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.

Fog that Feeds Fear

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.

Scientific Explanation of the Dense Mysterious Fog

1. What is Fog?

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.

2. Why the Chemical Smell?

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

3. What are the Health Concerns?

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.

Psychological Effects of Mass Panic Caused by Social Media

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.

GLP-1 medications have shown significant promise in treating obesity and type 2 diabetes in adults. Their use has also expanded among children with obesity. However, a new study found that nearly 1 in 6 children, or 17%, treated with GLP-1 medications developed a diagnosed nutritional deficiency within one year.

The research, conducted by scientists at Northwestern University and Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago, found that vitamin D deficiency was the most common nutritional deficiency, identified in 12.4% of children within one year of starting GLP-1 treatment.

“As appropriate pediatric use of GLP-1s becomes more widespread, we need to understand the risks during periods of rapid growth and pubertal development,” said senior author Justin Ryder, associate professor of surgery and pediatrics at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine.

“Nutrients such as vitamin D, iron and calcium are of particular concern during adolescence, when deficiencies may have lasting implications for skeletal health and overall development,” the expert added. The study was published in the journal Childhood Obesity.

Only a Small Share Received Nutritional Counselling

According to Ryder, nutritional support is key once treatment with a GLP-1 medication is initiated.

However, the study found that only 5% of patients received nutritional counseling within 30 days of starting GLP-1 treatment, while less than 25% received nutritional counseling within six months.

Key Findings

The scientists used national administrative claims data from 2017 to 2022 covering more than 100 million patients. They identified 2,031 GLP-1 users aged 10–17 who met continuous enrollment criteria and had no prior diagnosis of nutritional deficiency.

Among these children, the most commonly prescribed GLP-1 medications were liraglutide (78.6%), dulaglutide (10.4%) and semaglutide (9.1%).

The researchers said proactive nutritional management is important when GLP-1 medications are prescribed to children, rather than waiting until a nutritional deficiency is diagnosed.

GLP-1 Prescriptions Rising For Children Under 12

The new study comes as the use of GLP-1 medications among younger children has been rising in the US, although their use for obesity in this age group remains limited and varies by medication. The FDA has approved GLP-1 treatment for obesity in adolescents, among those age 12.

A recent study from NYU Langone Health, based on health records from more than 3.5 million children aged 8 to 11 with obesity in the US, found that prescriptions for GLP-1 medications increased more than 300-fold between 2019 and June 2026.

In 2019, about 0.03% of children in the study group had been prescribed a GLP-1 drug. By June 2026, that figure had risen to 9.3%.

The medications included drugs such as Wegovy and Saxenda, made by Novo Nordisk, and Eli Lilly's Zepbound.

Among children receiving GLP-1 medications, 94% had severe obesity, while about 65% had obesity-related health conditions, including high blood pressure or sleep apnea.

GLP-1 Drugs and FDA Approval for Younger Children

The FDA has approved certain GLP-1 medications for obesity in some pediatric age groups, but the approvals and age limits vary by drug. The GLP-1 medications included in the under-12 study are not generally FDA-approved for weight management in children younger than 12.

However, doctors can prescribe medicines off-label when they believe there is a medical reason to do so. Clinical guidelines may also support the use of obesity medications in certain circumstances involving younger children.

India’s Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) has issued an advisory cautioning against the indiscriminate use of painkillers and antibiotics.

It warned that inappropriate or prolonged use of these medicines can lead to kidney complications and contribute to antimicrobial resistance.

This comes as a Parliamentary Standing Committee on Health and Family Welfare recently noted that the pooled prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in India is approximately 13.24%.

The committee suggested that people above 20 undergo kidney function testing every six months.

How Can Painkillers Affect Kidneys?

“NSAIDs/painkillers and antibiotics should not be taken indiscriminately, repeatedly or for prolonged periods without medical advice,” the CDSCO said.

• NSAIDs can increase the risk of renal impairment, particularly in people with existing kidney disease or other risk factors.
• The risk is greater with repeated or prolonged use.
• People with renal impairment, dehydration or cardiovascular disease require particular caution when using NSAIDs.

It also suggested them to seek medical advice if pain, fever or other symptoms persist or recur, instead of repeatedly using painkillers or antibiotics on your own.

Further, the CDSCO noted that antibiotics should not be used for self-medication or for conditions where they are not clinically indicated, such as most uncomplicated viral infections.

Prescribed antibiotics should be taken strictly as advised and should not be shared or used from leftover medicines.

“Antibiotics prescribed by a healthcare professional should be taken strictly as advised and should not be shared with other persons or used from leftover medicines.”

What CDSCO Told Doctors

Also read: Young Americans Are Developing Kidney Failure Without Usual Risk Factors: What Is CKDu?

Healthcare practitioners have been advised to prescribe NSAIDs and antibiotics only when clinically indicated, after considering the patient’s:

• Clinical condition
• Age
• Co-morbidities
• Concomitant medicines
• Relevant risk factors

“The lowest effective dose for the shortest appropriate duration should be considered when prescribing NSAIDs, particularly in patients at increased risk of renal impairment.”

Doctors have also been advised to take appropriate precautions when prescribing NSAIDs to people with:

• Renal impairment
• Dehydration
• Cardiovascular disease
• Other conditions that may increase the risk associated with NSAID use

Antibiotics should be prescribed judiciously in line with antimicrobial stewardship principles. Unnecessary combination therapy, inappropriate antibiotic selection, incorrect dosing and unnecessarily prolonged treatment should be avoided.

