Science
15 Lessons Scientists Learned About Us When the World Stood Still
When the pandemic upended our lives, it gave researchers a rare chance to learn more about who we are and how we live. The simultaneous changes endured by the entire world created experiments that could never have happened otherwise. What happens when sports teams play in empty stadiums? When people see their doctors online? When the government sends people money? When women stop wearing high heels? When children stop going to school?
Research was challenging in such an extraordinary period: It’s impossible to know whether changes were caused by the specific thing scientists were studying, or by some other aspect of the pandemic — or whether we could expect the same result in normal times.
Perhaps one of the most important takeaways from the pandemic was that science is a process. Just as our understandings about masks or vaccines changed as the pandemic went on, these lessons might also change with time. For now, here are 15 things we learned.
1. Flu season doesn’t have to be so bad.
Flu virtually disappeared during the pandemic. The precautions people took to prevent the spread of Covid also played a role in preventing other respiratory viruses, experts found. Slowing their spread doesn’t necessarily require extreme measures, like stay-at-home orders, the studies showed. Simple behaviors — masking, hand-washing and avoiding social gatherings or workplaces when sick — help keep people healthy. Even those precautions haven’t stuck, though: This year, flu is surging.
2. Home-field advantage got less mysterious.
When sports teams started playing in empty stadiums, researchers could more rigorously study why players seem to do better at home. A variety of studies found that, yes, the fans made a difference: Home teams played worse without them around. They were less likely to win at home and had poorer performances — and the effect was smaller for teams that had frequently played in front of smaller crowds before the pandemic. But there was also evidence that it wasn’t just about fans. When the N.B.A. restarted play, the top 22 teams isolated in Orlando, Fla., allowing researchers to study the effects of jet lag. Rebounding, shooting accuracy and wins were all higher among players who didn’t have to travel across time zones.
3. Teenagers need to sleep in, but schools won’t let them.
Most teenagers were sleep-deprived before the pandemic — they don’t naturally tend to feel tired until around 11 p.m. and need around 10 hours of sleep a night. But when schools closed, teenagers around the world started sleeping according to their natural rhythms. They went to bed later (by about two hours, one study found) and slept longer. They woke up naturally, without an alarm or a parent, which doctors say is the sign of sufficient sleep. Teenagers lost these gains when schools reopened at their usual early start times. When high schools start later, other research has shown, it’s associated with improved concentration, behavior, attendance, learning and mental health.
4. High heels aren’t just uncomfortable — they’re dangerous.
Starting in March 2020, the number of women showing up at emergency rooms with injuries they said were from wearing high heels, like fractures or sprains, declined sharply. In 2020, there were 6,300 hospital visits for high heel injuries, down from 16,000 during each of the four years prior, according to data analyzed by Philip Cohen, a sociologist at the University of Maryland. Now he’s looking into whether injuries have increased since people have begun socializing and working in offices again, or whether the pandemic has hastened the trend toward flats and sneakers.
5. Patients don’t always need to see a doctor in person, if at all.
Telehealth, once uncommon, accounted for half of medical visits early in the pandemic, found a study of two billion medical claims in the United States. Mostly, patients and doctors were satisfied with seeing one another online. Telehealth lowered health care costs, and was especially useful for treating chronic illnesses and for psychotherapy. And in some cases, the pandemic revealed, people don’t need to see a doctor at all. The number of people showing up with mild appendicitis decreased, while the number with complicated appendicitis didn’t change, which researchers said suggested that some patients who would typically have had surgery recovered on their own.
6. Women are better patients than men.
During the pandemic, women were more likely than men to wear masks, get vaccinated and follow other public health guidance. This was true in many countries. When men and women lived together, the men were a little more likely to follow health rules, but still less likely than the women. One group of researchers studied professional tennis players at the U.S. Open in 2020. The women were more likely than the men to skip the event because of safety concerns. This aligns with gender differences in health overall, researchers said — women are more likely to seek preventive care, visit doctors and follow health recommendations. It’s probably one reason women tend to live longer.
