Japan could become one of the first countries in the world to end the HIV epidemic, says the president of Gilead Sciences Japan, Kennet Brysting. The idea for now could seem a little too ambitious, but it is not entirely unrealistic, given that the availability of medicines that can prevent transmission of HIV. Drugs are not the cure, but control over the spread of virus to the point where the disease is no longer a major public health threat.

What Is The Role Of Preventative HIV Medicines?

Gilead's have two key drugs, Truvada and lenacapavir. These two are playing a crucial role in prevention. Truvada is taken as a daily pill, while lenacapavir requires two injections per year. It can make the virus undetectable in infected individuals and prevent transmission to those who are not infected yet. In trials, lenacapavir showed 100% efficacy in preventing HIV infections. This is why it is describe as "almost a vaccine".

In 2024, Japan also approved Truvada for HIV prevention, but the country has yet to approve lenacapavir for the same. Until now, people in Japan had been importing generic versions of Truvada or purchasing it from clinics that source it from overseas.

HIV In Japan

Up until now, Japan reported around 25,000 HIV infections, whereas 669 new cases were reported in 2023. For seven consecutive years, the number of new infections remained under 1,000. The downward trend thus shows that the virus has been controlled, however, getting to zero new infections remains the ultimate goal.

Brysting too acknowledged that simply having effective drug is not enough. What is important is to have a proper implementation, access and healthcare support to make sure that these treatments are widely available and effective.

What Are The Challenges In Implementation?

The biggest challenges is testing rates. There is a need to increase testing rates. At this very moment, around 86% people infective with Japan have been tested, but the goal is to increase it up to 95%, with an ideal goal of 100%. Without widespread testing, many infected people may not even know that they are infected and it could transmit the virus.

Another measure issue is the cost of preventative medication. While Japan's health insurance covers treatments for diseases, it does not cover preventative drugs. Those who purchase Truvada for prevention, pay around $470 per month. Some clinics in Tokyo offer generic alternatives too, which is cheaper, but they are not ideal.

Better Healthcare Support

Brysting expressed concern that individuals importing medications might not be consulting doctors regularly, which is essential for monitoring HIV status and overall health. Truvada users need to be tested for HIV initially and every three months, along with screenings for other infections and kidney function checks. Without proper medical supervision, there is a risk of misuse and inadequate protection.

Gilead is in discussions with Japanese authorities to improve access and insurance coverage for Truvada, and progress is being made. Japan has shown efficiency in approving critical medicines, as seen during the COVID-19 pandemic when Gilead’s remdesivir was approved in just three days.

What Is The Way Ahead?

Gilead at this moment is not only focused on HIV and hepatitis C, but also expanding into oncology with innovative treatments like CAR-T cell therapy, which strengthens a patient's immune system to fight cancer.

However, Japan’s strict approval processes can slow down drug availability. Phase 3 clinical trials often need to be conducted within the country, and Japan tends to approve medicines much later than other regions. For instance, Truvada was approved for prevention in Japan 12 years after the U.S. and nearly 20 years after its approval for treatment. inancial factors also play a role. The Japanese government adjusts drug prices annually, often reducing them, which can make long-term investment challenging for pharmaceutical companies.

Pharmacies across Britain are reporting serious shortages of a widely used medication, raising concerns that patients could face a higher risk of heart attacks and strokes. Pharmacists have described the situation as “madness,” warning that current NHS prescribing rules are stopping them from switching patients to suitable blood-thinning alternatives when aspirin is unavailable.

While aspirin is commonly taken as a pain reliever, it is also prescribed as a blood thinner. Around one-third of women and nearly 45 percent of men over the age of 65 rely on it as part of their daily medication routine.

Aspirin Shortage Hits UK Pharmacies

A new survey conducted by the National Pharmacy Association (NPA), involving 540 community pharmacies across the UK, found that 86 percent are currently unable to supply aspirin. The shortage appears to be most severe for the low-dose 75mg tablets, although pharmacists report that all strengths are affected. Several pharmacies have also stopped selling aspirin over the counter due to limited stock.

As per The Independent, Olivier Picard, chair of the NPA, said pharmacists are deeply concerned about their inability to order sufficient supplies and the impact this could have on patients who depend on the drug. Low-dose aspirin, particularly the 75mg dose, is commonly prescribed for its antiplatelet effect, which helps prevent the formation of blood clots and lowers the risk of heart attacks and strokes.

Who Is Prescribed Aspirin?

