Image Credit: Canva (representational purpose only)
Mysterious Fog in the US , Canada and UK: A dense, eerie fog with a "burning chemical-like smell" has spooked a good part of North America and parts of the United Kingdom and Canada. With social media amplifying all concerns, this phenomenon has sparked attention across all social media platforms. However, at the heart of this mysterious fog are a conjunction of natural events, social psychology, and environmental conditions that culminated in all the conspiracy theories and public health fears. Here's a closer look at the mysterious fog, its potential causes, and the societal response it has triggered.
The first reports of this "mysterious fog" came in from Florida where a resident said that they experienced respiratory symptoms, feverish warmth, and stomach cramps after contact with the fog. Similar stories started flooding social media, and within a day or two, a sinister force seemed to sweep across the United States, Canada, and parts of the UK. From Texas to Minnesota, people reported weird odors and health issues that they thought were linked to this bizarre atmospheric event.
Some witnesses were said to see "white particles" swirling through the air; theories ranged from a chemical attack or experimental weapon to drone-related chemical dispersals and references to historical military experiments, such as the infamous 1950s "Operation Sea-Spray."
Fuel to the fire were added when videos and posts, hundreds of thousands in number, began circulating on social media sites like TikTok and X (formerly Twitter) speculating on the origin of the fog. Hashtags like #ToxicFog went trending for days. Hysteria created a self-reinforcing loop in which every post spurred further scrutiny and fear.
Fog is essentially a low-lying cloud formed when the air temperature cools to its dew point, causing water vapor to condense into tiny droplets or ice crystals. Several types of fog—advection fog, radiation fog, and valley fog—can form depending on conditions such as warm, moist air moving over cooler land or when temperatures plummet rapidly under clear skies.
Such chemical-like smell as reported during the occurrence of fog events is sometimes attributed to air pollution. It acts like a sponge, where it absorbs these pollutants, which include sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, among others, that emit from industries. This mixture, therefore, leads to a stench that could be mistaken as unnatural or even toxic.
Also Read: Health Concerns Rise As US, Canada, and UK Come Under The Blanket Of Thick, Dense, Toxic Fog
High moisture levels from fog can significantly exacerbate symptoms related to respiration, but especially in already predisposed asthmatics and allergy patients. The connection of these symptoms with actual fever, stomach cramps, and puffy eyes is too remote. Experts assume that the irritating effects of entrapped pollutants trapped in fog tend to affect more the eyes and throat rather than the rest of the body affected by some report.
Social media amplified a natural weather event into a health epidemic. It made the personal experience of individuals become a cause for fear and speculation, a domino effect.
According to psychologists, this is a concept of selective perception, wherein once people's attention is drawn to environmental anomalies, they begin to notice them. This mirrors earlier panics, such as the Seattle windshield pitting panic of 1954. Then, atomic bomb testing caused fear in many and started to have people looking at their windshields for small marks that they had not seen before. Likewise, postings on the strangeness of the fog probably increased public awareness and suspicion, with people looking to attach unrelated symptoms to the phenomenon.
The fog hysteria shares a commonality with other instances of mass panic, such as the "drone sightings" of recent years or the Cold War-era fears of biological warfare.
Also Read: Mysterious Fog Is Making Americans Sick
These events underscore how fear can cloud judgment, especially when amplified by social media and sensationalist headlines. While historical cases, such as "Operation Sea-Spray," offer concrete evidence of the existence of unethical experiments, the jump from a natural weather condition to theories of chemical attacks exemplifies a more modern trend of connecting unrelated dots, all wonderfully seeded in distrust and anxiety.
Despite the swirling rumors, meteorologists and scientists are in agreement that the mysterious fog is not as alarming as it seems. It is well known that fog traps and amplifies pollutants, especially in urban and industrial regions. Moreover, winter months are the most conducive for fog formation, so its recent prevalence is unsurprising.
On the other hand, environmentalists advise that the fog should wake everyone up to increased levels of pollution. The reported odors and health irritations could be just symptoms of far deeper systemic issues like industrial emissions and lack of control over air quality.