7. Not even being stuck at home makes men do more housework.
During lockdowns, there was a lot more domestic labor to do. More dishes piled up, with more needy children underfoot. But even when men worked from home, women still handled more of the work. Eight in 10 mothers said they managed remote schooling (fathers overestimated their contribution). That could be a reason mothers’ antidepressant use increased when schools were closed, but not fathers’. Mothers were also more likely than men to cut back at work — though they returned as soon as they could. Only couples who really wanted egalitarian relationships, researchers wrote, could overcome “the stickiness of gender inequality in household work.”
8. Alcohol restrictions can save lives.
Many places had curfews or bans on selling alcohol during lockdowns — and it appeared to have saved lives. In South Africa, hospital admissions to trauma units and deaths declined. In Southern India, traumatic brain injuries decreased. In other parts of the world, however, alcohol use increased significantly — and, along with it, domestic violence and other problems.
9. Office workers don’t need to be chained to their desks.
Even without in-person meetings, work travel and days spent in cubicles, business continued on. The lesson, said Nick Bloom, a Stanford economist: “Work from home works.” Researchers are still studying how remote work affects productivity, collaboration and creativity. But some version of it seems here to stay: Just over a quarter of paid work days are now worked from home, compared with about 7 percent prepandemic. Remote work has downsides — for innovation, mentorship and service jobs in downtowns. But it also has benefits that workers aren’t eager to give up, like no commutes, more focused work time and making it easier for parents to juggle child care. As a result, it also improves retention.
10. Computers are no replacement for classrooms.
Five years later, the data is clear: When it came to learning, remote school wasn’t enough. Across the country, in rich and poor districts, and among students of different races, test scores in reading and math fell. Many students still haven’t caught up. There was learning loss even in countries with much shorter school closures than the United States. Other factors hampered students’ learning, including poverty and stress, but the importance of attending school in person is clear: The sooner children returned to classrooms, even part-time, the better they did.
11. There’s a simple way to bring children out of poverty.
The monthly checks that the U.S. government sent most parents during the pandemic were enormously successful in bringing children out of poverty, a variety of research has found. Families used the money to pay for food, child care, health care and housing. The benefits weren’t just financial — the checks improved parents’ mental health and family well-being. In 2022, when the checks ended, child poverty doubled. The expanded child credit was part of a rapid $5 trillion expansion of the social safety net.
12. Premature births might be prevented by taking care of moms.
The first reports came from Denmark and Ireland in 2020: The number of babies born premature or at a very low birth weight plummeted early in the pandemic. Soon it became clear that this trend was global: One study estimated that worldwide, 50,000 premature births — a leading cause of infant mortality — had been prevented in just the first month of the pandemic. Researchers aren’t sure exactly why, but a leading theory is that staying home benefited pregnant women — they could rest more, and were exposed to fewer stressors, pollutants and viruses. Perhaps giving pregnant women a break would make them, and their babies, healthier.
13. Dolphins talk more when people aren’t around.
When humans were less active — what scientists call the anthropause — animals began breeding more and traveling farther. Dolphins whistled longer, birds changed their songs, sea turtles laid more eggs. But the anthropause also revealed the ways in which animals have adapted to people, and humans’ disappearance disturbed delicate balances. In some places, predators or invasive species arrived. Urban wildlife that had become accustomed to coexisting with humans, like crows or raccoons, retreated. It revealed the ways in which humans both threaten and protect the natural world, scientists said.
14. Trees and plants make people happier.
Unable to spend time in indoor public spaces, people flocked to natural areas when they could, and were better off for it. A study in Hong Kong compared people who lived near urban green spaces with those who didn’t, and found that parks provided physical activity and a refuge. A study in nine countries found that access to nature — even a balcony or garden at home — buffered the stress of lockdowns and improved people’s moods. And a study in Taiwan analyzed the “window/wall ratio” in people’s quarantine rooms and found that more windows, especially if people could see vegetation, made them happier.
