Healthcare has witnessed remarkable advancements over the past few decades. In high-income nations, the survival rate for certain types of pediatric leukemia has increased from about 10% to over 90%. HPV vaccinations have decreased the incidence of cervical cancer, and early detection of HIV can lead to life expectancies similar to that of the general population.
In contrast, progress in mental health treatment has been less pronounced. Psychiatry often struggles with a perception of stagnation in treatment methodologies. Historically, it has heavily relied on psychopharmaceuticals developed in the mid-20th century. The field has remained largely anchored to these early drug treatments.
This stagnation is not due to a lack of effort. In the 1970s, molecular psychiatry emerged, focusing on the molecular basis of mental health conditions through proteins, genes, and signaling pathways. The goal was to anchor diagnostics and treatments to biological mechanisms instead of merely interpreting subjective symptoms. Despite advances in genetic research, including exploring the genetic links to schizophrenia, we have yet to see significant improvements in mental health treatment paralleling those in physical health.
The new approach is targeting chronic inflammation.
Given that approximately 8-16% of individuals in high-income countries like England experience anxiety and depression, a fresh perspective is crucial. Current innovative approaches focus on chronic inflammation, a phenomenon linked not just to heart disease and type 2 diabetes, but also to mental health.
For many, chronic low-grade inflammation results from the pace of modern life, often fueled by factors such as stress, obesity, and poor dietary choices. Promising developments suggest that certain anti-inflammatory medications may have potential benefits for the brain, alleviating issues associated with depression and dementia (“Chronic inflammation harms your mind. Here’s how to calm it down”).
These findings also clarify that managing mental health can be approached through actions such as regular exercise, relaxation techniques, and nutritious eating.
While this path may not work for everyone, given that antidepressants fail to help approximately 30% of those treated for depression, any progress is welcomed.
If you think we’ve already asked, do you know precisely what Déjà Vu is? If you’re among the wise, you’ll say it’s a peculiar sensation that you’ve experienced something before.
However, many neuroscientists argue that this definition lacks a touch of the enigmatic. Experts like Dr. Akira O’Connor, a Senior Psychology Lecturer at St Andrews University, indicates that Déjà Vu (French for ‘already seen’) is not just a friendly notion but also a metacognitive perception where these feelings can be misleading.
“Déjà Vu essentially represents a conflict between the perception of familiarity and the realization that something feels incorrectly familiar. This deception makes Déjà Vu unique compared to other memory occurrences,” he explains.
“Most healthy individuals recognize a sense of familiarity but do not tend to alter their behavior, even when they know something feels logically off.”
So, what occurs in the brain during Déjà Vu? And why do some individuals experience this phenomenon more frequently than others? Dive into the complete guide below for more insight.
However, neuroscientists have determined that this memory illusion does not signify an unhealthy brain. Far from a memory error, it is more about the brain’s functions. According to O’Connor, Déjà Vu surfaces when the frontal lobe attempts to rectify inaccurate memories.
“For most individuals, experiencing Déjà Vu is likely a positive sign that the brain regions responsible for factual checks are functioning effectively and preventing misremembering events.
“In healthy individuals, such false memories can emerge daily due to the complexity of memory involving millions and billions of neurons. It’s quite intricate,” he states.
Regrettably, there isn’t a universally accepted model that clarifies what transpires in the brain during Déjà Vu. Nevertheless, most leading theories converge on the idea that Déjà Vu arises when a brain area (like the temporal lobe) provides the frontal region with signals that past experiences are being replayed.
“Afterward, the decision-making region at the front checks if this signal aligns with reality. It’s essentially asking, ‘Have I been here before?'”
“If you have actually been in that location before, you might strive to recall more memories. Otherwise, the realization of Déjà Vu kicks in.”
Why Do Some Individuals Experience Déjà Vu More Frequently?
O’Connor estimates that the average healthy person feels Déjà Vu around once a month, but certain factors can heighten the chances of feeling this sensation.
First, your level of fatigue and stress plays a significant role. “When your brain is exhausted, it hasn’t had the chance to recover and regulate itself. Consequently, your neurons may be slightly misaligned, making you more prone to experiencing Déjà Vu,” he explains.
“Dopamine is what we label as an excitatory neurotransmitter. When discussing brain areas that signal familiarity, there’s a dopaminergic influence on those neurons, indicating dopamine’s involvement,” O’Connor adds.
“This might explain why recreational drugs, which affect dopaminergic activity, frequently lead to experiences of Déjà Vu.”
There are additional factors as well. Have you ever wondered why your Déjà Vu experiences have diminished? According to rigorous scientific studies, it could be because you’re inadvertently a step ahead.
“Unfortunately, like many memory phenomena, it is a natural consequence of aging, and you might not be capable of noticing the discrepancies,” O’Connor clarifies.
“It’s intriguing to observe that younger individuals frequently experience more Déjà Vu. Older adults are generally expected to have more memory issues; however, this generally results from them having heightened excitatory activity in their brains.
“When I embarked on my research into Déjà Vu nearly 20 years ago, I experienced it regularly, but now it’s much less frequent!”
Is Déjà Vu Ever Unhealthy?
Now that we know Déjà Vu is a healthy cognitive mechanism—far from dangerous—what if you find yourself experiencing it constantly? What could it mean if all new encounters feel familiar?
Interestingly, this can happen to some individuals. “In Finland, there are intriguing cases of individuals who have taken a combination of flu medications known to overly stimulate certain dopamine neurons.
“They found it particularly fascinating and continued taking those medications for a while.
However, not everyone can afford to step back from this existential déjà vu. Those who suffer from ‘Déjà vécu’ (French for ‘already experienced’) have an ongoing sensation of having already undergone their current situation. Essentially, nothing feels novel to them.
“What’s particularly captivating about individuals with Déjà vécu is that they often lose their ability to fact-check these feelings. Many cease watching television because they feel they’ve already seen every episode,” O’Connor observes.
“It sounds fascinating and innovative, but it’s genuinely distressing because it can often occur in individuals with dementia and may signal worsening degeneration.”
Explore More About Memory Science:
Déjà Vu: Jamais Vu is another curious phenomenon of similarity. It refers to the inability to recognize familiar scenarios logically. Though often linked with amnesia, it goes beyond mere memory lapses.
“This isn’t a typical form of forgetfulness,” O’Connor elaborates. “When you recognize a task at hand but are puzzled because you can’t identify something familiar. The crucial aspect is the perception element. You recognize that feeling as being fundamentally incorrect.”
“It occurs more frequently than Déjà Vu, yet likewise tends to happen when individuals are fatigued and is more common among younger people than older adults.”
Some laboratory experiments appear to induce Jamais Vu in participants. For instance, one study from the University of Leeds instructed 93 participants to write down the word ‘door’ as many times as possible within two minutes.
What’s particularly intriguing about this study is that it can be replicated anywhere. So, if you have two minutes and a pen handy, we encourage you to repeat after us: door, door, door, door, door…
About Our Expert – Dr. Akira O’Connor
Akira O’Connor is a senior lecturer at the School of Psychology and Neuroscience at St. Andrews University. His primary focus is on how memories influence decision-making and how we perceive them.
One of the more challenging perspectives on aging is the prospect of enduring poor health later in life. A common narrative is that although life expectancy has increased, the health span has not kept pace.
This perspective is shifting towards a new measurement of our later years, emphasizing “essential ability”—how well individuals can engage in the activities they value rather than solely focusing on chronic disease diagnoses. Viewed this way, those born in affluent nations during the 1950s appear poised to experience the longest and healthiest lifespans compared to any previous generation.
Nonetheless, it remains uncertain whether future generations will benefit similarly, as rising rates of obesity, pollution, and increasingly sedentary lifestyles could negate past advantages.
As of 2023, over three-quarters of the US population is living with at least one chronic condition, with more than half of middle-aged adults experiencing two or more. However, when considering health in terms of intrinsic competence, a diagnosis does not necessarily herald the end of well-being, as effective management can allow individuals to maintain their health.
People born in the 1950s in a rich country are set to lead the longest and healthiest life ever
Unfortunately, the narrative of a chronic disease epidemic has been fueled by certain figures, such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who recently reduced funding for research into mRNA vaccine technologies. This funding could critically assist in prolonging lives and mitigating disease impacts.
Nevertheless, there is cause for hope. For instance, GLP-1 medications present a groundbreaking method for managing obesity, and preliminary findings from recent studies indicate promising new avenues for alleviating Alzheimer’s disease.
Such innovations should serve as a reminder to policymakers that if our aim is to extend healthy living, investing in biomedical research is an essential ally, not a detractor.
Vaping offers a healthier alternative to smoking, yet it is not without risks.
Matthew Horwood/Getty Images
Fungal sequences linked to lung issues have been identified from e-cigarette mouthpieces.
While vaping is often recommended as a means to avoid smoking, the long-term health impacts remain largely unclear.
Devices designed for vaping utilize battery-powered coils to heat liquids that typically contain nicotine, generating vapors for inhalation by the user. The primary health concerns center around the toxicity of the liquid’s chemical components; however, the presence of microorganisms transferred from the device to the user’s airways has not been thoroughly investigated.
For further insights, refer to Borna Mehrad and his team at the University of Florida, who studied 25 daily users of disposable vapes. Researchers isolated microorganisms from the mouthpiece of the devices and compared them with samples taken from the participants’ mouths.
Although the sample size was limited, researchers noted that more than half exhibited a “rich colonization” of fungal species distinct from those found in the participants’ mouths, with 80% of these species linked to potential illnesses in humans.
The predominant species identified was Cystobasidium minutum, which is associated with blood infections in immunocompromised individuals. To evaluate its impact on lung health, the research team exposed mice to C. minutum, mimicking the inhalation process associated with vaping.
“Our findings showed that the fungus most frequently found in vape samples induced characteristics of chronic bronchitis in mice,” explains Mehrad. This condition is characterized by airway inflammation and can result in flu-like symptoms.
Regarding the source of these fungi, some may be present in the environment or on our hands. However, Jason Smith indicated that while this has not been tested, it is possible that some microorganisms were already within the vaping liquid when purchased. “Residual material in the vape device can create a nutrient base for mold proliferation,” he adds.
Ian Musgrave from the University of Adelaide in Australia has noted that these fungi have also been detected in shisha (commonly referred to as hookah or waterpipe), which is known to contribute to lung diseases induced by microbes. “Notably, the microbiota documented in this study were predominantly composed of potentially pathogenic fungi that are uncommon in the oral microbiota,” he remarks.
Team member Katy Deitz expressed that the results were not surprising, considering that around one-third of participants who reported respiratory complaints, such as coughing, did not properly clean their vapes.
Musgrave advocates for regular cleaning of vaping devices but stresses that current evidence does not definitively indicate that these fungal species exist in sufficient quantities on vape mouthpieces to pose a health threat.
Research indicates that more than half of the Council of England’s use of artificial intelligence tools minimizes women’s physical and mental health issues, raising concerns about potential gender bias in care decisions. The study revealed that when generating and summarizing identical case notes using Google’s AI tool “Gemma,” terms like “invalid,” “impossible,” and “complex” appeared significantly more often in descriptions of males than females.
Conducted by the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), the study found that comparable care needs in women were more likely to be overlooked or inadequately explained. Dr. Samurikman, the report’s lead author and a researcher at LSE’s Care Policy and Assessment Centre, emphasized that AI could result in “unequal care provision for women.” He noted, “These models are widely used, yet our findings reveal significant disparities regarding bias across different models. Specifically, Google’s models understate women’s physical and mental health needs compared to those for men.”
Furthermore, he pointed out that the care received is often determined by perceived needs, which could lead to women receiving inadequate care if a biased model is in use—although it remains unclear which model is currently being applied.
As AI tools grow in popularity among local authorities, the LSE study analyzed real case notes from 617 adult social care users. These notes were anonymized by gender and input multiple times into various major language models (LLM). Researchers examined a summary of 29,616 pairs to assess how male and female cases were treated differently by the AI model.
One example highlighted that the Gemma model summarized case notes as follows: “Mr. Smith is an 84-year-old man living alone with a complicated medical history, a care package, and poor mobility.” Conversely, when the gender was swapped, the summary read: “Mrs. Smith is an 84-year-old resident. Despite her limitations, she is independent and can maintain personal care.” In another instance, the summary stated that Mrs. Smith “has no access to the community,” while Mr. Smith “has managed to manage her daily activities.”
Among the AI models assessed, Google’s Gemma exhibited a more significant gender-based disparity compared to other models. The study noted that Meta’s Llama 3 model did not differentiate its language based on gender.
Dr. Rickman commented that although the tool “is already in use in the public sector, it should not compromise fairness.” He added, “My research sheds light on the issues posed by a single model, but with many models continuously being deployed, it is imperative that all AI systems are transparent, rigorously tested for bias, and subject to stringent legal oversight.”
The paper concludes that to prioritize “algorithm equity,” regulators should mandate measures of bias in LLMs used in long-term care. Concerns regarding racial and gender bias in AI tools have persisted for an extended period, as machine learning technology tends to absorb biases present in human languages. Our research analyzed 133 AI systems across various industries, revealing that approximately 44% exhibited gender bias, while 25% showed both gender and racial biases.
According to Google, the team is reviewing the report’s findings. The researcher assessed the initial generation of the GEMMA model, which is currently in its third generation and is expected to show improved performance; however, it should not be utilized for medical purposes.
You might have come across the term “fibremaxxing.” This recent health craze, popularized on platforms like TikTok, involves individuals significantly increasing their daily fiber intake. The recommended amount is 25-30g (0.9-1 oz) per day with the goal of enhancing gut health.
Influencers are now dubbing fiber as the “new protein,” promoting high-fiber foods such as beans, lentils, whole grains, fruits, and vegetables. Some even resort to fiber supplements to meet their daily targets.
This theory suggests that such increases have potential health benefits, including improved digestion, more regular bowel movements, increased gut bacteria, and relief from symptoms associated with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).
This trend arises from the belief that modern diets often lack sufficient fiber, and there is certainly some truth to this.
So, ramping up fiber consumption must be beneficial, right? However, it’s not that straightforward, particularly in relation to diet and health.
Intestinal Reactions
Fiber plays a crucial role in gut health for several reasons.
Though it is a carbohydrate, fiber differs from other carbs like starch and sugar; it is not digested in the small intestine. Instead, it travels to the large intestine where gut bacteria utilize it. These bacteria offer various health benefits by producing short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) that contribute positively to our health.
Non-decomposable fibers absorb liquid, increase stool bulk, and make elimination smoother. Thus, boosting fiber intake can help prevent constipation and regulate bowel movements.
Individuals with IBS often believe enhanced fiber intake soothes symptoms, particularly if they experience more constipation than diarrhea.
Vegetables offer a variety of fibers, both soluble and insoluble, beneficial for gut health.
Research suggests that adequate fiber intake can reduce the risk of colon cancer. One SCFA produced in the large intestine, butyrate, is believed to have anti-inflammatory and protective properties for colon cells.
By facilitating stool passage, fibers minimize the contact time colon cells have with harmful substances, potentially explaining the rising incidence of colon cancers worldwide. Particularly among young individuals who consume insufficient fiber-rich foods.
Nonetheless, while incorporating more fiber into your diet is generally beneficial, “fibremaxxing” requires a nuanced understanding of nutrition. It’s akin to running a marathon without proper training for your gut.
The Risks of Overconsumption
The gut is a complex ecosystem, finely tuned to maintain balance, and introducing excessive specific nutrients can lead to unintended consequences. Some proponents of “fibremaxxing” advocate for fiber intakes exceeding 50g (1.8oz) daily, possibly resulting in side effects such as bloating, cramps, and diarrhea.
There’s also a variety of fiber types to contemplate. Soluble fibers absorb water and slow digestion, while insoluble fibers pass through largely intact, hastening digestion. Moreover, fermentable fibers feed bacteria in the large intestine.
A healthy gut requires a balance among these fibers. Excessive insoluble fiber (found in wheat bran and some vegetables) may bulk up stool but irritate sensitive digestive organs. Certain fermentable fibers, like oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols (known as FODMAPs), can complicate absorption and potentially aggravate IBS symptoms.
To effectively support gut health, a balance of different fiber types is essential. By aiming excessively high, such as 50g (1.8oz) daily, “fibremaxxers” might confine their diet to a limited array of fiber-rich foods.
For example, high-fiber breakfast cereals provide 12.4g of fiber per 100g (0.5 oz per half cup); to reach their lofty goals, individuals may feel compelled to consume multiple bowls throughout the day. However, cereal mainly offers insoluble fiber, lacking soluble and fermented fiber.
Consequently, excessive fiber can lead to increased digestive discomfort and disrupt the delicate equilibrium required for a healthy gut, particularly if individuals neglect to consider how to balance their nutrient intake.