Doctors often prescribe aspirin to people who have previously suffered a heart attack or stroke, experienced a transient ischaemic attack, or have conditions such as angina or peripheral arterial disease (PAD). It may also be recommended after certain types of surgery to reduce the risk of clotting.

Aspirin: Why Is UK Facing A Shortage?

The NPA is urging the government to reform prescribing regulations that currently prevent pharmacists from offering safe alternatives when the prescribed medicine is unavailable. Mr Picard said pharmacists have long argued for the ability to make appropriate substitutions in these situations.

He added that forcing patients to return to their GP for a revised prescription when an alternative drug is already available is not only frustrating but potentially dangerous. Delays or interruptions in treatment could lead patients to miss vital medication, increasing risks to their health.

Aspirin Added To Export Ban List

In response to the ongoing issue, the Government has added aspirin to its export ban list in an attempt to safeguard supplies for patients in the UK.

The NPA also said pharmacists have been forced to tightly ration the remaining stock, prioritising patients with the most urgent heart conditions or those requiring emergency prescriptions.

According to the Independent Pharmacies Association, international manufacturing delays and wider supply chain disruptions are key reasons behind the shortage. The organisation also pointed to low prices negotiated by the NHS, which can make the UK a lower priority for pharmaceutical manufacturers when stock is limited.

Dr Leyla Hannbeck, chief executive of the Independent Pharmacies Association, said it is deeply concerning to see shortages affecting essential medicines such as aspirin and blood pressure treatments. She explained that while manufacturing delays play a role, pharmacies are also struggling because they cannot order the quantities they need.

She added that low reimbursement rates mean manufacturers often prioritise other countries, leaving the UK at the back of the queue. In the meantime, patients affected by shortages are advised to speak to their local pharmacist, who can offer guidance on suitable alternatives where available.

Aspirin Rising Prices Add Pressure On Pharmacies

The shortage has also led to sharp price increases in pharmacies that have managed to secure supplies. The NPA said the cost of a packet of 75mg dispersible aspirin tablets has risen from 18p earlier last year to £3.90 this month.

However, the NHS reimbursement rate remains at £2.18 per packet, meaning pharmacies lose an average of £1.72 every time the medication is dispensed. Mr Picard said this is yet another sign of a pharmacy contract system that urgently needs reform.

Actor Shreyas Talpade recalls that during a shoot for Single Salma in Lucknow, he felt unusually drained after an intense action sequence. In an interview with the Times of India, he revealed, along with the fatigue, there was an odd sensation in his throat, something he had never experienced before. He sat down briefly, brushed it aside, and convinced himself that he was fine.

Yet, something did not sit right with him. Concerned, Shreyas decided to consult a doctor. He underwent an ECG and a 2D echo, and both reports came back normal. While he did not completely ignore what his body was telling him, he also did not probe further. He assumed the medical reports meant there was nothing to worry about.

Months later, in December 2023, Shreyas Talpade suffered a major cardiac episode, an experience that would alter his life in ways he never imagined.

Shreyas Talpade Had No Classic Risk Factors, Yet He Suffered a Heart Attack

Shreyas was only in his mid-40s when the incident occurred, but it changed him both physically and emotionally.

Physically, he now follows lifelong precautions to ensure such an episode does not recur. Regular medication, scheduled follow-ups, routine checkups, and strict adherence to medical advice have become a permanent part of his life.

Emotionally, the impact was even more intense. Shreyas points out that he had none of the four common risk factors associated with heart attacks. He did not smoke or drink. He was neither diabetic nor hypertensive. And yet, the cardiac episode happened.

Shreyas Talpade’s Five Mantras For Heart Health

• Listen to your body: If something feels unusual, do not delay or dismiss it.
• Get tested early: The sooner you detect a problem, the faster you can respond.
• Stay consistent: Fixed timings for meals, medicines, and sleep are essential. A healthy life depends on routine, not randomness.
• Rest adequately: Seven to eight hours of uninterrupted sleep is non-negotiable. It plays a vital role in healing and recovery.
• Monitor your heart regularly: ECGs, 2D echo tests, stress tests, and calcium score screenings can save lives. Prevention is always better than cure.
• Manage stress: Stress is unavoidable, but learning to manage it is crucial. Focus on what you can control and let go of the rest.

Shreyas believes that while life brings uncertainty, many aspects of health remain within our control. After an experience like his, priorities naturally shift. Family becomes the top priority, and staying healthy becomes essential to spend meaningful time with loved ones. That, he says, means sleeping well, exercising four to five times a week, and eating nutritious meals on time.

