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.

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in India, while lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related deaths, according to the latest GLOBOCAN estimates of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a specialized cancer agency of the World Health Organization (WHO).

The report highlights that India's cancer burden is shaped by region-specific risk factors, with breast, oral, cervical, lung and esophageal cancers together accounting for nearly half of all cancer cases and deaths in the country.

It also estimates that nearly one in 10 Indians is at risk of developing cancer before the age of 75, while around seven in every 100 people face the risk of dying from the disease before reaching that age.

Breast Cancer Tops New Diagnoses

Also read: Shigella Driving Antibiotic-Resistant Bacterial Diarrhea Among Gay Men in UK, Lancet Study Finds

Female breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in India, accounting for 192,020 new cases in 2022.

The five most common cancers in India are:

• Breast cancer: 192,020 cases
• Lip and oral cavity cancer: 143,759 cases
• Cervical cancer: 127,526 cases
• Lung cancer: 81,748 cases
• Esophageal cancer: 70,637 cases

Among women, breast cancer accounts for more than one in four new cancer diagnoses, while cervical cancer remains the second most common cancer despite being largely preventable through HPV vaccination and regular screening.

Among men, cancers of the lip and oral cavity remain the leading diagnosis, reflecting the continuing impact of tobacco use.

Lung Cancer Is the Deadliest

Read More: Bryan Johnson's Autoimmune Gastritis: US Doctor Explains the Hidden Signs of Autoimmune Disease

Although breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer, lung cancer causes the highest number of cancer deaths in India, highlighting its poor survival rates and the importance of early diagnosis and tobacco control.

Lip and oral cavity cancer ranks as the second most common cancer by incidence and the third leading cause of cancer deaths, giving

India one of the world's highest oral cancer burdens.

India's Cancer Burden Continues to Rise

According to the WHO Global Status Report on Cancer 2026:

• India recorded an estimated 1.6 million new cancer cases in 2024.
• Around 900,000 cancer deaths occurred during the year.
• Annual new cancer cases are projected to rise to 2.8 million by 2050, driven by population growth, ageing and changing lifestyles.

WHO: India Needs Stronger Prevention and Early Detection

The report says India's cancer profile reflects unique regional risk factors, particularly the country's high burden of oral cancers.

"India's cancer burden reflects the influence of region-specific risk factors, particularly the high prevalence of oral cancers, highlighting the need for stronger prevention, early diagnosis and improved access to treatment," the report said.

The WHO says health systems must move beyond treating tumors alone and adopt a more people-centred approach to cancer care.

Nearly 40% of Cancer Cases Are Preventable

The report estimates that almost four in 10 cancer cases worldwide are linked to preventable risk factors, including:

• Tobacco use
• Alcohol consumption
• Overweight and obesity
• Physical inactivity
• Human papillomavirus (HPV)
• Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C infections
• Helicobacter pylori infection.

A sexually transmitted form of Shigella, a highly contagious bacterium that causes severe diarrhea, is spreading rapidly among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) in the UK, according to a new study published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases.

The study, led by researchers at the University of Cambridge, found that sexually transmitted Shigella strains are spreading faster than non-sexually transmitted strains and evolving resistance to key antibiotics at an alarming rate.

“Many men who have sex with men are unaware of the serious and increasing risk posed by sexually transmitted Shigella,” said Professor Kate Baker, senior author of the study from Cambridge’s Department of Genetics.

“Sexual infection is now a sustained part of Shigella transmission in the UK. It is vital that this message reaches the communities most affected, so we can help to prevent the spread,” Baker said.

“Sexually transmissible shigellosis needs to be treated as a distinct public health threat, requiring different surveillance, prevention, and treatment strategies.”

What Did The Study Find?

Also read: Cancer Kills Over 26,000 Daily; Cases to Hit 35 Million by 2050, Says WHO Report

Using genomic sequencing techniques similar to those used to track COVID-19 variants, researchers mapped how Shigella bacteria spread and evolved across the UK. The study, conducted in collaboration with the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), analyzed 3,514 laboratory-confirmed Shigella samples collected across the UK between 2004 and 2020 from people aged 16 years and older.

Sexually transmitted Shigella spread significantly faster than strains acquired through food, travel, or other non-sexual routes.

Over an evolutionary period of about 2.5 years, sexually transmitted strains spread an average of 117 km between related cases, compared with 46 km for non-sexually transmitted strains.

Sexually transmitted Shigella is primarily circulating within GBMSM sexual networks, particularly in major cities including London, Brighton and Manchester.

No statistically significant increase was seen among non-GBMSM populations, and little evidence was found that infections are spreading widely beyond these sexual networks.

More than half of all Shigella infections in the UK are now sexually transmitted.

