The Intersection of Medicine and Environment: Current Findings, Meta-Science, and the Path Forward
Abstract
The relationship between human health and the environment has emerged as one of the most consequential scientific frontiers of the twenty-first century. This paper examines the current state of knowledge at the medicine-environment intersection, synthesizing recent findings from epidemiology, toxicology, and health systems research. It explores the meta-scientific dimensions of this field—how economic structures, biological understanding, and governmental policies interact to shape both environmental exposures and health outcomes. The paper highlights contributions from Asian women researchers who are advancing this field, including Dr. Juan Zhang's work on environmental nephrotoxicity in China, Dr. Hyemin Jang's research on air pollution and women's health in Korea, and Dr. Hsing-Kang Chen's investigations into household exposures and maternal mental health in Taiwan. The analysis considers the continuation of current projects, emerging possibilities for intervention, and the critical learnings that must inform future action. It concludes that addressing the medicine-environment nexus requires integrated strategies that transcend traditional disciplinary and policy silos, with particular attention to vulnerable populations and the paradoxical role of healthcare systems themselves as contributors to environmental harm.
1. Introduction
The recognition that environmental conditions fundamentally shape human health is not new—Hippocrates wrote of airs, waters, and places in the fifth century BCE. Yet the contemporary understanding of this relationship has undergone a profound transformation. Where earlier frameworks conceived of environmental health primarily in terms of discrete exposures and specific diseases, current research reveals a far more complex picture: one of synergistic interactions, cumulative burdens, and systems-level effects that operate across the life course and even across generations.
This paper examines the medicine-environment intersection at the current moment—a moment characterized by both alarming discoveries and unprecedented opportunities for intervention. It addresses three interconnected dimensions of this field. First, it reviews recent empirical findings that have expanded our understanding of how environmental factors influence human health, from particulate matter and flame retardants to household mold and indoor air quality. Second, it explores the meta-scientific context in which these findings emerge: the economic structures that drive environmental exposures, the biological paradigms that shape how we understand them, and the governmental frameworks that determine our collective response. Third, it highlights the contributions of Asian women researchers who are playing increasingly prominent roles in advancing this field, examining how their work exemplifies broader trends in global environmental health research.
The paper concludes by considering the trajectories of current projects, the possibilities that lie ahead, and the essential learnings that must guide future efforts. At a time when climate change, chemical pollution, and biodiversity loss converge as existential threats to human health, understanding the medicine-environment intersection is not merely an academic exercise—it is a prerequisite for survival.
2. Recent Findings at the Medicine-Environment Interface
2.1 Air Pollution and Non-Communicable Disease: New Mechanisms, New Populations
The health effects of air pollution have been studied for decades, but recent research continues to uncover previously unrecognized impacts and vulnerable populations. A large multiregional study in China by Ce Liu and colleagues, published in February 2026, examined the relationship between particulate matter (PM) exposure and hypertension prevalence across diverse geographic and climatic conditions . The study of 27,602 adults found that long-term exposure to PM2.5 was significantly associated with higher odds of hypertension (odds ratio 1.100 per 10 μg/m3 increase). Critically, the research revealed that this association was synergistically amplified in regions experiencing frequent cold waves, while higher elevation—independently protective against hypertension—paradoxically potentiated the adverse effects of PM exposure.
This finding has profound implications for environmental health assessment. It suggests that current risk models, which typically treat air pollution as an independent factor, may substantially underestimate disease burden in regions where multiple stressors converge. As climate change increases the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, populations already burdened by poor air quality face compounding risks that demand integrated, climate-informed public health strategies.
Equally significant is research examining air pollution effects on conditions not traditionally associated with environmental exposures. A nationwide cohort study in South Korea, led by Hyemin Jang and colleagues and published in Environmental Research, investigated the relationship between long-term PM2.5 exposure and urinary tract infections (UTIs) in women . Following 4.4 million Korean women aged 30 and older over a median of nine years, the study found that each 10 μg/m3 increase in PM2.5 was associated with a 3.2% increased risk of incident UTIs. The association remained robust after adjustment for lifestyle and clinical factors, and vulnerability was particularly pronounced among women with lower income and those engaging in high-risk drinking.