Heart Attack: Why Timely Meals Matter More Than Extreme Diets

He stresses that while nutritious food is important, eating at regular times is even more critical. Maintaining fixed meal schedules helps the body function better. Having dinner early allows the digestive system enough time to rest. Even the healthiest food, he notes, loses its benefit if meal timings are irregular.

His earlier discipline with clean eating and regular workouts played a significant role in his recovery. Shreyas also believes that post-pandemic health changes and the Covid vaccine may have triggered complications, but his active lifestyle helped him bounce back faster.

According to him, proper nutrition, regular exercise, quality sleep, and balance strengthen the body. Without these habits, the outcome could have been very different. He firmly believes the body responds to the care it receives.

Learning To Handle Stress And Let Go

Shreyas acknowledges that stress is an unavoidable part of life. However, he believes learning how to manage it is essential.

Over time, he has realised that not everything lies within one’s control. Letting go of what cannot be changed is just as important as addressing what can be managed. Wisdom often comes with age, but when someone shares their experiences, he feels it is important to listen.

His message is clear: do not wait for a personal crisis to learn lessons the hard way.

The United States under President Donald Trump’s administration has completed its withdrawal from the World Health Organization (WHO). The US Department of Health and Human Services confirmed the news on Thursday. This has been a longstanding goal of President Trump.

Trump’s Goal To Exit From WHO

During Trump’s first term, he tried to leave WHO, then gave a notice through an executive order on the first day of his second term. It noted that the US would leave the organization. As per law, the US must give WHO a one-year notice and pay all outstanding fees before its departure. This means the US still owes WHO roughly $260 million. However, legal experts said that US is unlikely to pay up and WHO will have little recourse.

Dr. Lawrence Gostin, an expert on global health law and public health at Georgetown University told CNN, “As a matter of law, it is very clear that the United States cannot officially withdraw from WHO unless it pays its outstanding financial obligations. But WHO has no power to force the US to pay what it owes.”

WHO could pass a resolution saying that US cannot withdraw until it pays, however, it won’t risk creating any further tension that there already is.

The HHS on Thursday confirmed that all US government funding to WHO has been terminated and all personnel and contractors assigned or embedded within the organization have been recalled. It also said the US had ceased official participation in WHO-sponsored committees, leadership bodies, governance structures and technical working groups.

What the US Exit From WHO Means for the World

The US government has said it is moving ahead with its decision to exit the World Health Organization (WHO), arguing that the country has not received enough value for the money, staff, and support it has given to the global health body over the years.

Senior officials from HHS said the WHO acted against US interests, especially during the Covid-19 pandemic. They accused the organization of delaying the declaration of a global public health emergency and of praising China’s early response despite signs of underreporting, information suppression, and delays in confirming human-to-human transmission.

HHS also criticized the WHO for being slow to acknowledge airborne spread of Covid-19 and for downplaying the role of people without symptoms in spreading the virus. According to officials, these missteps cost the world precious time as the virus spread rapidly.

While the US has been the WHO’s largest funder, officials pointed out that no American has ever served as the organization’s director-general. “A promise made and a promise kept,” one senior official said, adding that US health policies should not be shaped by “unaccountable foreign bureaucrats.”

That said, the administration has not completely ruled out cooperation with the WHO. When asked whether the US would take part in an upcoming WHO meeting on next year’s flu vaccine composition, officials said discussions are still ongoing.

The government has insisted that leaving the WHO does not mean stepping away from global health leadership. Instead, the US plans to work directly with individual countries, health ministries, non-governmental organizations, and religious groups on disease surveillance and data sharing. This effort is expected to be led by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Global Health Center. Officials have promised more announcements on this strategy in the coming months.

However, many public health experts are deeply concerned. Some warn that replacing the WHO with country-by-country agreements will create a fragmented system that lacks coordination and adequate funding. Former CDC officials note that the CDC has staff in about 60 countries, far fewer than the global reach of the WHO.

Critics say the move could leave both the US and the world vulnerable to future outbreaks. Experts argue that infectious diseases do not respect borders and that global cooperation is essential for early detection, data sharing, and rapid response.

Several health leaders have called the decision dangerous and short-sighted, warning that without WHO membership, the US could lose timely access to critical data, virus samples, and genomic information needed to develop vaccines and treatments. WHO’s director-general has described the US withdrawal as a “lose-lose” situation, saying both America and the rest of the world stand to suffer.