Credits: Canva
Is your teenager skipping breakfast? Why is that happening and what can you do? As per the data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which surveyed adolescent health and well-being found that 1 in 4 students in high school ate breakfast, which means 3 in 4 high school students are not eating their breakfast. This data is as per the 2023 survey.
The report describes a 10-year long trend and also recent changes among the two years. The study delved deeper into adolescents' dietary, physical activity and sleep behaviors. The study is also based on a national youth risk behavior survey of a representative sample of students from grade nine to 12.
The study found that while high school students drank slightly less soda and sports drinks and consumed more water, other healthy eating habits declined. In 2023, only 27% of students ate breakfast every day in the past week. The numbers were even lower for female students, with just 22% eating breakfast daily, compared to 32% of male students. Boys were also more likely to eat fruits and vegetables daily and drink water at least three times a day. Poor mental health and lack of physical activity have also been linked to skipping breakfast.
The other findings included a survey across 10-year period, where a decrease in the percentage of students eating fruits from 65% to 55%, eating vegetables, from 61% to 58%, and having breakfast daily from 38% to 27% was noted.
However, there was a positive trend among this, which was in children drinking plain water at least three times a day, which increased from 49% to 54% from when the survey began in 2015.. There were fewer students who also said that they drank soda in 2023 than in 2013. On an average, in 2013, around 22% students avoided soda, whereas in 2023, 31% students avoided it.
The report also emphasized that a healthy diet, along with daily physical activity and sufficient sleep further contributes to a healthy lifestyle. “The 10-year trends from 2013 to 2023 also show a decline in healthy dietary, physical activity, and sleep behaviors,” the survey reported.
While there is no one straightforward answer to it, psychologists and those who study children, believe that for many high school going kids, it is the easiest time to skip a meal. This is because they are caught between rushing to school, or not just that hungry in the morning. So for them, to sit down to have a breakfast may seem hassle and something they would have to take time out from their busy schedule. They at this age also prioritize their extra-curricular activities.
There has also been a shift in their circadian rhythm, and most teens cannot fall asleep before 11 pm, or even at midnight. Which means they wake up tired and struggle to do things right in the morning, which is why they choose to skip breakfast or give extra minutes to any other activities.
There is of course another, more popular reason, to lose weight. While experts and studies, like the one published in the Journal of Nutrition that found skipping breakfast leads to higher levels of hunger hormones, the students still feel the need to do this. However, it could lead to a slow metabolism, prompt the body to conserve energy and burn fewer calories, weight gain and deprive yo off the essential nutrients like calcium, iron, and vitamin D.
Without a morning breakfast, your blood sugar might drop too, which can increase irritability and stress, along with including the risk of depression in teenage.
Credit: AI
Tiny plastic particles in the human body may cause serious heart attacks. A recent study observed that people who had microplastics present in their arteries supplying blood to the heart are more likely to experience severe heart attacks.
The study has raised concerns about the effects of plastic pollution on cardiovascular health.
A new study published in the European Heart Journal has found that people with microplastics present in the arteries supplying blood to the heart were more likely to experience larger and more severe heart attacks, raising concerns about the cardiovascular effects of plastic pollution.
Microplastics are plastic fragments smaller than five millimeters that originate from the breakdown of larger plastic items.
“Micro and nanoplastics are tiny plastic particles that are found virtually everywhere in the environment, including the air we breathe, the water we drink, and many foods we consume,” said Pasquale Paolisso, lead author of the study.
Although microplastics have already been detected in human blood, lungs, brain, and arteries, researchers are still trying to understand their long-term health effects.
Also read: Recovering From A Heart Attack? Avoid These Dangerous Mistakes
In the latest study, researchers analyzed 61 Italian patients who were treated for heart attacks and measured the presence of microplastics in blood collected from the coronary arteries.
Researchers also collected data on whether the patients were smokers and on their exposure to pollution.
“In our study, smoking history was strongly linked to microplastics in the blood. Our findings suggest that smoking might make it easier for micro and nanoplastics to enter the bloodstream via the lungs. Air pollution may act in a similar way,” Dr Emanuele Barbato, an author of the study from Sapienza University of Rome, said.
Scientists detected micro and nanoplastics in 84 per cent of patients who had heart attacks.
In comparison, only 40 per cent of patients with chronic ischemic heart disease and 32 per cent of patients with normal coronary arteries were found to have micro and nanoplastics.
They discovered that patients with higher levels of microplastics tended to have larger areas of heart muscle damage and greater inflammation, suggesting that these particles may be linked to more severe cardiovascular events.
“While the findings do not prove that plastics directly cause heart attacks, they strengthen the growing scientific evidence that plastic pollution is an emerging public health issue deserving serious attention,” said Thava Palanisami,” a plastic researcher at the University of Newcastle in Australia.
The study is built on earlier research published in 2024, which found that patients whose arterial plaque contained microplastics and nanoplastics were more than four times as likely to suffer a heart attack, stroke, or death.
That landmark study was among the first to find that plastics accumulating inside blood vessels could have important clinical consequences.
Scientists believe microplastics may trigger chronic inflammation and oxidative stress, damage the cells lining blood vessels, and make fatty plaques in arteries more unstable. This could increase the likelihood of heart attacks.
Credit: AP
Almost a year after the last Senate-confirmed director of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), was fired for backing science and vaccines, President Donald Trump has nominated Dr. Erica Schwartz to head the agency, making her his third CDC nominee in less than two years.
