How Quitting Smoking Can Quickly Lower Risk Of A-Fib

Updated Sep 14, 2024 | 02:00 AM IST

SummaryNew research reveals that quitting smoking quickly reduces the risk of atrial fibrillation (A-Fib). Former smokers have a significantly lower risk compared to current smokers, emphasizing the health benefits of quitting.
How Quitting Smoking Can Quickly Lower Risk Of A-Fib

How Quitting Smoking Can Quickly Lower Risk Of A-Fib

Smokers who make the decision to quit will experience immediate health benefits, including a rapid reduction in their risk of atrial fibrillation (A-Fib), according to new research published in JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology. The study, conducted by Dr. Gregory Marcus, a cardiologist at the University of California, San Francisco, offers compelling evidence for smokers to quit, showing that it’s never too late to avoid the damaging effects of smoking on heart health.

Dr. Marcus, the senior author of the study, emphasized that A-Fib can be prevented even in individuals who have smoked for years. "The findings provide a compelling new reason to show current smokers that it’s not too late to quit, and that having smoked in the past doesn’t mean you’re ‘destined’ to develop A-Fib," Marcus explained. "Even for the current and longtime smoker, A-Fib can still be avoided."

What is Atrial Fibrillation (A-Fib)?

A-Fib is a heart condition that affects the upper chambers of the heart, known as the atria. When these chambers beat irregularly, blood can pool and form clots, increasing the risk of stroke. Stroke is one of the most serious complications associated with A-Fib, and smoking is known to exacerbate this risk.

"There’s strong evidence that smoking increases the risk of A-Fib," Marcus said. "But the benefits of quitting smoking have been less certain." With this in mind, his team sought to determine whether quitting could significantly lower a person’s risk of developing A-Fib, or if the risk would remain the same.

The research team analyzed data from over 146,700 current and former smokers, tracking their smoking habits and health over a 12-year period using data from the UK Biobank database. The results were promising: former smokers had a 13% lower risk of developing A-Fib compared to current smokers, while those who quit during the study saw an 18% reduction in their risk.

"This is likely a testament to the potency of reducing atrial fibrillation risk pretty shortly after quitting," Marcus said in a statement from the American College of Cardiology.

The findings highlight the importance of quitting smoking, not only for general health but specifically for reducing the risk of serious heart conditions like A-Fib.

Tips for Quitting Smoking

Quitting smoking is one of the most effective ways to lower the risk of A-Fib and improve overall heart health. While it can be challenging, the benefits of quitting are clear and immediate. Here are some tips to help you quit smoking successfully:

1. Choose a specific date to quit smoking and stick to it. Prepare yourself mentally and physically for this change.

2. Reach out to family, friends, or a support group to help keep you accountable. Sharing your goals with others can provide encouragement.

3. Options like nicotine patches, gum, or lozenges can help ease withdrawal symptoms and reduce cravings.

4. Identify situations that make you want to smoke, such as stress or social gatherings, and find healthy ways to cope with them.

5. Regular exercise can help distract you from cravings and improve your mood during the quitting process.

6. Drinking water can help flush nicotine out of your system faster, reducing cravings.

7. Activities like yoga, meditation, or deep breathing exercises can help manage stress, a common trigger for smoking.

Quitting smoking offers immediate and significant benefits, particularly in reducing the risk of atrial fibrillation. The latest research provides smokers with more motivation to quit, showing that it's never too late to take control of their heart health.

End of Article

Meet Paul Alexander: Longest-Known Polio Survivor Who Lived In An Iron Lung For 70 Years

Updated Jul 22, 2026 | 01:01 PM IST

SummaryPaul Alexander developed polio at the age of six, which made him largely dependent on an iron lung. Despite spending seven decades inside a giant metal tube, he became a lawyer, wrote a book, and spread awareness about his condition online.
Meet Paul Alexander: Longest-Known Polio Survivor Who Lived In An Iron Lung For 70 Years

Credit: X

Paul Alexander woke up inside a 600-pound giant metal tube and never left until he died. Paul depended on an iron lung for every breath, a machine that had largely disappeared from modern medicine.

Known as "the man in the iron lung," Alexander spent more than seven decades living inside the metal cylinder after contracting polio as a child. Paul became a symbol of resilience, determination, and the life-saving power of vaccines. His remarkable story is recalled even after his death in March 2024 at the age of 78.

Who Was Paul Alexander?

The doctors placed him inside an iron lung, a mechanical ventilator that kept him alive by helping his lungs expand and contract.

Although everyone initially believed he might not survive, Alexander defied expectations. He went on to graduate from college, earn a law degree, become a practicing attorney, publish a memoir, and inspire millions through interviews and social media.

Also read: Who Was Martha Lillard? Last U.S. Polio Survivor To Depend On An Iron Lung Who Breathed Her Last At 78

Life Beyond The Iron Lung

Paul Alexander refused to let the machine define him. Doctors taught him a technique called "frog breathing" or glossopharyngeal breathing. By using the muscles of his mouth and throat, he learned to gulp air into his lungs in small amounts.

