Gun deaths among children rise in states with lax firearm laws, new study finds
Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho and Georgia were among the states that saw a jump in pediatric gun deaths after amending their firearms restrictions following a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that applied the Second Amendment to the states, researchers found.
Dr. Jeremy Faust, an emergency room doctor at Massachusetts General Brigham Hospital and the study's lead author, said he started the research after wondering why gun deaths among children were so high. Firearms are the leading cause of death among children and teenagers in the United States, with a steep increase in ages 15 to 19 starting in 2020.
"Why did things go so badly in some states?" Faust asked. He said legal scholars told him to look at McDonald v. City of Chicago, which applied the Second Amendment to local jurisdictions.
The Supreme Court held in the landmark case that the Constitution's Second Amendment restrains the government's ability to significantly limit "the right to keep and bear arms." For the first decade of the 21st century, there were very few changes to gun laws but every state changed their laws to some or great extent after McDonald, said Faust.
Researchers divided the 50 states into three groups — most permissive, permissive, and strict — based on legal changes made since 2010. The team, which included researchers from Brown University, Yale New Haven, the University of Pittsburgh and the University of California, used a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention database to analyze data from the decade before the Supreme Court ruling and then compared that to data from 2011 to 2023.
The findings surprised Faust and his team, he told CBS News.
Youth deaths jumped by 7,398 in the period after the Supreme Court ruling — with a total of 23,000 gun-related fatalities. Children's deaths by both homicide and suicide also rose in states that had the most permissive firearm laws, the study found. Black youth also saw the largest increase in firearm deaths in the most permissive and permissive states.
The CDC found in 2023 that the vast majority of firearm deaths involving young children were due to guns that were stored unlocked and loaded. But Faust said that while gun storage is an important part of saving lives, the study shows strict laws play an enormous role in preventing youth firearms deaths.
In the states that had the most restrictive laws, deaths remained stable or, in some cases, there were fewer pediatric gun deaths.
California had a 40% reduction in children's gun deaths, the study found. New York, Rhode Island, Maryland and Massachusetts also saw a decrease.
"This study shows the problem is linked pretty tightly to legal posture. This can be fixed and bring back thousands of people," Faust said. "States should ask what they want for their communities? What are they willing to do to save lives?"
Gun advocates like Emma Brown, the executive director of Giffords — an anti-gun violence group led by former Arizona Congresswoman Gabby Giffords who was shot in the head in 2011 during a constituent meeting — applauded the study's findings.
"Guns are the leading cause of death for kids and young people in the United States, and now more kids are dying because some states prioritize making gun CEOs richer over fighting crime and building safe communities," Brown said. "This study shows what we all know: common sense gun laws save lives."
CBS News has reached out to the Second Amendment Foundation, one of the plaintiffs in McDonald V. City of Chicago, for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
14 minutes ago
- CNN
The 20 best men's skin care products on Amazon, according to dermatologists
Men's Amazon skin care quick picks A cleanser that won't strip your skin: La Roche-Posay Toleriane Hydrating Gentle Cleanser A bestselling exfoliant: Paula's Choice Skin Perfecting 2% BHA Liquid Exfoliant A moisturizer that punches above its price: The Ordinary Natural Moisturizing Factors + HA The best sunscreen we've tested: Murad Multivitamin Clear Coat Broad-Spectrum SPF 50 With some of the best men's skin care available on Amazon, an affordable skin care regimen is just a few clicks away. Yet only 11% of men have a daily skin care routine, according to a 2023 CivicScience survey. If you count yourself among the majority of guys slacking on grooming, this guide will fix that. Ahead, you'll find everything you need to take care of your skin, including dermatologist- and editor-approved Amazon skin care products that ship straight to your door. La Roche-Posay Toleriane Hydrating Gentle Cleanser With its wide availability and derm-approved formulas, La Roche-Posay has become a mainstay in our skin care guides, and the brand's Toleriane cleansers continue that trend. 