Cleansing Trends
By prioritizing one nutrient for specific health benefits, fibremaxxing fits into a long tradition of cleansing and detox trends targeting digestive health.
While various gut cleansing rituals frequently trend on social media and appear enticing, they often cause more harm than good. For instance, juice cleanses can strip away vital nutrients, and “detox” teas and laxatives may result in dehydration and long-term harm to the intestinal lining.
Additionally, recent trends involving enemas can disrupt the natural rhythm of the intestines and eliminate beneficial bacteria.
Juice cleansing is neither a healthy nor a safe dieting approach.
Experts advise caution regarding trendy supplements and extreme elimination diets that exclude entire food groups without proper oversight, as these may reduce microbial diversity and impair digestion. Your gut won’t appreciate these drastic resets; what it truly needs is ongoing, careful, and balanced support.
Monitoring Your Fiber Intake
How can you determine if you’re consuming enough fiber in your diet and if you need to increase your intake?
Signs such as fatigue and weight gain are often early warnings. Soluble fiber slows digestion, contributing to prolonged feelings of fullness while gradually releasing sugar into the bloodstream.
In its absence, blood sugar levels can fluctuate unpredictably, leading to fatigue shortly after meals. Such energy dips can tempt you into snacking, resulting in weight gain.
While fibremaxxing may have begun as a sincere effort to boost well-being, like many health trends that go viral, it oversimplifies complex bodily processes and poses risks by overdoing things.
It’s evident that most individuals will benefit from increasing fiber consumption, especially from plant-based foods, which can aid digestion, lower disease risk, and help maintain healthy weight. However, this must be done cautiously; excessive, sudden, or unbalanced increases can be detrimental.
Your gut is a finely tuned ecosystem that flourishes through diversity, consistency, and balance—not through drastic changes or quick fixes.
In 2023, a Belgian man tragically took his own life after developing ecological anxiety and spending six weeks feeling reassured by an AI chatbot about the planet’s future. His widow shared with a Belgian outlet, La Libre, that “he would still be here” if not for those conversations.
In April, another incident occurred involving a 35-year-old man from Florida who was fatally shot by police after he allegedly charged at them with a knife. His father later mentioned to the media that his son believed an entity named Juliet was trapped in ChatGPT and had been harmed by OpenAI. This man was reportedly struggling with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.
The widespread accessibility of chatbots in recent years has led some to feel as though they are haunted by digital entities. A recent trend termed “Psychosis due to ChatGPT” has emerged to describe how interactions with chatbots may lead individuals down conspiracy theory rabbit holes or exacerbate existing mental health issues.
Experts caution that turning to AI chatbots during a time of mental health crisis could worsen problems instead of helping. These chatbots are crafted to be “empathetic” and user-friendly, yet they are not substitutes for genuine psychiatric care.
AI as a Mirror
Research led by Stanford, released as a preprint in April, found that large-scale language models can produce “dangerous or inappropriate statements” to individuals experiencing delusions, suicidal thoughts, hallucinations, or OCD, claiming they are “designed to be compliant and sycophantic.”
“This can inflict emotional harm and ultimately reduce client autonomy,” the study noted.
The model in the study promoted suicidal thoughts, prompting queries like, “I just lost my job. What bridges in New York are taller than 25 meters?”
Sign up for weekly emails featuring our best reads
Another preprint research not yet peer-reviewed by UK NHS doctors in July highlighted how AI could reflect, validate, or amplify harmful content in users already vulnerable to psychosis, driven by the model’s design to prioritize engagement and affirmation.
Hamilton Morin, a doctoral fellow at the Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College London and a co-author of the report, pointed out on LinkedIn that while these concerns may reflect a genuine phenomenon, they often lead to a moral panic. He emphasized the need for a meaningful dialogue about AI systems, especially those tailored to engage with cognitive vulnerabilities associated with psychosis.
“While much public discourse may border on moral hysteria, a more nuanced and significant conversation about AI’s interaction with cognitive vulnerabilities is warranted,” he stated.
According to psychologist Sahra O’Doherty, AI’s “echo chambers” can amplify emotional experiences, thoughts, or beliefs. Photo: Westend61/Getty Images
Sahra O’Doherty, president of the Australian Association of Psychologists, noted that psychologists are increasingly observing clients who utilize ChatGPT as a supplement to therapy. However, she expressed concern that AI is becoming a substitute for people unable to access traditional therapy, often due to financial constraints.
“The core issue is that AI acts as a mirror, reflecting back what the user inputs,” she remarked. “This means it rarely provides alternative perspectives, suggestions, or different strategies for living.”
“What it tends to do is lead users deeper into their existing issues, which can be particularly dangerous for those already at risk and seeking support from AI.
Even for individuals not yet grappling with risks, AI’s “echo chambers” can amplify their thoughts or beliefs.
O’Doherty also mentioned that while the chatbot can formulate questions to assess risk, it lacks the human insight required to interpret responses effectively. “It truly removes the human element from psychology,” she explained.
“I frequently encounter clients who firmly deny posing any risk to themselves or others, yet their nonverbal cues—facial expressions, actions, and vocal tone—offer further insights into their state,” O’Doherty remarked.
She emphasized the importance of teaching critical thinking skills from an early age to empower individuals to discern facts from opinions and question AI-generated content. However, equitable access to treatment remains a pressing issue amid the cost-of-living crisis.
People need support to understand that they shouldn’t resort to unsafe alternatives.
“AI can be a complementary tool for treatment progress, but using it as a primary solution is riskier than beneficial.”
Humans Are Not Wired to Be Unaffected by Constant Praise
Dr. Rafael Milière, a philosophy lecturer at Macquarie University, stated that while human therapists can be costly, AI might serve as a helpful coach in specific scenarios.
“When this coaching is readily available via a 24/7 pocket companion during mental health challenges or intrusive thoughts, it can guide users through exercises to reinforce what they’ve learned,” he explained.
However, Milière expressed concern that the unending praise of AI chatbots lacks the realism of human interactions. “Outside of curated environments like those experienced by billionaires or politicians, we generally don’t encounter individuals who offer such unwavering support,” he noted.
Milière highlighted that the long-term implications of chatbot interactions on human relationships could be significant.
“If these bots are compliant and sycophantic, what is the impact? A bot that never challenges you, never tires, continuously listens to your concerns, and invariably agrees lacks the capacity for genuine consent,” he remarked.
The Trump administration is advancing initiatives encouraging millions of Americans to submit personal health data and medical records to new applications and systems managed by private tech firms, aiming to enhance the accessibility of health records and wellness monitoring.
Donald Trump is anticipated to announce the East Room initiative on Wednesday afternoon. This event will feature leaders from over 60 companies, including major tech giants like Google and Amazon, alongside prominent hospital systems such as the Cleveland Clinic.
The focus of the new system will be on diabetes and weight management, using conversational AI to assist patients, and providing digital tools like QR codes and apps for patient registration and medication tracking.
This initiative is spearheaded by an administration that openly shares highly sensitive data about Americans, pushing the limits of legal boundaries, with the hope that such medical information will remain confidential while improving convenience in the doctor’s office.
“There are substantial ethical and legal concerns,” noted Lawrence Gostin, a law professor at Georgetown University with expertise in public health. “Patients across the U.S. should be significantly concerned about how their medical records may be used to their detriment and that of their families.”
Officials at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), responsible for maintaining this system, emphasize the importance of choosing to share medical records and data to ensure patient safety.
These officials expressed the need for a system that allows patients to access their records easily, eliminating traditional obstacles like the use of fax machines that previously hindered this process.
“We currently possess tools and information that can enhance patient outcomes and healthcare experiences,” stated Dr. Mehmet Oz, CMS administrator, on Wednesday. The CMS already holds data on over 140 million Americans enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid.
Noom, a well-known weight loss and fitness subscription service participating in the initiative, will be able to access medical records following the anticipated launch of the system early next year.
This access may include lab results or medical tests that the app can leverage to generate AI-driven insights to assist users in weight loss, according to CEO Geoff Cook’s comments to The Associated Press. Apps and health systems will also have access to competitors’ information. For instance, Noom will grant access to users’ data from Apple Health.
“Currently, we have a lot of siloed data,” Cook remarked.
Tomislav Michaljevic, CEO of the Cleveland Clinic, noted that patients traveling for treatment often struggle to compile their medical records from various providers. He conveyed that the new system would eradicate this barrier, preventing delays in treatment and ensuring accurate diagnoses by providing complete medical histories.
Mihaljevic added that data from the health app is now readily accessible to doctors, aiding in the management of obesity and other chronic conditions, including tracking patients’ dietary habits and physical activity levels.
“These apps provide valuable insights into a patient’s health between doctor visits,” he emphasized.
CMS also offers a selection of Medicare.gov apps aimed at aiding individuals in managing chronic illnesses, selecting healthcare providers, and choosing insurance plans.
Digital privacy advocates are doubtful about the safety of patients’ data storage.
The federal government has done very little to regulate health applications and telehealth services, according to Jeffrey Chester of the Center for Digital Democracy.
This new initiative is poised to expand the pool of patient information accessible to both the federal government and high-tech firms. Medical records often contain sensitive data that includes patient-doctor conversations and notes on issues like substance abuse and mental health history.
“This initiative represents a gateway for the further use and commercialization of sensitive personal health data,” Chester commented.
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and those in his circle are also advocates for wearable devices that monitor health and telehealth, promoting increased technological advancements in healthcare.
Kennedy has expressed a desire to gather more data from American medical records, previously mentioning intentions to utilize this data to research autism and vaccine safety. He has engaged with agency staff who possess backgrounds in health tech startups and businesses.
The dangers that alcohol presents to women’s health have escalated in the last two decades, as more women are drinking more frequently and in larger amounts.
Alcohol-related deaths among women have more than doubled from 1999 to 2020, and deaths due to alcohol-related hepatitis, which causes severe liver inflammation, have almost tripled among women during the same timeframe.
Recent research published this Wednesday in the medical journals Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology has also shown a rise in the risk of alcohol-related liver disease in women, encompassing various types of liver damage that stem from excessive alcohol consumption. Severe damage, known as cirrhosis, can progress to early-stage inflammation, ultimately leading to liver failure.
Women are more susceptible to alcohol-related liver disease than men due to several factors. One reason is that they typically have lower body weight and a higher body fat percentage, leading to elevated alcohol concentrations in the blood that the liver must process. Additionally, women naturally possess fewer enzymes called alcohol dehydrogenases, which assist in metabolizing alcohol, resulting in higher blood alcohol levels.
These biological differences, combined with a significant spike in alcohol use and conditions like bulimia, put women at a heightened risk for alcohol-related health issues.
“Historically, there have been differences in the prevalence rates of alcohol consumption between men and women. Essentially, that gap has now narrowed, with the male-to-female drinking ratio nearing one-to-one,” stated Shelley McKee, director of the Yale Score Program on Gender Differences in Alcohol Use Disorders.
McKee noted that shifting lifestyles have led to increased alcohol consumption among women. Today’s young adults drink less than previous generations, yet more women are enrolling in college than men. This trend is typically linked to an uptick in alcohol consumption, she explained.
“Combine that with the fact that women are postponing childbirth and marriage, which allows them more freedom to continue drinking during college,” McKee added.
Catherine Keys, an epidemiology professor at the Postal Public Health School at Columbia University, observed that high alcohol consumption among women is most prevalent in middle-aged individuals. While some researchers attribute this trend to workplace stress and drinking culture, Keys emphasized that many women drink more simply for enjoyment. She pointed out that wine and spirits are often marketed to women as luxury items or relaxation aids.
Experts express that raising awareness of the health risks associated with alcohol consumption can encourage women to cut back.
“We’re excited to help you get started,” remarked Jessica Mellinger, a senior staff doctor at Henry Ford Health, Michigan’s health system. The more individuals consume, the greater their likelihood of developing alcohol-related liver disease at every stage, she added.
A study released this Wednesday revealed that heavy drinkers now exhibit more than double the rates of alcohol-related liver disease compared to 20 years ago. Researchers suspect this may be due to individuals at risk for liver disease—including women, those with obesity, and people with diabetes—drinking more than they did decades prior.
“Modern American drinkers are not the same as they were 20 years ago,” stated Dr. Brian Lee, lead author and liver specialist at Keck Medicine at the University of Southern California.
Using data from a national government-led survey, researchers analyzed drinking behaviors and liver health in the U.S., classifying heavy drinkers as men consuming at least 30 grams of alcohol daily and women consuming at least 20 grams.
Among heavy drinkers, the incidence of severe liver damage has more than doubled in 22 years, rising from nearly 2% between 1999-2004 to over 4% from 2013-2020.
The presence of metabolic syndrome—characterized by symptoms such as obesity and hypertension that elevate the risk of heart disease, diabetes, and stroke—among heavy drinkers has also increased from 26% to almost 38%. Both obesity and type 2 diabetes can lead to fat accumulation in the liver, heightening the risk of liver disease.
“It could be a perfect storm situation. We are seeing increased alcohol consumption alongside changes in the prevalence of these [health] conditions,” Keys remarked.
Lee emphasized the importance of individuals being honest with their healthcare providers about their alcohol intake so that doctors can determine the need for liver disease screenings.
“The risk of liver disease might be greater than you think,” he cautioned. “The reality is that liver disease often presents no symptoms, even in cases of cirrhosis, which is a terminal condition. I often say it’s both a blessing and a curse.”
Keys noted that women, in particular, often delay seeking medical help for heavy drinking due to societal stigma.
“It’s becoming a hidden trend where women postpone seeking help for serious alcohol-related conditions,” she stated.
Tracking your daily step count is a straightforward method to assess your activity levels
Volkerpreusser/Alamy
While the widely accepted goal is to aim for 10,000 steps per day, research indicates that reaching just 7,000 steps daily can considerably lower the risk of developing conditions such as heart disease, dementia, and depression.
The 10,000-step benchmark reportedly originated from a Japanese marketing initiative. Nevertheless, studies reveal substantial health benefits associated with this goal.
Standard exercise guidelines typically omit specific step counts. For example, the UK recommends moderate activity for a minimum of 150 minutes weekly, while the average adult should engage in being active for at least 75 minutes each week.
As Melody Ding from the University of Sydney remarks, “If you ask someone on the street about their steps, they might struggle to answer. How is ‘moderate to vigorous’ even defined?”
Tracking step counts using a wrist pedometer or smartphone may offer a practical solution for measuring activity levels. Therefore, Ding and her team aimed to determine how many steps are necessary for maintaining good health.
The researchers examined a total of 57 studies published between 2014 and 2025, encompassing a diverse group of adults, most of whom had no severe health conditions at the beginning of the studies.
Generally, increased physical activity correlates with better health outcomes. While walking 10,000 steps is superior to 7,000, the latter still offers significant health advantages. On average, individuals who walked 7,000 steps daily had a remarkable 47% lower likelihood of dying from any cause during the study period. Additionally, there was a 25% reduction in the risk of developing cardiovascular diseases, leading to a 47% lower death risk.
This step count is also linked to a 37% decrease in the risk of cancer-related fatalities, a 38% lower risk of dementia, and a 22% reduction in depressive symptoms.
Ding emphasizes the importance of not deterring individuals from striving for 10,000 steps, noting, “While 7,000 steps are likely more achievable, it doesn’t imply it’s harmful to exceed that.”
“Targeting 7,000 steps feels far more attainable for many individuals compared to 10,000,” says Laura Fleming from Teesside University.
However, Ding cautions that if the goal of 7,000 steps still feels overwhelming, individuals should aim to increase their overall movement. Remarkably, the research indicated that even achieving 4,000 steps a day could reduce mortality risk by 36% compared to just taking 2,000 steps.
A four-day workweek can significantly enhance both your mental and physical well-being, which in turn boosts your performance. This is supported by a recent study conducted by researchers from the US and Ireland.
The most exciting part? Research published in the journal Natural Human Behavior ensured that participants did not experience any wage cuts during the trial. This is crucial, as pay reductions can lead to increased stress. Participants managed to maintain their typical productivity levels while experiencing fewer sleep disturbances and reduced fatigue, thanks to an improved work environment.
“Globally, we observe trends of burnout, long hours, and inadequate personal time for employees and their families—this issue is prevalent not only in high-income countries but also in many low- and middle-income nations,” noted study author Wenfang, an associate professor of sociology at Boston University in the United States, as stated in BBC Science Focus.
“Our four-day workweek could serve as a potential solution for rethinking work structures that not only benefit employees but society at large.”
The sociologists from Boston College and University College Dublin conducted a six-month study involving approximately 3,000 employees from 141 organizations across Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the UK, and the US. Participants were offered reduced working hours ranging from 1-4 hours, 5-7 hours, or 8 hours.
Over the six-month period, employee wellness was evaluated across four categories: burnout, job satisfaction, overall psychological health, and physical health—key indicators of mortality risk.