The authorities must be transparent in their communication to combat misinformation and allay public fears. Governments and environmental agencies must provide timely updates on weather phenomena, air quality, and health risks. Initiatives like real-time pollutant tracking and public education campaigns can help demystify natural occurrences while addressing valid environmental concerns.
The mysterious Canada fog is a compelling case study in how environmental events intersect with psychology and societal dynamics. While rooted in natural phenomena, the fog became a vessel for collective fears, amplified by modern technology and historical anxieties.
In this information era where communication occurs at an almost lightning pace, the fog becomes a metaphor that reminds everyone about scientific literacy, environmental responsibility, and an effective balance when considering public concern. Whether perceived as a marvel of nature or as a tale that serves to teach, it left a very powerful mark in people's minds.
Credit: iStock
Two experimental heart drugs developed by Novartis and Novo Nordisk have failed to reduce major cardiovascular events in separate late-stage trials, despite successfully targeting cholesterol and inflammation.
Novartis' pelacarsen lowered lipoprotein(a), or Lp(a), by 78%, while Novo Nordisk's ziltivekimab substantially reduced inflammatory markers. However, neither drug reduced heart attacks, strokes or cardiovascular deaths compared with a placebo.
"Everybody in the world, me included, thought that this was going to work," said Dr. Steven Nissen of Cleveland Clinic, presenting the pelacarsen results at the American Heart Association's Scientific Sessions 2026.
Also read: Confused By Your Cholesterol Report? Here's What LDL And ApoB Really Mean
The seven-year Phase III Lp(a) HORIZON trial involved 8,323 people with established cardiovascular disease and elevated Lp(a) levels across 42 countries.
Participants received monthly injections of pelacarsen or a placebo. Despite reducing Lp(a) by 78%, the drug did not lower the risk of non-fatal heart attacks, strokes, urgent procedures to unblock arteries or cardiovascular deaths.
Even participants with higher Lp(a) levels showed no cardiovascular benefit.
"I cannot avoid the disappointing conclusion – it didn’t work," Nissen said, adding that cardiovascular outcomes remained unchanged despite the significant reduction in Lp(a).
Novo Nordisk's Phase III ZEUS trial tested whether ziltivekimab, an experimental anti-inflammatory drug, could reduce cardiovascular events by blocking interleukin-6 (IL-6).
The trial included 6,376 patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease and systemic inflammation.
In July 2026, Novo announced that the trial had failed to demonstrate a cardiovascular benefit. Results published in the New England Journal of Medicine on November 7 showed that although the drug substantially reduced inflammatory markers, it did not prevent major cardiovascular events.
During a median follow-up of 33 months, cardiovascular death, non-fatal heart attack or non-fatal stroke occurred in 17.6% of patients receiving ziltivekimab and 17.7% receiving placebo.
On September 7, Novo Nordisk discontinued two additional late-stage trials of ziltivekimab in patients with heart failure and inflammation.
An independent data monitoring committee recommended stopping the studies, concluding they were unlikely to succeed.
Read More: This Common Heart Attack Risk Starts Silently In Healthy People In Their 20s
Nissen suggested that participants may have had advanced cardiovascular disease, making it too late for the drug to prevent further events.
Dr. Roger Blumenthal of Johns Hopkins suggested that participants' blood pressure and LDL cholesterol were already well controlled, leaving limited scope for additional risk reduction.
Another hypothesis was that anti-clotting medications taken by all participants may have diluted pelacarsen's potential effect, since Lp(a) is thought to contribute to cardiovascular disease partly by promoting blood clots.
These remain hypotheses, not proven explanations.
The findings also do not mean that Lp(a) or inflammation is irrelevant to heart disease. They show that lowering these markers with these particular drugs did not reduce cardiovascular events in the populations studied.
People with elevated Lp(a) can manage their cardiovascular risk by addressing other risk factors.
Nissen recommended exercise, weight management and lowering LDL cholesterol with statins when appropriate.
Three other cardiovascular outcome trials involving investigational Lp(a)-lowering drugs are underway. Their results may help determine whether targeting this cholesterol particle can prevent heart attacks and strokes.