15. There’s no substitute for human contact.
Across the globe, when people didn’t see other people, their mental health — as measured by loneliness, depression and anxiety — got worse. Social media was not a substitute, and often made mental health deteriorate. The pandemic made clear that socializing is particularly important for two age groups, researchers said: young adults and older adults. The older group had better mental health, as well as cardiovascular and cognitive health, when they had structured socializing, like activities at community centers or weekly visits or phone calls.
Science
Trump administration declares ‘war on sugar’ in overhaul of food guidelines
The Trump administration announced a major overhaul of American nutrition guidelines Wednesday, replacing the old, carbohydrate-heavy food pyramid with one that prioritizes protein, healthy fats and whole grains.
“Our government declares war on added sugar,” Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a White House press conference announcing the changes. “We are ending the war on saturated fats.”
“If a foreign adversary sought to destroy the health of our children, to cripple our economy, to weaken our national security, there would be no better strategy than to addict us to ultra-processed foods,” Kennedy said.
Improving U.S. eating habits and the availability of nutritious foods is an issue with broad bipartisan support, and has been a long-standing goal of Kennedy’s Make America Healthy Again movement.
During the press conference, he acknowledged both the American Medical Association and the American Assn. of Pediatrics for partnering on the new guidelines — two organizations that earlier this week condemned the administration’s decision to slash the number of diseases that U.S. children are vaccinated against.
“The American Medical Association applauds the administration’s new Dietary Guidelines for spotlighting the highly processed foods, sugar-sweetened beverages, and excess sodium that fuel heart disease, diabetes, obesity, and other chronic illnesses,” AMA president Bobby Mukkamala said in a statement.
Science
Contributor: With high deductibles, even the insured are functionally uninsured
I recently saw a patient complaining of shortness of breath and a persistent cough. Worried he was developing pneumonia, I ordered a chest X-ray — a standard diagnostic tool. He refused. He hadn’t met his $3,000 deductible yet, and so his insurance would have required him to pay much or all of the cost for that scan. He assured me he would call if he got worse.
For him, the X-ray wasn’t a medical necessity, but it would have been a financial shock he couldn’t absorb. He chose to gamble on a cough, and five days later, he lost — ending up in the ICU with bilateral pneumonia. He survived, but the cost of his “savings” was a nearly fatal hospital stay and a bill that will quite likely bankrupt him. He is lucky he won’t be one of the 55,000 Americans to die from pneumonia each year.
As a physician associate in primary care, I serve as a frontline witness to this failure of the American approach to insurance. Medical professionals are taught that the barrier to health is biology: bacteria, viruses, genetics. But increasingly, the barrier is a policy framework that pressures insured Americans to gamble with their lives. High-deductible health plans seem affordable because their monthly premiums are lower than other plans’, but they create perverse incentives by discouraging patients from seeking and accepting diagnostics and treatments — sometimes turning minor, treatable issues into expensive, life-threatening emergencies. My patient’s gamble with his lungs is a microcosm of the much larger gamble we are taking with the American public.
The economic theory underpinning these high deductibles is known as “skin in the game.” The idea is that if patients are responsible for the first few thousand dollars of their care, they will become savvy consumers, shopping around for the best value and driving down healthcare costs.
But this logic collapses in the exam room. Healthcare is not a consumer good like a television or a used car. My patient was not in a position to “shop around” for a cheaper X-ray, nor was he qualified to determine if his cough was benign or deadly. The “skin in the game” theory assumes a level of medical literacy and market transparency that simply doesn’t exist in a moment of crisis. You can compare the specs of two SUVs; you cannot “shop around” for a life-saving diagnostic while gasping for air.
A 2025 poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation points to this reality, finding that up to 38% of insured American adults say they skipped or postponed necessary healthcare or medications in the past 12 months because of cost. In the same poll, 42% of those who skipped care admitted their health problem worsened as a result.