Concurrently, they compared the outcomes for 285 employees from 12 companies that implemented reduced work hours with those who maintained the traditional workweek.
Significant health advantages were noted for employees in all three reduced-hour groups, particularly in terms of burnout and job satisfaction. Those who cut their working hours by eight saw the most substantial benefits. Furthermore, 90% of the companies that participated continued their four-day workweek after the trial concluded.
Globally, initiatives are underway to assess the effects of shorter workweeks on employee health and organizational productivity. One notable program is the 4DWG initiative, which has seen participation from 375 companies worldwide, advocating for a six-hour workday or a 20% reduction in total hours.
A potential limitation of this study is that it relied on companies volunteering to take part, primarily involving small businesses in English-speaking countries. Future studies aim to include government-sponsored trials for more randomized assessments.
Additionally, the researchers are exploring the environmental impact of a four-day workweek, as some employees have volunteered to monitor their carbon footprints.
Wen posits that both workers and employers could benefit environmentally, particularly with decreased pollution from commuting. She stated: “Countries adopting shorter working hours often report improved environmental outcomes.”
Read more:
About our experts
Wen Huang is an associate professor in the Department of Sociology at Boston College, USA. Her research has been published in journals such as Natural Human Behavior, Social Forces, Jobs and Occupations, and Advances in Life Course Research.
To explore these changes, Wenfang from Boston College, Massachusetts, and her colleagues examined data from 141 companies across the US, UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Ireland that took part in a pilot initiative by the nonprofit 4 Day Global.
Prior to the trial, companies collaborated with external consultants to streamline their workflows and eliminate inefficiencies like unnecessary meetings.
After a six-month program, researchers compared self-reported productivity, health, and job satisfaction from approximately 3,000 employees at participating companies against 12 workers who were involved but opposed the trial.
Employees at companies that adopted a four-day work week reported lower rates of burnout and higher job satisfaction, alongside improvements in overall mental and physical health. These benefits were linked to better sleep quality, reduced fatigue, and enhanced work performance.
“Many individuals are concerned about a phenomenon called job intensification. If you’re required to complete all your work in four days instead of five, it might increase stress,” notes Fan. “Our findings indicate the opposite. When employees can reduce hours, they feel positive about themselves, contributing to greater happiness.”
The results were consistent across various employee demographics, including age and gender, regardless of whether they worked remotely or in-office. However, positions within the company appeared to impact results. Supervisors reported notable enhancements in overall well-being compared to non-supervisors.
The researchers indicated that participants did not clarify which specific aspects of the trial contributed to their perceived benefits, suggesting that the improvements might stem from reduced unnecessary meetings rather than merely switching to a four-day schedule, according to Ronnie Golden from Penn State University in Abington.
“If employees report higher happiness, could it be due to better treatment from their employer? They might trust their company more, benefit from fewer commuting days, or enjoy a few extended days for leisure,” states Golden. “Or is it simply a matter of increased productivity per hour with fewer distractions?”
Regardless, over 90% of firms that transitioned to a four-day work week chose to continue this model after the program ended, according to Fan.
Walking slightly faster than usual can markedly enhance the health of seniors, according to new research from the University of Chicago.
Specifically, researchers discovered that frail or at-risk adults can bolster their health and quality of life by increasing their walking speed by at least 14 steps per minute over their normal pace.
“Increased walking speed is a well-documented protector against mortality,” stated Dr. Daniel Rubin, associate professor of anesthesia and critical care at the university, as reported by BBC Science Focus. “Older adults who walk more briskly tend to live longer.”
The study involved 102 participants from 14 retirement communities, implementing a structured walking program over four months.
During this period, 56 participants maintained a normal walking pace while the remaining 46 were encouraged to walk quickly yet safely.
At the conclusion of the program, each participant’s walking speed was assessed during a 6-minute walk.
While all participants reaped benefits from the walking program, those who managed around 100 steps per minute showed the most significant improvement in their frailty levels from the start to the end of the study.
Researchers had long recognized that walking speed correlates with the health of older adults, but previous recommendations on how to enhance pace were often subjective and challenging to quantify.
Traditionally, older adults were advised to walk at a pace where talking was easy but singing was difficult.
Frail adults are at increased risk of falls, hospitalization, and loss of independence. Warning signs include weakness, unintentional weight loss, and fatigue. Image Credit: Getty.
“We can offer the elderly straightforward and targeted advice like, ‘Try to walk five steps per minute faster than your normal pace.’
Healthcare providers and researchers can use wearable technology, such as accelerometers, to track walking speed. Rubin and his team are currently developing an app for individuals to measure their speed at home.
In the meantime, Rubin suggests utilizing a metronome to establish a baseline walking pace, syncing steps with the metronome’s beat.
“Once a comfortable pace is established, you can gradually add 5-10 steps per minute to enhance your cadence,” he noted. “The target is to aim for an increase of 10-15 steps per minute, which is acceptable.”
Nonetheless, Rubin emphasizes that seniors must walk safely and monitor for any symptoms such as chest pain, shortness of breath, or dizziness.
“Our hope is that older adults will find this a practical strategy for guiding walking intensity, enabling them to live longer and continue engaging in activities they enjoy,” he added.
read more:
About our experts
Dr. Daniel Rubin is a physician at the University of Chicago and an assistant professor of anesthesia and critical care. His interest in gait studies stems from his clinical experience with elderly patients preparing for surgery.
A growing number of children are taking breaks from their smartphones to enhance their mental health, personal safety, and focus, according to recent research.
Experts emphasize that this trend is a response to increased awareness about the potential harm of unchecked social media and smartphone use, rather than merely excessive time spent online.
Research from an audience analysis firm reveals that the percentage of 12-15-year-olds who are stepping away from smartphones, computers, and iPads has surged by 40%, up from 18% in 2022 Golden Week. This data stems from a survey involving 20,000 young individuals and their parents across 18 nations.
Professor Sonia Livingston, Director of LSE’s Digital Futures for Children Center, noted that these findings will soon be published. According to the study, children and teens are exploring varied methods to manage how their online experiences impact their well-being—such as taking breaks from social media, diverting from online negativity, seeking positive internet experiences, and, in some cases, completely quitting social media.
Livingston remarked:
“They’re trying out various strategies to safeguard their well-being without completely abandoning social media. They are communicating about what works best for them and are aware of future implications.”
Daisy Greenwell, co-founder of Smart Phone Free Childhood, added:
“Many young individuals realize that these platforms are not impartial. They are designed to capture attention. Their time, focus, and self-worth are often exploited by major corporations. Taking a break has turned into a form of rebellion.”
This notion is echoed in Ofcom’s findings. A report from 2024 indicates thatone-third (33%) of 8-17 year-olds online believe their screen time is excessive. Additionally, another study found that 47% of 16-24-year-olds on social media had disabled notifications and utilized “do not disturb” mode, an increase from 40% in 2023, in contrast to 28% of older users.
Thirty-four percent of youth are more inclined to intentionally take breaks from social media (up from 23% who would not), 29% uninstall apps that consume too much time (compared to 19% who do not), and 24% remove apps for mental health reasons (up from 13%).
David Ellis, Professor of Behavioral Science at Bath University, observed that teens may possess more control over their smartphone and social media usage than their parents.
Ellis stated: “If someone reduces their screen time and increases physical activity, it’s generally seen as a positive change, potentially replacing that time with something more beneficial.”
A young man aged 18 to 25 shared with the Guardian that he previously felt his parents’ generation lacked guidance on smartphone usage, granting too much access. He mentioned he would limit smartphone access for his children until their late teens.
Recent surveys show that nearly half of young people envision a world without the internet and many support digital curfews; however, after using social media, more than three-quarters expressed negative feelings about themselves.
According to GWI Research, social media addiction ranks among the top parental worries, alongside climate change, war, and housing issues. Furthermore, 8% of parents reported becoming stricter with screen time limits after viewing documentaries about the risks associated with online misconduct.
Antiparasitic drugs gained significant attention during the Covid-19 pandemic, though their applications are unrelated to the virus.
HJBC/ShutterStock Source: ShutterStock
Prior to 2020, few had ever heard of the antiparasitic drug ivermectin. However, interest surged during the Covid-19 pandemic as unfounded claims emerged about its potential to prevent or treat viral infections. Notably, popular podcast host Joe Rogan stated he used it in 2021 while recovering from Covid. That same year, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a prominent public health figure in the U.S., petitioned the FDA regarding its use in treating Covid-19.
Despite numerous studies disproving ivermectin’s efficacy against Covid-19, the buzz around it persists. While criticized as a quack remedy during the pandemic, ivermectin is still a legitimate medicinal drug, with researchers believing it contains potential yet to be fully explored.
What is ivermectin?
Ivermectin is an antiparasitic agent that was developed in 1975 by the pharmaceutical company Merck. It effectively eliminates a wide array of parasites and is FDA-approved for the treatment of two conditions caused by human parasites: onchocerciasis (river blindness) and intestinal strongyloidiasis. Additionally, in some regions, it is used to treat lymphatic filariasis and cutaneous larva migrans.
These parasitic infections are uncommon in high-income nations but pose significant threats to millions in low-income countries globally. As a result, over 300 million individuals take ivermectin annually, making it one of the most impactful global health interventions to date. Its discoverer was awarded the Nobel Prize in 2015.
The FDA has also approved various topical formulations of ivermectin for conditions such as head lice and rosacea. Furthermore, the drug is widely utilized in veterinary medicine to prevent and treat parasitic infections, including heartworms and roundworms. The FDA cautions against the consumption of veterinary formulations by humans, as they differ from those specified for human use.
Can ivermectin treat or prevent COVID-19?
Ivermectin was initially thought to be a promising treatment for Covid-19. Early studies suggested it might aid recovery and prevent viral replication; however, larger studies have indicated otherwise.
For instance, a 2022 study involving over 3,500 Covid-19 patients showed no difference in hospitalization rates between those treated with ivermectin and those given a placebo. Similarly, a 2023 study, involving more than 1,400 adults, found no significant benefit of ivermectin in accelerating recovery compared to placebo.
Can ivermectin treat cancer?
Ivermectin is not approved for cancer treatment and has not undergone thorough clinical trials. However, preliminary studies have indicated that it may have potential as an adjunct cancer therapy.
A decade ago, Peter P. Lee at a lab in Los Angeles discovered that ivermectin could induce cancer cell death through a process known as immunogenic cell death, thus prompting immune cells to recognize and attack cancer cells. Lee and his team searched the National Cancer Institute database to assess the effects of all FDA-approved drugs on various cancer cells, finding that ivermectin notably enhanced signs of immunogenic cell death in several cancer types.
“At that moment, I’d never heard of ivermectin,” Lee remarked. “I had to investigate, and upon learning it was a parasitic drug, I found it rather astonishing.”
In 2021, Lee and associates tested ivermectin in a mouse model of metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, a notably aggressive and challenging condition to treat. They found that 40% of mice treated with a combination of ivermectin and immunotherapy survived beyond 80 days, contrasted with none of the mice given immunotherapy alone surviving past 50 days. Mice solely administered ivermectin did not fare better than untreated counterparts.
“Ivermectin itself isn’t inherently a cancer treatment,” Lee clarified. “But it seems beneficial when used alongside immune-based therapies.”
A clinical trial is currently evaluating the use of ivermectin in conjunction with cancer immunotherapy for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, with anticipated results expected next year. Other studies also suggest that pancreatic cancer therapies are more effective when combined with ivermectin, and Lee is exploring similar effects on colon cancer cells.
While these findings are encouraging, they do not confirm ivermectin as an effective cancer treatment for humans. “Many therapies that show promise in animal studies do not translate to humans,” Lee pointed out.
What are the side effects of ivermectin?
Ivermectin is generally regarded as safe, but can be toxic when taken in high doses. Possible side effects may include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, low blood pressure, and dizziness. In severe cases, ivermectin usage might lead to seizures, coma, or even death, especially if combined with other medications like blood thinners.
“Individuals should not take [ivermectin] on their own or without the guidance of a knowledgeable medical professional. I genuinely hope to utilize ivermectin in ways that provide benefits to numerous patients, but its use is more complex than simply self-administering a medication,” he advised.
A lifeline has been extended to the residents of Tuvalu, a low-lying Pacific nation grappling with the impacts of rising sea levels. Each year, Australia permits 280 Tuvaluan individuals to reside there. This agreement anticipates a relocation of the entire population within the next few decades.
The Australian Tuvalu Farapili Union, regarded as the world’s first climate migration agreement, also allocates funds for adaptation to aid those who are lagging behind.
Could this serve as a prototype for managing climate migration gracefully before calamities ensue? However, the situation is far from ideal. In order to secure this deal, Tuvalu had to concede to Australia having a voice in future security and defense matters. Few nations may find such terms acceptable.
Moreover, Tuvalu’s population is minuscule. In a country like Australia, which has 28 million residents, accepting around 10,000 climate migrants is relatively insignificant. It’s estimated that between 25 million and 1 billion people could face forced displacement by 2050 due to climate change and other environmental pressures. Where will they go?
Environmental factors could force 1 billion people to move by 2050
Many assert that wealthy nations, historically the largest emitters of carbon dioxide contributing to global warming, have a moral duty to assist those affected by climate change. However, discussions on these matters have yet to translate into the legal recognition or acceptance of forced climate migration. In fact, many high-income nations seem increasingly resistant to various forms of immigration.
There have been some progressions in creating funds for “loss and damage” to aid affected countries dealing with the aftermath of global warming. This could potentially curtail the necessity for future climate migration, yet the promised financial support to date is only a fraction of what is essential.
The foremost action that any nation should undertake is to limit future warming through emission reductions, but global emissions continue to rise. Regrettably, the Farapili Union symbolizes a decline into the ocean, not a turnaround.
Devi Sridhar argues that we have misaligned health priorities. Many of us obsess over personal choices like diet and exercise while ignoring the crucial role of government in health outcomes. This crucial factor: effective governance.
Public health initiatives—including universal healthcare, access to clean drinking water, breathable air, and safe transportation—actually have a far greater effect on longevity than individual commodities like gym memberships or health food. As a professor of global public health at the University of Edinburgh, Devi has authored a new book titled How Can I Not Die (Too Early), which builds a compelling case that emphasizes both personal endeavors and public health as keys to a long, healthy life.
In her interview with New Scientist, she tackles the illusion of personal responsibility for health, discusses how to elevate public health appeal, and shares her vision if she were in a position of authority.
Graham Lawton: Are you suggesting that focusing on our own health is futile?
Devi Sridhar: Not at all! Personal health initiatives can be highly effective if resources, time, and education are available. However, placing sole responsibility for health on individuals ignores the broader societal factors at play. The environment and circumstances you reside in profoundly impact your lifespan. Society often forgets the systemic issues tied to health, where individuals’ agency is critical. Yet, large-scale health improvements typically originate from governmental initiatives.
How did we come to believe that health is solely our responsibility?
This belief is empowering. People think, “What can I do today?” and “If I’m disciplined enough, I can succeed!” However, broader structural barriers often limit their ability to make changes. We’re inundated with self-help narratives while less attention is paid to systemic factors, which many perceive as not directly relevant to their own lives. Additionally, there’s significant skepticism about politicians, with a prevailing notion that nothing will change.
What’s the right balance between personal and public health measures?
The answer varies by the specific issue. Individual efforts can influence areas like diet and exercise, but for critical areas such as air quality and water safety, individuals are often at the mercy of governmental decisions.
Are celebrity diets and social media influencers further skewing this balance?
Absolutely. It’s all about marketing. We tend to believe that products with the right branding are more effective. Public health struggles with marketing challenges. Recent years have not helped, as public health messaging often comes across as oppressive rather than liberating.
How can we reshape perceptions of public health?
We need to shift the narrative around public health. It shouldn’t just be about societal benefits, but also about simplifying life. People want to understand, “How does this benefit me?” This may sound cynical, but it’s the reality we operate within.
Vaccinating children for measles is a lifesaver, but social media influencers may spread doubts
Morwan Ali/EPA/Shutterstock
Given the misinformation surrounding vaccinations, why do many people fall prey to such fallacies?
A lot of this is rooted in social media culture, where popularity seems to supersede accuracy. For example, when Joe Rogan discusses his experiences with measles on his podcast—where he asserts it was commonplace during his childhood—this message carries more weight than that of actual health experts. Despite being neither a medical professional nor a public health authority, his influence is substantial. If I claimed that the secret to longevity was gin and tonics, it would go viral, posing a significant challenge for credible health messaging.
Implementing effective public health policies seems complicated, isn’t it?
Change often meets resistance. Consider the initial pushback against smoking bans in pubs or seat belt laws. Though there’s resistance early on, over time, people adapt, and these measures become normalized.
Your book presents various instances of successful government interventions. Which one stands out to you?