This research opens new avenues for understanding how air pollution affects human health. The proposed mechanism—that particulate matter impairs mucosal immunity and increases susceptibility to infections—suggests that the health burden of air pollution extends far beyond the cardiorespiratory outcomes that have dominated research agendas. For women, who experience UTIs at approximately four times the rate of men and whose domestic roles often entail greater exposure to household air pollutants, these findings carry particular weight .
2.2 Emerging Contaminants and Chronic Disease: The Case of TDCPP
As regulatory action has phased out some legacy pollutants, newer compounds have emerged as causes for concern. Among these are organophosphorus flame retardants (OPFRs), widely used as replacements for polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in building materials, furniture, electronics, and infant products. Tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP) is one of the most extensively used OPFRs, yet its health effects remain poorly understood.
A groundbreaking study by Xulei Zuo, Wei Wang, Xiaoyu Hou, and colleagues at Southeast University, led by Dr. Juan Zhang, has now identified TDCPP as an emerging environmental risk factor for chronic kidney disease (CKD) . Using network toxicology, molecular docking, transcriptomic validation, and mouse exposure experiments, the research team uncovered the mechanisms linking TDCPP exposure to kidney injury. They identified 1,270 overlapping targets between predicted TDCPP-binding proteins and CKD-related genes, with enrichment analyses showing strong links to inflammatory and apoptotic processes, as well as key signaling pathways including PI3K–Akt, MAPK, Ras, and cAMP.
Machine learning methods identified two hub genes—CTRB1 and HSPA1A—that were significantly downregulated in CKD transcriptomes and showed perfect diagnostic performance. Molecular docking predicted favorable binding of TDCPP to both proteins, with the strongest affinity for CTRB1. In vivo experiments confirmed that TDCPP exposure caused dose-dependent tubular degeneration, inflammation, and increased serum biomarkers of kidney injury, along with marked downregulation of CTRB1 and HSPA1A.
This study is notable not only for its findings but for its methodological approach. By integrating computational toxicology with experimental validation, the researchers constructed a comprehensive adverse outcome pathway (AOP) framework linking environmental exposure to chronic disease. This approach offers a model for investigating the health effects of the thousands of chemicals in commercial use for which toxicological data remain limited.
The public health implications are substantial. TDCPP has been detected in 100% of household indoor dust samples in Japan, in industrial wastewater in Germany, in milk samples in South America, and in human breast milk, placenta, semen, plasma, and urine across multiple populations . Humans are exposed through inhalation, ingestion, and dermal absorption. If the associations identified in this study are confirmed in human populations, the contribution of environmental flame retardants to the global burden of CKD—already a major cause of morbidity and mortality—could be significant.
2.3 Household Environments and Women's Health: Beyond Traditional Paradigms
The home, traditionally conceived as a refuge from environmental hazards, is increasingly recognized as a critical site of exposure with profound implications for health. Two recent studies illuminate this dimension, both with particular relevance to women's health.
A systematic review and meta-analysis by K. Dash and colleagues, published in Cureus, examined the respiratory health impacts of solid biomass fuel use among women and children in South Asian countries . The analysis of 36 studies revealed stark disparities: women using unimproved cooking fuels had a 23.3% prevalence of respiratory infections compared to 8% among users of improved fuels. For acute respiratory infections specifically, the prevalence was 29.2% among women using unimproved fuels versus 11.2% among those using improved alternatives. Children in households using unimproved fuels similarly demonstrated significantly higher prevalence of acute respiratory infections (26.4% versus 11.8%).