This self-inflicted public health crisis is set to deteriorate further. The Congressional Budget Office estimates roughly 15 million people will lose health coverage and become uninsured by 2034 because of Medicaid and Affordable Care Act marketplace cuts. That is without mentioning the millions more who will see their monthly premiums more than double if premium tax credits are allowed to expire. If that happens, not only will millions become uninsured but also millions more will downgrade to “bronze” plans with huge deductibles just to keep their premiums affordable. We are about to flood the system with “insured but functionally uninsured” patients.
I see the human cost of this “functional uninsurance” every week. These are patients who technically have coverage but are terrified to use it because their deductibles are so large they may exceed the individuals’ available cash or credit — or even their net worth. This creates a dangerous paradox: Americans are paying hundreds of dollars a month for a card in their wallet they cannot afford to use. They skip the annual physical, ignore the suspicious mole and ration their insulin — all while technically insured. By the time they arrive at my clinic, their disease has often progressed to a catastrophic event, from what could have been a cheap fix.
Federal spending on healthcare should not be considered charity; it is an investment in our collective future. We cannot expect our children to reach their full potential or our workforce to remain productive if basic healthcare needs are treated as a luxury. Inaction by Congress and the current administration to solve this crisis is legislative malpractice.
In medicine, we are trained to treat the underlying disease, not just the symptoms. The skipped visits and ignored prescriptions are merely symptoms; the disease is a policy framework that views healthcare as a commodity rather than a fundamental necessity. If we allow these cuts to proceed, we are ensuring that the American workforce becomes sicker, our hospitals more overwhelmed and our economy less resilient. We are walking willingly into a public health crisis that is entirely preventable.
Joseph Pollino is a primary care physician associate in Nevada.
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
-
High-deductible health plans create a barrier to necessary medical care, with patients avoiding diagnostics and treatments due to out-of-pocket cost concerns[1]. Research shows that 38% of insured American adults skipped or postponed necessary healthcare or medications in the past 12 months because of cost, with 42% reporting their health worsened as a result[1].
-
The economic theory of “skin in the game”—which assumes patients will shop around for better healthcare values if they have financial responsibility—fails in medical practice because patients lack the medical literacy to make informed decisions in moments of crisis and cannot realistically compare pricing for emergency or diagnostic services[1].
-
Rising deductibles are pushing enrollees toward bronze plans with deductibles averaging $7,476 in 2026, up from the average silver plan deductible of $5,304[1][4]. In California’s Covered California program, bronze plan enrollment has surged to more than one-third of new enrollees in 2026, compared to typically one in five[1].
-
Expiring federal premium tax credits will more than double out-of-pocket premiums for ACA marketplace enrollees in 2026, creating an expected 75% increase in average out-of-pocket premium payments[5]. This will force millions to either drop coverage or downgrade to bronze plans with massive deductibles, creating a population of “insured but functionally uninsured” people[1].
-
High-deductible plans pose particular dangers for patients with chronic conditions, with studies showing adults with diabetes involuntarily switched to high-deductible plans face 11% higher risk of hospitalization for heart attacks, 15% higher risk for strokes, and more than double the likelihood of blindness or end-stage kidney disease[4].
Different views on the topic
-
Expanding access to health savings accounts paired with bronze and catastrophic plans offers tax advantages that allow higher-income individuals to set aside tax-deductible contributions for qualified medical expenses, potentially offsetting higher out-of-pocket costs through strategic planning[3].
-
Employers and insurers emphasize that offering multiple plan options with varying deductibles and premiums enables employees to select plans matching their individual needs and healthcare usage patterns, allowing those who rarely use healthcare to save money through lower premiums[2]. Large employers increasingly offer three or more medical plan choices, with the expectation that employees choosing the right plan can unlock savings[2].
-
The expansion of catastrophic plans with streamlined enrollment processes and automatic display on HealthCare.gov is intended to make affordable coverage more accessible for certain income groups, particularly those above 400% of federal poverty level who lose subsidies[3].
