Cigarettes with ultralow nicotine levels are now being called the game-changer in the fight against smoking. If you are having trouble in quitting smoking, then, it is for you, that soon the Biden White House is expected to formally propose a plan that will order cigarette nicotine levels to be reduced, reports The Washington Post. For now though, it has been a failure, as these cigarettes, also known as VLN cigarettes that stands for very low nicotine are only available in 5,100 stores in 26 states. This is a very small fraction of the overall market for cigarettes. The company that makes it, 22nd Century, is struggling not because of the low supply, but also from the advocates who have long believed slashing nicotine levels altogether.

The Advent and ideation

Nicotine is a chemical that is produced naturally from tobacco that makes the cigarette and also keeps people hooked. While it is believed that it makes people alert, and get the "hit" to keep them going, it exposes the users to harmful substances, carcinogens, and increases the risk of heart disease, lung cancer, and other illness.

Ultralow-nicotine cigarettes, like the VLN brand, contain about 95% less nicotine than the regular cigarettes. The idea is quite simple: without the addictive grip of nicotine, smokers will find it easier to quit. Research too has shown some promise. For instance, the studies funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse revealed that very low nicotine cigarettes reduced addiction potential significantly without having users to increase their smoking frequency. However, the problem is, why would anyone choose for a low-nicotine that does not make them feel the same way, when the high-nicotine cigarette is right next to it, making them feel the same way, with the same alertness, sold at the same price.

“It’s very hard to imagine someone actively choosing to continue to use a low-nicotine product for the same price when a high-nicotine product is right next to it,” said Eric Donny, a Wake Forest University School of Medicine nicotine researcher.

No wonder, the experiment with low nicotine product by Philip Morris' Next cigarettes in the 1980s and Vector Tobacco's Quest brand in the early 2000s, flopped.

FDA's Role in the Push

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has supported the development of such products, even allowing VLN cigarettes to be marketed as lower-risk options. However, these products remain a niche market, available in only a fraction of U.S. stores.

Recently, the Biden administration has considered a bold step—mandating a dramatic reduction in nicotine levels for all cigarettes sold in the United States. Supporters believe this move could save millions of lives, while critics, including tobacco companies, warn of potential unintended consequences.

What Could Be The Challenges?

Resistance from Big Tobacco Companies: They could argue that slashing nicotine levels could backfire. Their claim is, smokers will turn to black markets or smoke more to satisfy their cravings, which may lead to greater exposure to harmful substances.

Consumer Reluctance: History is proof to the instances of smokers being hesitant to embrace the low-nicotine products.

Political Hurdle: It may face political roadblocks, as under the Trump administration, plans to cut nicotine were shelved.

Could Low-Nicotine Cigarettes Be The Solution?

Advocates believe that ultralow-nicotine cigarettes could be a game-changer, comparing them to decaf coffee or non-alcoholic beer—products that reduce harm while offering a similar experience.

Some experts warn that a black market for traditional cigarettes could undermine these efforts. They also stress the need for safer alternatives, such as vaping products, to support smokers transitioning away from traditional cigarettes.

Whooping cough is making an alarming comeback in the United States, with cases spiking to their highest level in over a decade. As of mid-December, preliminary data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reveals more than 32,000 cases of pertussis reported nationwide—nearly six times higher than the same period last year. The outbreak is causing alarm among health authorities as the highly contagious bacterial disease, once largely subdued by vaccination, returns with vigor.

Often mistaken in its early phases for a common cold, whooping cough may progress to bout after bout of violent coughing that induces vomiting, broken ribs, and an iconic gasping "whoop" for air. The illness can persist for weeks or even months, and sometimes individuals unknowingly spread it. With rising transmission and infants being particularly susceptible, the surge is also triggering new concerns about vaccine resistance and routine immunization coverage gaps.

Two infants in Louisiana have died of pertussis—also known as whooping cough—making it the first such deaths in the state since 2018. These fatalities are part of an overall national increase in cases of pertussis, triggering fresh alarm among pediatric professionals and public health officials about declining rates of vaccination and waning immunity.

Pertussis is a highly infectious respiratory infection caused by the Bordetella pertussis bacterium. It is identified by persistent fits of coughing that usually culminate in a characteristic "whooping" sound as the patient struggles to catch his or her breath. Though the disease infects individuals of all ages, it is particularly hazardous for babies too young to be vaccinated.

For babies, it's actually pretty scary," CNN quoted Dr. John Schieffelin, Associate Professor of Pediatrics at Tulane University.

“They’re just coughing so much, they can’t eat, they can’t drink, and they often get pneumonia, which means we have to put them on a ventilator… they just never stop coughing.” With two decades of experience in pediatric infectious diseases, Dr. Schieffelin asserts that no other illness compares to the suffering pertussis causes in the youngest patients. Surging Numbers: The Return of a Supposedly Controlled Disease

Louisiana reported 110 cases of pertussis through the first quarter of 2025 alone, almost reaching the total 154 cases for the entire year 2024. National trends have an even more ominous course. In 2024, the United States had more than 35,000 cases of pertussis—its highest rate in more than a decade—that resulted in 10 deaths, six of whom were infants younger than one year.