This helped him to leave the iron lung for short durations, attend school, pursue higher education, and eventually work as a lawyer. Still, he depended on the iron lung for most of his life, especially while sleeping.

Despite his conditions, Alexander earned a bachelor's degree, graduated from law school, practiced as a lawyer in Texas, and wrote his memoir - Three Minutes for a Dog: My Life in an Iron Lung.

His determination challenged and defied assumptions about disability and demonstrated that severe physical limitations need not prevent education, work, or meaningful relationships.

Also read: Even Light Exercise Could Help People With COPD Live Longer, Study Finds

Iron Lung Is An Obsolete Technology In Medicine

An iron lung, also called a negative-pressure ventilator, is a large cylindrical machine that helps people breathe when the muscles controlling respiration become paralyzed.

Unlike today's ventilators, which push air directly into the lungs through a tube or mask using positive pressure, an iron lung works by changing air pressure around the patient's body. The patient lies inside an airtight metal chamber with only the head remaining outside.

The machine then repeatedly lowers the air pressure inside the chamber. This causes the chest to expand naturally, drawing air into the lungs. The pressure then returns to normal. The chest relaxes, allowing air to flow back out. This cycle mimics normal breathing and can continue around the clock.

Iron lungs became obsolete eventually after polio vaccines and modern ventilators were developed.

The introduction of effective polio vaccines in the 1950s and 1960s dramatically reduced cases of paralytic polio worldwide.

The positive-pressure ventilators we use today are smaller, more portable, and better suited to intensive care. They deliver oxygen directly into the lungs, replacing bulky iron lungs.

Paul Alexander's life is more than a remarkable survival story. It serves as a reminder of the devastating impact infectious diseases once had before vaccines transformed public health.

End of Article

Hantavirus Claims 3 Lives In Venezuela: What The Rat-borne Virus Does To The Brain

Updated Jul 22, 2026 | 12:24 PM IST

SummaryThe fresh cases are reported barely two weeks after the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the end of the hantavirus outbreak linked to the MV Hondius luxury expedition ship, which infected 11 people and claimed three lives earlier this year.
Hantavirus Claims 3 Lives In Venezuela: What The Rat-borne Virus Does To The Brain

Credit: iStock

Amid earthquake rescue efforts, Venezuela has reported an outbreak of rat-borne hantavirus that has claimed three lives so far, according to the country's health ministry.

Three people with confirmed hantavirus infection died in the eastern state of Anzoátegui. Two other deaths—both involving health professionals in the state of Barinas—are still under investigation and are not linked to the Anzoátegui cases, the ministry said.

"We report the regrettable deaths of three patients in Anzoátegui with confirmed diagnoses of hantavirus," the ministry said in a statement.

The ministry added that there is "no scientific evidence of person-to-person transmission in our country," noting that the virus is primarily spread by rodents in rural and agricultural areas.

The fresh cases are reported barely two weeks after the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the end of the hantavirus outbreak linked to the MV Hondius luxury expedition ship, which infected 11 people and claimed three lives earlier this year.

What Is Hantavirus?

According to the WHO, hantaviruses are zoonotic viruses that naturally infect rodents and are occasionally transmitted to humans. In humans, the infection can cause severe illness and may be fatal, although symptoms vary depending on the virus strain and geographic region.

The virus is primarily transmitted through contact with infected rodents or their urine, droppings, saliva, and, less commonly, through scratches or bites.

According to the CDC, symptoms can appear one to eight weeks after exposure, initially presenting fatigue, fever, and muscle aches. As the disease progresses, it can cause coughing, shortness of breath, and chest tightness as fluid accumulates in the lungs.

Also read: Can Hantavirus Spread Through Semen And Breast Milk? What Experts Say

What The Virus Does To The Brain

A recent review published in JAMA Neurology highlights the often-overlooked neurologic complications of hantavirus infection. Hantaviruses cause two major clinical syndromes:

  • Hantavirus Pulmonary Syndrome (HPS), seen mainly in the Americas, primarily affects the lungs and cardiovascular system and has a mortality rate of 35% to 50%. Neurologic complications can include headache, delirium, seizures, and, in rare cases, brain hemorrhage or post-viral encephalitis.
  • Hemorrhagic Fever with Renal Syndrome (HFRS), which is endemic to Asia and Eastern Russia, presents with fever and kidney involvement and is more commonly associated with direct neurologic complications.

Headaches, Vision Problems, and Hormonal Disorders

Read More: Immunotherapy Shows Early Promise Against Severe Hantavirus Lung Disease: Study

Researchers from the US National Institutes of Health's (NIH) National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke reviewed data from 811 patients infected with the Puumala strain of HFRS.

