apply for a future NIH grant to study human fetal tissue research and will now not be able to do so.

Bhattacharyya explained she currently uses human-induced pluripotent stem cells, which are reprogrammed cells that are similar to embryonic stem cells, in her work. However, the loss of NIH funding for human fetal tissue research could affect future work.

“My reaction was, ‘How are we going to do some of our research if we can no longer use human fetal tissue?'” she recalled to ABC News. “In particular, my lab studies Down syndrome and so we know that in Down syndrome, the brain develops differently to lead to the intellectual disability that people with Down syndrome have.”

Bhattacharyya said human fetal tissue is valuable when studying Down syndrome or neuropsychiatric disorders because it can recapitulate what’s happening in brain development.

“And so that’s where the human fetal tissue really provides us with a benchmark or the ground truth so that we can validate our models,” she said.

Finding alternative methods of funding is another issue, scientists told ABC News. The NIH was the largest funder of research involving human fetal tissue, and no longer financially supporting such research may leave scientists scrambling to find other donors.

Goldstein said there are private disease foundations that will sometimes fund human fetal tissue research, such as the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, which funds stem-cell-related research in California.

However, experts say the hole left behind by the lack of NIH funding cannot be made up through private donations.

“There’s really nothing adequate to substitute for the federal effort,” Goldstein said. “It is the largest funder of medical research in the United States. It has systems in place to regulate quality and ensure that ethics and scientific principles are being adhered to. We really can’t move ahead as efficiently as we would like with the absence of the NIH.”

Although the NIH said tissue from spontaneous abortions will still be available, the researcher with knowledge of the matter said this tissue is very often not suitable for research purposes.

“The reason is because, most often, spontaneous abortion happens as a result of some sort of genetic abnormality or some injury, infection, some kind of damage to the fetus itself, that renders that tissue completely unusable for scientific research,” they said.

“Additionally, because spontaneous abortions are just that, they’re spontaneous and therefore completely unpredictable,” the researcher continued. “We have to be very careful in the way that we handle that tissue. It makes those studies intractable. And so, for that reason, spontaneous abortions are not a suitable replacement for fetal tissue research that we would normally obtain.”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.