Image Credits: Canva
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.
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.
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.
Credit: JamPress
A 51-year-old Brazilian businesswoman has died after undergoing six facial cosmetic procedures during surgery lasting several hours.
Andreia Vieira Gaspar, from Goiânia, Brazil, died on August 12, the Daily Star reported.
According to Brazilian news outlet G1 Goiás, the procedures reportedly included a deep facelift, neck liposuction, eyelid surgery, jawline work and other facial procedures.
Andreia reportedly left the operating theatre heavily swollen and struggling to breathe. Her condition worsened overnight, with neck pain and increasing breathing difficulties. She reportedly told her sister, Djiane Vieira: “Sis, I'm dying.”
Djiane then sought help from the medical team through a group chat, saying her sister was dying and asking for immediate assistance.
The Public Ministry of Goiás has requested a police investigation into possible involuntary manslaughter.
The family alleged that Andreia's condition worsened after surgery and questioned whether the hospital was equipped to handle a serious postoperative emergency. They also alleged that it did not have an intensive care unit or an ambulance available.
G1 reported that her condition deteriorated about six hours after surgery and that she died despite resuscitation attempts.
A medical report cited by the family identified acute thrombosis and pulmonary infarction as the causes of death.
Andreia had previously run a beauty salon in Goiânia and had lived in Spain for five years. Her family said undergoing the procedures had been a long-held dream. Her sister said Andreia had spent two years saving for the surgery, which cost BRL 118,000 (£16,800).
Social media trends, celebrity endorsements and demand for anti-ageing treatments have fueled interest in cosmetic procedures and injectable treatments. Experts warn that unregulated procedures can carry risks, including allergic reactions and infections, while severe complications can affect organs such as the liver and kidneys.
The cosmetic surgery market was estimated at USD 94.1 billion in 2025.
Experts stress that cosmetic procedures should involve realistic expectations, qualified medical advice and a clear understanding of the risks, recovery and costs.
Dr Chintan Gujarati, Cosmetic and Plastic Surgeon at Ruby Hall Clinic, told HealthandMe that cosmetic procedures require careful planning and informed decision-making.
He recommends asking:
1. Is the procedure right for me?
Discuss whether it suits your health, goals and individual needs.
2. Is my surgeon qualified?
Ensure the procedure is performed by a board-certified plastic surgeon or appropriately trained specialist.
3. What are the risks?
Ask about possible complications, including infection, scarring and the need for further treatment.
4. What results can I realistically expect?
Cosmetic procedures can improve appearance but cannot guarantee perfection.
5. What is the recovery process?
Ask about downtime, pain management, activity restrictions and when you can resume normal activities.
6. What will the procedure cost?
Request a breakdown of consultation, hospital, medication and follow-up costs.
7. What if I am unhappy with the results?
Discuss revision policies and corrective options before proceeding.
Credit: iStock
Children under 15 account for half of the 46 suspected mpox cases in Guinea-Bissau, which declared its first mpox outbreak on July 4, UNICEF said.
As of August 17, the country had reported seven confirmed cases, all among adults. Six were reported in the Autonomous Sector of Bissau and one in the Biombo Region. No deaths have been reported.
Of the 46 suspected cases, 23 are children under 15, including 16 aged 0-4 years. Young children face a greater risk of complications from mpox.
“This is the first time mpox cases have been reported in Guinea-Bissau, making even a small outbreak a major public health event,” said Sandra Martins, UNICEF Deputy Representative in Guinea-Bissau.
“While the country’s surveillance system remains extremely fragile, we face the risk that cases are going undetected, particularly among children who are the most vulnerable to severe complications.”
UNICEF said the confirmed cases do not appear connected, raising concerns about undetected chains of transmission and additional unidentified cases.
Gaps remain in community-based surveillance, including contact identification, sample testing and tracing how the virus is spreading.
Martins urged families to seek care if a child or family member develops a rash, fever, swollen lymph nodes or other symptoms.
Mpox is a viral zoonotic disease that can spread from animals to humans. It is caused by the monkeypox virus, part of the Orthopoxvirus genus, the same family as the variola virus that causes smallpox.
Mpox symptoms are generally milder than those of smallpox. After an incubation period of 5 to 21 days, symptoms typically begin with fever, headache, muscle aches and fatigue.
The disease usually resolves within 2 to 4 weeks, but severe cases can occur, particularly in children, pregnant women and immunocompromised people. Common symptoms include:
Mpox can spread through direct contact with the blood, bodily fluids or skin lesions of infected animals, including rodents and primates.
Human-to-human transmission can occur through close contact with respiratory secretions, skin lesions or contaminated objects. The virus can enter through broken skin, the respiratory tract or the mucous membranes of the eyes, nose or mouth.
The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for preventing mpox transmission include:
Credit: AI
The Centre has tightened restrictions on certain cough and cold medicines for children below four years, citing potential health risks associated with a specific drug combination in children.
The Union Health Ministry has restricted the manufacture, sale and distribution of fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) containing chlorpheniramine maleate and phenylephrine hydrochloride for children under four.
Manufacturers have also been instructed to carry a clear warning stating that the medicine “shall not be used in children below four years of age.”
The decision follows recommendations from an expert committee and the Drugs Technical Advisory Board (DTAB), which reviewed the safety of the combination in young children.
Chlorpheniramine is an antihistamine, while phenylephrine is a decongestant. The combination is used to relieve symptoms like blocked or runny nose, sneezing and watery eyes caused by colds, flu and allergies.
However, young children can respond differently to medicines than adults, and dosing errors or adverse effects can result in more serious effects in this age group.
The Health Ministry’s expert committee concluded that the combination could pose potential health risks in children below four, particularly when safer alternatives are available.
The latest directive therefore requires manufacturers to clearly communicate the age restriction rather than putting the onus on parents.
A common cold is usually caused by a virus, meaning antibiotics do not treat it. In many children, symptoms improve with supportive care such as adequate fluids, rest and measures recommended by a paediatrician.
Combination cough and cold products can contain several active ingredients, increasing the possibility of incorrect dosing and side effects if parents give more than one medicine containing the same ingredient.
This is particularly important for young children because their medication doses are generally calculated according to age and/or body weight.
The government has been tightening oversight of paediatric medicines following serious concerns surrounding cough syrups in India.
In June, the Centre removed cough syrups from an exemption that had allowed certain products to be sold through retail outlets in smaller villages without the same pharmacy restrictions.
Parents should avoid giving children under four any medicine containing this combination unless specifically advised by a qualified healthcare professional.
The government has emphasised that safer alternatives are available, while the latest restriction is intended to reduce avoidable medication-related risks in young children.
© 2024 Bennett, Coleman & Company Limited