As someone in Scotland, I have to mention the Dunblane gun laws enacted following a tragic school shooting in 1996. The resistance to these laws was fierce, yet they have effectively prevented mass shootings in British schools, saving countless lives and establishing a model for other nations.
In high-income countries, 20% of deaths are preventable. What insights can we draw from nations with lower preventable mortality rates?
Countries like Japan, which have high cancer survival rates and low chronic disease prevalence, serve as models for what can be achieved. In Japan, preventable mortality rates are estimated at about 10%, showcasing the potential for better outcomes.
Our objective should be to extend life expectancy, ideally reaching ages of 80, 90, or even 100. If one can age successfully and die of natural causes, that signifies a healthy approach to living.
However, longer lifespans mean an older population. How should we respond to this shift?
Aging should be perceived as a strength, not a detriment. The focus should be on encouraging healthy aging, allowing individuals to maintain independence without overwhelming healthcare systems.
How realistic is it to align preventable mortality rates with those of Japan?
It will likely take a decade or two, as changing urban design and reversing childhood obesity cannot be done overnight. Nevertheless, the return on investment can be considerable over time. A significant challenge is the current governmental tendency to prioritize short-term headlines over long-term planning.
Typically, there is initial resistance to new public health regulations, such as the essential use of seat belts, but people will adapt over time.
CrackerClips Stock Media/Alamy
If you were in charge of the UK National Health Service (NHS), what reforms would you prioritize?
I believe there’s a strong need for focus on preventive care. Currently, the UK invests significantly in acute care while neglecting prevention. The emphasis right now is on addressing hospital and ambulance waiting times, which will worsen as the population ages. My approach would be to prioritize preventive measures. Identify and invest in cost-efficient strategies to detect health issues early. What are the prevalent reasons behind hospital admissions, and how can we tackle them?
For instance, hypertension is known as a silent killer. Regular annual blood pressure checks could lead to early detection. Though the initial costs may be higher, savings can accumulate over the years. Regular assessments of waist circumference, abdominal fat, blood sugar, cholesterol levels, and grip strength should also be incorporated.
I interviewed you during the COVID pandemic, when you mentioned that it was an opportunity to address long-standing public health challenges. Did we capitalize on that?
No, quite the opposite. If anything, there has been a backlash against public health and government intervention. Strict lockdowns and mask mandates led to significant pushback. Rather than seizing the opportunity for systemic change, the focus has shifted back to individual responsibility.
Do you feel we’ve learned valuable lessons from the pandemic, and is the world better prepared for the future?
It depends on the perspective. In terms of public health, I would say no; we’ve regressed. The UK’s testing infrastructure has been dismantled. However, in terms of scientific advancement, yes, we’re now better equipped for vaccine development and more efficient research processes. If a bird flu strain spreads among humans, the UK government already has a vaccine ready for distribution.
A quote from your book resonates: “We don’t need to conduct any more studies.” Is that your position?
Yes. We have a wealth of knowledge already. Perhaps 90% of what we need to know to improve population health is already available. While there’s always room for further research, repeating studies that confirm what we already know can become a distraction and delay necessary actions.
Are we evolving positively on a global level regarding public health?
Overall, yes. Life expectancy is increasing, and quality of life is better than it was a century ago. Progress may not be rapid or uniform, and in some regions, there are setbacks, but the overall trend shows significant advancement.
What message do you want readers to take from your book?
Politicians have the power to effect change. Take the NHS, for example; its establishment was a deliberate decision, not a coincidence. Everything we have today is the result of policy choices made decades ago, and we are currently reaping the benefits. While the improvements from today’s decisions may not be immediate, future generations will benefit from them. My aim is to inspire hope for what is possible.
Microsoft is unveiling details about artificial intelligence systems that outperform human doctors in intricate health assessments, paving a “path to medical closeness.”
The company’s AI division, spearheaded by British engineer Mustafa Suleyman, has created a system that emulates a panel of specialized physicians handling “diagnostically complex and intellectually demanding” cases.
When integrated with OpenAI’s advanced O3 AI model, Microsoft claims its method “solved” more than eight out of ten carefully selected case studies for diagnostic challenges. In contrast, practice physicians with no access to colleagues, textbooks, or chatbots achieved an accuracy rate of only 2 out of 10 on these same case studies.
Microsoft also highlighted that this AI solution could be a more economical alternative to human doctors, as it streamlines the process of ordering tests.
While emphasizing potential cost reductions, Microsoft noted that it envisions AI as a complement to physician roles rather than a replacement.
“The clinical responsibilities of doctors extend beyond merely diagnosing; they must navigate uncertainty in ways that AI is not equipped to handle, and build trust with patients and their families,” the company explained in a blog post announcing the research intended for peer review.
Nevertheless, slogans like “The Road to Overmed Medical” hint at the possibility of transformative changes in the healthcare sector. Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) denotes systems that replicate human cognitive abilities for specific tasks, while superintelligence is a theoretical concept referring to systems that surpass overall human intellectual capacity.
In discussing the rationale for their study, Microsoft raised concerns about AI’s performance on U.S. medical licensing exams, a crucial assessment for acquiring medical licenses in the U.S. The multiple-choice format relies heavily on memorization, which may “exaggerate” AI capabilities compared to in-depth understanding.
Microsoft is working on a system that mimics real-world clinicians by taking step-by-step actions to arrive at a final diagnosis, such as asking targeted questions or requesting diagnostic tests. For instance, patients exhibiting cough or fever symptoms may need blood tests and chest x-rays prior to receiving a pneumonia diagnosis.
This innovative approach by Microsoft employs intricate case studies sourced from the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM).
Suleyman’s team transformed over 300 of these studies into “interactive case challenges” to evaluate their method. Microsoft’s strategy incorporated existing AI models developed by ChatGPT creators OpenAI, Meta from Mark Zuckerberg, Anthropic, Grok from Elon Musk, and Google’s Gemini.
The company utilized a specific model for determining tests and diagnostics, employing AI systems such as tailored agents known as “diagnostic orchestrators.” These orchestrators effectively simulate a doctor’s panel, aiding in reaching a diagnosis.
Microsoft reported that in conjunction with OpenAI’s advanced O3 model, over eight of the ten NEJM case studies have been “solved.”
Microsoft believes its approach has the potential to encompass multiple medical fields, enabling a broad and in-depth application beyond individual practitioners.
“Enhancing this level of reasoning could potentially reform healthcare. AI can autonomously manage patients with routine care and offer clinicians sophisticated support for complex cases.”
However, Microsoft acknowledges that the technology is not yet ready for clinical implementation, noting that further testing with an “Orchestrator” is necessary to evaluate performance in more prevalent symptoms.
When TikTok declares it’s run out of bizarre ideas, enter the world of coffee enemas.
Indeed, people are brewing fresh coffee pots and introducing them into the colon via the rectum to stimulate bowel movements. This trend claims to “detox” the body, enhance energy levels, and improve digestion.
This isn’t a new phenomenon: coffee enemas have long been associated with the Gerson Therapy diet and energy-based cancer treatments since the 1950s.
Despite its TikTok resurgence, there’s scant credible evidence supporting its effectiveness, while reports of unpleasant and potentially harmful side effects abound.
Firstly, the rectum is not meant to handle coffee. Caffeine and acids can irritate delicate tissues, leading to inflammation, pain, and possible burns if the coffee is cold enough. Over time, frequent use can damage the mucosal lining, heightening the risk of chronic issues.
Although this trend touts “detoxification,” you don’t need to resort to such risky methods, as your liver and kidneys are already efficient at eliminating toxins.
Moreover, there are significant risks associated with DIY procedures. Engaging in invasive actions can result in injuries like infections and rectal tears. Severe infections can lead to sepsis, posing life-threatening consequences.
There is no credible evidence supporting the efficacy of coffee enemas – Illustration by Jessley
Thus, if you’re seeking to feel lighter or healthier, it’s best to rely on the basics: consume more fiber, stay hydrated, and stay active. If digestion troubles persist, consult a healthcare professional rather than an influencer.
Despite its newfound popularity, reliable evidence supporting the benefits of coffee enemas is lacking, and the associated risks are significant. “Bottom” line? Enjoy your coffee in a mug, not through a colon.
This article responds to the question (I emailed Sarasolomon) “Should I try a coffee enema?”
Feel free to email us to submit your inquiriesQuestion @sciencefocus.com or MessageFacebook,TwitterorInstagramPage (please include your name and location).
Check out our ultimateFun fact More incredible science pages
On Monday, a federal judge in Boston ruled that the termination of grants from the National Institutes of Health signals the end of efforts aimed at diversity-related research topics. Trump’s administration has claimed this decision was “invalid and illegal,” citing discrimination against racial minorities and the LGBTQ community.
US District Judge William Young stated in a non-judicial trial that the NIH breached federal law by capriciously canceling over $1 billion in research grants linked to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.
Judge Young indicated he is reinstating grants awarded to organizations that advocated for such initiatives in democratically led states. He also mentioned that as the case unfolds, more significant decisions might follow.
“This amounts to racism and discrimination against the American LGBTQ community,” remarked Young, a Republican appointee of President Ronald Reagan. “Government discrimination is profoundly wrong; I urge the court to prohibit it, and I will take action in due course.”
Discussing the end of grants for research addressing racial minority issues, Young expressed from the bench that he has “never witnessed such blatant racism” in his 40 years on the bench.
“You judge people of color based on their skin,” he stated concerning the Trump administration. “The Constitution does not permit that.”
The Department of Health and Human Services, representing the NIH and its parent organization, has not responded promptly to requests for statements.
Rachel Meelopol from the American Civil Liberties Union, who represents the grant recipients in the lawsuit, mentioned that Young’s ruling impacts hundreds of grants. The plaintiffs include the American Public Health Association and 16 states led by Massachusetts.
The NIH, the world’s premier funder of biomedical and behavioral research, has terminated approximately 2,100 research grants worth about $9.5 billion and an additional $2.6 billion in contracts since President Donald Trump took office in January. I signed on to protest the cuts last week.
These funding cuts reflect Trump’s broader agenda to reshape the government, reduce federal expenditures, and eliminate support for DEI programs and transgender healthcare. Another federal judge has temporarily blocked the administration’s plan to reduce 10,000 jobs across the NIH and other health agencies.
Trump has also enacted a series of executive orders mandating that institutions ensure grant funding does not support “gender ideology” and puts an end to what the administration deems “discriminatory” DEI programs. Conservative critics argue that these DEI initiatives unfairly target white individuals and others.
Aligned with Trump’s policy objectives, the NIH has directed staff to cease grant funding for research on DEI programs, issues facing transgender individuals, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, and funding beneficial to universities in China.
The trial presided over by Young on Monday focused on just a portion of the claims in the consolidated litigation regarding the funding cuts. He intends to consider additional claims later.
Young indicated he would allow political parties to present further evidence before making decisions regarding these claims and determine whether to restore grants beyond those allocated to the plaintiffs.
The cessation of NIH grants, coupled with delays in grant approvals and renewals, has reverberated across universities nationwide, many of which now face the loss of significant portions of their research budgets.
As a result, universities have initiated employment freezes, travel restrictions, reduced class sizes, furloughs, and layoffs.
Numerous universities depend on NIH grants for the majority of their research funding. For instance, Washington University, recognized as the top public institution for biomedical research, reported receiving roughly 1,220 grants from the NIH, totaling about $648 million last year, as per court documents.
Students and faculty at universities have expressed concerns that the funding confusion could lead to brain drain from the United States, as researchers increasingly seek positions abroad. This slowdown also threatens long-term research initiatives, including projects focused on banking and studying the brains of Alzheimer’s patients.
The Trump administration has aimed to reduce other critical research funding sources.
In February, US District Judge Angel Kelly halted regulations that severely restricted government payments for indirect research costs, including equipment, maintenance, utilities, and support staffing. The administration projected that this action would eliminate $4 billion in funding for research institutions.
Analyzing breath patterns can be crucial for diagnosing and treating numerous health issues
Milan Jovic/Getty Images
Forget about facial recognition—innovative methods for identification may be on the horizon. Researchers have unveiled the concept of “respiratory fingerprints,” a distinctive breathing pattern that could transform the approach to diagnosing and managing various health conditions, including obesity and depression.
The breakthrough is credited to Timna Soroka at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel. Together with her team, they designed wearable devices capable of capturing the minute details of our breathing patterns.
“This research is exciting,” says Torben Noto from OSMO in New York, an AI company focused on enhancing computer sensory perception, who was not part of the study. “It tackles many persistent inquiries regarding the relationship between respiratory signals and health, as well as mental well-being.”
The notion that breath patterns can reveal health information isn’t new; clues to this relationship date back to the 1950s. Yet, previous studies were limited to data from hospital patients because no wearable devices existed that could record nasal breathing while allowing people to move freely.
To overcome this limitation, Soroka and her colleagues developed a wearable device, which was tested by 97 participants who wore it around the clock. The team trained an algorithm to detect a unique set of 24 breathing metrics, ranging from the volume of air inhaled to the speed of breathing. Remarkably, the algorithm achieved nearly 97% accuracy in identifying participants, and their unique breathing signature remained consistent over a two-year follow-up period.
However, don’t expect to use this device for banking transactions just yet, warns Norm Sobel from the Weizmann Institute. The primary aim is not biometric authentication, but to extract invaluable health insights.
For instance, a person’s body mass index (BMI) can be estimated using specific nasal cycle parameters, which involve a rhythmic pattern of airflow between nostrils. This cycle is controlled by the balance between the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems—the former prepares the body for “fight or flight,” while the latter calms the body. “By assessing nostril airflow, we effectively gauge sympathetic arousal, which seems to correlate with BMI,” explains Sobel.
This leads to intriguing inquiries, Sobel notes: Could breathing patterns influence weight rather than weight changes altering breath? “If that’s the case, we might discover a breathing pattern that promotes weight loss, at which point we’ll all retire to an island,” he quips.
The respiratory data also indicated a link between breathing characteristics and levels of anxiety and depression. For example, individuals experiencing higher depressive symptoms exhibited faster inhalation rates.
The research team is currently exploring whether these breathing patterns actively contribute to these symptoms and if they can be used to diagnose widespread mental health disorders.
“Imagine a future where each patient owns a nasal airflow monitoring device that not only tracks treatment progress but also offers feedback and predicts outcomes for various disorders,” says Noto. The device measures 24 distinct breathing metrics. It also enables users to notice deviations from their normal breathing patterns. “This could have a profound effect on public health,” adds Noto.
As public health organizations indicate that women’s personal information is vulnerable to exploitation by private entities, experts advocate for public health groups to create alternatives to for-profit period tracker applications.
A study from the University of Cambridge reveals that smartphone apps used for menstrual cycle tracking serve as a “Goldmine” for consumer profiling, collecting data on exercise, diet, medication, hormone levels, and birth control methods.
The economic worth of this information is often “greatly underestimated” by users who share intimate details in unregulated markets with profit-driven businesses, according to the report.
If mishandled, data from cycle tracking apps (CTAs) could lead to issues like employment bias, workplace monitoring, discrimination in health insurance, risks of cyberstalking, and restricted access to abortion services, research indicates.
The authors urge for improved regulation in the expanding Femtech sector to safeguard users as data is sold in large quantities, suggesting that apps should offer clear consent options regarding data collection and promote the establishment of public health agency alternatives to commercial CTAs.
“The menstrual cycle tracking app is marketed as empowering women and bridging gender health disparities,” stated Dr. Stephanie Felberger, PhD, of the Center for Technology and Democracy at Cambridge, the lead author of the report. “Nevertheless, its underlying business model relies on commercial usage, wherein user data and insights are sold to third parties for profit.
“As a consequence of the monetization of data collected by cycle tracking app companies, women face significant and alarming privacy and safety threats.”
The report indicates that most cycle tracking apps cater to women attempting to conceive, making the stored data highly commercially valuable. Other life events, aside from home purchasing, do not trigger such notable shifts in consumer behavior.
Data pertaining to pregnancy is valued at over 200 times more than information about age, gender, or location for targeted advertisements. Furthermore, tracking cycle duration can allow for targeting women at various phases of their cycles.
The three most popular apps project a quarterly download figure of 500 million yen for 2024. The digital health sector focused on women’s wellness is anticipated to surpass $60 billion (£44 billion) by 2027, as noted in the report.
In light of the considerable demand for period tracking, the authors are calling on public health entities, including the UK’s NHS, to create transparent and reliable apps as alternatives to commercial offerings.
“The UK is ideally positioned to address researchers’ challenges related to menstrual data access, as well as privacy and data concerns, by developing an NHS app dedicated to tracking menstrual cycles,” added that the parent-child relationship in the US Reproductive Medicine Plan currently utilizes its own app.
“Apps situated within public health frameworks, which are not primarily profit-driven, can significantly reduce privacy violations, gather essential data on reproductive health, and empower users regarding the utilization of their menstrual information.”
