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.

Your eyes may explain a lot about how your brain handles attention. A new Indian study suggests that tiny fluctuations in the pupils may provide a physiological clue to attention related differences in children with ADHD.

Researchers from the Indraprastha Institute of Information Technology Delhi analysed eye-tracking data from 50 children aged 10 to 12, including 28 children with combined-type ADHD and 22 without a neurodevelopmental diagnosis. These findings were published in Scientific Reports.

Instead of just looking at the size of the pupils, researchers examined how pupil responses shifted from one trial to another while children performed a working-memory task.

What ADHD-Related Clues Do Pupils Hold?

During the experiment, children watched dots appear on a grid and had to remember their positions while ignoring distractions. An eye tracker recorded their pupil diameter 1,000 times per second.

After accounting for age, IQ and memory-task difficulty, the researchers estimated that unmedicated children with ADHD had about 23% greater trial-to-trial variability in their pupil responses than children in the control group.

Among the unmedicated children with ADHD, greater pupil variability was also associated with poorer accuracy on the task.

The pattern was, however, more complicated. Within individual trials, pupil variability was actually lower in the ADHD group. This suggests that different measures of pupil dynamics may capture different aspects of attention and brain activity.

Also read: Increased Screen Timings Have Lead to ADHD: Key Symptoms

Effect Of ADHD Medication On The Pattern

The researchers also looked at 17 children with ADHD who completed the task both after taking their usual methylphenidate medication and after stopping it for 24 hours.

When the children were taking medication, their pupils showed a stronger response during the task and less variation between trials. Their overall pupil-response pattern also became more similar to that of the control group. But the researchers caution against interpreting this as proof that medication normalising attention span.

Methylphenidate can itself influence physiological systems that affect pupil size, meaning the study could not completely separate the drug's direct effects on the pupils from changes related to attention.

Also read: Using AI Apps To Manage ADHD? How They Can Help And Why Experts Urge Caution

Can A Pupil Test Diagnose ADHD?

There is no single biological test for ADHD currently. Diagnosis involves clinical assessment, developmental history and behavioural symptoms across different settings and circumstances.

The study itself has several limitations. For instance, it was based on a small sample, used existing eye-tracking data and involved a controlled laboratory task rather than everyday environments like classrooms.

Although the statistical model found greater trial-to-trial pupil variability, the direct participant-level difference between the ADHD and control groups did not remain statistically significant after correction for multiple comparisons.

The researchers therefore describe pupil dynamics as a useful source of additional physiological information, rather than a diagnostic test.

First author Saumya Yadav said, "It is still too early to consider pupil measurements as a clinical diagnostic tool.”

Larger studies will need to determine whether these pupil patterns can reliably distinguish ADHD from other conditions and whether they remain consistent outside laboratory settings.

A recent AI analysis of more than 400,000 Reddit posts about popular GLP-1 drugs like Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro and Zepbound revealed several side effects that researchers may not have fully recorded in clinical trials.

The study, published in Nature Health, analysed 410,198 Reddit posts from May 2019 through June 2025. Researchers identified 67,008 people who self-reported using semaglutide or tirzepatide, with 43.5% reporting at least one side effect.

The findings do not prove that the drugs caused the symptoms. Instead, they did identify patterns in patients' own accounts that may need further investigation.

What Side Effects Did The AI Find?

As expected, the analysis found gastrointestinal symptoms in majority. Among GLP-1 users who reported side effects, the most common were:

• Nausea: 36.9%
• Fatigue: 16.7%
• Vomiting: 16.3%
• Constipation: 15.3%
• Diarrhoea: 12.6%

Researchers also found abdominal pain, reduced appetite, acid reflux, bloating, headache and dizziness among commonly reported symptoms.

But two groups of symptoms stood out as they may be less represented in existing clinical-trial data and drug information. They are reproductive symptoms and complaints associated with temperature.

Nearly 4% of people who reported side effects described reproductive symptoms, including irregular menstrual cycles, bleeding between periods and heavy bleeding.

GLP-1 drug users also described chills, feeling unusually cold, hot flashes and fever-like sensations.

Also read: GLP-1 Drugs Mounjaro, Zepbound Show Promise For 1 Billion With Sleep Apnea

Effects Of Ozempic Or Mounjaro On Menstrual Cycles

The study was based on self-reported social-media posts, so researchers cannot establish whether semaglutide or tirzepatide directly caused menstrual changes, chills or hot flashes.

