Heart attacks and strokes are among the leading causes of death globally, with millions suffering from cardiovascular diseases (CVD) every year. There are more than seven million people in the UK alone, with about 100,000 patients experiencing heart attacks annually. However, a group of researchers at University College London (UCL) estimate that one 'polypill' taken daily day could eliminate a majority of these cases dramatically lowering death tolls.

The proposed polypill, a combination of a statin and three blood pressure-lowering drugs, has been under study for over two decades. Experts argue that introducing this pill universally for individuals aged 50 and above could be more effective than the current NHS Health Check, which assesses risk factors every five years for those aged between 40 and 74.

Studies have repeatedly proven the effectiveness of the polypill in preventing CVD. A groundbreaking 2019 study in The Lancet found that five years' use of the polypill cut the risk of heart attack and stroke by a third. In addition, previous modelling analyses have estimated that if given universally to people over 55, the polypill might be able to prevent 80% of heart attacks and strokes.

Today, the NHS Health Check follows a risk-based model in which patients are tested for CVD risk factors and treated with drugs accordingly. Yet, as per UCL's study, this system has serious flaws:

Low Uptake: Just 40% of those eligible for the NHS Health Check choose to have it, leaving a considerable number of at-risk patients undiagnosed and untreated.

Ineffective Prediction of Risk: The majority of heart attacks and strokes happen to people at average risk levels, thus making it challenging to identify the need for intervention effectively.

Limited Effectiveness: Even at maximum take-up, the NHS Health Check programme is predicted to have fewer health impacts compared to a polypill initiative applied to the whole population.

Simplicity and Affordability of the Polypill Strategy

One of the big benefits of the polypill is that it is so easy. In contrast to the existing screening-based model, the polypill scheme would not involve complicated medical tests or lengthy risk assessments. Instead, people reaching 50 would just have to fill out a few questions to determine possible side effects before they were prescribed.

Professor Aroon Hingorani of the UCL Institute of Cardiovascular Science, one of the strongest proponents of this scheme, says:

"Finally, the time is now to do much better on prevention. A population approach would prevent a lot more heart attacks and strokes than is done today with a strategy of trying to target a smaller group only."

Aside from the possible health implications, the polypill is also an economic solution. The drugs used are off-patent, thus cheap to produce and distribute. With the vast economic cost of managing CVD-related illnesses, a preventive model could result in substantial cost-saving for the NHS in the future.

The polypill has been proven to be effective by numerous international trials. In 2019, a randomised trial in rural Iran discovered that participants who took the polypill for five years had a 34% reduced risk of having a heart attack or stroke compared to non-participants.

Likewise, modelling research has indicated that even if only 8% of people aged over 50 took up the polypill regimen, it would still be more beneficial to their health than the NHS Health Check programme.

Is This a Case of Over-Medicalisation?

One of the main objections to the polypill strategy is the suggestion that it might result in the unnecessary medicalisation of a significant proportion of the population. But, it is argued, it should be considered as a preventative measure, not as mass medication.

Professor Sir Nicholas Wald of UCL's Institute of Health Informatics explains:

"Instead of being a 'medicalisation' of a significant proportion of the population, a polypill programme is a prevention measure to prevent an individual from becoming a patient."

He compares it with public health measures like water fluoridation or compulsory seatbelts—interventions that have been shown to have a significant impact in reducing public health danger at low individual cost.

With the evidence in favour of the polypill's effectiveness and viability overwhelming, experts are calling on the NHS to act now. It is their belief that substituting the NHS Health Check with a polypill-based prevention program could be the UK government's flagship policy under its pledge to put disease prevention ahead of cure.

As Professor Hingorani points out, "The status quo is not a justifiable option." With CVD still a major cause of death globally, taking a population-wide polypill approach could be a turning point for preventative medicine, potentially saving thousands of lives annually. The question now is whether the NHS will take up this call and establish a policy with the potential to transform the prevention of cardiovascular disease on a national level.

Biotechnology company Grail's vision of detecting more than 50 cancers with one blood test may soon become a reality after it showed promise of a positive outcome with the US Food and Drug Administration staff reviewers.

According to Reuters, FDA has not raised any major concerns yet about the accuracy and of the blood test, Galleri, which is designed to capture signals from more than 50 types of cancer. The promising biomedical technology seems to be closer to a positive regulatory decision.

FDA's Stance On Galleri

Ahead of an advisory committee meeting on September 23, FDA briefing documents were released which said that reviewers had no outstanding questions regarding its accuracy, safety, overall analytical performance, and study design.

However, this does not mean the FDA has approved Galleri. External advisers will now examine whether the available evidence is sufficient to back it and approve the multi-cancer early detection test.