These findings underscore the disproportionate burden borne by women in low-resource settings, where traditional gender roles assign cooking responsibilities and thus concentrate exposure to indoor air pollution. Approximately 2.4 billion people globally rely on solid biomass fuels for cooking and heating, and in South Asia—encompassing India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Bhutan—this reliance is particularly pronounced in rural areas . The health impacts extend beyond respiratory infections to include tuberculosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and lung cancer, contributing substantially to the global disease burden.
A second study, led by Hsing-Kang Chen and colleagues in Taiwan and published in the Journal of Affective Disorders, examined associations between household environmental exposures and postpartum depression (PPD) . Using data from the Taiwan Birth Cohort Study, a nationwide population-based cohort of 17,981 mothers, the research found that multiple household factors were significantly associated with PPD at six months postpartum. Environmental tobacco smoke (OR=1.18), household renovation or wall/furniture painting (OR=1.33), mold spots at home (OR=1.31), and household insecticide use (OR=1.13) all exhibited significant positive associations. Moreover, a dose-response effect was observed: the higher the number of environmental exposure factors, the greater the risk of PPD.
This research expands the scope of environmental health beyond physical disease to encompass mental health outcomes, recognizing that the same environmental stressors that affect the body also affect the mind. For postpartum women, who experience PPD at rates approaching 20% globally and who spend substantial time in the home environment with their infants, these findings have particular salience. They suggest that interventions to improve housing quality and reduce household exposures could yield mental health benefits alongside physical health improvements.
2.4 The Healthcare Paradox: Medicine as Environmental Burden
A final category of recent findings concerns not how the environment affects health, but how healthcare itself affects the environment. This represents a crucial reflexive turn in environmental health research—an acknowledgment that the institutions dedicated to healing are themselves contributors to environmental harm.
A comprehensive review by Pernilla Sörme and Scott Weitze, published in Clinical Biochemistry, examines the environmental impact of clinical medical laboratories . The global healthcare system emits approximately two gigatons of carbon dioxide annually, accounting for 4.4% of total global net emissions. Within this, clinical laboratories are particularly resource-intensive spaces, consuming five to ten times more energy per square meter than office spaces and five times more water. Supply chain emissions (Scope 3) account for approximately 71% of healthcare's carbon footprint, with significant contributions from reagents, plastics, pharmaceuticals, transportation, and waste management.
The paradox is striking: the same institutions that exist to promote health are, through their operations, contributing to the environmental degradation that undermines health. As the World Health Organization has estimated that 23% of global deaths are attributable to environmental factors, this paradox demands urgent attention . The review identifies numerous opportunities for improvement, including optimizing the Total Testing Process to reduce unnecessary testing, transitioning to sustainable procurement, implementing third-party certification programs such as My Green Lab, and fostering cultural change through staff engagement.
3. The Meta-Science of Current Living: Economic, Biological, and Governmental Dimensions
Understanding the medicine-environment intersection requires moving beyond individual studies to examine the meta-scientific context in which environmental health research occurs and in which environmental exposures are produced and distributed. Three dimensions merit particular attention: the economic structures that drive environmental pollution and shape exposure patterns; the biological paradigms that frame how we understand environment-health relationships; and the governmental frameworks that determine how—or whether—societies respond.
3.1 Economic Dimensions: The Production of Risk
Environmental health risks are not randomly distributed; they are systematically produced by economic structures and practices. The CUSP Research Roadmap 2026-2032, developed by five Horizon 2020 projects investigating micro- and nanoplastic (MNP) health impacts, illuminates this dimension . MNPs have been detected in air, food, water, and human blood, lungs, and placenta. They originate from the global plastics economy—an economy built on linear material flows, fossil fuel feedstocks, and the externalization of environmental and health costs. The road map identifies critical knowledge gaps regarding long-term, low-level exposure effects and risks for vulnerable populations, but the existence of these gaps itself reflects economic priorities: research funding follows perceived economic interests, and the health effects of economically valuable materials have historically been underinvestigated until evidence of harm becomes unavoidable.