They found that 97% experienced headaches, 40% reported blurred vision, and 31% experienced vomiting. About 1% developed severe complications such as meningitis or encephalitis, while rare cases involved peripheral neuropathy or stroke.

Pituitary damage was identified as a significant complication of HFRS. It can lead to hormonal disorders weeks or even months after infection. These may include fatigue, adrenal insufficiency, diabetes insipidus, sexual dysfunction, amenorrhea, and symptoms of hypothyroidism.

The studies also reported cerebrospinal fluid abnormalities, sudden vision loss among hantavirus patients.

Long-Term Effects and Treatment

The long-term neurologic consequences of hantavirus remain poorly understood, according to Avindra Nath of the NIH. However, one study found that 20 years after Puumala infection, 78% of patients had persistent hypertension and 8% had chronic kidney disease.

Currently, there are no US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved antiviral treatments or licensed vaccines for hantavirus infection, although several vaccine candidates are in preclinical trials. Several antiviral drugs—including favipiravir, molnupiravir, griffithsin, and ribavirin—have shown promise in early studies, but more research is needed, Nath said.

End of Article

Nearly All Countries Overuse Antibiotics; 60% Still Use WHO-Discouraged Drugs: The Lancet

Updated Jul 22, 2026 | 11:25 AM IST

SummaryLow- and middle-income countries, which bear a higher burden of infectious diseases and antimicrobial resistance, often need greater access to specialized Watch and Reserve antibiotics. But these often remain inaccessible.
Nearly All Countries Overuse Antibiotics; 60% Still Use WHO-Discouraged Drugs: The Lancet

Credit: iStock

Nearly all countries are overusing antibiotics—particularly those meant for specific conditions—fueling the global threat of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), according to a study published in The Lancet Public Health.

The study, led by researchers from the Universities of London and Oxford, found that 99% of countries overuse "Watch" antibiotics, while 60% continue to use antibiotics that the World Health Organization (WHO) advises should no longer be prescribed.

"Our findings show the world faces a double challenge – while some antibiotics are being overused, millions of people may still lack access to the medicines they need to treat their infections," said Aislinn Cook, lead author and Senior Research Fellow in Infectious Diseases Epidemiology at City St George's, University of London.

Understanding WHO's AWaRe Classification

Also read: Shigella Driving Antibiotic-Resistant Bacterial Diarrhea Among Gay Men in UK, Lancet Study Finds

The WHO groups antibiotics into three categories under its AWaRe framework:

  • Access antibiotics: First-line medicines, such as amoxicillin, recommended for most common bacterial infections.
  • Watch antibiotics: Broader-spectrum drugs that should be reserved for specific infections when Access antibiotics are ineffective.
  • Reserve antibiotics: Last-resort treatments for severe drug-resistant infections.

In 2024, UN member states agreed that at least 70% of global antibiotic use should come from the Access group by 2030.

What the Study Found

Researchers estimated that around 43 billion antibiotic courses were needed globally in 2019—roughly one course per person per year to treat bacterial infections. About 77% of these should have been Access antibiotics, suggesting the UN's 70% target is achievable.

However, analysis of antibiotic use across 67 countries revealed widespread inappropriate prescribing:

  • Nearly three-quarters of countries used more antibiotics overall than required.
  • 99% of countries overused Watch antibiotics, increasing the risk of antimicrobial resistance.
  • More than half of countries and territories underused Reserve antibiotics, potentially limiting treatment options for patients with life-threatening drug-resistant infections.
  • 60% of countries continued using antibiotics that WHO recommends should no longer be prescribed.

Read More: 645 Million People Went Hungry in 2025; Middle East Conflict Driving Food Prices: UN

Global Inequality in Antibiotic Access

The study also highlighted major disparities in antibiotic access. Researchers noted that low- and middle-income countries, which bear a higher burden of infectious diseases and antimicrobial resistance, often need greater access to specialized Watch and Reserve antibiotics.

Yet these medicines are used more frequently in high-income countries, pointing to unequal access rather than clinical need.

Antibiotic Resistance Rising Among Children

A separate study found that antibiotic-resistant bacteria are increasingly leaving children vulnerable to common infections.

The research, led by the Murdoch Children's Research Institute (MCRI) and covering 82 countries, found that antibiotic resistance increased across every region between 2004 and 2022, making many life-saving drugs used to treat common childhood infections less effective.

Published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, the study found that babies, children in intensive care, and those living in countries with limited healthcare resources are the most affected.

What Can Be Done?

Researchers called for stronger national policies to curb unnecessary antibiotic prescribing while ensuring patients who genuinely need specialized antibiotics can access them.

They stressed that improving access will require coordinated action at both local and national levels. This includes:

  • ensuring quality-assured antibiotics are available and affordable in frontline healthcare settings,
  • procuring the right antibiotics in adequate quantities,
  • strengthening surveillance of antibiotic use,
  • setting country-specific prescribing targets based on local disease burden and public health needs.

End of Article