Credit: X
Climate change is no longer a distant environmental concern. The effects of increasing temperatures, extreme weather events, melting glaciers, changing rainfall patterns and worsening air pollution on human health are alarming. Countries are continually identifying these health risks but monitoring if their climate policies are actually effective is the big question. This is one of the important areas of discussion at the 31st United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP31), which starts on November 9, 2026 in Antalya, Türkiye.
The World Health Organization (WHO) is stressing upon health to become a central part of climate policy discussions. The health body has urged countries to increase focus on measurable action, healthcare systems that can withstand climate change and funding to execute those actions.
Ahead of the conference, Dr Diarmid Campbell Lendrum, Head of the Climate Change, Energy, and Air Quality Unit at WHO headquarters said, “Health is the strongest argument for climate action."
Countries Need Reliable Health Indicators For Climate Change
Also read: Climate Crisis Is A Health Crisis: Just 6 Actions Could Save 1.6 Million Lives, Says WHO
Climate change has numerous effects on health. Extreme heat can lead to dehydration, heat exhaustion and heatstroke, while floods and droughts can disrupt access to safe drinking water, food and healthcare. Changing temperatures and rainfall patterns can also fuel spread of infectious diseases, including mosquito-borne illnesses.
Air pollution, which is closely linked to the burning of fossil fuels, adds to the burden of respiratory and cardiovascular disease.
However, measuring these effects is not as straightforward as one might think.
An increase in hospital admissions during a heatwave, for instance, could be considered an indicator, but countries also need to monitor who is most affected, whether healthcare facilities can cope and whether preventive measures are working.
A WHO review published in October 2025, Mapping Climate Change and Health Indicators, examined 31 reports from 22 countries. It identified 3,880 indicators being used to assess health risks related to climate change. After removing overlaps and combining similar measures, researchers identified 1,684 unique indicators.
These indicators covered climate hazards, population exposure, vulnerability, health outcomes, the impact on healthcare systems, future risks, and the policies and resources available to address them.
What Will Countries Measure?
Also read: Big Lancet Report: Heat-Related Deaths Rise 36% Since Paris Climate Agreement, Global Warming Blamed
Health indicators can help governments think beyond recording extreme weather events and examine their consequences for public health and healthcare systems. Some of the areas that countries could monitor include:
What Is WHO Calling For At COP31?
WHO is using COP31 to push for stronger implementation of existing climate and health commitments. Its priorities include making healthcare systems resilient to climate change, reducing the health sector's environmental footprint and ensuring that health considerations are included in climate policies and financing decisions.
The conference will begin with a dedicated Health Day on November 9, featuring discussions on health technologies related to climate, digital health, humanitarian response and resilient healthcare systems.
WHO's November 2026 briefing estimates that 3.3 to 3.6 billion people live in contexts highly vulnerable to climate change. It also says that scaling up six climate health actions could save 1.6 million lives annually and generate around US$24 in returns for every dollar invested.
Ultimately the challenge for countries is to turn climate and health commitments into measurable improvements. Tracking heat-related deaths, diseases, healthcare preparedness and unequal health impacts can help governments understand where action is working and where gaps remain.
Credit: X
A wearable device developed by Zomato founder Deepinder Goyal has sparked a massive social media debate among doctors over its scientific claims and validity.
Called Temple, the gadget, worn on the forehead, is designed to track physiological signals linked with blood flow in the brain and generate a metric called 'Entropy', which, according to Goyal, is a measure of the body's real-time energy expenditure.
Also Read: Delhi AQI Crosses 2,000 Mark After Diwali: What Happens To Your Body Within Hours Of Exposure?
Priced at Rs 85,000, one of the factors that has sparked arguments, the device is now available pre-orders in India. However, medical experts have questioned whether the technology can accurately measure what it claims to and whether its readings offer meaningful insights into brain health, ageing or longevity.
The controversy intensified after Goyal defended the project against criticism from doctors. In a post on X, he said the development had cost $30 million, including $20 million of his personal money. He also said further research was underway.