'This daily gentle cleanser is made with prebiotic thermal spring water, niacinamide and ceramides to effectively wash away dirt, oil and pollutants while maintaining the skin's natural moisture barrier,' said Dr. Brendan Camp, double board-certified dermatologist at MDCS Dermatology. Order it if you have normal or dry skin. La Roche-Posay Toleriane Purifying Foaming Cleanser La Roche-Posay's Purifying Cleanser boasts a similar formula with a little extra cleansing oomph for oilier skin types. 'In my experience, men prefer a foaming cleanser, and this one checks all the boxes in terms of leaving the skin feeling refreshed without stripping the barrier,' said Catie Boucher, a board-certified dermatology nurse practitioner and founder of SavvyDerm. Cetaphil Daily Facial Cleanser Dr. Marisa Garshick, a board-certified dermatologist at MDCS Dermatology, directed men with normal to oily skin to Cetaphil's Daily Facial Cleanser. 'It contains glycerin, vitamin B3 and vitamin B5, so it won't leave the skin feeling dry while still adequately cleansing,' she said. Neutrogena Stubborn Texture Daily Cleanser If there's one product I credit with keeping my skin (mostly) clear, it's this drugstore face wash. Infused with 1% salicylic acid, the foaming formula breaks down excess oil without completely stripping the skin, making it an excellent choice for oily, acne-prone skin types. Read our review CeraVe Foaming Facial Cleanser CeraVe is everywhere, and for good reason. Not only are its products affordable and available at most stores, but they also receive high praise from derms like Dr. Noah Gratch, a board-certified dermatologist at MCDS Dermatology. He said CeraVe's Foaming Cleanser works for all skin types, thanks to its fragrance-free, oil-regulating formula that won't dry out the skin. Kiehl's Facial Fuel Energizing Scrub Part cleanser, part exfoliator, Kiehl's Facial Fuel Scrub removes dead skin and pollutants while also softening facial hair for a closer shave. As soothing as the menthol and vitamin E formula is, Gratch recommends only using it twice a week. CeraVe Acne Control Gel This AHA- and BHA-based gel from CeraVe is Boucher's pick for exfoliation, as it helps 'decongest the pores' while calming and hydrating the skin with niacinamide and hyaluronic acid. Be sure to wear sunscreen after applying. La Roche-Posay Effaclar Salicylic Acid Acne Treatment 'A few months ago, my brother asked me for the name of my dermatologist so he could get his skin in order ahead of his wedding,' associate deals editor Elena Matarazzo said. The derm's advice? Try this serum to reduce blemishes and pore size. 'He's been using it ever since, along with a gentle cleanser from the brand, and has seen noticeable differences on his cheeks, which were a major problem area during his initial consult with the doctor.' Paula's Choice Skin Perfecting 2% BHA Liquid Exfoliant This Amazon bestseller earns a nod from Garshick. With active ingredients like salicylic acid, it helps to fight ingrown hairs, smooth the skin and unclog pores, according to the dermatologist. Start by using it every other day, followed by daily or twice-daily applications. Kate Somerville ExfoliKate Intensive Exfoliating Treatment 'Used just one to two times a week, this exfoliating treatment eliminates dull skin, removes buildup and reveals smoother, healthier-looking skin,' Camp said. The anti-aging treatment works with the help of ingredients like lactic and salicylic acid, plus soothing aloe vera, honey and vitamin E. The Ordinary Saccharomyces Ferment 30% Milky Toner 'Though it's not one of beauty editor Sophie Shaw's top products from The Ordinary, I do love the hydrating qualities of this affordable toner,' associate testing writer Joe Bloss said. After cleansing with a face wash, toners like this one can remove dead skin and offer a moisture boost. The Ordinary Natural Moisturizing Factors + HA I'm testing this formula for an upcoming story on the best men's moisturizers, and though I've used it before, I'm once again stunned by The Ordinary's price-to-quality ratio. For less than a latte, you get an excellent face moisturizer with clean ingredients that works for nearly all skin types. If you pick one moisturizer, make it this one. CeraVe Moisturizing Cream Men looking for a do-it-all moisturizer they can apply everywhere should consider this cream, which topped our testing pool in our review of the best moisturizers for dry skin. Gratch likes that it's lightweight and fragrance-free, so it won't clog pores or irritate sensitive skin. Vanicream Daily Facial Moisturizer Free from dyes, fragrances and other irritating ingredients, Vanicream's moisturizer should be a go-to for anyone with eczema or extra-sensitive skin. Camp also commends the product's rich but lightweight texture, which he said is 'formulated with hyaluronic acid and five key ceramides to retain moisture and leave skin feeling soft.' La Roche-Posay Hyalu B5 Serum 'For men who prefer more of a serum, La Roche-Posay Hyalu B5 is a great option as it allows for easy application, especially for men with