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.

Hair loss is one of the recent and increasingly discussed concerns among people taking popular weight-loss medicines like Ozempic and Zepbound.

A new study has compared hair loss risk linked with these two drugs to obtain a clear picture of whether one drug is more likely to trigger shedding than the other.

The study, published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, examined the risk of new-onset hair loss among people taking semaglutide or tirzepatide, the active ingredients in Ozempic/Wegovy and Zepbound/Mounjaro, respectively.

The findings emerge at a time when hair loss due to GLP-1 treatment is widely discussed. Even though the findings indicate, the absolute risk of hair loss due to GLP-1 remains relatively low.

Ozempic Vs Zepbound: Which Drug Poses Higher Risk?

The study compared people who were prescribed semaglutide and tirzepatide and looked at newly diagnosed hair loss. The researchers found an association between use of both medications and hair loss, including conditions like telogen effluvium, a form of temporary shedding that can occur after a major physical or metabolic stress.

However, the researchers say that the findings not be interpreted as proof that either drug directly damages hair follicles. The study was based on electronic health data, which helped researchers identify an association but could not establish that the medication itself was the cause of hair loss.

Also read: Nestlé Customizes Drinks For Ozempic, Wegovy Consumers: What Are Protein And Nutrition Needs of GLP-1 Users?

Why Can Weight-Loss Drugs Cause Hair Shedding?

One of the leading explanations suggests that the hair loss has more to do with the rapid change in metabolic health which helps with the weight loss. Researchers have not found evidence that the drug directly attacks the hair follicles.

When the body undergoes a sudden metabolic change, more hair follicles can prematurely enter the resting phase of the hair-growth cycle. Several months later, those hairs can shed. This effect is known as telogen effluvium.

Reduced food intake can also mean some people consume less protein, iron and other nutrients which are essential for for healthy hair growth. These factors could contribute to shedding during a phase of major weight loss.

Previous clinical data have reported hair loss in around 3% of adults taking Wegovy compared with 1% taking placebo, while Zepbound trials reported hair loss in about 4%-5% of users compared with 1% with placebo.

Also read: Paris Jackson Undergoes ‘Painful’ ECT for Depression: Can Electroconvulsive Therapy Reduce Suicide Risk?

Temporary Hair Loss Due To Metabolic Shift

Telogen effluvium is generally a temporary form of hair shedding. Hair follicles remain intact, meaning they can return to their normal growth cycle once the rapid weight loss stabilises.

Hair shedding may become noticeable several months after weight loss begins, rather than immediately after starting the medication. Regrowth can then take several additional months.

However, not every case of hair loss during GLP-1 treatment is necessarily telogen effluvium. Other forms of alopecia can have different causes and require different treatment.

The new findings come amid growing scrutiny of hair loss as a potential adverse effect of GLP-1 medicines.

A separate large study published in The BMJ in July 2026 also found that adults with type 2 diabetes taking GLP-1 receptor agonists had a slightly higher risk of alopecia compared with people taking other diabetes medicines.

Researchers have stressed that more research is needed to understand whether the medicines themselves contribute to hair loss or whether the shedding is related to rapid weight loss and metabolic or nutritional changes.

China has reported a rare human case of H1N2v swine flu, underscoring the risk of zoonotic transmission and the importance of continued surveillance of swine-origin influenza viruses.

Swine flu is caused by type A influenza viruses that mainly infect pigs. Human infections are rare and usually occur after close contact with infected pigs. When these viruses infect humans, they are known as variant viruses.

H1N2v differs from seasonal human H1N2 influenza. The “v” stands for variant, indicating a virus of swine origin.

China Reports Human H1N2v Case

China reported its first human H1N2v infection in a 2-year-old boy from Yunnan province.

China notified WHO on February 3, 2026, after the infection was laboratory-confirmed on February 2. The child developed mild illness on January 20 and had reported exposure to domestic pigs before becoming ill.

A study by Chinese CDC researchers, published in Frontiers in Public Health on July 29, found:

• The boy lived near pigs, chickens and pigeons.
• A pig owned by his great-uncle died around the time the child became ill.
• Influenza A was detected in samples from the child and the deceased pig.
• Investigators considered the pig a plausible source, although the exact transmission route could not be established.
• 30 close contacts were monitored; none tested positive or developed influenza-like illness.
• No secondary infections were identified, with no evidence of human-to-human transmission.

No Evidence Of Sustained Human Spread

Dr Amit Prakash Singh, Consultant – Internal Medicine at CK Birla Hospital, Delhi, told HealthandMe that H1N2v is a swine-origin influenza virus that can occasionally infect humans, usually after exposure to infected pigs or contaminated environments.

“As no secondary cases or sustained human-to-human transmission were identified, this should not currently be viewed as a pandemic threat,” he said.

People with frequent pig exposure, young children, older adults, pregnant women and those with underlying health conditions may need greater caution, he added.

Prevention includes avoiding close contact with sick animals, practicing hand hygiene and respiratory precautions, and seeking medical attention for persistent or severe flu-like symptoms.

Previous H1N2v Cases

H1N2v infections have been reported sporadically in the US and Europe, particularly following exposure to pigs.

• CDC surveillance lists 44 confirmed H1N2v infections in the US since 2010 through May 2026.
• During the 2024–25 influenza season, one H1N2v infection was reported in an adult from Iowa. The patient was hospitalized and recovered.
• CDC reported two H1N2v infections during the 2025–26 season by May 2026.

