What spoils crops, kills about six times more people than malaria every year and is breathed in by every person every single day? It is not a virus or bacteria, but something even more formidable: fungi.
For example, Aspergillus spores are ubiquitous in the environment. Most of the time, this group of molds cause no harm, but exposure to a pathogenic variety such as Aspergillus fumigatus or Aspergillus flavus can make an unlucky few, typically those with weakened immune systems or lung ailments, extremely ill.
Invasive aspergillosis is a disease caused by spores invading lung tissue. An estimated 2.1 million people globally develop the disease every year, and 1.8 million people die.
What is more terrifying than those odds? Perhaps the effect that climate change might have on such pathogens, which society is ill-equipped to respond to effectively.
Fungal pathogens are the underdogs of the medical world — largely understudied and underfunded — partly because fatal disease most often occurs in immunocompromised populations or developing countries. The most common infections known to the public are minor — athlete’s foot, thrush, ringworm — and so the idea of a deadly fungus is limited to science fiction, such as the video game-turned-TV show The Last of Us.
However, do not underestimate these infectious agents. Right now, we have a helpful innate defense: Our body temperature is too high for most species to survive. Yet there is one thing that fungal pathogens have in common: the ability to grow well in hotter environments.
For A fumigatus, anything from a warm compost heap to a toasty human body does just fine. That is why they are so good at infecting people — and why the climate crisis is worrying to medical mycologists.
A study, published on preprint platform Research Square and funded by charitable foundation the Wellcome Trust, used climate modeling and forecasts to map how the global distributions of three Aspergillus strains — A flavus, A fumigatus and A niger — could be expected to change under different warming scenarios. Their geographical ranges differ according to environmental variables such as annual mean temperature and annual precipitation, and so it is expected that the fungi would find new places to thrive as global warming alters the environment.
Under the most severe warming scenario, which imagines a world that continues to rely heavily on fossil fuels, all three species push northward, with A fumigatus increasing its spread by about 77.5 percent as temperatures rise and rainfall patterns change in the northern hemisphere. The modeling also points to a potential rise in Europe and Australia of people living alongside such fungi, an ominous insight into the regions’ coming disease landscapes.
Some of the other findings might seem broadly positive — for example, Africa, Asia and South America show large potential reductions in the number of people living in suitable areas for Aspergillus — but there are several reasons to be alarmed.
First, the study did not account for the possibility of the species adapting to warmer temperatures, something that lead author Norman van Rhijn, Wellcome Trust research fellow at the University of Manchester, said was “very likely.”
That would mean fungi could maintain their current range as well as spread to new regions.
As with vector-borne diseases such as tick-borne encephalitis and dengue fever, part of the challenge with migrating pathogens is that medical professionals might not know what they are being presented with.
Invasive aspergillosis and other fungal diseases are already extremely hard to diagnose, as their symptoms are generic and testing is complex, particularly when people are critically ill. A 2022 study showed that many cases are missed altogether and only diagnosed at autopsy.
Out of 67 cases of fatal invasive aspergillosis, only 27 percent were diagnosed or suspected to have the disease by clinicians. Diagnosis would only be complicated further if doctors in newly suitable areas are not alert to the health risk.
Fungal diseases such as aspergillosis are not easy to treat, either. Because fungi are much more closely related to human beings than either bacteria or viruses, it is hard to find ways to kill the bug without also harming the patient. The pipeline of new antifungals has been largely stagnant for the past three decades, thanks to the high risks and costs associated with their development, meaning there are not many effective treatments to choose from.
Meanwhile, drug resistance is becoming a larger problem. Aspergillus species also infect crops, so fungicides are a major tool needed to protect food security. The issue is that the main products available rely on the same mechanism to destroy the fungi that the antifungals use to treat serious infections. Studies have shown that airborne spores of A fumigatus are commonly resistant to current drugs.
There was hope on the horizon in the form of new treatment options that tackle such infections in diverse ways. Yet it might already be too late. A new antifungal, olorofim is in late-stage clinical trials, but a fungicide called ipflufenoquin kills in the same way and has beat the drug to market in the US, Australia and Japan, and it is pending approval in the EU.
Exposure to the fungicide, sold under the trade name Kinoprol, could turn the ￡250 million (US$339 million) of investment and two decades of development spent on olorofim into a waste of time and money by allowing Aspergillus to develop resistance before it has been deployed in the clinic. A similar predicament exists with another drug, fosmanogepix, and fungicide, aminopyrifen.
The crisis shows how important a comprehensive approach is to environmental and human health in a climate-changing world. Agricultural and medical bodies need to work together to address these common issues.
The One Health movement pushes for this, which has led to some successes around the world, but government departments, research bodies and companies too often remain siloed, and initiatives are still falling short. If we do not start collaborating, we will keep walking ourselves into the same difficult positions while wasting money and resources.
For Elaine Bignell, professor of medical mycology at the University of Exeter, the study and others like it are important because they help raise awareness.
“Over the last half century, a miniscule amount of funding — from governments, charities, philanthropies — have gone toward fungal disease,” she said.
Although they do mostly affect those who are going through chemotherapy, organ transplants or severe respiratory issues, Bignell said that anyone could fit into one of those boxes.
As fungi adapt to a hotter world, new diseases emerge or existing ones might find it easier to infect people. Some mycologists said that one has already emerged, thanks in part to climate change: Candida auris, a new multidrug-resistant species, which appeared simultaneously on three continents in the early 2010s.
It has been found to spread easily among hospitalized patients, clinging to plastic medical equipment such as blood pressure cuffs and catheters and causing serious infections.
It is not just temperature, either. Bignell said that another risk lies in sea-level rise. As seawater creeps further inland, more fungi would be exposed to high-salt environments. Adaptation to salinity might also help fungi withstand the conditions in the human body.
“The tougher fungi get in response to stressors in the environment, the harder it’ll be for us to fend them off,” Bignell said.
The Last of Us has exposed the public to the idea of a future deadly fungal pathogen, but what is less appreciated is that they are already among us. More research, regulation and monitoring are desperately needed to combat them. Environmental health and human well-being are inextricably linked, and we should start acting like it.
Lara Williams is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering climate change. This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
RSS