facial hair who feel moisturizers get caught in their beard,' Boucher said. She also recommends CeraVe's Oil Control Moisturizing Gel-Cream. Neutrogena Hydro Boost Hyaluronic Acid Gel Cream Greasy skin? Try Neutrogena's gel cream, which Garshick said provides moisture while feeling weightless. In our drugstore moisturizer review, our tester confirmed that the gel is very lightweight, making it a great choice for sweltering hot weather and those with normal or combination skin. For best results, apply it to damp skin. Neutrogena Sport Face Sunscreen SPF 70+ Men's skin is more susceptible to sun damage, Gratch said, so it's vital to add sunscreen to your routine. Neutrogena's Sport Face Sunscreen is his choice, thanks to its lightweight formula that doesn't clog pores. Murad Multivitamin Clear Coat Broad-Spectrum SPF 50 After our panel tested 25 sunscreens, Murad's lightweight gel stunned us with its invisible application and nourishing skin-perfecting ingredients. It's expensive, but one tester said that just a little bit of the potent formula goes a long our review Andalou Naturals Daily Shade + Blue Light Defense Facial Lotion SPF 30 In our roundup of the best face sunscreens, Garshick called this one of her favorite formulas, praising its broad-spectrum protection and its moisture-boosting ingredients. Supergoop! Mineral Mattescreen SPF 40 Guys may be reluctant to use tinted sunscreen because it seems like makeup, but I've used this formula for years and can confidently say the tint is imperceptible. On top of its invisible, matte application, it's wonderfully light, soaking into greasy skin without adding any oil or heft. The only con is the price. The following FAQs have been answered by clinicians Dr. Brendan Camp and Catie Boucher. What is the highest-rated men's skin care product on Amazon? What is the highest-rated men's skin care product on Amazon? If you filter skin care products by gender on Amazon and sort by bestsellers, you'll find top-rated products from brands like Thayers, Dove Men and Harry's, as well as viral hits like Medicube and Hero Cosmetics. But I'd use our clinicians' picks to steer you in the right direction, given they have the expertise to surface products with science-based ingredients. What is the best daily skin care routine for men? What is the best daily skin care routine for men? A skin care routine doesn't have to be complicated. If you want to stick to the basics, Camp suggests a simple three-step approach. In the morning, cleanse, moisturize and apply sunscreen. (Remember that a moisturizer with SPF can serve two purposes.) In the evening, repeat the same process but skip the sun protection. You can add other products — like toners and exfoliants — gradually, Camp added. Skin care kits can also be a good starting point, as they often include everything needed for a well-rounded daily regimen. Still lost? Don't be afraid to ask for help, Boucher said. 'Beyond those essential foundational products, it can be very helpful to schedule a consult with a professional to learn more about how you can best care for your skin in the long term.' Are there differences between men's and women's skin? Are there differences between men's and women's skin? In general, men and women tend to share the same skin care concerns, Boucher said, though guys with facial hair may gravitate to lighter formulations that won't get caught in their beards. There are, however, some physiological differences. 'The main differences between men's and women's skin is the fact that, as a general rule, men's skin is thicker and produces more oil,' she said. 'While these are key differences to keep in mind when choosing skin care products, marketing tends to put men into a 'one size fits all' box when it comes to their routine.' For this article, I consulted the following four clinicians to gain their professional insights on men's skin care. Catie Boucher, board-certified dermatology nurse practitioner and founder of SavvyDerm Dr. Brendan Camp, double board-certified dermatologist at MDCS Dermatology in New York Dr. Marisa Garshick, board-certified dermatologist at MDCS Dermatology in New York and New Jersey Dr. Noah Gratch, board-certified dermatologist at MDCS Dermatology in New York CNN Underscored has a team of skilled writers and editors who have many years of experience testing, researching and recommending products, and they ensure each article is carefully edited and products are properly vetted. We talk to top experts when applicable to make certain we are testing each product accurately, recommending only the best products and considering the pros and cons of each item. For this guide, associate writer Maxwell Shukuya leaned on board-certified clinicians and hands-on testing to compile a list of the best men's skin care available on Amazon. Shukuya also brings his own experience as a product tester, having written guides on mineral sunscreens, drugstore face washes and sustainable skin care.