-
Rising healthcare costs, including specialty drugs and new high-cost cell and gene therapies, are significant drivers requiring premium increases regardless of plan design[5]. Some insurers are managing affordability by discontinuing costly coverage—such as GLP-1 weight-loss medications—to reduce premium rate increases for broader plan members[5].
Science
Trump administration slashes number of diseases U.S. children will be regularly vaccinated against
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced sweeping changes to the pediatric vaccine schedule on Monday, sharply cutting the number of diseases U.S. children will be regularly immunized against.
Under the new guidelines, the U.S. still recommends that all children be vaccinated against measles, mumps, rubella, polio, pertussis, tetanus, diphtheria, Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib), pneumococcal disease, human papillomavirus (HPV) and varicella, better known as chickenpox.
Vaccines for all other diseases will now fall into one of two categories: recommended only for specific high-risk groups, or available through “shared clinical decision-making” — the administration’s preferred term for “optional.”
These include immunizations for hepatitis A and B, rotavirus, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), bacterial meningitis, influenza and COVID-19. All these shots were previously recommended for all children.
Insurance companies will still be required to fully cover all childhood vaccines on the CDC schedule, including those now designated as optional, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longtime vaccine critic, said in a statement that the new schedule “protects children, respects families, and rebuilds trust in public health.”
But pediatricians and public health officials widely condemned the shift, saying that it would lead to more uncertainty for patients and a resurgence of diseases that had been under control.
“The decision to weaken the childhood immunization schedule is misguided and dangerous,” said Dr. René Bravo, a pediatrician and president of the California Medical Assn. “Today’s decision undermines decades of evidence-based public health policy and sends a deeply confusing message to families at a time when vaccine confidence is already under strain.”
The American Academy of Pediatrics condemned the changes as “dangerous and unnecessary,” and said that it will continue to publish its own schedule of recommended immunizations. In September, California, Oregon, Washington and Hawaii announced that those four states would follow an independent immunization schedule based on recommendations from the AAP and other medical groups.
The federal changes have been anticipated since December, when President Trump signed a presidential memorandum directing the health department to update the pediatric vaccine schedule “to align with such scientific evidence and best practices from peer, developed countries.”
The new U.S. vaccination guidelines are much closer to those of Denmark, which routinely vaccinates its children against only 10 diseases.
As doctors and public health experts have pointed out, Denmark also has a robust system of government-funded universal healthcare, a smaller and more homogenous population, and a different disease burden.
“The vaccines that are recommended in any particular country reflect the diseases that are prevalent in that country,” said Dr. Kelly Gebo, dean of the Milken Institute School of Public Health at George Washington University. “Just because one country has a vaccine schedule that is perfectly reasonable for that country, it may not be at all reasonable” elsewhere.
Almost every pregnant woman in Denmark is screened for hepatitis B, for example. In the U.S., less than 85% of pregnant women are screened for the disease.
Instead, the U.S. has relied on universal vaccination to protect children whose mothers don’t receive adequate care during pregnancy. Hepatitis B has been nearly eliminated in the U.S. since the vaccine was introduced in 1991. Last month, a panel of Kennedy appointees voted to drop the CDC’s decades-old recommendation that all newborns be vaccinated against the disease at birth.
“Viruses and bacteria that were under control are being set free on our most vulnerable,” said Dr. James Alwine, a virologist and member of the nonprofit advocacy group Defend Public Health. “It may take one or two years for the tragic consequences to become clear, but this is like asking farmers in North Dakota to grow pineapples. It won’t work and can’t end well.”
-
Detroit, MI5 days ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology3 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX4 days agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Health5 days agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits
-
Nebraska2 days agoOregon State LB transfer Dexter Foster commits to Nebraska
-
Iowa2 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Nebraska2 days agoNebraska-based pizza chain Godfather’s Pizza is set to open a new location in Queen Creek
-
Entertainment2 days agoSpotify digs in on podcasts with new Hollywood studios