Other factors may also influence these symptoms. People taking GLP-1 drugs may experience substantial weight loss, changes in food intake, metabolic changes or other health changes that could effect these symptoms.

The researchers therefore describe these findings as safety signals, rather than confirmed adverse effects.

Also read: Are GLP-1 Drugs Actually Changing Asthma Biology, Or Are People Simply Having Fewer Attack Due To Weight Loss?

Reliability Of Reddit Analysis

Clinical trials help in determining whether a medication is effective. They also help in identifying its potential side-effects. But once millions of people begin using a drug, patients may describe symptoms in everyday settings that were uncommon or not specifically investigated during trials.

Reddit provides researchers with a huge data collection of real-world experiences. AI can quickly scan hundreds of thousands of posts for recurring symptom patterns that would be extremely difficult to identify manually.

However, Reddit users are not representative of all people taking GLP-1 drugs. The researchers noted that the population studied was younger, more likely to be male and disproportionately based in the US.

The study does not provide evidence that people should stop Ozempic, Mounjaro or other GLP-1 medications. Instead, it shows how AI-assisted analysis of patient experiences could help in addition to traditional drug-safety trials and monitoring.

Common symptoms of GLP-1 medications remain nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and constipation as they are backed by extensive research and clinical trials.

The newly highlighted symptoms, particularly menstrual and temperature-related changes, need clinical research to determine whether they are genuinely caused by the drugs.

Globally renowned beauty and haircare brand L’Oréal is in the midst of a new legal battle in the US over allegations that it did not warn consumers possible potential cancer risks linked with its chemical hair-relaxer products.

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes filed a consumer fraud lawsuit against L’Oréal USA, its parent company and SoftSheen, accusing the companies of selling chemical hair relaxers without disclosing alleged links to ovarian and uterine cancers. Arizona is the first US state to bring such a lawsuit against L’Oréal over the products.

The lawsuit alleges that the products were primarily marketed to African American women and, in some cases, children.

The state is seeking damages and penalties, including warnings if the brand wants to keep selling the products.

What Is The Concern With Hair Relaxers?

Chemical hair relaxers are highly alkaline products designed to permanently straighten textured hair. They work by breaking and reforming the disulfide bonds in keratin, which gives hair its natural shape.

According to the Arizona lawsuit, some chemical relaxer products contain substances including phthalates, parabens, and other chemicals classified as probable carcinogens.

The complaint states that repeated use can increase exposure as these products are applied directly onto the scalp.

However, the presence of a potentially hazardous chemical does not establish that using a particular product will cause cancer. Cancer risk depends on factors including the substance, dose, duration, and route of exposure.

Also read: Prostate Cancer: What's Fact, What's Fiction

Earlier Study Flags Same Concerns

The legal action follows years of scientific research that examined links between chemical hair relaxers and cancers related to hormones.

A 2022 study from the US National Institutes of Health found that women who reported frequent use of chemical hair-straightening products had more than twice the risk of developing uterine cancer compared with women who did not use them frequently.

The researchers, however, found an association, not proof that hair relaxers directly caused these cancers.

Other research has also investigated possible links with ovarian and breast cancers, adding to concerns about repeated exposure to chemicals may cause serious health conditions.

Also read: Beyond Vaccines And Nutrition: Why Childhood Cancer Needs A Wider Conversation

What Does L’Oréal Say?

According to Reuters, L’Oréal has rejected the allegations. A spokesperson for L’Oréal USA said that the company is confident in the safety of its products and considers that the claims lack legal and scientific merit.

The company said, “L’Oréal’s highest priority is the health and well-being of all our consumers. Our products are subject to a rigorous scientific evaluation of their safety by experts who also ensure that we strictly follow all regulations in every market in which we operate. We are confident in the safety of SoftSheen-Carson’s products and believe the allegations made in this lawsuit have neither legal nor scientific merit.”

L’Oréal also disputes the research underlying the litigation, saying the study cited by plaintiffs did not establish a causal connection between hair-relaxer use and the alleged health conditions and called for further research.

The Arizona lawsuit comes amid more than 12,000 similar lawsuits consolidated in a federal multidistrict litigation in Chicago involving L’Oréal, Revlon and other manufacturers. Trials in that litigation may start in 2027.

The current evidence does not mean that everyone who has used a chemical hair relaxer will develop cancer.

But repeated use is an area of ongoing scientific investigation. People who use these products can reduce unnecessary exposure by following product instructions carefully, avoiding application to irritated or damaged skin, and considering less frequent use or non-chemical alternatives.