Harvard Business Review
28 minutes ago
- Harvard Business Review
A New Framework for Reducing Healthcare Disparities
Despite decades of efforts to address healthcare inequities in the United States through programs and policies targeting social determinants of health, disparities persist across racial, gender, socioeconomic, and geographic lines. Systematic reviews of hospital systems' initiatives and programs to address social determinants of health (SDOH) have revealed unsatisfactory progress. Some attribute the slow progress to insufficient standardization and sharing of learnings across communities, or the underinvestment in SDOH data and measurement. We posit that the core problem may be an overreliance on importing solutions from other communities and healthcare settings without adequately accounting for the specific needs and realities of local patient populations. Health inequities are rooted in the unique social, structural, and cultural fabric of each community, and context-blind interventions risk wasting resources, eroding trust, and perpetuating the very inequities they aim to fix. To help healthcare organizations tailor their approaches to the needs and contexts of individual communities, we created our Strategic Fingerprint Framework for Health Equity, which we describe in this article. We developed it by studying the innovative, ground-level decisions made by the Health Equity Accelerator at Boston Medical Center in its approach to advancing health equity. The accelerator has already achieved promising results, including eliminating racial disparities in the decision-to-incision time to perform urgent cesarean sections and narrowing gaps in diabetes-related outcomes. Given that all fingerprints are unique, we use the term 'fingerprint' in the name of our framework to emphasize the need to tailor health equity initiatives to the target population's unique characteristics and the healthcare institution's capabilities. That said, a hyper-local approach does not preclude learning from or replicating solutions developed elsewhere. Instead, it calls for leaders to deliberately decide which solutions to adopt, adapt, or create anew to ensure the best fit for their specific context. Underlying Principles Four foundational principles comprise the philosophical underpinning of the framework and articulate the core values and assumptions guiding each strategic decision: Hyper-Locality Solutions to health inequities must address specific neighborhood or community contexts. Generic interventions often fail to resonate with local needs and structural barriers. For example, providing nutritional guidance for specific health conditions needs to take into account the ethnic makeup of the local population. A guideline for patients with diabetes to avoid rice may be difficult to follow in a predominantly Hispanic community, where rice is a core ingredient in the culinary tradition. Community Co-Creation Traditional top-down approaches often perpetuate paternalism in healthcare systems. Our framework emphasizes involving community members in the design and implementation of solutions. Meaningful co-creation ensures solutions reflect lived experiences and foster trust. Condition Specificity Moving beyond a broad focus on social determinants of health, this principle emphasizes condition-specific health-related social needs (HRSNs). For instance, food scarcity and limited transportation options challenge patients with diabetes in different ways than those with asthma. In contrast to traditional approaches aiming to reduce food scarcity or bolster transportation options in the community, our framework proposes that healthcare organizations center on the condition and explore ways to address the unique challenges that SDOHs present for patients with that condition (i.e., HRSN-focused interventions). Internal Consistency Choices made within the framework must align with one another. A lack of coherence can lead to fragmented efforts and diminished impact. Each decision should build on prior ones to create a logical and reinforcing path. Strategic choices also need to account for specific constraints affecting the autonomy of the organization, such as regulatory requirements and limitations, economic constraints (e.g., funding and payment models), and availability of appropriate skills and resources. Essential Pillars Two pillars support the framework and represent the implementation methodology in our approach. They focus on how to make each choice in the framework effective and impactful: Data-Driven Decision-Making Robust analytics should drive every decision. Leveraging detailed data on patients' health needs, social determinants of health, and patient-reported outcomes, will ensure that the initiatives have a targeted and measurable impact. Metrics are vital for tracking progress and refining strategies. Prioritization Strategy guru Michael Porter wrote: 'The essence of strategy is choosing what not to do.' Prioritization prevents overextension and focuses resources on a manageable number of high-impact initiatives. Prioritization also applies when examining the set of choices for each strategic decision outlined in our framework. Other viable initiatives and choice-set options may be deferred rather than dismissed. Strategic Choices Healthcare organizations must make deliberate choices in six key areas. The Health Equity Accelerator at Boston Medical Center (BMC) is an example of an innovative approach to health equity consistent with our framework. We briefly describe its choices in each area. Medical Conditions Identify priority health conditions by analyzing data on inequities and prevalence within the community. For example, if cardiovascular disease