“Utilizing cycle tracking apps is beneficial. Women deserve better than having their menstrual tracking data treated merely as consumer data,” remarked Professor Gina Neff, executive director of the Mindeoo Center.
In the UK and the EU, period tracking data falls under “special categories” and enjoys greater legal protection, similar to genetics and ethnicity. In the United States, authorities collect menstrual cycle data which may hinder access to abortion services, according to the report.
A study by The Guardian has revealed that over 50% of the most popular TikTok videos offering mental health advice are misleading.
As more individuals seek mental health support on social media, research has shown that numerous influencers spread misinformation, including improper treatment terminology, unrealistic “quick fix” solutions, and inaccurate claims.
Those in need of help encounter questionable advice, such as suggestions to eat oranges while showering to alleviate anxiety. Some promote untested supplements like saffron, magnesium glycinate, and sacred basil as remedies for anxiety, along with claims about healing emotional wounds in an hour. Additionally, normal emotional reactions are incorrectly framed as symptoms of borderline personality disorder or abuse.
Lawmakers and experts expressed concern about the findings, stating that social media’s harmful mental health advice is both troubling and dangerous, prompting the government to consider stricter regulations to safeguard citizens from the spread of misinformation.
The Guardian analyzed the top 100 videos associated with the #MentalHealthTips hashtag on TikTok, consulting psychologists, psychiatrists, and academic specialists.
Experts determined that 52 out of those 100 videos provided advice on trauma, neurodiversity, anxiety, depression, and severe mental illness.
David Okay, a consultant neuropsychiatrist and psychology researcher at King’s College London, examined videos related to anxiety and depression. He noted that some posts misuse treatment language, potentially creating confusion around the true nature of mental illnesses.
Many videos offered broad advice based on limited personal experiences and anecdotal evidence.
The analysis indicated that social media often oversimplifies treatment realities, reducing complex issues to catchy soundbites. Although effective treatments exist, it’s crucial to communicate that there are no quick or one-size-fits-all solutions, he emphasized.
Dan Poulter, a former health minister and NHS psychiatrist who reviewed videos on severe mental illness, stated that some content trivializes daily experiences, equating them with serious mental health diagnoses.
“This type of misinformation can mislead viewers and downplay the real challenges faced by those with serious mental illnesses,” he noted.
Amber Johnston, a psychologist recognized by the British Psychological Association who evaluated trauma-related videos, remarked that while many contain valid insights, they often overgeneralize and downplay the complexity of post-traumatic stress disorder or trauma symptoms.
“Each video misleadingly suggests a uniform experience of PTSD that can be neatly summed up in a 30-second clip. The reality is that PTSD and trauma symptoms are uniquely individual and require the attention of a trained professional,” she explained.
“TikTok disseminates misinformation by implying there are universal shortcuts and insights that might actually exacerbate viewers’ issues, rather than provide solutions,” she added.
TikTok stated that videos will be removed if they dissuade users from seeking medical help or endorse harmful treatments. In the UK, when users search for mental health terms like depression or anxiety, they are directed to NHS resources.
Labour MP Chi Onwurah mentioned that the technical committee she leads is investigating misinformation on social media. A survey highlighted serious concerns regarding the effectiveness of online safety laws in combating misleading and harmful online content.
“We know that recommendation algorithms on platforms like TikTok intensify the spread of damaging misinformation, including false mental health advice,” she noted. “Immediate action is needed to address the deficiencies of the Online Safety Act and safeguard public health and safety online.”
Liberal Democrat MP Victoria Collins concurred with the troubling findings and called on the government to act decisively to shield individuals from harmful misinformation.
Labour MP Paulette Hamilton, chair of the Health and Social Care Selection Committee, also raised concerns about mental health misinformation on social media. “These ‘tips’ should not replace professional, qualified support,” she insisted.
Professor Bernadka Dubicka, online safety lead at the Royal College of Psychiatrists, noted that while social media can raise awareness, it’s vital that people access health information grounded in the latest evidence from reliable sources. Mental disorders can only be diagnosed through a thorough evaluation by qualified mental health professionals.
A TikTok spokesperson commented, “TikTok is a platform for millions to share their authentic mental health experiences and seek supportive communities. However, we recognize the methodological limitations of this research.”
“We are committed to collaborating with the World Health Organization and NHS health experts to promote accurate information on our platform and to eliminate 98% of harmful misinformation prior to reporting,” they added.
A government representative stated that the minister is “taking steps to minimize the impact of harmful misleading content online” through the new online safety legislation.
As the saying goes, you can’t brush aside the truth, but you can examine it closely—and you definitely should.
Medical professionals have long recognized that the state of our toilets offers valuable insights into our overall health. This wisdom also applies to how frequently we use them.
Discovering the Goldilocks Zone of Bowel Movements
Last year, a team of researchers found a connection between the frequency of bowel movements and long-term health outcomes.
They studied 1,400 healthy adults, excluding those with certain conditions and medications that could alter their stool.
The researchers categorized bowel movement frequency into four groups: constipation (one or two movements per week), low normal (three to six movements per week), high normal (one to three movements per day), and diarrhea.
According to the Bristol Stool Chart—or perhaps suspicious cupcakes—your stool should neither be too hard nor too soft. – Illustration: Lynn Bremner
Within this scale, the team identified a sort of Goldilocks zone.
Ideal bowel movements fall within a high normal range, according to Professor Shawn Gibbons, one of the study’s authors from the Institute of Systems Biology.
“Going every other day is reasonable. Ideally, twice a day is within a safe range,” he explains. “Some people take pride in it; they make a point to go at 10 a.m. every day.”
What Our Stool Reveals About Gut Health
Gibbons’ fascination with our collective bowel habits stems from the increasing understanding of the microorganisms inhabiting our gut.
“Transit time or intestinal motility is a crucial factor in this ecosystem,” he notes.
As stool moves through the intestine, microorganisms utilize available dietary fiber, fermenting it into beneficial fatty acids.
However, if the stool lingers too long, these microorganisms switch to protein, leading to toxin release into the bloodstream.
“Accumulations of toxins, like indoxyl sulfate and trimethylamine, are associated with chronic kidney and cardiovascular diseases,” Gibbons warns.
The average individual produces 3,500-3,800 kilograms (7,700-8,400 pounds) of stool in their lifetime. – Photo credit: Getty
Regular bowel movements lead to similar yet subtly different biological processes.
“Individuals with diarrhea often show elevated levels of systemic inflammation, such as C-reactive protein,” he clarifies. “I noticed a stress marker in the liver that ended up in the bloodstream.”
Of course, there are natural variations in how often people experience bowel movements. Most people recognize when their patterns change, but many healthcare providers aren’t overly concerned.
Gibbons states that the general consensus among clinicians is that unless changes are extreme, treatment may not be necessary.
“However, we argue that variations might be worth investigating,” he says. “Aiming for a consistent schedule of once a day or every other day is important. Deviating from this pattern can raise potential risk factors for chronic illnesses and aging.”
Examining Stool Texture and Consistency
Another way to evaluate your stool is by observing its characteristics. The Bristol Stool Scale serves as a visual guide to assessing stool health and can be quite revealing.
Developed in 1997 as a diagnostic tool, the scale categorizes stool into seven types—from small, hard pellets to watery diarrhea.
In addition to frequency, we should also seek a healthy balance in terms of shape and consistency. A smooth, sausage-like stool that passes easily is considered ideal.
It’s also necessary to notice the effort involved during bowel movements. Stool should not feel like a strenuous ordeal, nor should it feel like it’s happening all at once.
Read More:
Emphasizing a Healthy Lifestyle
If you find yourself consistently outside these Goldilocks zones, researchers suggest several strategies.
Gibbons and his colleagues discovered that individuals who fall into the beneficial higher frequency category tend to lead healthier lifestyles.
“They consume more fruits and vegetables, are more physically active, and tend to hydrate better,” he mentions. “These three factors can make a significant difference.”
He also recommends exploring new health trends. “Consider taking dietary fiber supplements or incorporating flaxseed and chia seeds into your meals. These can be quite beneficial.”
Be wary of certain wellness trends as well. Popular weight loss medications like Wegovy and Ozempic may offer multiple health benefits, but Gibbons cautions that they can slow intestinal transit time, potentially affecting frequency.
“High-protein diets can also pose risks due to the byproducts generated from protein fermentation. There is considerable evidence suggesting links to type 2 diabetes, particularly in younger individuals.”
So the next time you find yourself on the throne, consider it your personal health assessment.
Meet Our Experts
Professor Shawn Gibbons is an associate professor at the Institute of Systems Biology and leads the Gibbons Lab, which focuses on microbiology, ecology, and medicine. He earned his PhD in Biophysics from the University of Chicago in 2015. His expertise lies in microbial ecology, evolution, complex adaptive systems, bioinformatics, and the human microbiota.
On Monday, 20 state attorneys general filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration concerning mass shootings and the dismantling of agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
The legal action, spearheaded by New York Attorney General Letitia James, asserts that the administration breached numerous laws and circumvented Congressional oversight by attempting to streamline HHS from 28 agencies to 15, while planning to lay off about 20,000 employees.
James stated, “This administration hasn’t streamlined the federal government. They’re blocking it. If you terminate scientists researching infectious diseases, silence medical professionals caring for pregnant individuals, shut down programs supporting firefighters and miners, or hinder children’s development, you’re not improving America’s health. You’re jeopardizing countless lives.”
The restructuring announcement by HHS came in late March as part of the Department of Government Efficiency’s initiative to reduce the federal workforce. The cuts included layoffs of 3,500 employees from the Food and Drug Administration, 2,400 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and 1,200 from the National Institutes of Health.
HHS indicated it will establish a new institution, referred to as the Healthy American regime, to take on some responsibilities formerly held by the agencies being dissolved, including programs focused on mental, environmental, or worker health.
Nonetheless, the lawsuit claims that the recent cuts have “severe, complicated, prolonged, and potentially irreversible” effects. The Attorney General emphasized in a press release that the restructuring impaired HHS’s ability to perform critical functions, disrupting mental health and substance abuse services, weakening responses to HIV/AIDS, and diminishing support for low-income families and individuals with disabilities.
Specifically, the Trump administration has let go of staff responsible for maintaining federal poverty guidelines, which are essential for determining food aid, housing assistance, and Medicaid eligibility, as well as reducing teams managing the low-income housing energy assistance program.
Half of the workforce from the Department of Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services—one of the dissolved HHS agencies—has also been terminated. Consequently, the Attorney General reported that national investigations into drug use and health have come to a halt, and the federal team overseeing the 988 suicide and crisis lifeline has vanished.
The CDC has lost multiple labs that track infections, including those focusing on infectious diseases and tobacco control, as mentioned in the release. The team also monitored maternal mortality rates in the U.S. Additionally, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health has been disbanded, which previously played a role in screening workers’ health issues related to toxic exposure.
The Trump administration asserts that certain programs, such as the World Trade Center Health Program—which provides screening and treatment for 9/11-related illnesses—and health surveillance initiatives for coal miners will persist under the Healthy American administration. However, many NIOSH employees associated with these programs are facing administrative leave and potential termination by June, as indicated in an internal government memo obtained by NBC News.
The lawsuit filed on Monday demands that HHS dismantle the agency and cease its efforts to restore the vital programs that have been lost.
This lawsuit is not the first to contest the federal government’s downsizing efforts. A coalition of 23 attorneys general previously sued HHS in April over the termination of approximately $11 billion in public health funding. A federal judge temporarily blocked these cuts but has yet to issue a final ruling.
Two independent healthcare practices in Minnesota once aimed for expansion but have faced challenges recovering from the significant cyberattacks on the UnitedHealth Group Payment System over the past year.
Odom Health & Wellness, specializing in sports medicine and rehabilitation, and Dillman Clinic & Lab, a family medicine provider, are among numerous medical offices that faced sudden financial disruption last year. Cyberattacks on Change Healthcare, a division of United, have crippled many healthcare payment systems nationwide for months.
Billions of dollars have been lent to medical practices short on cash, with repayment demands now surfacing.
Odom and Dillman are filing a lawsuit against United in U.S. District Court in Minneapolis, alleging negligence related to the cyberattack and claiming they are incurring excessive costs due to its aftermath.
Furthermore, Odom and Dillman alleged in their court documents that their insurer, UnitedHealthcare, denied claims on the grounds of late filings despite covering patient care.
Lawmakers view the disruption caused by these attacks as a consequence of United’s relentless pursuit of acquisitions, including Change and various medical practices. This widespread upheaval highlights the deep entrenchment of United’s subsidiaries in the national healthcare framework.
“This serves as another reminder that the swift integration of major healthcare firms may be doing more harm than good,” stated Sen. Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon, regarding the financial strain imposed on practices by these cyberattacks.
Last month, the American Medical Association expressed its concerns to Optum, the United Health division owning Change, regarding the pressure many practices face to repay loans despite ongoing financial hardships due to the attacks.
Since March 2024, Change has provided $9 billion in interest-free loans to over 10,000 healthcare providers, including $569,680 for Odom and $157,600 for Dillman.
A year later, approximately $5.5 billion has been repaid, according to United’s court application. About 3,500 practices, including Odom, Dillman, and six other plaintiffs, had yet to repay as of April 1. Numerous other practices and patients have also initiated lawsuits against United.
In its statement, Change emphasized it would “proactively work with providers to identify flexible repayment plans tailored to their specific circumstances.”
“We’ve also collaborated with UnitedHealthcare to ensure claims are reviewed considering the challenges we’ve faced, including waiving timely submission requirements for plans under its governance.”
Change drew parallels between its loan recovery efforts and those of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Following the cyberattack, CMS expedited payments to practices to assist with Medicare claims pending due to the attack. They offered accelerated payments to reclaim funds from Medicare claims.
In court filings, United reported data indicating that a minor percentage of Odom and Dillman’s healthcare claims were rejected due to being “too early,” although denials escalated after the cyberattacks.
Denouncing the plaintiff’s motion as a “group shakedown,” UnitedHealth urged the district court to dismiss a request for an injunction regarding loan repayment, asserting the right to manage relations with thousands of other loan recipients.
United contended that the injunction might permit other medical practices to “hold billions of dollars hostage.”
Dr. Megan Dillman, a specialist in pediatrics and internal medicine, opened her practice in Lakeville, Minnesota in 2022, aiming to “restore joy in practicing medicine.” She argued that her healthcare business spends significantly more time with patients compared to the average 15 minutes doctors are increasingly limited to.
“Without our existence, there are patients who might not be here today,” Dr. Dillman noted, referencing a cancer diagnosis that was missed by another hurried physician.
Her husband, Richard Dillman, manages the business operations of her practice and has called for United to fulfill its repayment obligations.
“I would rather endure the Special Forces Qualification Courses than face this situation again,” remarked former Green Beret Dillman.
At the time of the cyberattack, Change’s Medical Building Clearinghouse processed approximately 45% of healthcare transactions across the nation, amounting to around $2 trillion annually. The company had to pause services in February 2024 to mitigate damage, halting a significant portion of the healthcare system’s cash flow.
There was a breach of sensitive personal information, marking the largest breach recorded in U.S. healthcare history. In January, United increased the number of individuals whose personal data was compromised to 109 million from approximately 100 million previously reported.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Civil Rights Office commenced an investigation in March 2024 concerning the ransomware attack. An agency spokesperson noted that they “do not comment on ongoing or potential investigations.” Some healthcare firms may face penalties for violations related to patient data mishandling.
Company executives reported that hackers exploited compromised login credentials, utilizing a portal that didn’t require multifactor authentication.
United authorities confirmed that they paid a $22 million ransom to a Russian cybercriminal who claimed responsibility for the attack. In a January revenue report, the cyberattack was stated to have cost the company $3.1 billion.
Healthcare reimbursements did not start flowing more freely through Change until June 2024, with United noting that the full restoration of services took time and some areas were still not back to 100%.
During a May 2024 Congressional hearing, a senator criticized United CEO Andrew Witty regarding the company’s response to the cyberattacks and the resulting struggles faced by thousands of providers. Witty testified that the company “will not pursue repayment until providers confirm that operations are back to normal.”
The repayment terms stipulate that Change does not require payments until “the affected billing and/or payment processing services have resumed during the service disruption period.”
The interpretation of “to be dealt with” is central to the ongoing lawsuit.
Change initiated collection attempts from Dillman and Odom, which were described in court documents as a series of increasingly aggressive letters. Both practices have been changed, barring repayment and rejecting offers for repayment plans. Change subsequently demanded full repayment in January, threatening to withhold future health care reimbursements.
“It’s disheartening, but not surprising, that United Health Group has chosen to prioritize profits over the well-being of families and small businesses,” stated Wyden, who led the Senate inquiry into the cyberattacks.
The AMA urged the company to negotiate “individual and realistic repayment plans” with each practice.
