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.
Credits: Wikimedia Commons
It is no news that all appointments in the United States' Health Departments that have been made under RFK Jr are of the people who have been vaccine critiques. In a similar scenario, Dr Ralph Abraham, a state surgeon from Louisiana, who had ordered health officials to stop promoting mass vaccination will now serve as the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) principal deputy director.
It was in February when Abraham instructed health department staff to stop promoting vaccines for preventable diseases.
He wrote in a February 13 internal memo that although patients should continue speaking with their providers about the risks and benefits of vaccination, the health department will stop promoting mass vaccination. The memo was issued on the same day Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was sworn in as secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services. While his hiring has not been announced by HHS, but his new role has been confirmed. It was first reported by health newsletter Inside Medicine.
As of now the CDC does not have a permanent director. Kennedy ousted Dr Susan Monarez from the role in August. Jim O'Neill, who is serving as the deputy HHS secretary said this month that the agency has had "mission creep" and needs to focus on its original mandate.
“We want to … take the people we have and put them to their best use. And secondly, we are always recruiting. We are eager to hire wonderful scientists and data engineers and AI engineers and researchers and drug reviewers across the department, including CDC. If you are talented, you care about health or human services – please come work with us.”
The news of his appointment comes days after the CDC changed its guidelines on vaccines on its website. The CDC website now links vaccines with autism and states that "vaccines do not cause autism is not an evidence-based claim".
While Abraham has not outrightly been anti-vaccine, he had asked the health staff to not promote it for preventable diseases or infection and has long echoed Kennedy's 'Make America Healthy Again' (MAHA) rhetoric. He had questioned trust in the pharmaceutical industry and public health institutions.
“The solution to increased spending and declining outcomes in our country is unlikely to come in the form of a pill or a shot,” Abraham said in a February statement. “Much of the solution will likely come down to the usual hard work of improving diet, increasing exercise, and making better lifestyle choices.”
Apart from the guidelines being changes on autism and vaccine link, in August, Kennedy dismissed all members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), the body whose recommendations form the basis of state immunization mandates.
Just days later, eight new members were named—though one withdrew amid ethics concerns. Unlike their predecessors, this panel includes only one epidemiologist and one infectious disease specialist, with no virologists or immunologists. Many appointees lack peer-reviewed vaccine research altogether, and those who do have published, on average, 78% fewer vaccine-related papers than former members.
Credits: Canva
The long-standing practice of adding fluoride to community drinking water in the United States is now under sharp review as questions rise about whether its advantages continue to outweigh possible risks. A fresh set of findings pushes back against recent warnings about fluoride in water and suggests that it might offer added benefits.
This renewed national discussion began after a government report from the National Toxicology Program stated that high fluoride exposure was tied to lower IQ in children. That report, however, assessed fluoride amounts that were at least twice higher than federal recommendations and had limited information about what happens at lower, commonly used levels, as per CNN.
However, the latest study examined fluoride quantities that match the usual suggested range in drinking water. Researchers found strong evidence showing that children who grew up with water containing these lower levels of fluoride performed better on cognitive assessments than those who had no fluoride exposure.
Dr. Rob Warren, lead author of the study released in Science Advances, said he was surprised by the National Toxicology Program’s earlier conclusions and felt the need to produce evidence more suitable for public policy. He explained that he pursued the work because it was a major question without a clear answer.
The national debate has also intensified as US Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has labeled fluoride an industrial waste and pointed to possible IQ loss while calling for a rollback of federal guidance. Utah and Florida have already moved to prohibit fluoridation of public water.
As per CNN, Warren compared the situation to testing a heart medication. If the advised dose is 100 milligrams, but a study measures reactions to nearly a million milligrams, the results do not reflect what happens at the normal dose. He said that this is how much of the fluoride research has been structured and that only extremely high doses have shown harmful effects, which is not helpful for policy decisions.
Warren directs a long-running program that began in the US Department of Education and has followed tens of thousands of Americans from their high school years in the 1980s through several decades.
For the current analysis, the team linked math, reading and vocabulary test scores from nearly 27,000 participants to the level of fluoride in their childhood drinking water. These measurements were based on older records from the US Geological Survey and the Department of Health and Human Services, as per CNN.
Researchers worked under the assumption that participants spent their entire upbringing near their high schools. They sorted people into three groups. One group had steady exposure to recommended fluoride levels either through natural sources or public water treatment. Another group never had fluoride in their water. A third group had mixed exposure because their community changed its water policy at some point.