has a high prevalence and shows the largest disparity in outcomes by race or socioeconomic status in the community served by the healthcare organization, it should be a candidate for intervention. Based on an extensive data analysis, the accelerator team at BMC decided to focus on pregnancy and perinatal conditions (e.g., pre-eclampsia); diabetes, including the integration of behavioral health in primary care for patients with diabetes; Covid-19; and prostate cancer. These were conditions for which there were significant health disparities across racial groups in the community the hospital serves. Approach Depending on organizational expertise and resources, interventions may take an operational/clinical approach (e.g., redesigning care-delivery models) or an academic approach (e.g., conducting clinical research and publishing findings). Implications of these choices include several tradeoffs, such as prioritizing speed over comprehensiveness, a narrow over a broader focus, or short-term over long-term benefits for the patients. For example, in its Equity in Pregnancy and Equity in Diabetes initiatives, BMC chose to adopt an operational/clinical approach to reduce inequities by redesigning the care-delivery model. 'Had the data driven us to focus on inequities associated with gender identity and gender dysphoria,' said one executive, 'we might have chosen an academic route, as we have some of the leading research scholars on these issues among our staff.' Intervention Design Design targeted interventions tailored to the chosen condition and approach. Each intervention requires: Metrics to Track Progress For example, BMC decided to measure the decision-to-incision time for pre-eclampsia patients. In its Equity in Diabetes initiative, it measured HbA1c and time in range for glucose control, as well as patient-reported outcomes (PROs) including PHQ2/PHQ9 and, in some cases, PAID-5 to measure diabetes-related stress. Deciding Where to Standardize and Personalize Standardization can be necessary to reduce systemic or unconscious bias. Personalization is necessary to address individual needs. The challenge is choosing a point on the continuum between the two that achieves the best of both worlds. One BMC executive stated: 'We standardize the parts where we are more likely to observe bias, which is oftentimes subconscious and cannot be completely rooted out with training and education. Where it makes sense to personalize, we allow for flexibility in the implementation of the solution.' A key choice in BMC's Equity in Pregnancy initiative was to standardize the decision-to-incision time expectations for urgent, unplanned C-sections. In contrast, in its Equity in Diabetes initiative, BMC chose to develop patient education and nutritional guidance materials accounting for the variation in cultural preferences within its patient population and the availability of food items at local food stores. Relation with the Rest of the Organization Determine if the initiative will function as a stand-alone project or be integrated into the hospital's standard care model. Integration ensures sustainability and scalability, but stand-alone projects may allow for faster implementation. BMC leaned toward the integration approach. It decided that each initiative would be housed in the relevant clinical department or services line. Referring to the Equity in Pregnancy initiative, one hospital executive said, 'The accelerator does not deliver babies; OBGYN delivers them. The work is done where the work is done.' Departments and service lines involved in each initiative receive resources from the accelerator in the form of project management, data analytics, and administrative support. Financial Sustainability The economic viability of each initiative needs to be clear from the design phase. The financial strategy for the initiative includes the choice of individual funding sources or combinations thereof along the initiative's lifespan. Examples include: Soliciting grants or donations. Leveraging existing billing codes and payment models. Reinvesting savings from cost-reduction initiatives. Flexibility is key as funding mechanisms may vary by intervention, by community, and over time. BMC leveraged combinations of funding sources in each initiative. It predominantly relied on donations and grants to fund the pilot stage of each initiative, but when applying to have their envisioned initiative accepted by the accelerator, the people pitching it had to submit a financial plan for sustaining it beyond the pilot stage. Additional Choices Our framework allows for the inclusion of other strategic decisions specific to the hospital or community context. While BMC made choices along the areas we've described, another organization may need or want to add other areas and key decision points to tailor its approaches to the hyper-local features and needs of the community it serves. Early Results at BMC's Health Equity Accelerator Early results from the BMC Health Equity Accelerator demonstrate the potential of our framework to drive measurable and equitable improvements in care. In the Equity in Pregnancy Initiative, the team significantly reduced decision-to-incision times for urgent, unplanned C-sections (from 88 to 50 minutes overall) with even more substantial reductions for Black patients (from 98 to 50 minutes) and Hispanic patients (from 84 to 49 minutes), effectively eliminating the disparity with white patients. Similarly, the Equity in Diabetes Initiative showed promising early outcomes, with the percentage of diabetic patients with HbA1C levels greater than nine dropping from 13.7% to 11.8%. Notably, the racial disparity in poor glycemic control between Black and Hispanic