More About Galleri

Also read: From Remdesivir To Ventilators: COVID Patients Died Due To Hospital Protocols, Claims Whistleblower Nurse

Galleri is a type of multi-cancer early detection (MCED) test. Instead of searching for one specific cancer, it examines and analyses DNA fragments circulating in the blood for chemical patterns linked with various cancers.

If the test detects a cancer signal, it also attempts to predict where in the body that signal originated, helping doctors decide which diagnostic tests may be needed next.

The test is not meant to replace to existing cancer screening tests such as mammograms, colon cancer screening and cervical cancer screening. It is supposed to be used with existing screening methods for faster and more accurate diagnoses.

One Question Still Remains

Also read: LSD-Based Treatment Clears Second Phase 3 Trial: Could It Be The First New GAD Drug In 2 Decades?

No multi-cancer detection test is currently FDA-authorised in the US. Some are available as laboratory-developed tests, but they do not undergo the same premarket approval process.

Grail submitted Galleri for FDA premarket approval in January 2026. The application includes data from PATHFINDER 2, a US study involving more than 25,000 participants, as well as data from the large NHS-Galleri trial in the UK.

The FDA's latest briefing documents describe the test as having a favourable benefit-risk profile, but advisers have been asked to consider an important question before making their decision.

The question is does detecting a cancer signal translate into meaningful clinical benefit for patients? It's important as finding more cancers is not automatically the same as saving more lives.

Galleri Has Also Faced Questions About Early Detection

In February, Grail reported that its large UK NHS-Galleri trial did not significantly reduce the combined rate of stage III and IV cancers, the study's primary endpoint, across three screening rounds.

Later analyses reported by Grail found reductions in stage IV diagnoses during screening rounds that were held later, but the company also acknowledged that the trial did not show a statistically significant reduction in the combined primary endpoint of stage III and IV cancers.

This is why the FDA's question about whether Galleri should be considered an “early detection” test is particularly crucial.

The FDA's Molecular and Clinical Genetics Panel of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee is scheduled to review the application on September 23. The panel's recommendation will help inform the FDA. If authorised, Galleri could become the first FDA-authorised multi-cancer detection test in the US.

The COVID-19 pandemic may have ended, but memories of overwhelmed hospitals, medicine shortages, overworked healthcare workers and deaths remain fresh for many who lost loved ones.

US-registered nurse and whistleblower Kimberly Overton has claimed that some COVID-19 patients died because of hospital treatment protocols, including the use of remdesivir and ventilators.

“Patients did not die of COVID. They were killed by hospital protocols — remdesivir, ventilators, and the denial of life-saving treatments,” Overton claimed on several podcasts.

Nurses Claims Patients Died From Hospital Protocols

Overton has also described what she says she witnessed while working in an ICU during the pandemic.

“Ventilators are the new gas chambers." "I worked ICU during the pandemic... I could not watch one more of my patients needlessly die due to deadly hospital protocols."

“No bodies piling up at homes or on streets — they were dying inside hospitals from medical mismanagement and a corrupt system. This wasn't a virus. It was protocol murder”.

Overton founded the Nurse Freedom Network, a US-based organization that advocates for nurses, patients and informed consent and has amplified criticism of COVID-era hospital protocols.

Also read: Natural Origin or Lab Leak? Gabbard Reignites COVID Origins Debate, Claims Fauci Funded Wuhan Lab Research

Overton is not the first nurse to make such claims.

In 2023, Gail McCrae, who worked at a hospital in California's Bay Area, also criticized COVID-era hospital protocols and the use of remdesivir.

McCrae said remdesivir was the main medication nurses at her hospital were allowed to administer to hospitalized COVID-19 patients. She also questioned the timing of treatment, claiming patients were receiving the drug 10 to 12 days after symptoms began.

During one double shift, McCrae said she noticed an increase in “code blue” calls, referring to emergencies requiring resuscitation or immediate medical intervention.

“And nine out of 10 times those code blues were to the lower level, down to the clinic, where they were injecting people. [Two of] my colleagues did in fact go into anaphylaxis, after receiving their shots.”

What Was The Remdesivir Controversy?

Remdesivir became one of the first widely used antiviral treatments for hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the US.

Read More: COVID Hearing: US Senate Panel Votes to Hold Fauci in Contempt; Phone Records Under Review

The NIH-backed ACTT-1 trial found that remdesivir shortened recovery time, with patients recovering in a median of 10 days compared with 15 days in the placebo group. However, the WHO-led Solidarity trial found little or no effect on mortality, need for ventilation or hospital stay.

In November 2020, WHO issued a conditional recommendation against using remdesivir in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, citing insufficient evidence that it improved survival or other important outcomes.