Appearing before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) for her confirmation hearing on Wednesday, Schwartz pledged to restore public trust in the CDC through transparency and evidence-based decision-making.
However, she also faced pointed questions about vaccine policy, scientific independence, and whether she would resist pressure from Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Schwartz highlighted her military background and said restoring confidence in public health institutions would be her top priority.
"If confirmed, my first priority will be restoring trust in public health institutions through radical transparency and unwavering scientific integrity," she said.
"As CDC director, my sacred responsibility is to provide the American people with public health guidance that is clear, honest, and evidence-based. I will never betray science," she added.
Schwartz previously served as deputy US surgeon general during Trump's first administration and held the rank of rear admiral in the US Coast Guard.
Dr. Erica Schwartz is a physician with an extensive background in medicine, public health, engineering, and law. She holds a medical degree (MD), a Master of Public Health (MPH) in epidemiology, a law degree, and a degree in biomedical engineering.
Before being nominated to lead the CDC, Schwartz held several senior public health and military leadership roles, including:
Throughout the hearing, Schwartz repeatedly expressed support for vaccines, including mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, and strongly endorsed vitamin K injections for newborns to prevent life-threatening bleeding.
She also acknowledged that scientific evidence does not support a link between vaccines and autism, while arguing that more research is needed to better understand the rising prevalence of autism.
"We owe it to the American people to figure out why one in 30 children now has autism," she said.
Schwartz stated that she did not believe either President Trump or Health Secretary Kennedy would ask her to take actions that would harm public health or violate the law.
She also said she was unaware of Kennedy's decision to cancel nearly $500 million in mRNA vaccine contracts and was unfamiliar with reported cuts to smoking cessation and food safety programmes.
Although many observers consider Schwartz a qualified nominee with mainstream public health credentials, some experts said her testimony did not provide enough reassurance that she would independently defend scientific evidence if political pressure arose.
Dr. Jeanne Marrazzo, chief executive of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, said she wanted stronger commitments to evidence-based science from leaders overseeing the nation's top public health institutions.
The hearing also renewed criticism of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s handling of the CDC.
Several Democratic senators, including Sen. Bernie Sanders, argued that former CDC director Dr. Susan Monarez was removed because she resisted Kennedy's vaccine policies.
"Dr. Monarez, to her credit, stood up for science, public health, and for the scientific method. Frankly, she stood up for protecting the well-being of the American people, and that was the reason that she was fired," Sanders said.
If confirmed by the Senate, Schwartz would replace Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, who’s been serving as acting CDC director since February.
Credit: AI
A new Phase II clinical trial has found that a carefully formulated cannabis-based treatment may help alleviate agitation in people with advanced dementia. The findings offer hope for patients and caregivers who face one of the most distressing symptoms of the disease.
The findings are a result of the LiBBY (Life's End Benefits of cannaBidiol and tetrahYdrocannabinol) trial, that was presented at the Alzheimer's Association International Conference (AAIC) 2026 in London.
Researchers say the treatment, which combines purified tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) in an oral formulation, showed significant improvements compared to a placebo.
The multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase II study enrolled 120 hospice-eligible adults with Alzheimer's disease or other forms of dementia experiencing significant agitation.
Participants received either the THC/CBD formulation or a placebo for 12 weeks. Researchers assessed agitation using the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) along with clinician evaluations of behavioral improvement.
According to the trial results, participants in the cannabis treatment group experienced significantly greater reductions in agitation than those given a placebo.
Clinician assessments showed improvement in 83.9% of treated participants after two weeks, compared with 30.5% in the placebo group.
By 12 weeks, improvement was seen in 87.2% of treated participants versus 23.6% receiving placebo. Nearly 90% of treated participants showed overall clinical improvement during the study.
The study's lead investigator, Dr. Jacobo Mintzer of the Medical University of South Carolina, said, "These results were extremely impressive and showed a level of response not seen before in clinical trials related to dementia. Rarely do we see close to 90% of patients in a trial respond positively to a new medication."
He added, "Agitation affects many people with late-stage dementia, causing symptoms such as restlessness, aggression, and emotional distress that can profoundly impact patients and their caregivers. Current treatment options are limited and often carry significant side effects."
Also read: Normal Ageing or Alzheimer's? Doctors Explain Six Key Differences to Watch For
Agitation affects the majority of people living with Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, especially in the advanced stages.
Symptoms may include pacing, aggression, yelling, restlessness, irritability, and emotional distress, making day-to-day care increasingly challenging.
It also places a heavy emotional and physical burden on caregivers. Many currently prescribed medications, including antipsychotics and sedatives, may increase the risk of falls, excessive sedation, stroke, or even death in older adults.
A treatment that safely reduces agitation without substantially increasing adverse events could be helpful for the patients as well as caregivers.
Investigators said that the results are the strongest seen so far in clinical trials on agitation in advanced dementia.
Also read: Alzheimer's May Be Detectable Years Before Symptoms, Says Neurology Expert
Dementia is an umbrella term describing a significant decline in mental function that interferes with everyday life. It commonly affects memory, thinking and reasoning abilities and is caused by underlying conditions such as Alzheimer's disease or vascular dementia.
Dementia significantly affects an individual's ability to live independently, work and perform daily activities while placing a substantial burden on families and caregivers.
According to the WHO, dementia costs the global economy an estimated US$1.3 trillion every year, with about half of that amount attributed to unpaid care provided by family members and friends.
© 2024 Bennett, Coleman & Company Limited