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.

What Did The Study Intend?

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.

What Did The Study Find?

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.

Why Do High School Students Skip Breakfast?

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.

India’s medical industry has backed Maharashtra Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) Commissioner Tukaram Mundhe’s concerns about the sharp gap between procurement prices and maximum retail prices (MRPs) of several medical devices and hospital consumables, with patients ultimately bearing the burden.

IV Set: At Rs 11.05, MRP Rs 325

In a post on social media platform X, Mundhe said the most expensive part of a hospital bill may never touch the hospital, but patients bear the brunt as they have the least information to evaluate, compare prices, or seek alternatives.

This is because “a patient admitted for care has no way of knowing whether the price on a medical consumable reflects its actual cost or a markup fixed long before it ever reached the ward," said the IAS officer, who has previously led several food safety enforcement measures in the country.

He flagged the information gap as a core public health issue.

He shared how a survey of hospital consumables in Maharashtra found an IV infusion set with a trade price of Rs 11.05 carrying a printed MRP of Rs 325, a markup of 2,841%. A syringe procured at Rs 6.75 carried an MRP of Rs 57.20, while a catheter procured at Rs 29.41 carried an MRP of Rs 310.

He noted that “the MRP is often fixed upstream by manufacturers and distributors, disconnected from the trade price by a wide, unexplained margin. The result is a system where the party bearing the cost has the least information to evaluate it”.

Also read: High Sugar, Salt Or Fat? India May Mandate Red Hexagon Labels On Food Packs

Experts Call For Scientific Costing

“Piecemeal assessment of pricing will not serve any purpose. Hospitals get reimbursed under CGHS and PMJAY for procedures at below operating cost. We do not look at that. It is time that we carry out a scientific costing exercise on delivery of healthcare,” Dr Girdhar Gyani, AHPI Director, told HealthandMe.

“Patients deserve fair prices, not 2,800% markups, and ethical manufacturers deserve a level playing field and a fair opportunity to provide affordable, fair-priced medical devices,” added Rajiv Nath, Forum Coordinator, Association of Indian Medical Device Industry (AiMeD).

Maharashtra FDA Flags Regulatory Gap

Mundhe also flagged the structural regulatory gap. He noted that “scheduled medicines are capped under the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 2013. Most medical devices and consumables are not leaving both the pricing and the information around it almost entirely unmonitored”.

He called on the Department of Pharmaceuticals and the NPPA to “review” these findings and lay down “clear guidelines on the permissible gap between trade procurement price and declared MRP”.

“It's a step toward closing not just a pricing gap, but the information gap patients are left to bear alone”.

Industry Seeks Fair Pricing Policy

Welcoming the timely intervention by Mundhe, AiMeD said it has consistently cautioned that the current regulatory framework under the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 2013 is inadequate for medical devices.

“Patients, who cannot bargain or choose devices, are left vulnerable to inflated MRPs, while ethical manufacturers and importers are forced to either play within a distorted system or exit the market. This situation penalises both consumers and responsible suppliers, eroding trust and competitiveness”, it said.

AiMeD has long advocated for a Fair Pricing Policy tailored to medical devices, with transparent trade-margin caps based on ex-factory or landed import prices. Such a system would ensure affordability for patients, encourage ethical competition and strengthen the “Make in India” vision.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today launched a pilot program aimed at speeding up early-stage drug research and reducing delays before potential new medicines enter human trials.

Called the Expedited Investigational New Drug (IND) Pilot, the program is part of the US Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Operation TrailBlazer, launched in June.

The initiative aligns with the Trump Administration’s efforts to accelerate clinical trials and drug research in the US and maintain American leadership in medical innovation, particularly ahead of China.

“The pilot not only pairs industry innovators with top research institutions to accelerate high-quality data being submitted to the FDA, it also tests if the partnership can accelerate what happens after the FDA allows a clinical trial to proceed,” said Acting FDA Commissioner Kyle Diamantas, J.D.

How Will the Pilot Work?

Also read: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Launches Reforms To Speed Up Early Drug Research In US

The pilot aims to shorten the time between identifying a potential drug and starting a first-in-human clinical trial by pairing drug companies with qualified research institutions (QRIs).

These institutions will provide scientific expertise to support the preparation of Investigational New Drug (IND) applications.

The FDA said first-in-human clinical trials can currently take up to two years to complete in the US. Similar trials are completed faster in China and Australia, raising concerns about America's position in global scientific innovation.

The FDA will accept applications to participate in the pilot until October 30, 2026.