The PFAS problem exemplifies the same dynamic. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances—"forever chemicals"—are persistent environmental contaminants with serious health risks, yet they remain widely used because of their economic utility. A project at the University of Amsterdam, "Health(ier) without PFAS," estimates that approximately one-third of PFAS pollution originates from the medical sector itself . Medical tools, pharmaceuticals, and laboratory equipment contain PFAS, creating a situation where healthcare simultaneously treats PFAS-related diseases and contributes to PFAS contamination. The project, working with Amsterdam UMC as a living lab, aims to identify PFAS-containing products, assess the feasibility of alternatives, and develop transition pathways. This work recognizes that addressing environmental health requires not merely regulating individual chemicals but transforming the production systems that generate chemical risks.
The economic dimensions of environmental health also operate at the household level. The South Asian biomass fuel studies reveal how poverty and energy infrastructure shape exposure patterns . Households use unimproved fuels not from choice but from necessity; improved cooking technologies remain inaccessible to billions. Similarly, the Korean UTI study found that women with lower income were more vulnerable to PM2.5 effects, suggesting that socioeconomic disadvantage compounds environmental exposure . These findings underscore that environmental health is inseparable from economic justice.
3.2 Biological Dimensions: From Genome to Exposome
The biological understanding of environment-health relationships has undergone paradigm shifts. The completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003 inaugurated the genomic era, with initial expectations that genetic information would revolutionize medicine. Yet the subsequent period has been characterized by growing recognition that genes alone are insufficient—that environmental factors play equally crucial roles in health and disease.
This recognition has given rise to postgenomic fields including exposomics and microbiomics. The exposome concept, introduced by Christopher Wild in 2005, seeks to capture the totality of environmental exposures an individual encounters from conception onward—biological, chemical, physical, and social. The microbiome—the community of microorganisms residing in and on the human body—represents a crucial interface between environment and health, mediating environmental effects and itself shaped by environmental factors.
A workshop hosted by META at Politecnico di Milano in March 2026, "Postgenomic Intersections: Epistemology and Ethics for the Exposome and Microbiome," brought together philosophers, sociologists, and scientists to examine the convergence of these fields . The workshop addressed fundamental questions: Can microbiomics be integrated into exposomics? What is gained and lost through integration? How do concepts such as exposure, environment, health, and disease transform as postgenomic fields evolve?
These questions have profound implications. The Human Exposome Project, announced as a Moonshot initiative in 2025, aims to integrate microorganisms and the microbiome into exposome frameworks. Yet integration raises both opportunities and concerns. Methodologically, capturing the complexity of environmental exposures challenges existing analytical capabilities. Conceptually, expanding the exposome to encompass everything risks diluting its explanatory power. Ethically, comprehensive environmental monitoring raises questions about privacy, data ownership, and the potential for environmental data to exacerbate health inequalities.
The biological paradigm emerging from this work is one of dynamic interaction rather than static determination. Health and disease arise from ongoing transactions between organisms and environments, with no fixed boundary separating the two. This understanding has implications for research, clinical practice, and policy—all of which must become more attuned to environmental context.
3.3 Governmental Dimensions: Regulation, Response, and the Limits of Action
Governmental frameworks shape environmental health at multiple levels: through environmental regulations that limit exposures, through health systems that treat environmentally mediated diseases, through research funding that determines what is studied, and through international agreements that address transboundary environmental threats.
The current governmental landscape is characterized by paradox. On one hand, regulatory action has achieved substantial public health gains. The phase-out of leaded gasoline, restrictions on asbestos, and controls on criteria air pollutants have prevented millions of deaths. On the other hand, regulatory frameworks remain fundamentally reactive, responding to evidence of harm rather than preventing harm prospectively. The TDCPP story illustrates this pattern: a chemical was widely used for decades before its health effects were investigated, and regulatory action—if it comes—will follow evidence of harm rather than precede it .
The European Union's Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe programs represent ambitious governmental investments in environmental health research. The CUSP projects, the PFAS initiative, and countless other studies receive public funding precisely because governments recognize that environmental health is a public good requiring collective action. Yet research funding remains modest relative to the scale of environmental health challenges, and the translation of research findings into policy action remains uneven.