Human H1N2v infections remain rare. Greater concern would arise if there were evidence of sustained person-to-person transmission or changes that allow the virus to spread more efficiently among humans.

H1N2v Symptoms

According to the US CDC, illness caused by variant influenza viruses has generally been mild, with symptoms similar to seasonal flu. These can include:

• Fever
• Tiredness
• Loss of appetite
• Cough
• Runny nose
• Sore throat
• Eye irritation
• Nausea
• Vomiting
• Diarrhea

However, serious illness requiring hospitalization and, in some cases, resulting in death has also been reported.

How Is H1N2v Diagnosed And Treated?

Variant influenza A infection can be diagnosed through respiratory testing. Four antiviral drugs are recommended in the US for treating influenza: oseltamivir, peramivir, zanamivir and baloxavir, the CDC said.

Harvard University has agreed to pay $53 million (Rs 507 crore) to settle lawsuits brought by families whose loved ones donated their bodies to Harvard Medical School for education and research, only to have parts of those remains stolen and sold.

The settlement stems from Cedric Lodge's acts, the former morgue manager of Harvard Medical School, who was sentenced to eight years in prison after he pleaded guilty to stealing and selling human remains on the black market.

A Massachusetts court has granted preliminary approval to the settlement. The final approval is expected in December this year.

The case has not only raised disturbing questions about Lodge's actions, but also about how donated human remains are protected inside a reputed medical institution.

Deeper Glimpse Into The Case

Lodge worked at Harvard Medical School's morgue and had access to bodies donated to the school under their Anatomical Gift Program.

Federal prosecutors said that between 2018 and March 2020, instead of disposing remains according to the agreement, Lodge removed "heads, brains, skin and bones", and other body parts from donated cadavers after they had been used for teaching and research.

He allegedly transported the remains from the Harvard morgue in Boston to his home in New Hampshire, where he and his wife, Denise Lodge, sold them to buyers in different states. Some of the buyers subsequently resold the parts.

According to a statement from the US Attorney's Office, "At times, Cedric Lodge allowed [others] to enter the morgue at Harvard Medical School and examine cadavers to choose what to purchase."

Also read: Organ Donation: The Gift Of Life

When Did The Scandal Become Public?

The scandal came to light in 2023, when Lodge and several others were charged in the trafficking scheme. Lodge sentenced to eight years in federal prison in December 2025, while his wife, Denise Lodge, received a sentence of one year and one day for her involvement.

Other people who purchased remains from Lodge have also pleaded guilty and been sentenced. Katrina Maclean from Massachusetts, and Joshua Taylor from Pennsylvania, allegedly purchased body parts from Lodge.

According to the charging statement, in October 2020, Ms Maclean purchased dissected faces for $600 that she intended to have tanned into leather.

Ms Maclean owns a store called Kat's Creepy Creations. The business's social media page showed she specialised in up-cycling dolls into blood-soaked, horror novelties.

It is not confirmed if the cadaver parts were used in her products. The indictment alleges she stored and sold human remains at the store.

Mr Taylor allegedly bought several stolen body parts from Ms Lodge over the course of four years, worth more than $37,000. The indictment included a particularly grim reference to a PayPal memo for a purchase of $1,000 (£790) that allegedly read, "head number 7".

United States Attorney Gerard M. Karam said, "Some crimes defy understanding." He added, "The theft and trafficking of human remains strikes at the very essence of what makes us human."

George Q. Daley, Dean of the Faculty of Medicine at Harvard University, said he was "appalled to learn that something so disturbing could happen on our campus".

He said in a statement, "We are so very sorry for the pain this news will cause for our anatomical donors' families and loved ones, and Harvard Medical School pledges to engage with them during this deeply distressing time."

He also confirmed that Cedric Lodge was terminated on May 6.

Also read: World Organ Donation Day 2026: Too Old Or Too Sick To Donate Organs? Doctors Bust Key Myths

Families Questioned Harvard's Moral Responsibility

The criminal case against Lodge is separate from the civil lawsuits against Harvard. The families who donated the remains of their loved ones argued that Harvard had a responsibility to properly safeguard those bodies. Their lawsuits accused the university and medical school of negligence and breach of their duties toward donors and their families.

The case is particularly sensitive because body donation depends heavily on trust and respect. People who donate their remains generally do so with the expectation that they will be treated respectfully and used for legitimate medical education or research.

In October 2025, Massachusetts' highest court allowed the lawsuits against Harvard to proceed after an earlier dismissal, clearing the way for the settlement.

What Does The $53 Million Settlement Include?

The financial settlement will compensate families financially involved in the lawsuits. But Harvard has also agreed to certain non-financial compensation.

The institution will hold a live webinar with affected families and publicly acknowledge that Lodge's actions were “morally reprehensible” and inconsistent with Harvard's standards for treating anatomical donors and their loved ones.

Harvard also plans to create an annual scholarship for medical students, beginning in the 2027-28 academic year, in honour of people who donated their bodies to the school's Anatomical Gift Program.

Harvard Medical School Dean George Daley and Dean for Medical Education Bernard Chang said the settlement would allow the university and families to avoid prolonged litigation, while acknowledging the devastating impact of the scandal.