The immediate risks faced by the firefighters who were on the front lines battling the Palisades and Eaton fires that tore through Los Angeles County may have abated, but long-term health concerns remain.

A team of researchers tested the blood of a group of 20 firefighters who were called to duty when the wildfires hit Los Angeles County communities, and found that they had levels of lead and mercury in their blood that was significantly higher than what health experts consider to be safe — and also higher than firefighters exposed to a forest fire.

The results are part of the longer-term LA Fire Health Study, which is investigating the health impacts of the January fires on those exposed to the toxins it released into the the environment. The team includes researchers from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, UC Davis, the University of Texas at Austin, and the USC Keck School of Medicine.

“What you need to worry about is some of these metals that, when they get burned, they get up in the air,” said Dr. Kari Nadeau, chair of the Department of Environmental Health at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and one of the researchers working on the project. “They can get into your lungs, and they can get into your skin, and they get can absorbed and get into your blood.”

The group of 20 firefighters — who had come from Northern California to assist in the efforts — were tested just days after the fires were contained. They had toiled for long hours as the two fires razed entire communities, burning homes, cars, businesses, and a still unknown list of chemicals and metals. Combined, the fires killed 29 people and destroyed more than 16,000 structures.

On average, said Nadeau, the firefighters had lead and mercury levels three and five times higher, respectively, than a control group of firefighters who fought a forest fire alone. According to the California Department of Public Health, the average blood lead level for adults in the United States is less than 1 microgram per deciliter.

Researchers are still looking to expand the number of firefighters in the study, as well as the range of toxins they may have been exposed to. Nevertheless, even these limited and preliminary findings bolster a growing worry among firefighters that the L.A. fires may have exposed them to metals and chemicals with long-term health effects.

“The results are pretty alarming,” said Dave Gillotte, a captain with the Los Angeles County Fire Department and president of the Los Angeles County Firefighters Local 1014. “We don’t just fear, but we’re quite confident that we’re going to see health impacts with our firefighters who fought these fires on the front lines.”

Firefighters regularly risk exposure to chemicals and metals — including lead and mercury — when responding to house and commercial fires in an urban setting, Gillotte said. But response to a single house fire, for example, would likely last a few hours, not the days on end of the Palisades and Eaton fires. Firefighters also typically face prolonged exposure to the particulate matter in smoke when fighting wildfires in rural areas — but not the chemicals of an urban setting. The Eaton and Palisades fires presented a combined risk: a wildfire-like blaze with firefighters on the ground for extended periods in an urban setting, with electric vehicles, batteries, chemicals and metals burning in high heat, mixing and spreading with the same wind that was spreading the flames.

“It was a more intense exposure as a result of the wind driving those toxins, even with our protective gear,” Gillotte said.

According to Gillotte, these types of urban wildfires could cause long-term health impacts for first responders similar to those from events like the destruction of the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. Already, officials from the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District, the Sacramento Fire Department, and Los Angeles County have begun to test their firefighters for metal and chemical exposure, Gillotte said.

Meanwhile, as part of a separate study, Los Angeles city fire officials have also been looking at the health effects on its firefighters.

“We are very concerned and worried,” said Los Angeles Fire Department Capt. Kevin Frank. The LAFD has so far taken blood and urine samples of about 350 of its firefighters, as part of an ongoing nationwide study, funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, to look at firefighters’ biomarkers and exposure to cancer-causing substances. That study — which is different than the LA Fire Health Study and the one mentioned by Gillotte — includes more than 7,000 firefighters from across the country.

After the fires, Frank said, several firefighters who reported to Altadena and Pacific Palisades reported health issues, such as trouble breathing. Nadeau, who is working on the LA Fire Health Study, but not the FEMA-funded national study, noted that exposure to heavy metals can contribute to worse long-term health outcomes.

Firefighters already face higher levels of some illnesses, such as autoimmune diseases, asthma and some cancers, she said. Fire officials said the life expectancy of a firefighter is about 10 years lower than that of the average person.

The LA Fire Health study is still in its early stages. Nadeau says she and her colleagues plan to look for evidence of exposure to other heavy metals in addition to mercury and lead. “We’re going to be studying toxins that haven’t been studied” in firefighters before, she said.