Climate change adds urgency to governmental action while exposing the limits of current frameworks. The healthcare sector's carbon footprint, estimated at 4.4% of global emissions, has no regulator . No international treaty limits hospital emissions; no carbon price applies to laboratory operations. Reducing healthcare's environmental impact requires voluntary action, professional leadership, and institutional commitment—all valuable but insufficient without systemic policy support.
The dose-response finding in the Taiwan PPD study—that increasing numbers of environmental exposures produce increasing risk—has governmental implications . Current regulatory frameworks typically address individual exposures one chemical at a time, one medium at a time. Yet real-world exposures are multiple and cumulative. Addressing the health effects of multiple environmental stressors requires integrated approaches that current governmental structures struggle to deliver.
4. Asian Women Researchers at the Forefront
Any examination of the medicine-environment intersection at the current moment must recognize the contributions of Asian women researchers who are advancing this field through rigorous science and innovative approaches. Their work exemplifies the globalization of environmental health research and the essential contributions of diverse perspectives to scientific progress.
Dr. Juan Zhang of Southeast University in Nanjing, China, leads the research team that identified TDCPP as a risk factor for chronic kidney disease . As corresponding author of the study published in the International Journal of Surgery, Dr. Zhang oversaw a project that integrated network toxicology, molecular docking, transcriptomic validation, and in vivo experiments—a methodological sophistication that reflects the maturation of environmental health research in China. Her work demonstrates how researchers in Asian institutions are contributing not merely data but conceptual and methodological innovations to global environmental health science.
Dr. Hyemin Jang of Pusan National University in South Korea is the first author of the nationwide cohort study linking PM2.5 exposure to urinary tract infections in women . The study's scale—4.4 million participants followed for nine years—reflects the remarkable infrastructure for population-based research in Korea, including the National Health Insurance Service database that covers 97% of the population. Dr. Jang and her colleagues, including Jinah Park, Yejin Kim, and Hyojin Ha, have illuminated a previously unrecognized health burden of air pollution while identifying socioeconomic vulnerabilities that demand policy attention.
Dr. Hsing-Kang Chen in Taiwan led the research linking household environmental exposures to postpartum depression, published in the Journal of Affective Disorders . The study's use of the Taiwan Birth Cohort Study, a nationwide population-based cohort, enabled rigorous examination of multiple household factors and their associations with maternal mental health. By demonstrating dose-response relationships between environmental exposures and PPD risk, Dr. Chen's work expands the scope of environmental health to encompass mental health outcomes and highlights the particular vulnerabilities of postpartum women.
These researchers are part of a broader cohort of Asian women scientists whose contributions to environmental health deserve recognition. Their work addresses health issues of particular relevance to women—UTIs, postpartum depression, biomass fuel exposures—while employing rigorous methods that advance scientific understanding for all populations. They exemplify the globalization of environmental health research and the essential contributions of diverse perspectives to scientific progress.
5. Continuation, Possibilities, and Learnings
5.1 Continuation of Current Projects
Several major initiatives are poised to advance understanding of medicine-environment intersections in the coming years. The Human Exposome Project, announced in 2025 as a Moonshot initiative, aims to integrate microorganisms and the microbiome into exposome frameworks . This ambitious project will require developing new methods for measuring and analyzing environmental exposures, new frameworks for integrating multiple data streams, and new approaches to ethical governance of environmental health data.
The CUSP Research Roadmap 2026-2032 outlines 22 priority research needs for understanding micro- and nanoplastic health effects . These include developing standardized methods for MNP detection and characterization, understanding exposure pathways and human uptake, investigating health effects across the life course, and identifying vulnerable populations. The road map explicitly calls for strategic collaboration among policymakers, scientists, and industry to accelerate the transition toward safer alternatives.