The US FDA, meanwhile, granted full approval to remdesivir in October 2020 for certain hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Trump Also Received Remdesivir

Read More: COVID Hearing: US Senate Panel Votes to Hold Fauci in Contempt; Phone Records Under Review

Then-US President Donald Trump was hospitalized at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center after testing positive for COVID-19 in October 2020. His treatment included remdesivir.

Dr Anthony Fauci, who led the US response to the pandemic, had earlier described remdesivir as a potential “standard of care” after early trial results showed that it reduced recovery time.

COVID Origins and Deaths

According to the WHO, more than 7.1 million COVID-19 deaths have been officially reported worldwide since the pandemic began.

However, WHO cautions that the reported figure does not necessarily reflect the actual number of deaths because countries differ in testing, definitions and reporting practices, and many have reduced or stopped reporting COVID-19 deaths.

According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), more than 1.2 million COVID-19 deaths have been recorded in the United States since the pandemic began.

WHO's latest data also show that COVID-19 deaths continue to be reported globally, although surveillance and reporting have declined significantly.

The origins of SARS-CoV-2 also remain under investigation. The major hypotheses include zoonotic spillover and a possible laboratory-related incident, with scientific assessments continuing to evolve.

Seven in 10 general practitioners in the United Kingdom believe adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is being overdiagnosed, according to a survey of 829 doctors.

The observation has reignited debate over the dramatic increase in adult ADHD referrals and diagnoses.

The survey, conducted by GP publication Pulse, found that 410 GPs described adult ADHD as “very overdiagnosed” while 173 considered it “slightly overdiagnosed”.

Only 50 said it was diagnosed about right, while 148 believed it was underdiagnosed to some degree.

Pulse said that the survey should be viewed as a GP's opinion rather than a proven scientific estimate of overdiagnosis.

The survey also found that GPs estimated an average of 81.3% of patients they referred to adult ADHD services eventually received a positive diagnosis.

But that figure does not mean that 81% of people with suspected ADHD have it. These patients had already been referred for an assessment by a specialist, meaning they had passed through an initial clinical screening process.

Doctors Are Concerned About ADHD Overdiagnosis In Adults

Some GPs responding to the survey raised concerns that assessments may sometimes be too narrow and focus on identifying ADHD without considering other conditions that can cause similar symptoms that could overlap with ADHD. These can include anxiety, depression, trauma and other mental health conditions.

One GP told Pulse that they were concerned about “superficial” assessments and whether patients’ histories of trauma or adverse childhood experiences were being considered accurately.

There are also concerns around the growing use of private assessment providers. Some GPs surveyed said they believed positive diagnosis rates were higher among private providers than NHS services, although these are individual doctors’ observations rather than evidence represented nationally.

At the same time, Dr Katie Bramall, chair of the BMA's GP committee, argued that a high positive diagnosis rate among referred patients is not necessarily evidence of overdiagnosis.

She said lengthy NHS waits may mean that only people who remain convinced that ADHD is affecting them significantly eventually reach assessment.

She also pointed to changing understanding of ADHD, including how it can present in women and adults, as one reason more people are being recognised.

Also read: Botox And Fillers: UK Watchdog Says Clinics Should Check Mental Health Before Injecting

Is ADHD Being Overdiagnosed?

An interim report from the UK government's independent review of ADHD, autism and mental health conditions said recorded ADHD diagnoses in England have increased, particularly among younger adults and women.

The NHS's independent ADHD Taskforce has previously estimated adult ADHD prevalence at around 2-3%, while recorded diagnoses were significantly lower in earlier datasets. The taskforce concluded that under-recognition remained a problem.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists has also agreed that the rise in diagnoses should not be automatically interpreted as overdiagnoses of ADHD.

It has pointed to other factors like better awareness and improved recognition, while also addressing concerns about online self-assessment that may not be always accurate.

The government review therefore says that the current situation is more complex than simply labelling ADHD as either overdiagnosed or underdiagnosed. It highlights the lack of recent, large-scale representative data measuring adult ADHD prevalence in England.

On the other hand, demand for ADHD treatment continues to climb. NHS figures cited by Pulse show prescriptions for ADHD medicines increased by 29% between July 2025 and June 2026 compared with the previous 12 months, with an average of 238,000 patients receiving these medicines each month.

Also read: ADHD: Your Pupils May Explain How The Brain Handles Attention, Says New Indian Study

Signs of ADHD

For people asking themselves if they might have ADHD, one must look to medical sources over social media popularity. The NHS says that signs of ADHD in adults are most often:

• Difficulty with organization and time management
• Having trouble with following instructions
• Having trouble keeping one's focus on tasks and seeing them through
• Feeling restless or being impatient
• Risk-taking and being impulsive
• Trouble in relationships or in social situations