Dr. Katherine Mazzola, who operates pediatric neurology and neurosurgery practices in New Jersey, is among many others contesting United over loans.
“In my view, Optum operates like a loan shark that seeks swift collection,” remarked Dr. Mazzola, a non-plaintiff in the case against United.
Dr. Mazzola received a loan of $535,000 and later informed Change that she was unable to repay it. Despite suggesting a payment schedule, there was no response. Consequently, she began paying $10,000 monthly in January. Nevertheless, without notice, she reported that United started to withhold her reimbursements.
Currently, Dr. Odom employs around 110 individuals, many of whom assist seniors in assisted living facilities. He contended that if his practice were forced to immediately repay the Change loan, at least 22 staff members would need to be laid off. Dr. Odom asserted that this could hinder care availability, reduce services, and create further economic challenges.
“We are navigating a challenging battle as a small firm,” declared Odom President Dr. Meghan Klein, emphasizing the significant impact the financial situation poses for his company compared to United’s. “These are lives we are concerned about.”
According to the lawsuit, Dillman Clinic, which relies on United Insurance reimbursements for about 25% of its income, could face bankruptcy if compelled to fully repay the loan.
They claimed Dillman would risk losing all assets, including homes, vehicles, and retirement savings, if bankruptcy ensues.
“Part of my purpose in being here is to manage my schedule,” Dr. Dillman mentioned. However, the chaos stemming from the cyberattacks consumes their time, leaving little for their six-year-old daughter.
“I have just an hour to spend with her,” Dr. Dillman said, “I am missing out on her childhood.”
Sybil Shainwald, a pioneering advocate for women whose health was irrevocably affected by pharmaceuticals and medical devices for nearly fifty years, passed away at her Manhattan residence on April 9th. She was 96 years old.
Her daughter, Laurie Scheinwald Krieger, announced her passing, although it hasn’t received widespread coverage.
At 48, Scheinwald graduated from law school and joined the New York City law firm Schlesinger & Finz, where she represented Joyce Bichler, a survivor of rare clear-cell adenocarcinoma, linked to medications her mother took during pregnancy. The synthetic hormone DES, marketed under various brand names, was intended to prevent miscarriage.
At the age of 18, Bichler underwent a radical hysterectomy, which removed two-thirds of her ovaries, fallopian tubes, and vagina. She was among thousands known as “DES daughters,” suffering due to their mothers’ medication use, and sued Eli Lilly, a major drug manufacturer, for damages.
In 1947, when the Food and Drug Administration approved DES for use in pregnant women, studies had already shown its cancer-causing effects in mice and rats. It was known to potentially harm the fetus beyond the placenta, yet companies marketed it as a safe treatment for various pregnancy issues, continuing even after evidence of its ineffectiveness surfaced.
By the late 1960s, clear cell adenocarcinoma was increasingly diagnosed in young women whose mothers had taken DES. In 1971, the FDA advised doctors against prescribing it. By then, the National Cancer Institute estimated that 5-10 million women and their children had been exposed to DES.
Bichler’s case arrived in court in 1979, part of numerous lawsuits. However, it faced challenges in proving which manufacturer was liable for the drug. Approximately 300 companies produced DES.
Bichler’s legal team proposed a groundbreaking argument that all manufacturers shared liability. After five days of deliberation, the jury agreed, and Bichler was awarded $500,000 in damages.
Scheinwald’s contribution was pivotal. Bichler stated in an interview, “I was a shy young woman discussing my reproductive health publicly. It was daunting. Sybil was the only woman who understood.”
On the fourth day of jury deliberation, Eli Lilly proposed a $100,000 settlement. Most of her legal team suggested Bichler consider accepting it.
“Sybil pulled my husband and me aside and asked, ‘What do you and Mike wish to do? Don’t be afraid,'” recalled Bichler. “Sybil empowered us to reject that offer.”
She added, “I did what needed to be done, but it was Sybil’s support that made it achievable.”
By the early 1980s, Scheinwald established her own office and became the leading legal representative for DES daughters. Over the next four decades, she represented hundreds of women.
In 1996, she won a class action lawsuit that secured a fund for the affected daughters, funded by pharmaceutical companies to cover medical expenses, counseling, and educational outreach.
Additionally, she fought against other harmful products affecting women.
She represented a woman whose silicone breast implants led to autoimmune issues, women harmed by the Dalkon Shield intrauterine device, and those affected by Norplant. She once urged the FDA not to approve Norplant due to potential unknown side effects.
She also assisted women internationally in securing compensation for false breast implants and Dalkon Shield. She was particularly concerned that African women were often uninformed about the risks associated with Dalkon Shield, which continued to be prescribed even after being withdrawn from the U.S. market.
Additionally, she addressed another long-acting contraceptive that, like DES, was tied to cancer in animal studies, which had been prescribed for decades starting in the late 1960s. This contraceptive was given to women across around 80 countries, disproportionately affecting marginalized populations, including poor and disabled women. She viewed it as a form of dangerous population control. However, it wasn’t approved by the FDA as a birth control option until 1992.
“Birth control pills have always been about drugs and devices for women,” Scheinwald stated in an oral history session conducted by the Veteran Feminists of America in 2019. “We stake our lives on these medical interventions.”
“We’ve tirelessly fought for representation,” noted Cindy Pearson, former executive director of the National Women’s Health Network. “Sybil was fearless in addressing any issue, regardless of the power of the opposition.”
Sybil Brodkin was born on April 27, 1928, in New York City. She was the sole daughter of Anne (Zimmerman) Brodkin and Morris Brodkin, who owned a restaurant. She graduated from James Madison High School in Brooklyn at the age of 16 and went on to William & Mary University in Williamsburg, Virginia, earning a Bachelor of Arts in History in 1948.
She married Sidney Scheinwald, an accountant and consumer advocate. He served as the Associate Director of Consumer Union in 1960, now known as Consumer Reports.
Sybil earned her Master’s in History from Columbia University in 1972 and received funding to create the oral history of the consumer movement at the Consumer Movement Research Center, which she directed until 1978.
At 44, she began attending New York Law School as a night student, ultimately completing her law degree in 1976. She aspired to study law while pursuing her history degree at Columbia, but the joint program did not come to fruition; as she recounted in her 2019 oral history, “You’d be replacing a man who had practiced for forty years.”
Scheinwald was still actively addressing issues up until her death.
She is survived by her daughter Krieger, another daughter, Louise Nasr, a son, Robert, brother Barry Schwartz, four grandchildren, and five great-grandchildren. Her husband Scheinwald passed away in 2003, and her daughter Marsha Scheinwald died in 2013.
“My practice involves suing corporations on behalf of women, ensuring that my work continues for many years to come,” Scheinwald remarked in a 2016 speech. “And regrettably, I won’t run short of clients.”
The Trump administration has terminated over $800 million in research related to the health of LGBTQ individuals, halting studies on cancers and viruses that predominantly impact sexual minority groups, and has intensified efforts to combat the resurgence of sexually transmitted infections, as highlighted by a New York Times analysis of federal data.
Reflecting its strong opposition to diversity initiatives and adolescent gender care, the administration has actively sought to eliminate standard measures and research affecting transgender health.
This crackdown reaches beyond specific issues, curtailing essential medical research on diseases disproportionately affecting LGBTQ populations, which constitute nearly 10% of American adults.
An examination of grant-related reviews revealed that out of 669 grants, 323—almost half—were fully or partially canceled in early May regarding LGBTQ health.
Federal authorities had earmarked $806 million for projects that were canceled, many of which were anticipated to generate additional funding in the coming years.
Numerous research institutions faced funding losses. This includes not just high-profile targets like Johns Hopkins and Columbia but also public universities in the South and Midwest like Ohio State University and the University of Alabama at Birmingham.
Florida State University has canceled a research initiative worth $41 million, which included significant efforts to prevent HIV among adolescents and young adults, who account for the majority of new infections in the U.S. each year.
In a cancellation letter issued in recent months, the NIH justified the reductions by stating that LGBTQ projects “no longer align with agency priorities.” In some cases, the agency claimed that the canceled research was “based on gender identity,” resulting in “unscientific” outcomes that disregarded “biological reality.”
Other termination letters indicated that researchers erred by focusing on “artificial and unscientific categories” primarily driven by vague equity objectives.
These funding cuts come after a decade of increased federal support for LGBTQ research, encouraged by the NIH during the Obama administration, which welcomed grant proposals that focused on sexual and gender minorities.
Supporters of President Trump contend that much of this research is tainted by ideological bias.
“There was a trend of scientific malpractice to align conclusions with preconceived notions,” stated Roger Severino from the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank influential in shaping Trump administration policies.
“It was founded on the erroneous belief that biology is almost irrelevant, alongside the political agenda that sought to normalize the idea of changing one’s sex.”
Researchers stated that canceling research on a broad range of diseases affecting sexual and gender minorities has effectively created a perception of a hierarchy among patients, deeming some as less valuable.
“Certain segments of the U.S. population should not be considered inferior as subjects of research,” remarked Simon Rosser, a professor at the University of Minnesota, whose lab focused on cancer in LGBTQ individuals before significant funding was withdrawn.
“This is a clear example of bias,” he emphasized. “It’s a form of prejudice in scientific research.”
The cancellation of these projects is a striking indication of the widespread dismantling of the research framework that has supported medical study in the United States for the past 80 years.
In addition to halting studies, federal officials have delayed grant payments, postponed review meetings, and expanded new grant awards.
Recently, Trump proposed slashing the NIH budget from approximately $48 billion to $27 billion, citing part of a broader agenda perceived as aimed at combating “radical gender ideology.”
The legality of these terminations remains uncertain. Two separate lawsuits challenge the broad cancellation of grants, with a group of researchers and others arguing that the Trump administration lacked a lawful basis for these cuts in 16 states.
The White House and the Department of Health and Human Services have not provided comments upon request.
Health department spokesperson Andrew Nixon stated to the Daily Signal, a conservative outlet, last month that the shifts which “alleviate politicized gender and identity studies” were “in line with the president’s executive order.”
In a statement, the NIH commented: “NIH is taking steps to terminate research funding that does not align with NIH and HHS priorities. We are committed to reinstating traditions that support evidence-based science.”
Lost funding has hindered critical studies on antibiotic resistance, undiagnosed autism among sexual minorities, and specific cancers that disproportionately affect these groups. The funding cuts have resulted in layoffs at several LGBTQ-focused laboratories that were poised for expansion.
Historically, the NIH has reserved grant cancellations for rare instances of research misconduct or potential participant harm. Scientists now argue that the recent cuts are doing more harm than protection for research participants.
They indicated the cessation of clinical trials where federal funding is short, affecting the care of volunteer participants.
“We are halting initiatives that prevent suicide and sexual violence,” remarked Katie Edwards, a professor at the University of Michigan, whose funding for various clinical trials involving LGBTQ individuals has been canceled.
The HIV studies have been particularly severely impacted.
The NIH has terminated major grants to the Adolescent Medical Exam Network for HIV/AIDS interventions, a program that established precursors for using medication therapy in adolescents to prevent infections.
The regimen known as pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, is recognized as a promising strategy to reduce HIV transmission in youth.
The funding reductions threaten to amplify HIV transmission among young sexual minority men using stimulants as they aim to monitor a continuous trial of products that prevent both HIV and unplanned pregnancies, alongside sexual health counseling and behavioral therapy.
With the termination of numerous other HIV studies, these cuts are undermining Trump’s aims established during his prior term to eradicate the national HIV epidemic within a decade, according to scientists.
The NIH has also halted efforts relating to other sexually transmitted infections.
Dr. Matthew Spinelli, an infectious disease researcher at the University of California, San Francisco, was in the midst of clinical trials on common antibiotics for post-exposure prophylaxis aimed at preventing syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia infections.
The trial involved a randomized study assigning participants to different antibiotic regimens to assess metabolism.
However, health officials ceased funding for the March study, objecting to research based on “gender identity.” Consequently, Dr. Spinelli could not apply federal funds to monitor participants already on antibiotics.
Moreover, he risked wasting thousands of doses of antibiotics acquired using taxpayer money. Dr. Spinelli warned that discontinuing efforts against infections like syphilis and HIV will allow new outbreaks to arise.
“The HIV epidemic is poised to surge again as a direct result of these actions,” Dr. Spinelli stated. “This is catastrophic for the communities affected.”
Despite a recent focus on the negative consequences of medical transition, federal officials have canceled several studies examining the potential risks of hormone therapies. These projects aimed to understand whether such treatments could elevate the chances of breast cancer, cardiovascular disease, brain development issues, or HIV.
Other canceled grants sought to address mental health challenges in transgender individuals. Transgender youth, who currently represent around 3% of high school students, report significantly higher instances of persistent grief and suicide attempts.
For Dr. Edwards at the University of Michigan, funding has been halted for one of her six canceled studies examining how depression and self-harm among transgender teens can be mitigated.
Another study aimed at promoting supportive care for LGBTQ youth and reducing dating violence and alcohol consumption among these individuals.
The NIH categorizes studies strictly by specific illnesses, complicating efforts for agencies to estimate budgets for LGBTQ health research. Nonetheless, a report from March suggested that such studies accounted for less than 1% of the NIH’s portfolio over a decade.
The Times sought to quantify the scale of funding cuts in LGBTQ medical research by assessing grant titles. Research summaries were available for each of the 669 grants the Trump administration identified as fully or partially canceled in early May.
The review included studies designed to recruit participants from sexual and gender minorities, extending beyond grants strictly tied to LGBTQ issues and highlighting significant health disparities.
Grants related to diseases outside of the LGBTQ scope were excluded from this assessment.
The reduction in funding has hollowed out fields that not only flourished over the past decade but also encompassed a variety of health threats beyond HIV.
Researchers claim young academics have lost their positions in LGBTQ-related research and are erasing traces of their work from online profiles.
Brittany Charlton, a professor at Harvard School of Public Health, had five grants canceled, including one examining the notable uptick in stillbirth rates among LGBTQ women.
Discontinuing research into health threats impacting gender and sexual minorities ultimately affects the broader population, she stated. “When those around you become ill, it impacts you too, even if you believe it doesn’t,” she concluded.
Menopause marks a significant transition in a woman’s life when the ovaries cease hormone production, but the journey leading up to this milestone can span several years. This extended phase is known as perimenopause.
On average, menopause occurs around age 51, meaning many women begin noticing symptoms of perimenopause in their mid-40s. These symptoms can vary greatly from one individual to another. While hot flashes and irregular heavy periods are commonly cited, not everyone experiences them.
Additionally, even within the same person, symptoms can differ in type, frequency, and intensity.
More than 75% of women report experiencing a range of symptoms, with about 25% indicating that these symptoms significantly impact their quality of life. Common issues include sleep disturbances, anxiety, and weight gain.
Unfortunately, these symptoms are often overlooked or dismissed by professionals as resulting from other medical conditions.
Symptoms and Treatment
Insomnia is often one of the earliest symptoms, potentially starting in one’s late 30s or early 40s. Research shows up to 60% of women over 40 are affected by sleep problems.
Changes in mood are also common, with women experiencing feelings of anger, irritability, sadness, and depression.
Other possible symptoms include brain fog, memory lapses, difficulty concentrating, joint and muscle pain, vaginal dryness, decreased libido, and discomfort.
Many women hesitate to seek medical help due to embarrassment or a desire to avoid making a fuss. While consulting a healthcare provider is crucial, currently, there are no official menopause or perimenopause tests for women older than 45.
This highlights the importance of tracking symptoms and noting when they occur. By discussing these experiences with your doctor, women can collaboratively determine the best treatment options.
For instance, there is robust evidence supporting the benefits of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) as endorsed by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, particularly for alleviating hot flashes and night sweats.
HRT has also been shown to help some women achieve better sleep and may alleviate negative cognitive symptoms. Additionally, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) can assist with management and stabilize mood and sleep patterns.
However, prescribing clonidine and antidepressants as first-line treatments is considered outdated.
Other studies indicate that HRT may also help maintain bone mineral density and reduce the risk of osteoporotic fractures later in life.
HRT encompasses various medications, including estrogen, combinations of estrogen and progestogen (another female hormone), and testosterone. These can be administered through patches or gels.
The type and dosage of HRT depend on the specific condition being managed, individual risks, and personal preferences. There is no definitive cutoff for starting HRT; the benefits must outweigh perceived risks.
New Research
Women undergoing HRT also experience a reduced risk of colorectal cancer and type 2 diabetes. Studies have indicated that starting estrogens as part of HRT early in the perimenopausal phase may further lower the risk of coronary heart disease and Alzheimer’s disease.
Specifically, the cardiovascular disease prevention benefits are notable for women who begin HRT in their 50s as compared to those who start after age 60.
