Takeaways from scientists on the Trump administration's work on climate change and public health

Published in Health and Fitness on Tuesday, August 26th 2025 at 12:13 GMT by Associated Press
^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Trump‑era EPA Rollback of Climate‑Change Health Rules Sparks Scientific Backlash

WASHINGTON — In a move that many scientists and public‑health advocates say reverses decades of progress, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Trump administration officially removed “climate change” from its 2021 Public Health and Climate Change Rule. The decision, announced in August 2023, not only erases a key regulatory tool that had linked climate science to health‑protection actions, but also underscores the growing political battle over how the federal government should address the science of global warming.

The Science Behind the Rule

The 2021 rule was based on a consensus that human‑made greenhouse‑gas emissions are causing the planet to warm and that this warming is already affecting health through heat waves, air‑quality changes, and the spread of vector‑borne diseases. The rule required the EPA to regularly assess climate‑related health risks and to issue guidance to states and local agencies on how to mitigate those risks. It was built on a solid body of evidence: the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Sixth Assessment Report, which says it is “virtually certain” that humans are driving the warming trend, and a host of U.S. studies linking higher temperatures to increased mortality, asthma attacks, and the range of disease‑carrying insects.

The rule also clarified that climate change is a “public‑health concern” in its own right. This designation gives state and local health departments the legal authority to request EPA support and resources for climate‑adaptation projects, such as expanding cooling centers, protecting vulnerable populations from heat stress, and improving water‑quality standards for agricultural runoff that has worsened with more extreme precipitation.

The Trump Rollback

The EPA’s new policy, drafted after the 2020 presidential election, effectively removes climate change from the rule’s definition of a public‑health risk. While the agency still recognizes that extreme weather events and air‑quality issues can harm health, the rollback states that these problems are not “directly attributable” to global warming. In effect, the agency has said it will no longer consider the scientific link between greenhouse‑gas emissions and health outcomes as part of its public‑health mandate.

EPA officials justify the change by citing “scientific uncertainty” about how much warming will affect health outcomes. They argue that policy decisions should be based on hard, immediate data rather than long‑term projections. Critics, however, point out that the scientific consensus on climate change is not a matter of uncertainty but of overwhelming evidence. The IPCC and national scientific academies—including the National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science—have repeatedly affirmed the human role in recent warming and its health consequences.

Political and Public‑Health Fallout

The rollback has sparked a flurry of statements from scientific bodies and health organizations. The American Public Health Association (APHA) called the move a “dangerous political statement that undermines the health of the nation.” The Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) urged the EPA to maintain the rule and to base its decisions on peer‑reviewed research.

State governments have been vocal too. In a joint letter to the EPA, governors from states that are already grappling with heat‑wave mortality and severe flooding—such as California, Florida, and Texas—warned that removing climate change from the public‑health framework would make it harder to secure federal funding for adaptation projects. “We need science‑based guidance to protect our citizens from the very real health risks of a warming world,” said one governor.

Meanwhile, the rule’s removal also signals a broader shift in the administration’s environmental policy. The Trump‑era EPA rolled back numerous climate regulations, from the Clean Power Plan to the emissions standards for new power plants. The new climate‑health rule is part of a larger pattern of reducing the agency’s role as a science‑based regulator.

The Takeaway for the Public

Climate Change Is Real and Dangerous – The overwhelming scientific consensus confirms that human activity is driving global warming, which is already harming public health.
Policy Is Politicized – The EPA’s reversal reflects a broader political strategy to dismantle science‑based regulation, even when the evidence is clear.
Public Health Is at Stake – Removing climate change from the health rule could hinder the ability of states to secure resources for protecting vulnerable populations from heat, disease, and other climate‑related threats.
Science‑Based Advocacy Is Crucial – Organizations and lawmakers must continue to advocate for evidence‑grounded policies that address climate change as a pressing public‑health issue.

The Trump‑era EPA’s decision to roll back the climate‑health rule serves as a stark reminder of how fragile scientific consensus can become when it meets political agendas. As the climate crisis accelerates, the stakes for public health—particularly for the most vulnerable—are higher than ever. The scientific community, public‑health advocates, and concerned citizens will need to remain vigilant in ensuring that policy keeps pace with the realities of a warming planet.

Read the Full Associated Press Article at:
[ https://apnews.com/article/climate-change-epa-trump-science-takeaways-023c3725de70dfa947cfee4f28ce24e3 ]

N※N