Detroit area ranks sixth worst in pollution report
Why it matters: The findings, which predate the current Trump administration, come as the White House is reconsidering EPA rules and regulations meant to curb pollution and promote cleaner air.
Driving the news: Nearly half of Americans are now exposed to potentially dangerous levels of ozone or particle pollution, per the American Lung Association's 2025 State of the Air report.
Detroit remains high on the list of regions where annual pollution levels exceed air quality standards.
Zoom in: Our region's average annual concentration of particle pollution has been slowly rising, from 10.9 micrograms per cubic meter in 2018-20 to 13 in 2021-23.
That's compared with values for the cleanest cities, between 4-6 micrograms per cubic meter.
Between the lines: Extreme heat, wildfires and drought are degrading air quality nationwide, the Lung Association says, though pollution from industry and trucking remains a factor.
Air pollution is associated with an array of health conditions, from wheezing and coughing to asthma and premature death.
How it works: The report uses local air quality data to grade and rank locations based on ozone pollution, daily particle pollution and annual particle pollution.
This latest report includes data from 2021-2023, "the most recent three years of quality-assured nationwide air pollution data publicly available."
What they're saying:"Clearly, we need to do more to control the pollutants that are impacting our changing climate … instead of thinking about how to roll them back," says Katherine Pruitt, senior director of nationwide clean air policy at the American Lung Association and report author.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
5 minutes ago
- The Hill
On ultra-processed foods, let's move beyond talk
With Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. publicly calling out Big Food, ultra-processed foods are finally entering the national spotlight. But the conversation risks becoming politicized, and that would be a mistake. The health harms of ultra-processed foods are becoming increasingly documented, yet public discourse too often gets bogged down in politics rather than advancing solutions. What we need now is action. For decades, ultra-processed foods — cheap, palatable, shelf-stable products engineered for maximum consumption — have dominated the American diet. Originally developed during World War II to provide affordable, long-lasting rations, these foods have since morphed into something far more extreme. What began as a wartime necessity evolved into a profit-driven industry built on super-sized portions, synthetic additives, and relentless marketing. Today, these hyper-engineered products comprise more than 73 percent of the U.S. food supply, according to Northeastern University's Network Science Institute. Conditions once rare in children, such as type 2 diabetes and fatty liver disease, are now rising, especially in low-income and minority communities where ultra-processed foods are often more accessible than nutritious alternatives. We are seeing mental health suffer too. Emerging research on the gut-brain connection suggests that additives and refined carbohydrates in ultra-processed foods may disrupt the gut microbiome, contributing to increased rates of anxiety, stress, and depression. The consequences go far beyond individual health. The U.S. obesity epidemic costs an estimated $173 billion annually, straining our healthcare system and undercutting national productivity. Our food system, reliant on ultra-processed foods, has created a vicious cycle. We produce foods that drive obesity, then market expensive GLP-1 drugs to treat it. Now we're even engineering new foods designed to be eaten alongside the drugs. Meanwhile, patients absorb the costs — physically, financially, and emotionally. But it doesn't have to be this way. Based on original research at Princeton including a nationally representative survey of over 2,300 Americans, expert interviews, participation at the World Food Forum in Rome, and international case studies, there are concrete, nonpartisan steps we can take to sidestep gridlock and break this cycle. First, the U.S. needs a clear federal definition of ultra-processed foods to guide policy and consumer understanding. Countries like Brazil have led the way by incorporating such definitions into their national dietary guidelines, explicitly warning against ultra-processed foods. In Italy, local governments have even stepped up with food policy councils to drive change. Without a consistent federal standard, consumer confusion persists and harmful products continue to slip through regulatory cracks. Next, implementing standardized front-of-package labeling that draws from Latin America's bold warning icons and Europe's color-coded Nutri-Score can help consumers quickly identify highly processed products. Evidence from places like Chile and France shows these systems not only influence consumer behavior but can also push manufacturers to reformulate their products. We must also formally recognize food addiction as a public health issue. This would open the door to expanded nutrition research, dedicated support services, and stronger marketing regulations, especially to protect children from predatory advertising. Countries like South Korea and the U.K. have led the way: South Korea restricts fast food near schools through 'Green Food Zones,' and the U.K. is banning junk food ads on television before 9 p.m. and across digital platforms. But in some parts of the U.S., there is already momentum underway at the state and local level. Initiatives in both red and blue states, like Texas's proposal to mandate warning labels for specific ingredients and California's push for additive bans, show that food policy reform can transcend partisan divides. California's actions have already prompted other states, including Illinois, Florida, Arizona, and Utah, to advance similar measures. This patchwork of state leadership is starting to drive industry reformulation and set the stage for broader national change. Improving food literacy and nutrition education is essential to building foundational understanding of health and food systems. Japan's Shokuiku policy and Finland's Tasty School program show how school meals can serve as nutrition education, fostering healthy habits early. Requiring U.S. schools, hospitals, and