Category
10 articles
Panic is a finite resource, and most Americans spend it on the wrong germs. This evidence-based ranking separates the microbial threats that cause real, measurable illness in the US from the ones that merely make compelling headlines.
Mass screening programs for infectious diseases like chlamydia, hepatitis C, and COVID-19 have been celebrated as cornerstones of preventive medicine, yet a growing body of evidence suggests that testing asymptomatic populations at scale carries risks rarely acknowledged in public health messaging. From overdiagnosis to unnecessary treatment cascades, the ambition to detect every infection may be quietly undermining the very outcomes these programs were designed to protect. A careful examination
Sexually transmitted infections are rising sharply across the United States even as antibiotics remain widely available and public health infrastructure exists to contain them. A convergence of antimicrobial resistance, fragmented sexual health education, and systemic barriers to care has created conditions in which pathogens long considered manageable are reasserting themselves with troubling force. Understanding why requires looking beyond the laboratory and into the social and political archi
Whooping cough, measles, and even polio were once considered triumphs of twentieth-century medicine—diseases rendered irrelevant by vaccination campaigns that reshaped American public health. Today, these same infections are reappearing in communities across the United States, not because the science has failed, but because the systems built to deploy that science are fracturing in ways that demand serious examination.
Measles, whooping cough, and chickenpox were once regarded as near-conquered threats in the United States. Today, outbreaks are emerging in communities with documented vaccination coverage, raising difficult questions about waning immunity, booster policy, and the structural gaps in how public health communicates long-term protection.
For patients with low-prevalence infectious diseases, the medical system offers a frustrating paradox: their conditions are real, often debilitating, and poorly understood—not because they defy scientific inquiry, but because the economics of research funding rarely justify the investment. Across the United States, thousands of individuals navigate a healthcare landscape where their infections lack approved treatments, trained specialists, and in some cases, even reliable diagnostic criteria. Th
Warming winters and shifting ecosystems are enabling disease-carrying tick populations to colonize American regions where they were once rarely encountered, bringing Lyme disease, Powassan virus, and other serious infections into communities with little historical exposure and limited clinical preparedness. The public health implications are significant, and the window for proactive response is narrowing. Here is what the surveillance data shows — and what can be done about it.
Most of the infectious diseases that have reshaped human history did not originate in people. They crossed into human populations from animals, carried along pathways shaped by land use, trade, agriculture, and ecological disruption. Examining the predictable patterns behind these spillover events—from COVID-19 to avian influenza—reveals not only where the next threat is likely to emerge, but also which policy decisions could reduce that risk.
A growing body of research suggests that certain viral infections do not simply resolve—they leave behind lasting alterations to immune architecture, metabolic regulation, and neurological function. Long COVID has brought this phenomenon into sharp focus, but the biological mechanisms at play may apply to a broader category of pathogens with implications for how the US healthcare system diagnoses and treats chronic illness.
In 2022, the World Health Organization formally adopted 'mpox' as the preferred name for the disease previously known as monkeypox, igniting a broader conversation about how disease labels shape public perception, fuel stigma, and influence outbreak responses. The decision was neither arbitrary nor purely symbolic—it reflected decades of evolving scientific consensus on how infectious disease naming can cause measurable harm. Understanding why names matter in public health is essential to naviga