Around 30% are linked to international travel, while the remaining cases result from localized outbreaks, particularly among young children, and household transmission.

How to Prevent Sexually Transmitted Shigella

Read More: Can Arsenic, Lead and Other Metals In Tampons Pose A Health Risk? FDA Says No

Professor Baker recommended the following steps to reduce the risk of sexually transmitted Shigella:

• Avoid sexual activity if you have diarrhea or are recovering from a recent diarrheal illness.
• Wait at least two weeks after you have fully recovered before resuming sexual activity.
• Tell your doctor about your sexual history if you seek medical care for diarrhea or related symptoms.
• Ask for a comprehensive sexual health screening if you may have been exposed.

Growing Antibiotic Resistance Raises Concern

Researchers found that antibiotic-resistant sexually transmitted Shigella strains are spreading 71% faster than drug-susceptible strains. More than 70% of sexually transmitted Shigella strains were resistant to at least one clinically important antibiotic.

“This isn’t just one form of sexually transmissible diarrhea. This is multiple overlapping variants emerging that are all quickly becoming resistant to the drugs we use to treat them,” said Baker. “It’s highly likely that if you contracted your Shigella through sex you require different treatment to someone who contracted it through travel.”

Researchers also believe the rise in resistance may partly be driven by antibiotics prescribed to treat or prevent other sexually transmitted infections.

“Our evidence suggests that the variants of Shigella transmitting in sexual networks were actually getting resistant against treatments for other STIs, like gonorrhoea, so people need to remember that when they’re taking antibiotics they’re treating their whole body,” said Baker.

As the world celebrates football through FIFA, new research is drawing attention to the long-term health risks faced by athletes in American professional football.

A new study found that former NFL players are nearly four times more likely to die from neurodegenerative diseases like dementia, Parkinson's disease, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), than the general U.S. population.

About The Study

A major new study has found that former National Football League (NFL) players are nearly four times more likely to die from neurodegenerative diseases like dementia, Parkinson's disease, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) than the general population.

The research raised concerns about the long-term impact of repeated head injuries in professional football.

Published in eClinicalMedicine, the study analyzed mortality data from 19,824 NFL players who played at least one professional game between 1960 and 2019. The researchers from Mass General Brigham, Boston University, and the Concussion & CTE Foundation compared their health outcomes with those of the general U.S. population.

The co-senior author, Daniel Daneshvar, Harvard Medical School associate professor and chair of the Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital said, “This is the clearest population-level evidence we have ever had that NFL players are dying due to neurodegenerative disease at real and measurably higher rates.”

He added, “This study demonstrates that, when looking at athletes who have played in an NFL game, including nearly 20,000 players, across every official cause of death, the result is the same: NFL players are dying of dementia and Parkinson’s disease three to four times more often than they should.”

Despite having a lower overall risk of death than the average American, former NFL players experienced a dramatic increase in deaths linked to neurodegenerative diseases. Specifically, dementia-related deaths were 3.8 times higher, while deaths from Parkinson's disease were 3.88 times higher than expected.

Even after adjusting for other known risk factors, neurodegenerative mortality remained approximately three times higher than in the general population.

Also read: Bryan Johnson's Autoimmune Gastritis: US Doctor Explains the Hidden Signs of Autoimmune Disease

Risk Even Higher Among Younger Players

Researchers found that the risk was particularly alarming among players who died before the age of 60. In this group, deaths from neurodegenerative diseases were more than 12 times higher than expected compared with the general population.

The study also identified a clear dose-response relationship between years spent in the NFL and disease risk. Players whose careers lasted five seasons or longer had nearly double the risk of neurodegenerative death compared with those who played between one and four seasons.

According to study co-senior author Dr. Jesse Mez of Boston University's CTE Center, the study supports evidence of long-term brain disease due to repeated head impacts.

"A fourfold increase in dementia rates from a presumed environmental cause is immense," Mez said, adding that previous brain bank studies suggest chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) is most likely a major contributor.

Why Overall Mortality Was Lower

Interestingly, the researchers found that NFL players actually had lower overall mortality, with reduced deaths from cancer, cardiovascular disease, and suicide compared with the general population.

The team proposed the Selection Through Athletic Resilience Survivor (STARS) effect. They suggest that individuals who reach the NFL often have exceptional physical fitness, resilience, healthier lifestyles, and better access to healthcare, all of which contribute to longer overall survival.

However, these advantages make the elevated rates of neurodegenerative disease even more striking. Researchers argue that because NFL players are generally healthier than average, the true effect of repetitive head impacts on brain disease could actually be underestimated.

The findings add to growing evidence linking repeated head trauma in contact sports to long-term neurological damage and are likely to intensify discussions around concussion prevention, player safety, and long-term monitoring of athletes.