patients and white patients was cut in half, highlighting the framework's ability to reduce inequities while improving overall outcomes. Potential Implementation Challenges and Failure Modes While our framework provides a structured approach, it is not free from implementation challenges. Some of them include the following: Inadequate data quality and completeness may reduce the value of the information used to identify disparities, select prioritized conditions, and measure success. Community engagement requires a persistent and consistent commitment and interaction over time. It does not happen overnight. Healthcare resources are limited and may not be available in the future, especially for community healthcare and safety-net institutions, which are reimbursed at lower price levels and rely on donations to a large extent. The benefits of immediate actions may not manifest themselves until far in the future (e.g., savings emerging from having fewer patients with prostate cancer may materialize many years after the hospital investment in equitable prevention and screening processes). This delay may compress the ROI of the investment, potentially discouraging valuable initiatives from being funded. Scalability may challenge the personalization of the solutions. . . . In the quest for health equity, prioritization is not a compromise; it is a necessity. The scarcity of resources and the organizational benefits of focused operations demand that organizations lead their efforts strategically and direct their limited funds, staff, and operational capacity to the areas of greatest need and impact. Our framework can help them choose priorities, build momentum, achieve meaningful results, and create a pathway to broader equity over time. In healthcare, context is not just a detail; it is the foundation on which equitable solutions are built. If we embrace this truth, we stand a far better chance of achieving the health equity that has long been elusive.
Medscape
28 minutes ago
- Medscape
Wildfire Smoke/Dementia Risk Paper Retracted
Research published last year linking wildfire smoke exposure to increased dementia risk has been retracted by the study's authors after a single stroke coding error was discovered in the original analysis. Using amended data, the association between dementia and exposure to fine particulate matter < 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) from wildfire sources is no longer significant, the researchers determined. Investigators were 'very, very disappointed' by the 'unfortunate error,' lead author Joan A. Casey, PhD, associate professor, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, told Medscape Medical News. However, Casey maintains that the updated data do not alter the overall conclusion that wildfire exposure is 'pretty consistently' associated with increased dementia risk. She noted a continued positive association between the 3-year average of wildfire exposure and incident dementia. The notice of retraction with revisions was published online on June 30 in JAMA Neurology . A Single Keystroke Error The original study — whose preliminary findings were presented at the 2024 Alzheimer's Association International Conference and reported by Medscape Medical News at that time — was published online on November 25, 2024, in JAMA Neurology . That analysis included 1,223,107 million Kaiser Permanente Southern California members, individuals aged 60 years or older who were tracked from 2009 to 2019. Of these, 80,884 developed dementia. The original study showed an 18% increased risk for dementia for every 1 µg/m3 increase in the 3-year average wildfire PM2.5 concentration (odds ratio [OR], 1.18; 95% CI, 1.03-1.34), after adjusting for age, sex, race and ethnicity, marital status, smoking, and economic status. For the study, researchers had identified dementia using International Classification of Diseases codesfor Alzheimer's disease, frontotemporal dementia, Lewy body dementia, nonspecific dementia, vascular dementia, and Parkinson's disease (PD) dementia. Criteria for PD dementia was supposed to require a PD diagnosis and a secondary dementia diagnosis. But in preparing for a follow-up study, researchers realized the original analysis had a coding error. 'Where there should have been an 'and' symbol in our code, there was an 'and/or' symbol,' Casey explained . 'We included people as cases that either had PD or had one of the secondary dementia codes, when we only wanted to include people who had both of those things.' 'It's literally one keystroke in like thousands of lines of code,' said Casey. But the error resulted in the inclusion of 5413 individuals without dementia who were classified as dementia cases. Researchers also incorrectly excluded 5345 individuals with prevalent PD at baseline, which slightly altered the comparison group, said Casey. 'We have some people who should have been eligible as comparators in the analysis, and they were excluded but shouldn't have been,' she added. Recalculated Analyses The investigators have now recalculated all analyses using the corrected total cohort of 1,228,452 individuals and revised the number of people who developed dementia to 75,471. Not only do the corrections affect the cohort composition but also do affect odds ratios (ORs) and CIs. The previously reported finding of an association between 1-μg/m3 higher 3-year average of wildfire PM2.5 exposure and incident dementia is no longer statistically significant, with a smaller effect size (revised OR, 1.12; revised 95% CI, 0.98-1.28). However, Casey noted that results for multiple consecutive days of high levels of wildfire smoke exposure 'are unchanged' in the new analysis and the association between wildfire