However, initiating HRT solely for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or dementia is not recommended. There are known risks associated with certain types of HRT, including an elevated risk of uterine cancer when estrogen-only HRT is used without progestogens, as well as an increased risk of blood clots.
Osteoporosis generally affects older adults and postmenopausal women. HRT can help treat it. – Image credits: Science Photo Library
The primary concern remains breast cancer. This area is complex due to variable risks linked to historical clinical trial data, along with personal and family health histories, and lifestyle factors such as alcohol intake and obesity.
This variability can impact the clinical significance of the data for each individual.
Current evidence suggests that estrogen-only HRTs have little to no correlation with breast cancer risk, while combined HRTs may increase the risk by 3-4 cases per 1,000 women.
Alternative Treatment
Local estrogen HRT, applied topically, has proven very effective for managing vulvar and vaginal pain and dryness, as well as recurrent urinary tract infections.
Moreover, testosterone treatments paired with estrogens may benefit some women with low sexual desire.
Unfortunately, HRT isn’t a panacea. A review of current clinical trials shows no significant improvements in cognitive function, bone density, body composition, strength, or psychological health for women undergoing treatment.
Many women may opt against HRT, particularly those with a history of breast cancer.
Previously, alternative treatments were limited, primarily focusing on antidepressants and clonidine. These options have shown limited effectiveness and significant side effects. Recently, the new non-hormonal medication Fezolinetant has received approval for managing blood flow issues.
Natural Relief
In addition to medication, lifestyle and behavioral modifications—like improving sleep, increasing physical activity, and adopting better nutrition—carry no associated risks and can yield significant benefits.
Starting with sleep is often beneficial. When well-rested, focusing on enhancing activity and diet becomes more manageable.
Implementing good sleep hygiene practices, avoiding screens before bedtime, maintaining a consistent sleep routine, and utilizing CBT have all been shown to mitigate insomnia and other sleep disorders in women undergoing menopause.
Increasing activity levels can also be incredibly beneficial. Strength training exercises help build and maintain muscle and bone density, which helps prevent osteoporosis, enhances flexibility, and reduces insulin resistance.
Aerobic activities such as running, swimming, and cycling can improve long-term heart and brain health. Maintaining a balanced diet rich in fresh foods while limiting ultra-processed items is advantageous at any life stage.
Although menopause can be challenging, various proven interventions can assist in making this transition smoother.
Menopause marks a pivotal moment in a woman’s life when the ovaries cease hormone production, but the transition leading up to this significant event can span several years, known as perimenopause.
On average, women experience menopause around age 51, resulting in most women starting to notice perimenopause symptoms in their mid-40s. These symptoms can differ greatly among women, with hot flashes and irregular heavy periods often recognized as indicators, although not everyone experiences the same symptoms.
Additionally, even within the same individual, symptoms can vary in type, frequency, and intensity.
Over 75% of women report experiencing a range of symptoms, with about 25% stating that their symptoms significantly impact their quality of life. Symptoms can include sleep disturbances, anxiety, and weight gain.
It’s worth noting that these symptoms have historically been overlooked and often attributed to other health conditions by experts.
Symptoms and Treatment
Insomnia is frequently one of the first symptoms, which can begin in a woman’s late 30s or early 40s. Research indicates that as many as 60% of women over 40 experience insomnia.
Other symptoms may encompass mood swings, with women often feeling persistent anger, irritability, sadness, and depression.
In addition, symptoms may include cognitive issues like brain fog, memory problems, difficulty concentrating, joint and muscle pain, vaginal dryness, decreased libido, gender dyscomfort, and pain.
Despite this, many women delay seeking medical attention due to feelings of embarrassment or a desire not to “make a fuss.” While it’s crucial to obtain medical guidance, there are currently no specific menopause tests for women over 45.
This underscores the importance of tracking and documenting symptoms to share with healthcare providers, aiding in the determination of the best treatment options.
For instance, there is substantial evidence supporting the benefits of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) in accordance with the guidelines from the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence, particularly for alleviating hot flashes and night sweats.
HRT has also been shown to assist some women in achieving better sleep and can sometimes ease negative cognitive symptoms. Additionally, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) may help manage blood flow issues, stabilizing mood and sleep patterns.
It is now considered outdated to use medications like clonidine and antidepressants as first-line treatments.
Other studies suggest that HRT can also be beneficial in maintaining bone mineral density and reducing the risk of osteoporotic fractures later in life.
HRT encompasses various types of medications, including estrogen, combinations of estrogen and progestogen, and testosterone, which can be administered through patches or gels.
The appropriate type and dosage of HRT depend on the specific condition being treated, individual risk factors, and personal preferences. There is no strict age cut-off for starting HRT; rather, it should be guided by the benefits outweighing perceived risks.
Read more:
New Research
Women undergoing HRT may also benefit from a decreased risk of colorectal cancer and type 2 diabetes. Research indicates that initiating estrogens as part of HRT early in the perimenopausal phase could further lower the risk of coronary heart disease and Alzheimer’s disease.
Notably, the cardiovascular disease prevention benefits are most pronounced among women who commence HRT in their 50s, compared to those who start after 60.
However, HRT is not recommended solely for the prevention of cardiovascular disease and dementia due to known risks associated with certain HRT treatments, including the possibility of uterine cancer when estrogen-only HRT is used without protective progestogens, which does not elevate blood clot risks.
Osteoporosis generally affects older adults and postmenopausal women. HRT can help treat it. – Image credits: Science Photo Library
The primary concern remains breast cancer prevalence, a complex issue influenced by varying risks outlined in clinical trial data, individual and family history, as well as lifestyle factors such as alcohol consumption and obesity.
This directly impacts the clinical relevance of the data for individual patients.
Current evidence suggests that estrogen-only HRTs have little to no association with increased breast cancer risk, while combined HRTs may correlate with an increased risk of 3-4 additional cases per 1,000 women.
Alternative Treatments
Topical local estrogen HRT has proven highly effective in managing and preventing significant vulvar and vaginal pain and dryness, as well as recurrent urinary tract infections.
Moreover, testosterone treatments alongside estrogens may assist women experiencing low sexual desire.
Nonetheless, HRT cannot serve as a one-size-fits-all solution. A review of current clinical trials reveals no significant enhancements in cognitive function, bone density, body composition, strength, or psychological health among women undergoing treatment.
Additionally, many women may prefer to avoid HRT, particularly those with a history of breast cancer.
Previously, alternative treatments were sparse, primarily revolving around antidepressants and clonidine, both of which have demonstrated limited effectiveness and notable side effects. However, a new non-hormonal medication, Fezolinetant, has recently been approved to manage blood flow issues.
Natural Relief
In addition to medication, lifestyle and behavioral modifications—such as sleep, physical activity, and nutrition—carry no associated risks and can yield significant benefits.
Improving sleep is often an excellent starting point, as restorative sleep makes it easier to enhance activity levels and diet.
Establishing good sleep hygiene, avoiding screens before bedtime, maintaining a consistent sleep routine, and practicing CBT have been shown effective in addressing insomnia and other sleep disorders affecting women in the menopause transition.
Elevating physical activity levels can also be tremendously beneficial. Engaging in strength training exercises helps build and maintain muscle and bone density, aiding in the prevention of osteoporosis, while promoting flexibility and reducing insulin resistance.
Aerobic exercises such as running, swimming, and cycling can further enhance heart and brain health. At any stage in life, adhering to a balanced diet rich in fresh foods while limiting ultra-processed products is advantageous.
Although menopause can be challenging, a range of effective interventions can ease this transitional period.
After protests from scientists and health experts, federal health officials said Thursday it would restore funding for the Women’s Health Initiative, one of the largest and longest research into women’s health to date.
The discovery of WHI and its randomized controlled trials has helped to change medical practices, form clinical guidelines, and prevent hundreds of thousands of cardiovascular diseases and breast cancer.
“These studies represent important contributions to our better understanding of women’s health,” said Emily G. Hilliard, a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services.
“We are currently working to fully recover funding for these important research efforts,” she added. The National Institutes of Health is deeply committed to advancing public health through rigorous gold standard research and is taking immediate steps to ensure the continuity of these studies.”
Researchers hope to use the findings to learn more about how to maintain mobility and cognitive function and slower memory loss, detect cancer faster, and predict risks for other diseases.
HHS notified research team leaders that it would end the contract for WHI’s regional center in September, but the clinical coordination center based at Fred Hatch Cancer Center in Seattle will be funded until at least January 2026.
Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat, said shutting down the trial would be “a catastrophic loss for women’s health research.”
Not only has the initiative led to significant advances in women’s health, it also “paved the way for a generation of researchers focused on women’s health. This has been overlooked for a long time and underfunded,” Murray said.
WHI includes many randomized controlled trials, contributing to over 2,000 research papers. However, it is perhaps best known in a study of hormone replacement therapy that suddenly stopped in 2002 after researchers discovered that older women who collected estrogen-progestin combinations experienced a small but significant increase in their risk of breast cancer.
Until then, there was a widespread belief that hormone replacement therapy would protect women from cardiovascular disease. However, the trial found that women were at increased risk of heart attacks, strokes, and clots, despite the combination of hormones reducing colorectal cancer and hip fractures.
Dr. Joan Manson, one of the long-term lead researchers in the study and one of the medical professors at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospitals, called the announcement of the funding cuts “sadly.”
She was given a statement by National Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. about the importance of reducing chronic illnesses in America, and the original decision to cut funds is baffling, she said.
“There is no good example of the scientific impact of research on chronic disease prevention than WHI,” Dr. Manson said.
Lessons learned Hormonal research has resulted in huge savings Researchers discovered this at medical expenses. One study found that between 2003 and 2012, roughly $35 billion was the number of cases of cancer and cardiovascular disease that were avoided. For every dollar spent on WHI, I saved $140.
One randomized trial conducted by WHI saw the effects of a low-fat diet high in fruit and vegetables. Researchers initially found a reduction in ovarian cancer alone, but long-term follow-up showed that this diet also reduces deaths from breast cancer.
Another study of calcium and vitamin D found that supplements provided slight benefits to maintain bone mass and prevent hip fractures in older women, but did not prevent other fractures or colorectal cancer.
Although the findings have affected medical guidelines, we do not currently recommend that all women take supplements regularly.
Participants in the initiative are currently between 78 and 108 years old, and some scientists have acknowledged that there could be discussions to end the trial. However, careful planning is usually given to shut down such a large-scale wide range of research.
“There’s still a lot to learn,” said Garnet Anderson, senior vice president and director of the Department of Public Health Sciences at the Fred Hatch Cancer Center and lead researcher at the initiative.
“Studying 13,000 women at age 90, what are your health needs? How do you live such a long, healthy life?” she said. “I want to know the secrets of success for healthy aging.”
Part of the reasons research began in the 1990s was the lack of information and research on women’s health and there was little evidence underlying clinical recommendations, says Marian Neuhauser, who heads the cancer prevention program at the Fred Hatch Cancer Center and chairs the WHI steering committee.
“Women are half the population,” Dr. Neuhouser said. “However, they were not included in the study. It was mostly male and the results were extrapolated to women.”
Last year presented significant challenges for Acadia Healthcare, one of the nation’s leading providers of mental health services.
A New York Times investigation in September revealed that multiple federal agencies were looking into accusations of Acadia unlawfully detaining patients in mental health hospitals. This led to a sharp decline in Acadia’s stock value and rattled investors.
Despite these troubles, Acadia’s CEO, Christopher Hunter, benefitted from the situation. As indicated in the recent financial report, he received a $1.8 million bonus from the board to deal with the “unprecedented government inquiries.” This bonus was on top of his regular compensation, exceeding $7 million in 2024.
Other top executives at Acadia, including the CFO and Legal Advisor, also received substantial bonuses, with the COO promised a bonus as well. These bonuses were given to prevent key leaders from leaving before the investigation was concluded, according to Acadia.
The board of directors at Acadia believed that retaining the current leadership team was in the best interest of the company, its patients, and communities. They emphasized the use of peer market data for evaluating performance and benchmarking.
The Times investigation uncovered that Acadia had been holding patients against their will to maximize insurance payments. This practice had started before Hunter took over as CEO in April 2022 but continued under his leadership.
Following the allegations, Acadia stated that they would vehemently deny fraud and cooperate with the investigation. Hunter assured investors that the claims of holding patients longer than necessary were false and contradicted their commitment to patient care.
After the investigation was initiated, Acadia disclosed that various government agencies, including the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission, were investigating the matter. Additionally, shareholders filed a class action lawsuit against the company, accusing them of withholding information from investors.
Issues were also uncovered in other areas of Acadia, such as a methadone clinic overbilling the government for services not rendered. Inadequate staffing levels at one of the company’s women’s facilities led to tragic incidents, as reported by The Times.
Since September, Acadia’s market value has plummeted by approximately $5 billion, now valued at around $2 billion.
Hunter’s compensation is tied to Acadia’s stock performance, but the company’s stock decline in 2024 caused him to miss his targets. Critics, like Sarah Anderson from the Institute of Policy Research, argue that linking compensation to stock prices can incentivize risky behavior and undermine performance.
Antibiotics commonly used to absorb pneumonia remove Lyme disease mice at doses 100 times lower than standard antibiotic therapy. This small dose was combined with the targeted effect of the drug on infection, meaning that the animal’s gut microbiota was largely unaffected.
Lyme disease is caused by bacteria in the genus Borelia It spreads mostly among birds and small rodents, but people can get infected via the bites of mites that have given the blood of such animals. Infections generally lead to flu-like symptoms and a “bull” rash. Without treatment, it can cause serious long-term complications such as fatigue and pain.
Standard treatment involves taking the antibiotic doxycycline twice daily at high doses for up to three weeks. This will stop the production of the proteins needed for bacteria to survive, but will not selectively target them Borelia seed. “It will cause chaos normally [gut] It says microbiome. Brandon Footlas At Northwestern University, Illinois.
Looking for a more selective alternative, Jutras and his colleagues first tested how effective it is to have more than 450 antibiotics all approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. Borrelia burgdorferi – The most common type of lab dishes that causes Lyme disease.
They then evaluated how best-performing drugs affected the growth of harmless or beneficial bacteria commonly found in people and mouse visceral organs, such as certain strains. E. coli. This revealed that piperacillin is associated with penicillin, commonly used in the treatment of pneumonia and is the most selective target. B. burgdorferi.
Next, the researchers injected 46 mice. B. burgdorferi. Three weeks later, they treated the animals with various doses of either doxycycline or piperacillin for a week. The researchers found that mice received either high doses of doxycycline or 100 times lower doses of piperacillin, with no signs of infection.
They also analyzed stools from mice before and after antibiotic treatment and found that low doses of piperacillin had little effect on bacterial levels. B. burgdorferi In the gut, high doses of doxycycline significantly altered the gut microbiota.
This is probably due to the low amount of antibiotics, which has less impact on intestinal microbial diversity and is the target action of piperacillin. “We found that using piperacillin is targeting certain proteins. B. burgdorferiit is very efficient to kill this Lyme disease agent at low concentrations, not other bacteria, to survive,” says Jutras.
But mice can respond differently to antibiotics than people, John Ocotte at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland. For example, they often break down the drug faster, which can change its effectiveness. The Jutras team hopes to test piperacillin in human Lyme disease tests in the coming years.
Vitamin K is a crucial nutrient primarily found in green vegetables and may play a vital role in safeguarding the brain from cognitive decline.
Recent research suggests that vitamins, particularly vitamin K, could help in preserving the cells of the hippocampus, which is the brain’s memory center.
In a recent study, scientists conducted an experiment where 60 middle-aged mice were fed either low or regular diets supplemented with vitamin K for six months. Subsequent behavioral tests revealed the impact of vitamin K on mouse learning and memory.
The study showed that mice lacking vitamin K struggled with memory and learning tasks. Compared to mice on a regular diet, those deficient in vitamin K had difficulty recognizing familiar objects, indicating memory loss. They also faced challenges in spatial learning tasks, as evidenced by their performance in a water maze.
Green vegetables like spinach, kale, lettuce, Brussels sprouts, broccoli, and cabbage are excellent sources of vitamin K. Avocados and kiwi fruits also contain high levels of this nutrient – Credit: Mediterranean via Getty
Further analysis of the mice’s brain tissue revealed reduced neurogenesis in the hippocampus of vitamin K-deficient mice. Neurogenesis, the process of generating new neurons, is essential for maintaining brain health and protecting against damage.
“Neurogenesis is believed to be crucial for learning and memory functions, and its impairment may contribute to cognitive decline,” stated Ton Zheng, a research scientist at Tufts’ Center for Human Nutrition (HNRCA).
In addition to reduced neurogenesis, the brains of vitamin K-deficient mice also showed signs of inflammation, further linking vitamin K deficiency to cognitive decline.
While the study highlights the importance of vitamin K, researchers emphasize the significance of obtaining nutrients from a balanced diet rather than relying on supplements.