Review of IND Applications

Under the pilot, selected QRIs will support the IND application preparation process. This will allow the FDA to review and accept individual components of an application on a rolling basis during the pre-IND phase, rather than waiting for all components before beginning review.

The approach is intended to help identify and resolve issues with an IND application sooner and reduce the risk of the FDA placing a first-in-human clinical trial on hold during the 30-day IND period.

Read More: 18-Year-Old Dies From Rare Measles Brain Complication As Pennsylvania Death Toll Hits 4

The FDA said the goal is to make the path from scientific discovery to first-in-human trials faster, more predictable and more collaborative.

The federal agency said earlier planning and coordination could reduce unnecessary delays between the start of IND preparation and the beginning of first-in-human studies.

“The pilot hopes to utilize the American innovation ecosystem to accelerate the time to first-in-human clinical trials,” said Karim Mikhail, Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER).

Who Can Apply?

Drug sponsors and prospective QRIs will apply as a pair, with drug sponsors submitting applications to the FDA.

Applications will be reviewed by FDA scientific experts. The agency expects to select 8–10 Sponsor-QRI pairs for the initial pilot cohort.

READ: Fall Vaccines 2026: US Doctors Issue COVID, Flu And RSV Jab Guidance

What Is Operation TrialBlazer?

While launching Operation TrialBlazer, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., in a Fox News op-ed, said, “America should continue to lead the world in clinical research and medical innovation. Instead, we are losing ground.”

He cited a study showing that China now conducts more early-stage clinical trials than the United States.

In 2025, Chinese companies accounted for nearly half of global pharmaceutical licensing deal activity. “Those trends should concern every American,” Kennedy said, stressing that “the future of medicine should be built in America.”

According to the FDA, Operation TrialBlazer will help shorten development timelines by six to 12 months through a series of measures, including pairing drug developers with qualified academic centers and contract research organizations to prepare first-in-human trial applications.

The use of an experimental peptide, popularly known as part of the 'Wolverine stack', has surged significantly in the US, despite limited evidence that it actually helps people recover from injuries.

A new study based on more than 15 million medical records found that documented use of BPC-157, an unapproved peptide promoted online for pain relief, healing and performance enhancement, increased 33-fold between 2020 and 2026.

The findings were reported as US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has backed efforts to make the peptide available through compounding pharmacies.

BPC-157 is often combined with TB-500, a peptide derived from thymosin beta-4, in what users call the 'Wolverine stack'. The combination is marketed online as a way to accelerate tissue repair and recovery from muscle, tendon and other injuries.

Why Are People Taking BPC-157?

Researchers identified 1,039 patients with documented BPC-157 use. Among 644 patients, the peptide was taken for conditions ranging from sports injuries and chronic pain to gastrointestinal problems.

Pain and gastrointestinal symptoms were among the most common reasons for starting BPC-157. Many users obtained it through compounding pharmacies or grey-market peptide vendors.

The appeal comes largely from claims that BPC-157 can promote tissue repair and accelerate recovery. But these claims have not been established through the kind of controlled human trials normally required to demonstrate that a treatment works.

Also read: Bouncy Castles Linked To MRSA Outbreak In 48 Children In Ireland

Effect Of BPC-157 On Injury Recovery

The new analysis was based on real-world medical records, rather than a randomised clinical trial. Only around one-third of patients had documented responses to treatment. Some doctors recorded improvements, but patients were frequently taking other drugs or undergoing other treatments at the same time for recovery.

Dr Flynn McGuire of the University of Utah, who was not involved in the research, said, “There was no placebo or untreated comparator, and there was no standardized indication, formulation, dose, route, treatment duration, or outcome assessment.”

That makes it impossible to determine whether reported improvements came from BPC-157, another treatment, natural recovery or placebo effects. McGuire said randomised controlled trials are needed to establish whether the peptide produces meaningful clinical improvement.

Also read: BORG Drinking Trend: Why These Viral Alcohol Jugs Can Be Dangerous

Concern About Its Safety

BPC-157 is not approved by the US FDA for medical use. The FDA has previously raised concerns about the peptide, including the possibility of immune reactions and problems related to peptide impurities and product quality.

The agency says it has limited safety information for BPC-157 in humans and lacks enough information to determine whether some routes of administration could cause harm.

The FDA has also reported adverse events in its database involving reactions at the injection site, shortness of breath and skin or gum pigmentation changes, although it cautions that these events cannot necessarily be attributed to BPC-157.

In July, an FDA advisory committee considered whether BPC-157 and other peptides should be permitted as bulk substances for compounding. The process does not mean BPC-157 has been approved as a drug.