Typically, the results of studies like these are not made public until they have been peer-reviewed and published by a scientific journal. Nadeau said the consortium decided to share some of the preliminary data early, hoping to help residents, civic leaders and first responders understand the impacts of the fires.

“You really want to know: ‘What’s in the air, what’s in the water, what’s in the ash that blew into my kitchen cabinet? Do I let my dog outside?’” she said. “All these questions were coming up and we thought, ‘We really need to serve the community.’” Indeed, while the initial findings will be focused on firefighters’ exposure, the team is also looking into residents’ exposure to heavy metals and chemicals.

Nadeau is also looking ahead: The information, she says, could help fire officials as they face the possibility of another similar fire by helping them better understand the source of the chemicals, how safety equipment was used during the fires, and the efficacy of that gear.

“I’d like to say this is the last of its kind, but we know it won’t be,” she said. “It’s not a matter of if, but a matter of when people undergo a fire like that again in L.A.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has notified the California Department of Public Health it is suspending grants it had provided to support the state’s infectious-disease response during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The directive was sent to all 50 states and will cancel roughly $12 billion in funding. California officials said they couldn’t immediately say how the cuts would affect state services.

“We are working to evaluate the impact of these actions,” Erica Pan, the state department’s director and state public health officer, said in a statement.

The funding was awarded during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic to aid the state with its respiratory virus monitoring, testing and response, immunizations and vaccines for children, and to help address health disparities, Pan said.

The cuts were reported earlier by NBC News, which quoted a statement from U.S. Department of Health and Human Services spokesman Andrew Nixon saying that the “COVID-19 pandemic is over, and H.H.S. will no longer waste billions of taxpayer dollars responding to a nonexistent pandemic that Americans moved on from years ago.”

It is unclear how much funding the state had been awarded and how much is now being pulled, but a 2023 news release shows that the CDC awarded the state a $37-million grant to help strengthen the state’s health infrastructure, workforce and data systems.

According to the release, the grant award’s start date was Dec. 1, 2022, and was set to last through Nov. 30, 2027.

It couldn’t immediately be determined how much of the award has already been spent, but much of it was designated to support county health departments, including the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, Riverside County Department of Public Health, Long Beach Health Department, Orange County Health Department and San Bernardino County Department of Public Health.

In addition, two other large awards were provided by the CDC to California in the immediate wake of the COVID pandemic: a $555-million grant during 2020 and $1.7 billion as part of the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2021.

The state Department of Public Health didn’t immediately respond for a request for comment on what programs could be affected by the CDC’s cancellation of funding, nor how the state’s infectious-disease monitoring, testing, response and immunization programs could be affected.

The Los Angeles County Department of Public Health received notices from the federal government that COVID-associated funding was going to be rescinded, a spokeswoman for the department said. It also received an informal notice from the state that COVID-related grants for vaccination services probably would be terminated.

“In total, these actions to rescind … COVID-associated funding will impact more than $45 million in core L.A. County Public Health funding,” the spokeswoman said. “Much of this funding supports disease surveillance, public health lab services, outbreak investigations, infection control activities at healthcare facilities, and data transparency. We are working to determine the impacts of the announcement of the loss of this funding.”

According to 2025-26 state budget figures, Gov. Gavin Newsom allocated $5.1 billion to the state’s health department; about $2.3 billion of that comes from federal funding.

Although Congress initially authorized the money for state health programs as part of its COVID relief bills, it has since been allowed to be targeted to other programs, such as testing and surveillance for other respiratory viruses.

California has been ground zero for the H5N1 bird flu since last March. Thirty-eight people in the state have been infected with the virus, most of them dairy workers who were exposed working with infected cows or milk. However, two of the people were children; the cause of their infection has not been determined.

The virus has also infected 756 dairy herds; more than 75% of the state’s total dairy herds.

In addition, there have been eight measles cases since the beginning of the year, in addition to thousands of seasonal flu, COVID-19, norovirus and RSV cases.

Pan said the state will continue to advance public health and work to protect people.

“All Californians deserve to live in healthy and thriving communities, which is the role of public health,” she wrote in her statement, saying her department is “committed to seeking the resources required to support the critical, lifesaving infrastructure needed to keep people healthy and protect them against infectious disease, vaccine-preventable diseases and health emergencies.”