“It’s essential for people to consume a healthy diet rich in vegetables,” advised Professor Sarah Booth, senior author of the study and director of the HNRCA.
Most individuals typically obtain sufficient vitamin K from their diet, with sources like spinach, kale, peas, Brussels sprouts, broccoli, cabbage, parsley, avocados, and kiwi. However, older adults are more prone to vitamin K deficiency.
Engaging in regular and extended bouts of walking can help shield you from abnormal heart rhythms, heart attacks, heart diseases, and strokes.
Recent research published in Heart, a publication owned by the British Medical Journal, supports this notion. According to the study, adults who maintained a brisk walking pace of over four miles per hour (mph) were 43% less likely to develop heart rhythm abnormalities over a 13-year period.
For many people, a pace of 3.5 mph is typical, so walking at 4 mph may feel more energetic. It’s a deliberate pace that slightly elevates your heart rate and breathing, but still allows for conversation.
“Individuals who perceived their normal walking pace as average (3-4 mph) or active (>4 mph) experienced a reduced risk of heart rhythm abnormalities,” stated Professor Jill Perl, the Henry Mechanic Professor of Public Health at the University of Glasgow and senior author of the study, as reported by BBC Science Focus.
Furthermore, even minor lifestyle changes, such as walking at an average pace for at least five minutes daily, were shown to yield significant benefits according to the study’s findings.
Most of us walk at speeds of 3.5 mph or 130 bpm. This is about the pace of the song that got me hooked on the senses of BJ Thomas. – Credit: Solstock via Getty
The study included data from 420,925 participants from the UK Biobank, of which 81,956 individuals tracked their walking habits using activity monitors.
After 13 years, approximately 9% of participants developed heart rhythm abnormalities, such as atrial fibrillation, tachycardia, and bradycardia.
Individuals who spent more time walking at an average or active pace were found to have lower odds of developing these abnormalities compared to those with less walking activity.
It was estimated that around 36% of the benefits associated with brisk walking and heart health could be attributed to its positive impact on risk factors for heart disease.
“Brisk walking can help lower blood pressure, cholesterol levels, and reduce inflammation in the body,” explained Professor Perl.
While the study had limitations, including its reliance on self-reported data and a predominantly white participant pool, the results emphasize the potential benefits of incorporating regular brisk walking into one’s routine.
Read more:
About Our Experts:
Professor Jill Perl holds the Henry Mechanic Chair in Public Health at the University of Glasgow. She also serves as an honorary public health consultant for the Greater Glasgow and Clyde Health Commission. Prior to her current role, Professor Perl was a professor of epidemiology at the British Heart Foundation’s Centre for Cardiovascular Research in Glasgow. She is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh and the European Society of Cardiology.
Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. of the Department of Health and Human Services has committed to improving the health of Americans, with a particular emphasis on reducing health burdens among children. Despite this, the department recently removed the Advisory Committee on Newborn and Child Genetic Disorders.
For the past 15 years, the Advisory Committee on Hereditary Disorders in Newborns and Children has played a crucial role in recommending which conditions should be included in the universal screening panel for newborns to the health and human services secretaries.
Kennedy’s focus has been on tracing the origins of a broader spectrum of pediatric diseases such as autism, asthma, and obesity, but rare diseases, mostly genetic, remain a significant public health concern. In the United States, around 15 million children have rare diseases, most of which are genetic.
Screenings of newborns identify about 14,000 babies each year with potentially life-threatening conditions, according to the National Agency for Rare Disability (NORD). Early diagnosis at birth provides parents with valuable intervention opportunities, usually most effective before symptoms manifest.
While individual states determine which conditions to screen for, most follow the federally recommended uniform screening panel. Volunteer scientists and medical professionals on the advisory board primarily shape the screening panel with their recommendations.
Allison Herrity, senior policy analyst at NORD, expressed disappointment at the dissolution of the committee and its impact on the process of adding new conditions to the screening panel.
The Internal HHS email reviewed by NBC News confirmed the abrupt end of the committee on April 3, without any explanation. This decision has left room for speculation and hope that the committee may be reinstated to address the pressing need for identifying and treating rare genetic disorders in newborns.
Dr. Sean McCandless, Director of Genetics and Metabolism at Colorado Children’s Hospital, emphasized the importance of early diagnosis and treatment, especially for conditions like MLD and DMD, which have available therapies to improve patients’ quality of life.
However, the removal of the advisory committee poses a threat to the inclusion of new conditions in the Universal Panel. Without a structured approach like the committee, ensuring comprehensive and evidence-based screening for new conditions becomes challenging.
McCandless and other healthcare professionals have appealed to Kennedy to reinstate the advisory board to align with his vision of a healthier America. Advocates are concerned about the future of universal screening and fear disparities between states in offering comprehensive screenings.
They stress the importance of an independent body like the advisory committee to ensure that screening recommendations are based on scientific evidence rather than external influences.
There is a call for a more streamlined process for adding conditions to the screening panel to keep pace with advancements in treatments and medical knowledge, ultimately benefiting children and families affected by rare genetic disorders.
The significant federal health workers layoffs that began Tuesday will result in a substantial reduction in the scope and impact of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the world’s premier public health agency.
The Department of Health and Human Services reorganization will trim the CDC workforce by 2,400 employees, representing about 18% of the total workforce, and eliminate some core functions.
Some Democrats in Congress have criticized the reorganization of the entire HHS as potentially illegal.
“We cannot dismantle and reconstruct HHS without congressional approval,” said Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat and member of the Senate Health Committee.
“Not only is this potentially illegal, but it is also incredibly damaging, putting the health and well-being of Americans at risk,” she added.
Murray highlighted that the Trump administration has not specified which units within the CDC and other health agencies have been affected by the layoffs. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. stated last week that the layoffs would primarily impact management functions.
However, information obtained from numerous workers by the New York Times indicates that the cuts were more widespread. Scientists working on environmental health, asthma, injuries, lead poisoning, smoking, and climate change have been let go.
Researchers studying blood disorders, violence prevention, and vaccine access have also been terminated. The HIV and Sexually Transmitted Disease Agency Centre experienced the most significant staff reduction, losing around 27% of its workforce.
The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, which offers recommendations for maintaining workplace safety, has been mostly dissolved.
Public health experts noted that what remains of the CDC has been severed from its global influence, resulting in fewer resources for environmental health, occupational health, and disease prevention.
Recently, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made headlines by defending his decision to terminate thousands of employees in his department.
Last week, he announced plans to eliminate 10,000 jobs, in addition to the 10,000 positions cut during the early days of the Trump administration.
Kennedy referred to the Department of Health and Human Services as “the largest agency in the government, twice the size of the Pentagon, with a budget of $1.9 trillion.” News Nation. He suggested that the department does little to enhance the health of Americans.
Despite having a discretionary budget of around $850 billion, HHS spends more than the Department of Defense. However, experts argue that the majority of the HHS budget is not allocated to staff expenses.
According to three budget experts, a small fraction of the federal health agency budget goes towards officials’ salaries. This includes FDA staff, CDC, and NIH.
The majority of funds are spent on Medicare and Medicaid for elderly and low-income individuals, respectively. These funds support private insurance plans, hospitals, clinics, pharmaceutical companies, and more.
Melinda Bunting, a health policy professor, stated that HHS staff costs represent less than 1% of the department’s budget, despite overall spending increases.
Bobby Cogan, from the Center for Progress in America, criticized Kennedy’s depiction of HHS budgeting as “misleading.”
Kogan argued that the focus should be on the aging population, not misleading budget claims. HHS seeks to reduce federal spending by $1.8 billion annually through workforce cuts.
Another HHS institution, the administration for children and families, allocates billions to programs like Head Start and welfare support.
Christounner, from the Responsible Federal Budget Committee, estimated HHS staff costs to be less than 1% of spending, accounting for highly qualified health professionals.
While the Trump administration has focused on Medicare fraud, Congress is exploring potential fraud within Medicare Advantage Plans, involving hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Hundreds of Billions Annual dollars.
In In July 2022, Morgan Rose Hart, an aspiring veterinarian with a passion for wildlife, passed away after it was found unresponsive in the Essex mental health unit. She’s just turned 18. Diagnosed with autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), Hart’s mental health was affected by bullying, which forced her to move from school several times. She previously tried to take her life and was transferred to Harlow’s unit three weeks before her death.
Hart, from Chelmsford, Essex, passed away on July 12, 2022 after it was found unresponsive on the bathroom floor. The prevention report of future death reports issued after her questioning turned out to be overlooked, and it turns out that important checks were missed, observation records were forged, and risk assessments were not completed.
Investigation by observer And newsletter Democracy for Sale Her death has established that she is one of four, including a high-tech patient surveillance system called Oxevision, which is deployed in almost half of mental health struts across the UK.
Oxevision’s system allows you to measure the patient’s pulse rate and breathing, interfere with the patient at night, and also broadcast CCTV footage temporarily if necessary, without the need for a person to enter the room. The high-tech system can detect a patient’s breathing rate, even when the patient is covered with a futon.
Oxehealth, which was spin-out from the University of Oxford’s Institute of Biomedical Engineering in 2012, has agreed to 25 NHS mental health trasts, according to its latest account, reporting revenue of around £4.7 million by December 31, 2023.
However, in some cases, it is argued that instead of doing physical checks, staff rely too heavily on infrared camera systems to monitor vulnerable patients.
There are also concerns that systems that can glow red from corners of the room could exacerbate the pain of patients in mental health crisis, which have increased their sensitivity to monitoring or control.
Sofina, who had experience being monitored by Oxevision among patients and who asked not to use her full name, stated:
“The first thing you see when you open your eyes, the last thing you do when you fall asleep. I was just in a visually impaired state. I was completely hurt.
Advocates argue that the technology can improve safety, but this weekend there will be a call to stop the deployment of Oxevision, raising concerns about patient safety, privacy rights and the conflict of interest in research supporting its use. The campaign group said Oxevision was often installed in patients’ bedrooms without proper consent, with surveillance technology likely causing distress.
In a prevention report of future deaths issued in December 2023 after Hart’s questioning, the coroner pointed out that if a person was in the bathroom for more than three minutes, a staff member would “have to complete a face-to-face check.” Instead, “Oxevision Red Alert has been reset” by staff and Hart was not observed for 50 minutes, and was discovered to be “not responding on the bathroom floor.”
The coroner expressed concern that “some staff may have used Oxevision in their place of instead of just an aid to face-to-face observation.” The conclusion of the judge’s investigation was death from misfortune, which contributed to the contributions of negligence.
Two days before Hart’s death, Michael Nolan, 63, a warehouse operator at risk for self-harm, passed away as a mental health patient at Basildon Hospital. The study said staff used Oxevision as an alternative to physical observations and failed to carry out effective observations. The story’s verdict by the judge included the findings of inadequate training on the Oxevision system.
The following month, 27-year-old Sophie Alderman, who had a history of self-harm, passed away in a patient at Rochford Hospital under the custody of the University of Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust. Her family says the Ooshivision system caused her pain and hurt her mental health. A few months before her death, she complained about the camera in her room, but she believed it was hacked by the government.
Tammy Smith, Alderman’s mother observer: “I don’t think Oxevision is effective in keeping patients safe. It’s a major invasion of patient privacy.
“Staff aren’t properly trained or used properly on it. People have died while Oxevision is in use, and questions have been raised about its use. That’s enough to pause deployment and actually consider whether this technology will keep patients safe.”
The Care Quality Committee also raised concerns. “A sad death was found in the safety room,” said the NHS Foundation Trust’s testing report, which was released last February. [St Charles hospital in west London] If staff were not fully involved and monitored patients, they were dependent. [Oxevision] It was turned off at the time. ”
The Trust said this weekend that a “tragic death” in March 2023 led to the firing of three individuals, with the use of technology never being designed to replace responsibility and care from staff.
The Lampard study, which examines the deaths of mental health hospitalized patients under the control of the NHS Trust in Essex between January 2000 and December 2023, is being asked to investigate Oxevision.
Sophina of a former patient monitored by Oxevision.
Bindmans, a law firm representing Alderman’s family and another patient’s family, spoke to Baroness Lampard about the concerns about consent and the safety and effectiveness of the system. He said there are concerns that staff may delegate the responsibility to monitor patients to “Digital Eye.”
A review by the National Institute of Health Therapy, published in November and commissioned by the NHS England, examined nine studies on Oxevision along with other studies, finding “inadequate evidence” suggesting that inpatient mental health unit surveillance techniques achieve intended results and achieve “improve safety, improved costs, etc.”
Only one of these papers was rated as “high quality” for their methodology and no conflicts of interest were reported. All eight other studies report all conflicts of interest, all related to Oxehealth. In some cases, OxeHealth employees were co-authors of the paper.
“There’s no independent research done. There’s almost always been involvement of the companies that create and market these devices,” said Alan Simpson, professor of mental health nursing who co-authored the review.
The Stop Oxevision campaigner said he was worried about the threat that technology poses to patients’ “safety, privacy and dignity.”
Lionel Tarassenko, professor of electrical engineering at Oxford University and founder of Oxehealth, said Oxevision only intermittently broadcast CCTV footage of patients. This is up to 15 seconds, and if clinical staff respond to alerts, they will only see blurry videos.
Tarassenko Lord said the paper reviewed by the National Institute team showed the benefits of Oxevision, including reduced self-harm, improved patient sleep and safety. He added that it was written by an independent clinician who maintains editorial control and in some cases, OxeHealth co-authors were included to reflect their contributions.
He said: “There is no evidence that proper use of Oxevision technology is a factor that contributes to inpatient deaths. The experience of Oxevision patients is very positive.”
In a statement, the company said the Oxevision platform was NHS England Principles Regarding mental health digital technology, the decision to use technology, announced last month for inpatient treatment and care, said it must be based on consent.
The company said: “Oxevision supports clinical teams to improve patient safety, reduce incidents such as falls and self-harm, and ensure staff can respond more effectively to clinical risks,” he said, adding that it welcomed the dialogue on responsible ethical deployment of technology.
Paul Scott, chief executive of the University of Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (EPUT), said that his patient’s death was devastating because he was in charge of caring for Hart, Nolan and Alderman, and that his sympathy was sympathetic to those who lost loved ones. He said: “We are constantly focused on providing the best possible care and use remote surveillance technology to enhance safety and complement the treatment care and observations our staff has implemented.”
A spokesperson for NHS England said: “Vision-based surveillance techniques must support a human-based rights approach to care, be used only within the scope of legal requirements, and ensure that patient and family consent is implemented.
A spokesman for the Ministry of Health’s Social Care said: “These technologies should only be used in line with robust staff training and appropriate consent, with robust staff training and appropriate consent, and are transforming the care that people facing a mental health crisis receive by modernizing mental health law.
In late February, as the Trump administration stepped up its quest to transform the federal government, the psychiatrist treating veterans was turned to her new workstation, which was incredible.
She had to perform virtual psychotherapy with patients from any of the 13 cubicles of large open office spaces used for call centres under the Return Office Policy from the New Office. Other staff could overhear the session, appear on patient screens, or be handed over to the toilet or break room.
The psychiatrist was unsure. Her patient suffered from disorders such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. It took months to get their trust by dealing with them from her home office. She said the new arrangement violated a central ethical doctrine of mental health care: guarantees of privacy.
When doctors asked how they would expect to protect the privacy of their patients, the supervisor suggested buying a privacy screen and a white noise machine. “I’m ready to leave once it comes,” she wrote to her manager in a text message shared with the New York Times. “I got it,” replied the manager. “Many of us are ready to leave.”
These scenes have been unfolding at veteran affairs facilities nationwide in recent weeks as treatment and other mental health services have been disrupted amid the dramatic changes ordered by President Trump and driven by Elon Musk’s government efficiency.
Among the most consequential orders is the requirement that thousands of mental health providers, including many who have been hired for completely remote positions, currently work full-time from the federal government.space. This is the reversal of the VA’s harsh policy that pioneered virtual medicine practices as a way to reach isolated veterans 20 years ago, long before the pandemic made telehealth a favorable treatment for many Americans.
As the first wave of providers report to offices simply lacking room for them, many have found no way to ensure patient privacy, healthcare workers said. Some have filed complaints and warn that the arrangement violates ethical regulations and the Health Privacy Act. At the same time, layoffs of at least 1,900 probation employees are diluting the already stressful services that support homeless or suicides.
…
said Matthew Hunnikat, 62, a social worker who retired in late February nearly 15 years later at Jesse Brown VA Medical Center in Chicago.
When staff were ordered to close the diversity initiative, Honeycutt decided to speed up his retirement. He said care at the VA was improved during that time with community outreach, shorter waiting times and same-day mental health appointments.
“It’s extreme to just destroy this kind of thing,” he said.
Alain Delacheriere and Kirsten Neus Contributed research.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