other public institutions to prioritize minimally processed, nutrient-dense foods would protect vulnerable communities and shift national demand toward real food. Perhaps the most innovative recommendation derived from my research is for the U.S. to adopt data-driven tools like GroceryDB and Food Compass 2.0 to improve food labeling. These AI-powered systems analyze products beyond traditional nutrient content, assessing the degree and type of processing to provide a clear, science-based score. Unlike existing labels, which often overlook the complexity of ultra-processing, these tools can help consumers easily identify truly unhealthy foods and encourage manufacturers to reformulate products. While still evolving, such technology holds promise to make food labels more transparent and accurate, offering a powerful complement to policy efforts. Still, tackling the ultra-processed food crisis will require more than isolated reforms. It demands a coordinated, cross-sector effort. The government must formally recognize UPFs, invest in stronger regulations and nutrition research, and empower localities to lead. Industry must shift its value proposition toward health, investing in tools like AI-powered nutrition scoring and product reformulation. And at the grassroots level, youth activism and community-based initiatives can drive the cultural change needed to make access to nutritious food the norm, rather than the exception. The evidence is clear, and the political moment is ripe. If enough people understand and care about the harms of ultra-processed foods, pressure from below can compel action from above. The question is no longer whether we can act, but whether we will. Lina Singh is a Fulbright Scholar and recent graduate of Princeton University's School of Public and International Affairs. She is an incoming master's student at the University of Gastronomic Sciences in Pollenzo, Italy. Nicole Avena, Ph.D., is a neuroscientist specializing in nutrition, addiction, and eating behavior and an Associate Professor at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and Visiting Professor of Health Psychology at Princeton University.
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
Trump to launch effort to ease Americans' access to their medical records — but privacy concerns loom
Donald TrumpFacebookTweetLink Follow President Donald Trump on Wednesday will make a fresh push to improve Americans' access to their own medical records, tasking dozens of major health and technology companies with solving an issue that has long bedeviled the federal government. The plan is expected to center on a pledge that roughly 60 companies will sign — including tech giants Microsoft and Oracle — to help develop new ways for more easily sharing patient data across the US's fragmented health care system, three people familiar with the matter told CNN. Trump is slated to tout the voluntary framework during a White House speech on Wednesday. Yet it remains unclear how quickly the companies can make progress on such a sweeping goal — and how the administration plans to hold them accountable for following through on the high-level, nonbinding commitment. The proposal may also spark pushback from privacy advocates who have warned that making patients' sensitive health data more widely accessible risks also making it less secure. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which oversees the largest federal health programs, declined to comment on the details of the announcement. But in a statement, spokesperson Catherine Howden said the 'initiative aims to build a smarter, more secure and more personalized healthcare system — one that improves patient outcomes, reduces provider burden and drives greater value through private sector innovation and aligned federal leadership.' Bloomberg News first reported some of the initiative's details. The move represents the latest in a long line of attempts by the federal government to give patients greater access and control over their own health records, which often don't smoothly transfer from one health provider to another. Meanwhile, there's a newly added benefit for Silicon Valley, which has heavily invested in a growing array of consumer health, wellness and artificial intelligence startups that stand to gain from users being able to more seamlessly download their data and direct it to the apps of their choice. Amy Gleason, the acting administrator of DOGE and a former health tech executive, and Arda Kara, who worked at big data firm Palantir before joining the Trump health department, have led the medical records push, two of the people familiar said. The pledge comes two-and-a-half months after the health department issued a request for input from health and tech companies for improving the nation's 'digital health ecosystem.' Past Democratic and Republican administrations have made improving health record access a policy priority, arguing that it's critical to providing patients with better and more efficient care. But progress in Congress and within the federal government has been slowed by the thicket of technical challenges and privacy considerations surrounding Americans' most sensitive health data. Trump officials are planning to try a different route, relying on the private sector to make headway on those thorny problems ahead of any significant government intervention, the people familiar said. The tactic mirrors the hands-off approach the administration has taken on other top health priorities, such as encouraging food companies to voluntarily remove artificial dyes from products and getting insurers to commit to improving a 'prior authorization' process often blamed for delaying patients' care. But overhauling health records access will likely require broad collaboration among competitors across the health and technology industries, raising questions about whether the private sector will be able to agree on a host of minute details with broad implications. Plus, previous pushes have prompted significant concerns among privacy advocates and some parts of the health industry. Those groups worried that giving Americans greater ability to share their records will undermine federal efforts to keep their information private, making it easier for people to unwittingly expose their most sensitive data to companies with poor security or bad intentions, which could profit by selling that data.