The PFAS phase-out project at Amsterdam UMC, running from 2025 to 2027, will generate case studies of PFAS-free replacements, academic publications, and guidelines for sustainable healthcare practices . By working with a major academic medical center as a living lab, the project aims to demonstrate that reducing PFAS use is compatible with maintaining patient safety and care quality—essential evidence for broader healthcare system transformation.
5.2 Possibilities for Transformation
The current moment offers unprecedented possibilities for transforming the medicine-environment relationship. Several directions merit attention.
Integration of environmental health into clinical practice. Despite overwhelming evidence that environmental factors shape health outcomes, environmental health remains largely separate from clinical medicine. Most physicians receive minimal training in environmental health; most clinical encounters do not include environmental exposure assessment; most health systems do not systematically address environmental determinants of health. Integrating environmental health into clinical practice—through education, screening, referral pathways, and electronic health record modifications—could substantially reduce disease burden.
Green healthcare transformation. The recognition that healthcare itself contributes to environmental harm opens possibilities for transformation . Clinical laboratories can reduce energy consumption, minimize waste, and optimize procurement. Hospitals can transition to renewable energy, sustainable food systems, and low-carbon supply chains. Professional organizations can establish sustainability standards and certification programs. The My Green Lab Certification framework, now being expanded to address clinical laboratory challenges, offers a model for systematic improvement.
Climate-informed public health. The synergistic effects identified in the China hypertension study—the amplification of PM health effects by cold waves—demonstrate the need for climate-informed public health strategies . As climate change proceeds, public health agencies must anticipate compound risks, develop early warning systems for extreme weather events, and design interventions that address interacting stressors rather than single exposures.
Precautionary chemical policy. The TDCPP findings underscore the limitations of reactive chemical regulation . A precautionary approach—requiring safety testing before market approval, phasing out persistent and bioaccumulative substances, and shifting the burden of proof to producers—could prevent harm rather than documenting it after decades of exposure. The European Union's REACH regulation represents movement in this direction, but global chemical safety remains far from achieved.
5.3 Current Learnings
What have we learned from recent research at the medicine-environment intersection? Several lessons stand out.
First, environmental health effects are often synergistic, not additive. The China hypertension study found that cold waves amplify PM effects, and elevation—independently protective—potentiates PM toxicity . These interactions mean that risk assessments based on single exposures likely underestimate true burdens. Protecting health requires understanding how multiple environmental factors combine.
Second, vulnerability is patterned by social position. The Korean UTI study found that low-income women were more susceptible to PM effects . The South Asian biomass studies found that women's traditional roles concentrate exposure . The Taiwan PPD study found that multiple household exposures combine to increase risk . Environmental health is environmental justice; addressing environmental determinants of health requires addressing social determinants of exposure and susceptibility.
Third, environmental health research requires methodological pluralism. The TDCPP study integrated computational toxicology, machine learning, molecular docking, and in vivo experiments . The UTI study combined air pollution modeling with health insurance claims and health examination data . The exposome workshop brought together philosophers, sociologists, and scientists . No single method suffices for understanding complex environment-health relationships; progress requires diverse approaches and interdisciplinary collaboration.
Fourth, healthcare must address its own environmental footprint. The clinical laboratory review documents the substantial environmental impact of healthcare operations . The PFAS project reveals healthcare's contribution to persistent chemical pollution . Healing and harming are intertwined in current healthcare systems; transforming this relationship is both an ethical imperative and a practical necessity for protecting population health.
Fifth, research alone is insufficient without policy translation. The gap between what is known about environmental health risks and what is done to address them remains vast. Bridging this gap requires not only more research but more effective communication, more robust policy engagement, and more sustained advocacy by researchers and affected communities alike.
6. Conclusion
The intersection of medicine and environment at the current moment is characterized by both deepening understanding and escalating urgency. Recent research has expanded our awareness of how environmental factors shape health—from the synergistic effects of air pollution and climate on hypertension, to the contribution of flame retardants to chronic kidney disease, to the associations between household exposures and postpartum depression. This research has been advanced by researchers around the world, including Asian women scientists whose contributions exemplify the globalization and diversification of environmental health science.
