In recent years, it has become harder to ignore the ways our surroundings affect our health—not only in distant, statistical terms, but in the details of everyday life. The state of the planet, once treated as a background condition, is now increasingly seen as something that reaches into our bodies, our moods, and the stability of our societies. When rivers dry up, when the air grows harder to breathe, or when the heat settles in longer each summer, it is not just the landscape that suffers. It is people—coughing in crowded cities, losing crops in unstable climates, or struggling with anxiety in urban environments stripped of green space. The idea that a damaged Earth could still support healthy human life is growing more difficult to defend. What once felt like separate conversations—about forests, weather, or wildlife—now feel personal. The question is no longer whether the planet’s health matters to us, but whether we can stay well while the world around us grows unwell.

One of the most tangible consequences of this interdependence is seen in the changing patterns of infectious disease. As the climate warms and precipitation patterns shift, disease-carrying vectors like mosquitoes expand into new regions once inhospitable to them. The threat is not confined to the tropics. Smith and Thomas project that by the end of this century, over a billion people could be living in areas where malaria is viable nearly year-round, including densely inhabited zones like the Nile River basin (1). Europe, too, is no longer immune. An unusually hot summer in 2022 led to an increase in dengue cases in France, a country once considered outside the range of such illnesses (2). More haunting still is the prospect that ancient pathogens, long trapped in permafrost, might reemerge. As Basu warns, these microbes—forgotten by time but not extinct—could confront our immune systems with unfamiliar threats (3). These developments are a sobering reminder: as the planet warms, the biological order reshuffles, and human health becomes more vulnerable.

The effects are not limited to infectious diseases. The quiet violence of chronic exposure to pollutants often escapes headlines but not human lungs. Air pollution, driven by fossil fuel combustion and industrial emissions, shortens lives silently. Thomas reports that some seven million people die prematurely each year due to polluted air (4). Fine particles and toxic gases lodge deep within the respiratory system, strain the heart, and fuel the rise of cancers. Contaminated water, too, remains a daily threat for millions, responsible for approximately 1.7 million deaths annually due to poor sanitation and industrial runoff (4). In every breath and every sip, the health of the environment is mirrored in our bodies.

Emerging evidence suggests this link runs even deeper. Microplastics—tiny fragments of our consumption—have now been detected not only in fish and seawater, but in human organs and bloodstreams. Though their long-term effects remain uncertain, their presence reveals how thoroughly the boundary between the natural and the artificial has dissolved (5). We are, quite literally, absorbing the consequences of ecological neglect.

Food systems are no less affected. Agricultural instability caused by erratic weather, droughts, and flooding is disrupting crop yields and altering global food distribution. But even when food reaches our plates, its quality may be diminished. Myers’ research shows that rising carbon dioxide levels are reducing the nutrient density of staple crops, stripping them of iron, protein, and zinc—micronutrients vital for development and immune function (6). In coastal communities, overfished and warming oceans threaten seafood supplies that feed billions (4). In 2016 alone, 24 million people were displaced by environmental disasters, their lives and livelihoods destabilized (4). These cascading effects don’t fall equally. As Jauquet notes, it is the vulnerable—those with the fewest resources and the least political power—who bear the heaviest burden (5). The environmental crisis is also a crisis of equity.

Health is not only physical; it is also emotional, psychological, and deeply connected to the spaces we inhabit. During the COVID-19 lockdowns, many rediscovered the therapeutic power of nature. As cities fell silent, people sought solace in walks through parks and along riversides. Jauquet calls these moments “corona walks”—simple, unassuming acts that revealed how much we depend on nature not just for survival, but for sanity (5). Trees, birdsong, open skies—these are not luxuries. They are medicine.