This year, 2025, is looking to be even worse, with already 6,600 cases reported—almost four times the number reported at this time last year.

The United States previously reported over 200,000 cases of whooping cough per year prior to the availability of the pertussis vaccine. As the DTaP vaccine (diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis) became widespread during the late 1940s, illness plummeted. Pertussis started seeping back into the United States in the 1980s due to enhanced surveillance and declining vaccine-induced immunity.

The CDC advises a five-dose series of the DTaP vaccine in children, starting at two months of age and continuing up to age six. Teenagers should have a booster (Tdap) between ages 11 and 12, and adults are encouraged to receive a Tdap booster every 10 years.

For newborns too young to be vaccinated, maternal immunization during the third trimester of pregnancy is crucial. This practice offers passive immunity to the infant, avertinh 78% of cases and decreasing the hazard of hospitalization by 91%, states the CDC. A second protective method is "cocooning," in which all members of the household are vaccinated to protect the infant from transmission.

The increase in cases of pertussis has come at the same time as a troubling drop in childhood vaccination coverage. The rate of US kindergartners vaccinated with the DTaP series has fallen steadily over the last five years, leaving thousands at risk.

In Louisiana, where the latest infant deaths occurred, access to healthcare is another pressing challenge. “Especially in a state like Louisiana, we’ve got a lot of poverty. We’ve got a lot of rural populations, and not everyone has access to regular medical care,” said Dr. Jennifer Herricks, founder of the nonprofit Louisiana Families for Vaccines.

Dr. Herricks and other health advocates contend that such systemic obstacles, combined with increasing vaccine reluctance, render state efforts to encourage immunization all the more vital. But in a contentious decision, the Louisiana Department of Health recently stated it would no longer encourage mass vaccination at community events and health fairs.

In a memo, Louisiana Surgeon General Dr. Ralph Abraham made clear that although the state still supports routine childhood immunizations, it will no longer encourage seasonal vaccines like COVID-19 and flu at mass clinics. But some local health officials are concerned this change in approach sends a confusing message.

"When you cast dispersions or make a question regarding the safety and effectiveness of a single vaccine, I think that it actually ends up having this ripple effect across all vaccines," said Dr. Jennifer Avegno, Health Department Director for New Orleans. Although she lauded the recent messaging by the Department of Health regarding pertussis, she wondered if outreach was sufficient. "It's perhaps too little, too late."

While the country grapples with this comeback, experts emphasize that vaccination is the best means to avoid pertussis outbreaks and save lives—particularly among the most vulnerable. Beyond early childhood immunizations, adult booster doses and maternal vaccination during pregnancy are key measures.

Dr. Schieffelin stresses the importance of communities coming together to work toward the protection of infants. "We have to think not just about ourselves, but about the people around us—particularly babies who can't yet get vaccinated. That's what community immunity is all about."

With over 6,000 cases already this year and numbers rising, the stakes are high. Public health officials, parents, and policymakers all must move quickly to rebuild trust in vaccines, increase access to care, and protect future generations from this preventable and fatal disease.

Women are frequently overmedicated, which leads to an increased risk of adverse side effects, a recent study conducted by scientists from the University of Chicago and the University of California discovered. This discrepancy arises because drug dosages are typically based on trials conducted predominantly on male subjects. "Drugs are optimized from the beginning to work on male bodies," explained Professor Brian Prendergast, a psychologist at the University of Chicago and co-author of the study. He also added that there was a need to immediately reevaluate the widespread practice of prescribing the same doses to men and women.

Side-Effects Range From Nausea To Seizures

It has long been recognized by scientists and medical professionals that women experience more side effects from medications than men, even when doses are adjusted for body weight. These side effects can range from mild symptoms such as headaches and nausea to more severe reactions like bleeding and seizures. Historically, women were excluded from clinical drug trials due to the mistaken belief that hormonal fluctuations would distort test results.

'Biomedical Science Is Done On Men, By Men'

"For much of the time it’s been practiced, biomedical science has been done by men, on men," said Prendergast. "It even starts in the petri dish: Most cell lines used in early tests are male, and then drugs are tested on male lab animals."

It is pertinent to note that since 1993, the National Institutes of Health has mandated the inclusion of both men and women in clinical trials, with stricter enforcement following a pivotal 2014 study co-authored by Prendergast. That study demonstrated that hormonal cycles in female mice did not interfere with drug testing outcomes.

Despite these regulations, women remain underrepresented in many drug trials, and studies that do include them often fail to analyze or publish sex-specific data. Moreover, numerous medications approved before the 1993 mandate remain in use without adjustments for sex-based differences in drug metabolism.