Associated Press
an hour ago
- Associated Press
Global Kratom Coalition Applauds HHS Crackdown on Dangerous Synthetic Kratom Derivatives
New federal action targets 7-hydroxymitragynine products, while protecting access to natural kratom leaf The Global Kratom Coalition (GKC) today applauded the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for taking decisive action to protect public health by moving to schedule products that contain high concentrations of 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH or '7'). Scheduled drugs are those with a high potential for abuse, with no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. The announcement, made by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary, targets manipulated, high-potency, synthetic products like '7' that are opioids masquerading as dietary supplements and are being sold online and in smoke shops across the country. The introduction of these products in the last two years has raised alarm among public health experts and responsible kratom advocates alike, who warn that these synthetic products pose a serious risk to consumers and undermine the safe, traditional use of kratom leaf. 'The Department of Health and Human Services is showing bold, science-driven leadership by taking aim at these rogue 7-OH products,' said Walker Gallman, legislative director of the Global Kratom Coalition. 'Secretary Kennedy and Commissioner Makary deserve enormous credit for drawing a clear line between dangerous synthetics and the natural plant. This is a huge win for public health and for millions of Americans who responsibly use leaf kratom to improve their quality of life.' HHS made clear that natural leaf kratom is not the target of this action. Federal officials have rightly distinguished between the traditionally used botanical with centuries of safe use and synthetic derivatives like '7,' which pose significant health risks due to their potency and opioid-like effects. This distinction is critical to protect public health while preserving access to natural kratom for the millions of Americans who use it safely and responsibly. Today's announcement follows FDA actions taken earlier this month. The FDA has already begun ramping up enforcement, issuing seven warning letters to manufacturers of 7-OH products. This action sets the stage for stronger measures ahead, including potential product seizures and civil penalties. Today's announcement also featured strong support from Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), who has been an advocate for distinguishing natural leaf kratom from synthetic opioids, as well as powerful testimony from natural leaf kratom consumer Melody Woolf of Kalamazoo, Michigan. Woolf, a longtime advocate for natural kratom, described how natural kratom leaf helped her in her daily life but warned that synthetic 7-OH products represent a dangerous and misleading alternative. 'It was only the powdered kratom leaf that saved my life,' Woolf testified. 'Now I'm seeing something very dangerous happen. 7-OH is being sold over the counter, and it's not the plant. It's concentrated and addictive. People think it's kratom, but it's not. And it's dragging some back toward opioid use. 7-OH needs to be off the shelves.' Gallman added, 'Melody's story is one of thousands. She represents what we're fighting for—access to natural, responsibly regulated kratom. We applaud HHS for standing with consumers like her and protecting them from deceptive, dangerous knockoffs.' The Global Kratom Coalition encourages HHS to work closely with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to move swiftly through the federal scheduling process for synthetically derived 7-hydroxymitragynine products. Coordinated action is essential to ensure these dangerous, highly concentrated substances are removed from the market before they can cause further harm. By partnering on enforcement and regulation, HHS and DEA can protect consumers while preserving access to safe, natural kratom leaf. About Global Kratom Coalition The Global Kratom Coalition is an alliance of kratom consumers, experts, and industry leaders dedicated to protecting access to kratom while advancing scientific research, driving consumer education, and developing robust regulations to protect consumers. For more information, visit Media Contact Patrick George +1 916-202-1982 [email protected] ### SOURCE: Global Kratom Coalition Copyright 2025 EZ Newswire