Students who had fluoride for only part of their childhood scored higher on tests than peers who never had it. Those who grew up with fluoride throughout all their childhood years scored even better. Follow-up testing that continued up to 2021, when many had reached about 60 years of age, also showed no sign that fluoride contributed to cognitive decline.
Warren clarified that cognitive tests are not exact IQ scores, although they relate strongly. Test results reflect both mental ability and the learning opportunities a person receives. He is currently working on a follow-up project that will look more closely at fluoride and IQ with improved childhood location data.
Other studies this year suggested that removing fluoride from public water in the United States could lead to more than 25 million extra cavities among children and teenagers in five years along with nearly 10 billion dollars in dental treatment costs. Although the new study did not measure dental health, experts noted that pain from untreated cavities can interfere with a child’s ability to attend school or stay focused, which may influence academic scores.
Fluoride occurs naturally in some groundwater and foods. It protects teeth by strengthening enamel, which can be damaged by acids formed from bacteria, plaque and sugar. Communities in the United States started adding fluoride to water systems in 1945 to improve oral health in a cost-effective way.
The American Dental Association and numerous specialists continue to support community water fluoridation. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has also kept its recommendations unchanged. The agency does not have authority to require fluoridation, but it considers 0.7 milligrams per liter the ideal amount.
Recently, the US Food and Drug Administration restricted the use of prescription fluoride supplements. The agency noted that unapproved fluoride products may alter the gut microbiome and that better options exist to protect teeth.
In a written response published with the new research, Dr. David Savitz from Brown University argued that before ending a decades-long public health practice, there must be clear proof of harm at commonly used fluoride levels. He wrote that there is still no convincing evidence that fluoridation lacks benefit or causes damage at recommended doses.
He quoted a well-known saying, noting that if something is not broken, there is no reason to fix it. He said the new study suggests that fluoridated water remains on the side of being effective and safe.
Credits: Canva
The Neuralink chip is a piece of technology that’s hoped will one day allow people to operate devices like phones and computers using their thoughts. Its creator, tech mogul Elon Musk, describes it as a “Fitbit in your skull with tiny wires.” Elon Musk's brain implant company Neuralink said recently that 12 people worldwide have received its chips. The device is meant to have several applications, from restoring motor functionality within people to enabling a brain-computer interface. The question now is whether it will be able to reverse paralysis in the future or not.
Neuralink is a neurotechnology company Musk set up in 2016. The device is roughly the size of a coin and is implanted into the skull, with hair-thin threads placed inside specific parts of the brain to form a working brain-computer interface.
The implant records brain signals and transfers them to an external device, such as a smartphone, through Bluetooth. Its first product, Telepathy, is designed to let a person operate their phone or computer through intention alone. By placing the chip in regions that manage movement, Neuralink believes it could help people living with neurological conditions. Musk has said that early users would likely be people who cannot use their limbs.
As per Reuters, the company has run trials using monkeys and pigs. Demonstrations have featured monkeys moving a cursor or playing simple on-screen games using the implant. Neuralink maintains that no monkey died because of the device itself, though reports have circulated describing complications in some animals, including paralysis, seizures and swelling in the brain.
The human brain contains millions of neurons responsible for movement, emotion and thought. These neurons send electrical signals down pathways that run from the brain to the rest of the body. If a person tries to stand up, the brain sends electrical instructions to the legs, and the reaction is instant. Paralysis develops when pathways in the spinal cord are damaged or blocked, according to the description on Neuralink’s website.
Because the Neuralink implant reads the brain’s signals, it can forward those signals to the limbs even when the spinal cord no longer relays them. This would require one implant in the brain and another placed below the injured area of the spinal cord. With steady training, a person could regain movement, raising the possibility that Neuralink may one day help restore mobility.
Experts have questioned the company’s experiments on animals and the general risks linked to brain operations, which can include seizures or bleeding. They have also pointed to worries about data privacy and long-term surveillance, since there is limited detail on how much control users will have over their neural information.
Earlier this year, the US Department of Transportation fined the company for failing to register as a carrier of hazardous biological material, including implants removed from primates, according to agency records reviewed by Reuters.
In late May 2023, the FDA granted Neuralink permission to start human testing. The company said on Twitter that the approval marked the beginning of its first clinical study in people, calling it a vital step toward making the technology accessible in the future.
Neuralink has continued to share updates, and in July 2025, it announced that it had completed two brain-implant procedures on the same day. Both individuals are said to be recovering well. Musk responded soon after, expressing confidence in what the technology might achieve in the coming years.
© 2024 Bennett, Coleman & Company Limited