exposure and dementia risk among certain racial and ethnic group, including Native Americans and Alaska Natives, remains statistically significant in the new analysis, although not as robust as in the original reporting, said Casey. The updated analysis still showed an association between exposure to non–wildfire fine particulate matter and incident dementia with some alterations(original analysis: OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.01-1.02; corrected analysis: OR, 1.007; 95% CI, 1.002-1.011). However, the revised analysis affected results for non-wildfire exposure in certain subgroups. While the original analysis showed a significant association between 3-year mean non-wildfire PM2.5 exposure and incident dementia in both sexes and in high- and low-poverty neighborhoods, the association in men and in high-poverty communities no longer meets the conventional threshold for statistical significance ( P < .05). New Data, Same Story Ultimately, the updated data 'don't change things a huge amount,' Casey said. 'As a whole, the story remains quite similar. We still need more research, but to me, this points towards there being a relationship between long–term wildfire smoke exposure and incident dementia,' she added. The study also continues to highlight the importance of thinking about environmental risk factors for neurological conditions, Casey added. 'We should be having conversations with patients about ways they can protect themselves from these types of exposure, especially if they're coming in already with things like mild cognitive impairment,' she said. Wildfire smoke, which results from burning organic materials, contains elevated concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. The smoke may enter the central nervous system via the olfactory nerve and cross the blood-brain barrier, possibly triggering neuroinflammation. However, much of this is speculation. 'For us, the big next steps are trying to understand the biological underpinnings and what is mediating this relationship,' said Casey. Three years may not be the most relevant exposure window for the onset of dementia, Casey said. 'What's probably happening here is the exposure is hastening a process that was already set in motion and unveiling dementia sooner,' she noted. The coding error was discovered when the researchers were updating the cohort to investigate a longer duration of exposure. 'We wanted to look back 10 years and see what those relationships looked like,' she said. 'I think that will be really important, especially as we continue to see ongoing and continued wildfire smoke exposure in our population.' Wildfires have become more severe and prolonged, and they're occurring earlier in the year than in the past. The fires are also now more frequent. Studies suggest exposure to wildfires has increased 27-fold over the past decade in the US. Experts attribute changes to wildfire characteristics to warmer temperatures, earlier snowmelt, and prolonged dry periods. 'It's so important for neurologists to engage in the conversation about climate change and how it affects the health of their patients,' said Casey. 'To me, the biggest overarching public health message here is that we need strong climate policy, which is going to be the thing that slows these types of exposures.' As previously reported by Medscape Medical News , wildfire exposure has been linked to an increased risk to several neurological disorders. One study showed exposure to wildfire smoke reduces cognitive performance in adults while other research has linked it to lower academic performance in students. Additional research has tied air pollution, including wildfire smoke, to an increased risk for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and youth as well as an increased risk for PD and multiple sclerosis in adults. An 'Unfortunate' Error Asked to comment, Anthony White, PhD, senior group leader, Cellular and Molecular Neurodegeneration, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Queensland, Australia, said while the retraction is 'unfortunate,' the authors should be commended for applying the necessary scientific rigor to update their work. 'The study obviously involves an enormous level of complex data and assessments, and the error reported should not be seen as any reflection of poor science by the research team,' White said. 'On the contrary, they have done extremely well to pick up the original error and modify the study.' He noted how difficult it is to obtain statistically relevant results in association studies such as this one as they look at a broad range of dementia types and years after a diagnosis. As well, researchers need to separate a range of pollution sources into wildfire and non-wildfire exposure. White also noted that the study only assessed the relationship between dementia and PM2.5 levels, which represent just one component of wildfire smoke. The association between wildfires and dementia is supported by other research, said White and pointed to a 2023 study in JAMA Internal Medicine that showed positive links between dementia and wildfires. Other studies show strong ties between air pollution and dementia, he added. 'We know that wildfire smoke is a particularly potent form of air pollution.' Heather M. Snyder, PhD, senior vice president of medical and scientific relations, Alzheimer's Association, also weighed in on the new development. She, too, noted several other 'credible studies' link wildfire to dementia, as well as overall health including heart and metabolic diseases. 'All of the literature today suggests an association. Whether that's the full extent of the connection, or if there is a cause and effect, is still not known.'