“We have a number of new research breakthroughs coming up (especially Entropy), and are validating them as we speak,” Goyal wrote on November 6.
Also read: This Easily Available Nutrient Can Also Slow Down Ageing
One of the main concerns is the device's sensor placement. Temple uses optical sensors based on photoplethysmography (PPG), positioned near the temple. These detect changes in blood flow through superficial blood vessels.
However, the superficial temporal artery supplies blood to the scalp and face. The brain receives its blood supply primarily through the internal carotid and vertebral arteries. A signal detected from a superficial vessel cannot automatically be interpreted as a measurement of blood circulation inside the brain.
Dr. Cyriac Abby Philips, widely known online as The Liver Doc, is one of the many doctors who challenged Goyal's claims about Temple on social media post.
He wrote, "Deepinder's Temple device is very much like Baba Ramdev's Coronil. Only one difference. Former is scienceploitation, latter is pseudoscience and both are harmful in their own ways. Learn to identify a scam and fraud when you see one."
Dr Jason Philip, in an X post, called the research behind the device "pseudoscience". He said that the gravity ageing hypothesis is a flawed concept. Ageing is a result of many factors like metabolic factors, genomic instability, mitochondrial dysfunction, chronic inflammation and more.
Many also slammed Goyal for selling the device without solid research or clinical outcomes.
Dr Rishabh Jain responded to Goyal's post, saying that doctors asking for scientific evidence is a legitimate demand. He also said that Goyal's response to clinical questions are mostly commerce-based and does not "constitute scientific validation".
Dr Kapil Singhal, Director of Neurology at the Institute of Neurosciences, Medanta, Noida, told Mint, “Temple appears to be measuring blood flow in the superficial temporal artery, which supplies blood to the scalp, not the brain. The brain receives blood through the internal carotid and vertebral arteries. These are not the same.”
Dr Praveen Gupta, Chairman of Marengo Asia International Institute of Neuro & Spine, Gurugram, also cautioned against treating a reading from one location as representative of the entire brain.
A device may detect physiological changes near the forehead but establishing that these reflect cerebral blood flow requires comparison with established clinical measurements and independent validation.
Also read: Mental Health And Longevity: The Mind-Body Connection To Aging Gracefully
Goyal has described Entropy as a new biomarker that measures how hard the body is working to sustain itself. The score is influenced by factors like sleep, exercise, stress, food and meditation.
However, doctors say that a metric responding to changes in activity does not establish what biological function it measures.
Neurologist Dr Sudhir Kumar told India Today that the idea was interesting but required stronger evidence.
“The idea of developing a novel physiological metric from signals recorded over the temple region is certainly intriguing, and advances in wearable technology have the potential to improve our understanding of human physiology. However, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,” he said.
He added, “The key questions are not whether the signal changes with exercise, stress, or meditation, but whether it reliably measures what it claims to measure, whether it adds information beyond existing metrics, and whether acting on it improves health outcomes.”
In other words, doctors want to know how Entropy is calculated, what it represents biologically and whether it has been independently shown to improve health outcomes.
Temple is also associated with Goyal's Gravity Ageing Hypothesis which proposes that gravity and prolonged periods spent upright may affect blood circulation to the brain and contribute to ageing.
However, the brain has a mechanism called cerebral autoregulation that helps maintain relatively stable blood flow despite changes in posture and blood pressure.
Dr Gupta told The Indian Express, “The brain automatically adjusts the size of its blood vessels and regulates blood supply to ensure that it continues to receive enough oxygen and nutrients, even when we change positions, stand up or exercise.”
He added that there is no established scientific evidence that everyday exposure to gravity progressively damages the brain or accelerates ageing.
Goyal has said that Temple is a wellness and research product rather than a medical device. He has also argued that its claims will be independently verifiable and that more research will be shared soon.
However, doctors say the difference between detecting a physiological signal and demonstrating its clinical significance is crucial. Temple's ability to track certain readings would not, by itself, establish that it can diagnose neurological conditions, predict cognitive decline or measure longevity.
© $2026 Times Horizon Private Limited