Hospitals Asked To Strengthen Monitoring

The CDSCO has asked hospitals and healthcare institutions to:

• Strengthen systems for rational prescribing and monitoring of NSAIDs and antibiotics
• Promote antimicrobial stewardship
• Conduct prescription reviews
• Provide appropriate patient counselling.

What CDSCO Told Pharmacies

The regulator has directed pharmacies and retailers to strictly comply with rules governing the sale and distribution of prescription medicines.

• Schedule H, H1 and other prescription drugs must be sold in accordance with applicable provisions of the Drugs Rules, 1945.
• Pharmacists and retailers should not encourage or facilitate self-medication with antibiotics or prescription-only NSAIDs.
• Prescribed warnings and conditions of sale on medicine labels must be followed.
• Schedule H1 drugs should not be sold at retail except in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Drugs Rules, 1945.

NSAIDs, Antibiotics Require Medical Supervision

The CDSCO said that various drugs, including NSAIDs and antibiotics, are placed under Schedules G, H, H1 and X of the Drugs Rules, 1945.

Most NSAIDs are included in Schedule H and are not to be sold at retail without a prescription from a Registered Medical Practitioner. Similarly, most antibiotics are included in Schedule H1.

They are required to carry the following warnings:

• It is dangerous to take this preparation except in accordance with the medical advice.
• Not to be sold by retail without the prescription of a Registered Medical Practitioner.

At least six major hospitals in the US have made deals with the Department of Justice to refuse gender-affirming hormones and surgery for young transgender individuals. The move has marked quite an escalation in the federal government's effort to restrict gender-affirming care across the country.

The latest agreements, announced on September 18, involve New York University Langone Health and the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC). They follow Mount Sinai Health System, Connecticut Children's Medical Center, Cleveland Clinic Foundation and Texas Children's Hospital.

Under the agreements, the hospitals will not provide puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones or gender-affirming surgeries to patients under 18.

The DOJ uses the term "sex-rejecting procedures" for these treatments, while medical organisations and healthcare providers generally use the term gender-affirming care.

Why Is The DOJ Targeting These Hospitals?

Also read: CDC Youth Report: US Teen Mental Health, Suicide Risk Improve; Sleep, Low Exercise Remain Concerns

The agreements stem from a nationwide investigation by the Justice Department that was launched after President Donald Trump directed the DOJ in 2025 to prioritise investigations involving gender-affirming care for minors.

The DOJ says it is examining potential violations of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, False Claims Act and other federal healthcare laws, including allegations that providers used false diagnosis codes to obtain insurance or government payments for treatments.

The DOJ has also subpoenaed hospitals for information about patients who received gender-affirming care, including sensitive medical records.

Attorney General Todd Blanche said the DOJ is "fighting to protect our nation's children" and working to reach agreements with hospitals to end what the administration calls gender-affirming care for minors.

However, the legal status of the allegations cannot be neglected. The DOJ itself says the claims resolved through these agreements are just allegations and that there has been no determination of any kind of liability. NYU and UPMC have denied the allegations.

NYU And UPMC Deals

Also read: ‘Life-Saving’ Martha’s Rule To Expand To Emergency Departments Across England: What It Means

NYU Langone agreed to pay the federal government $8.5 million, while UPMC has agreed to pay $950,000. Both have agreed to stop providing gender-affirming medical treatments to minors.

The settlements also resolve the DOJ investigations and protect confidential information involving patients, families and healthcare providers that had been sought through earlier subpoenas.

NYU had already stopped its transgender youth programme in February, citing the "current regulatory environment." However, its agreement with DOJ does not affect its pediatric mental-health programmes transgender children. Similarly, UPMC's agreement applies to patients under 18.

Other Hospitals That Have Agreed

The six hospital systems that have agreed to the DOJ deals are:

1. Texas Children's Hospital, in May 2026, ended specified treatments worth more than $10 million in payments/damages and penalties
2. In June this year, Cleveland Clinic, agreed to end specified pediatric treatments
3. In August, Connecticut Children's stopped treatments and incurred monetary penalty and $500,000 for medical care
4. Mount Sinai Health System, in September 2026, too ended care and paid monetary penalty and $2 million for medical care
5. NYU Langone, stopped treatments and care in September and bore $8.5 million payment
6. UPMC, too, ended treatments and paid $950,000 in the deals

These agreements apply to the individual hospital systems that signed them. They do not by themselves create a nationwide federal ban on gender-affirming care for minors. Some states have enacted restrictions on gender-affirming care for minors, while other states have laws protecting access to such care.

The agreements generally concern future provision of gender-affirming treatment to minors. They do not eliminate the hospitals' overall pediatric mental-health care services.

The settlements demonstrate how the DOJ investigation has created a difficult choice for hospitals. They can either fight the government's allegations in court and reveal sensitive patient information or reach an agreement that ends the investigation while restricting the treatments in question.

NYU said its agreement was intended to protect patient from prolonged litigation and to preserve their confidentiality. The six settlements therefore represent more than individual hospital policy changes. They show how the Trump administration is using federal investigations, healthcare-fraud laws and settlement agreements to influence access to gender-affirming care for minors.