The meta-scientific context of this research—the economic structures that produce environmental risks, the biological paradigms that frame our understanding, and the governmental frameworks that shape our response—is essential to comprehending both the challenges we face and the possibilities for action. Economic systems built on linear material flows and externalized costs generate environmental contamination as an inherent feature, not a correctable bug. Biological understanding has evolved from gene-centric determinism to recognition of dynamic organism-environment interactions. Governmental frameworks remain largely reactive and fragmented, ill-suited to addressing cumulative exposures and compound risks.
Yet possibilities for transformation exist. The Human Exposome Project, the CUSP Research Roadmap, and the PFAS phase-out initiatives represent ambitious efforts to advance knowledge and drive change. Integration of environmental health into clinical practice, transformation of healthcare operations toward sustainability, development of climate-informed public health strategies, and adoption of precautionary chemical policies could substantially reduce environment-related disease burden.
The learnings from current research are clear: environmental health effects are synergistic, vulnerability is socially patterned, methodological pluralism is essential, healthcare must address its own environmental footprint, and research must translate into policy. These lessons must guide future efforts if we are to address the profound environmental health challenges of our time.
In the end, the medicine-environment intersection is not merely a scientific frontier but a moral one. The conditions in which people live, work, and play—the air they breathe, the water they drink, the chemicals in their homes and bodies—are not matters of fate but of choice. They reflect decisions made by governments, corporations, and societies. Recognizing this is not cause for despair but for determination. If environmental health risks are produced by human action, they can also be reduced by human action. The research reviewed here provides both the evidence for why such action is urgently needed and the knowledge for how it can most effectively proceed.
References
META | PoliMi. (2026). Workshop: Postgenomic Intersections: Epistemology and Ethics for the Exposome and Microbiome (2-3 March 2026). https://www.meta.polimi.it/workshop-postgenomic-intersections-epistemology-and-ethics-for-the-exposome-and-microbiome/
Liu, C., et al. (2026). Cold Waves and Elevation Strengthen the Association of Particulate Matter Exposure With Hypertension Prevalence: A Large Multiregional Study in China. Journal of the American Heart Association, e047614.
Jang, H., Park, J., Kim, Y., Ha, H., Ahn, S., Kim, H., & Lee, W. (2026). Long-term exposure to ambient air pollution and the risk of urinary tract infections in women: A nationwide cohort study. Environmental Research, 289, 123417.
CUSP. (2025). CUSP Research Roadmap 2026-2032: Informing and advising on the state of the art, gaps, and future needs in micro- and nanoplastic and health research in Europe. Zenodo.
Sörme, P., & Weitze, S. (2026). Improving the environmental impact paradox of clinical medical laboratories. Clinical Biochemistry, 141, 111063.
Zuo, X., Wang, W., Hou, X., Zhang, C., Zhang, Y., & Zhang, J. (2026). Network toxicology and experimental validation reveal TDCPP as an emerging environmental risk factor for chronic kidney disease. International Journal of Surgery, 10.1097/JS9.0000000000004843.
Dash, K., Nayak, S., Patel, K., et al. (2026). Solid Biomass Fuel Use and Respiratory Health Among Women and Children in South Asian Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cureus, 18(2), e104012.
University of Amsterdam. (2026). Health(ier) without PFAS: phasing out non-essential uses of "forever chemicals" in hospitals and healthcare (2025-2027). SEVEN. https://seven.uva.nl/en/research/sevens-portfolio/healthier-without-pfas.html
İlgördü, Ö. Ö., & Basak, S. (2026). Spatiotemporal Variability of Indoor CO2 and PM2.5 in a Multifunctional, University-Affiliated Healthcare Facility. Environments, 13(2), 99.
Chen, H-K., et al. (2026). Household environmental exposures and postpartum depression: A nationwide prospective birth cohort study. Journal of Affective Disorders, 121455.