Study Identifies 86 Drugs With Sex Difference

The study was published on June 5 in the journal Biology of Sex Differences. For the trials, Prendergast and co-author Irving Zucker of UC Berkeley analyzed publicly available data from clinical drug studies. They identified 86 drugs that exhibited clear sex differences in metabolism. The findings revealed that women metabolize nearly all these drugs more slowly than men, resulting in prolonged exposure and, in 96% of cases, significantly higher rates of adverse side effects.

The medications examined include widely used drugs such as aspirin, morphine, and heparin, along with common antidepressants like sertraline and bupropion.

While every individual metabolizes medications differently, women generally retain drugs in their bloodstream and tissues longer than men. The liver and kidneys also process drugs at varying rates between sexes, an effect that persists even when dosage is adjusted for body weight.

“The reasons for these big differences are not fully understood, but this is a really striking result and a wake-up call,” Prendergast stated.

Study Proposes Several Recommendations

To address this issue, the study’s authors propose several recommendations. They advocate for the FDA to disclose the gender composition of study participants in clinical trial data, label drugs known to have sex-based metabolic differences, and ensure that this information is integrated into medical education.

"There are a lot of drugs that are prescribed on a ‘one-size-fits-all’ basis, and it’s clear that this doesn’t always work," Prendergast emphasized. "Especially for drugs that we already know have a wide therapeutic range—meaning a broad range of doses can be effective—we could do a much better job of adjusting dosages based on sex."

This approach would involve starting women on lower doses and gradually increasing the amount until achieving optimal efficacy with minimal side effects. "We have an opportunity to do this better," Prendergast concluded. "This information needs to be widely available."

Eating a well-balanced, nutrient-rich diet can prove to be a magic bullet for your health and well-being, including reproductive health. Certain foods, such as spinach, carrots, and avocados, contain key nutrients that contribute to improved blood flow and hormone balance.

The foods you consume provide essential nutrients that fuel the body, including sexual organs. Some studies suggest that maintaining a well-balanced diet may help reduce the likelihood of erectile dysfunction. Below are eight foods that may support sexual health and testosterone levels.

Fruits & Vegetables That Can Prevent Erectile Dysfunction

1. Spinach

Spinach is a rich source of folate, a nutrient known to enhance blood circulation. Folic acid plays a crucial role in male sexual function, and low levels have been linked to erectile dysfunction. A cup (240 grams) of boiled spinach provides 66% of the daily recommended intake of folate. Additionally, spinach contains magnesium, which promotes blood flow and may reduce the risk of erectile dysfunction.

2. Caffeine

Caffeine may have a role in preventing erectile dysfunction, though research findings are mixed. A 2014 study involving over 3,000 men found that those with a higher caffeine intake (85 to 300 mg per day) reported fewer instances of erectile dysfunction. However, a 2024 review of studies involving more than 51,000 men did not establish a significant link between caffeine consumption and erectile dysfunction.

3. Apples

Apples are high in flavonoids, natural plant compounds that offer various health benefits. A 2016 review identified apples as a top source of flavonoids such as anthocyanins, flavones, and flavanones. Increased consumption of these compounds was linked to a 19% lower risk of erectile dysfunction. Additionally, apple peels contain ursolic acid, which has shown potential in inhibiting prostate cancer cell growth.

4. Avocados

Avocados have long been associated with fertility and sexual health. They are rich in vitamin E and zinc, both of which contribute to sperm quality and testosterone production. A 2024 review suggests that avocados may enhance sexual duration, reduce premature ejaculation, increase attraction, and improve overall sexual satisfaction.

5. Chile Peppers

A 2015 study found that men who preferred spicier foods had higher testosterone levels in their saliva. While this does not confirm that spicy foods directly boost testosterone, the compound capsaicin found in hot peppers may have benefits. A 2013 study suggested that capsaicin stimulates pleasure centers in the brain, potentially enhancing mood and serving as an aphrodisiac.

6. Carrots

Carrots contain carotenoids, which may help improve testosterone production, sperm count, and sperm motility. Given that low testosterone levels are linked to erectile dysfunction, consuming carrots may help manage hormone levels.

7. Oats

Oats contain L-arginine, an amino acid that helps relax blood vessels, potentially improving blood flow to the penis. Some studies suggest L-arginine may aid in treating erectile dysfunction and boosting testosterone levels. Additionally, oats have been classified as an aphrodisiac that may enhance libido.

8. Tomatoes

Tomatoes are packed with antioxidants, including lycopene, which may support sexual and reproductive health. A 2024 review found that individuals with lower lycopene intake had a higher risk of erectile dysfunction. Tomatoes are also rich in vitamin C and polyphenols, which may reduce inflammation and improve blood flow. A 2017 study involving men with infertility suggested that consuming tomato juice for 12 weeks improved sperm motility.

Can Diet Alone Cure Erectile Dysfunction?

While there is limited research on whether diet alone can reverse erectile dysfunction, a 2020 review found that following a Mediterranean diet—rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes, and healthy fats—may help prevent the condition.