Recognizing this, healthcare systems are beginning to respond. In the UK, doctors now prescribe time in nature to patients battling anxiety or depression (5). These “green prescriptions” reflect a growing awareness that the environment is not separate from human care—it is part of it. Yet, even as we acknowledge this, we continue to destroy the very spaces that support our well-being. Forests shrink. Rivers dry. Cities expand into the wild. Urban design trends like biophilic architecture attempt to reclaim some of what is lost, but they cannot replace the quiet complexity of unspoiled ecosystems (5).

A bitter irony remains: the very systems designed to protect our health are often complicit in the planet’s decline. Jauquet observes that the global healthcare sector emits more greenhouse gases than the entire aviation industry, underscoring the contradiction between intention and impact (5). This calls for not just reform, but a reimagining of public health. Institutions like the Planetary Health Alliance, led by experts such as Myers, seek to bridge this gap—integrating ecological science with medicine to design systems that heal without harm (6). Protecting biodiversity, reducing emissions, and investing in ecosystem restoration are not just environmental goals—they are healthcare strategies.

Yet knowledge alone does not guarantee action. Cultural inertia, economic interests, and psychological fatigue often undermine progress. Jauquet describes a common posture in modern societies as “freebooting”—relying on short-term fixes and individual conveniences while avoiding systemic change (5). Technological optimism can be helpful, but when it becomes a substitute for behavioral change, it delays necessary transitions. As Jauquet frames it, we are caught between the “wizards,” who trust in innovation, and the “prophets,” who call for restraint and humility (5). Perhaps what is needed now is neither pure faith in technology nor total rejection of it, but a measured, collective commitment to incremental change. Small shifts—choosing sustainable products, supporting local food systems, valuing nature as more than scenery—can slowly change the narrative.

So, can humanity be healthy on a sick planet? The answer appears increasingly clear. As ecosystems unravel, health systems strain. As pollution rises, life expectancy falls. As biodiversity erodes, so does human resilience. Yet within this bleak outlook lies an invitation: to reframe climate change not just as an environmental problem, but as a human one. Pencheon argues that doing so can shift public perception and political will, mobilizing support in ways that abstract ecological warnings cannot (5). It becomes not about polar bears or distant glaciers, but about children’s lungs, clean water, and the possibility of joy in green places.

Health, in the deepest sense, is wholeness—a condition in which body, mind, and environment are in harmony. That harmony is being tested. But the fact that human and planetary health are so intertwined may also be our greatest opportunity. It means that by healing the Earth, we also heal ourselves.
As Jauquet poignantly reminds us, “there are no healthy people on a sick planet” (5). If that is true, then our responsibility is not only to treat disease, but to restore the ground beneath our feet.

⸻
References
1. Smith M, Thomas C. Climate and malaria transmission in sub-Saharan Africa. [Cited in: Marley J. If Earth gets sick, so do you. PreventionWeb. 2025]. Available from: https://www.preventionweb.net/news/if-earth-gets-sick-so-do-you
2. Head M. Emerging habitats for disease-carrying mosquitoes in Europe. [Cited in: Marley J. If Earth gets sick, so do you. PreventionWeb. 2025]. Available from: https://www.preventionweb.net/news/if-earth-gets-sick-so-do-you
3. Basu A. Emerging pathogens and climate change. [Cited in: Marley J. If Earth gets sick, so do you. PreventionWeb. 2025]. Available from: https://www.preventionweb.net/news/if-earth-gets-sick-so-do-you
4. Thomas L. How does the health of our planet affect our own health? News-Medical. 2022 Apr 7 [Cited 2025 Jul 4]. Available from: https://www.news-medical.net/health/How-Does-the-Health-of-Our-Planet-Affect-Our-Own-Health.aspx
5. Jauquet C. No healthy people on a sick planet. Christophe Jauquet. 2022 Sep 17 [Cited 2025 Jul 4]. Available from: https://www.christophejauquet.com/post/climate-change-is-a-health-issue
6. Harvard University. Sick planet, sick people. Harvard Gazette. 2015 Dec [Cited 2025 Jul 4]. Available from: https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2015/12/sick-planet-sick-people