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.

"We just saw it, and everyone is freaking out," told one scientists to the Washington Post on account of anonymity on seeing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) update its website backpedaling on the link between vaccines and autism. The said link had long been debunked, however, the Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr. has echoed the thought, and has a long history of critiquing vaccines and linking it to autism.

The agency's website was updated on Thursday and under Autism and Vaccine, it notes: 'The claim "vaccines do not cause autism" is not an evidence-based claim because studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccine cause autism.'

The first header reads: 'Vaccine do not cause autism', the reason the header has not been removed is all thanks to an agreement with the chair of the US Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pension Committee that it would remain on the CDC website, as per the website.

As the Post reported, the scientists did not have any prior information about the changes to the website, neither were they consulted for it. Before the Wednesday update, the CDC website stated that studies have shown that there is "no link" between vaccines and developing autism in infants. The website previously stated that "no links" have been found between any vaccine ingredients and disorders.

Read: CDC Plans Vaccine-Autism Study Despite Scientific Consensus

The CDC's Claim: Autism and Vaccine Link

As per the CDC website, approximately 1 in 2 surveyed parents of autistic children believe vaccines played a role in their child's autism. For this, the CDC cites a 2006 survey published in the Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics. The CDC notes that these vaccines are often those that the child receives in the first six months of life, including Diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (DTaP), Hepatitis B (HepB), Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib), Poliovirus, inactivated (IPV), and Pneumococcal conjugate (PCV) and one given at or after the first year of life (Measles, mumps, rubella (MMR)).

According to CDC a timeline has been provided that shows the correlation between the prevalence in autism cases and higher doses of the above mentioned vaccines. In 1986, the CDC recommended five infant vaccine doses: two oral polio (OPV) doses and three DTP injections. By 2025, the schedule expanded to include multiple doses of rotavirus, HepB, DTaP, Hib, PCV, IPV, influenza, and, at 12 months, MMR, varicella, and HepA.

Autism rates have risen since the 1980s, and while this trend coincides with an increase in recommended childhood vaccines, correlation alone does not establish causation. Autism is believed to have multiple contributing factors, and some researchers have examined possible environmental links. One study reported a statistical correlation between aluminum adjuvants and autism prevalence.

Read: Fact Check: Does Aluminum In Vaccines Cause Food Allergies As RFK Jr Claims?

While the CDC notes that correlation does not prove causation it also mentions that "it does merit further study".

What Are The Scientists Saying?

“CDC cannot currently be trusted as a scientific voice,” said Demetre Daskalakis, who formerly led the agency’s center responsible for respiratory viruses and immunizations. He resigned in August. “My question is, how language that misrepresents decades of research ended up on a CDC website,” said Debra Houry, the CDC’s former chief medical officer who also resigned in August.

However, the spokesman for the Department of Health and Human Services that oversees the CDC, Andrew Nixon, said, "We are updating the CDC’s website to reflect gold standard, evidence-based science.”

The Origin Of This Vaccine-Autism Theory

This originated from now debunked 1998 study, which was retracted after its author, Andrew Wakefield, was found guilty of professional misconduct and barred from practicing medicine in the UK. Despite decades or research no such link could be proven, however, the claim still continues in the political and public discourse.

Kennedy, who had long been anti-vaxxer, also made numerous claims, even though studies have long debunked this theory.

Many years of extensive study has shown that there is no real connection between vaccines and autism. As per a 2019 study, which was conducted over a decade in Denmark, involving half a million children, confirmed that the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine does not increase any risk of autism. Other studies too have confirmed the same, being studied over large sample sizes. It had reinforced the medical consensus that vaccines are safe and essential for public health.

Los Angeles County has recorded its first flu-related death of the season, the LA County Department of Public Health announced Wednesday.

The individual was an “older adult” with pre-existing health conditions. Officials noted that the person had likely not received a flu vaccine for this season, which generally spans from October through May.

Although flu cases are still low in November, health authorities expect the number of infections to rise as holiday travel and indoor gatherings increase.

First Flu Death In LA County

"The LA County Department of Public Health reported Wednesday the first flu-related death of the season in Los Angeles County. “We extend our condolences to the family and loved ones of the deceased. This sad loss underscores the serious risks posed by influenza,” said Dr. Muntu Davis, Los Angeles County health officer, in a news release.

Flu activity remains low for now, but it is anticipated to climb around Thanksgiving and the broader holiday period, when travel and indoor events are more common.

Experts advise getting vaccinated at least two weeks before holiday travel or gatherings, since it takes time for immunity to develop.

They also recommend wearing a properly fitted mask in crowded indoor settings, particularly for households with older adults, children under five, or pregnant women.

Flu Shot Guidelines and Eligibility

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that everyone aged six months and older receive an annual influenza vaccine, with rare exceptions for specific medical conditions. Annual vaccination is especially important for high-risk groups, including:

• Older adults, particularly those aged 65 and above
• Young children under five, especially under two years
• Pregnant individuals
• People with chronic medical conditions such as asthma, diabetes, or heart disease
• Residents of long-term care facilities

Timing: The ideal time to get a flu shot is before flu activity peaks, usually in early fall. It takes about two weeks after vaccination for the body to build full immunity, so getting vaccinated before holiday travel and gatherings is crucial.

Flu Shot: Types of Vaccines

Several flu vaccines are available, including standard-dose, high-dose for older adults, and nasal spray options for certain age groups. Your healthcare provider can recommend the most appropriate option based on age, health status, and any contraindications.

Flu vaccines are generally safe. Mild side effects like soreness at the injection site, low-grade fever, or fatigue may occur, but serious reactions are extremely rare. Individuals with severe allergies to vaccine components should consult their healthcare provider before vaccination.

Even after vaccination, preventive measures such as frequent handwashing, wearing masks in crowded indoor spaces, and avoiding contact with sick individuals can help reduce flu transmission.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is promoting a long-debunked theory, suggesting a potential link between vaccines and autism, and claiming that studies supporting this connection “have been ignored by health authorities.”

CDC Pushes Controversial Vaccine-Autism Theory

The disputed theory appeared on a revised section of the CDC’s website under “Autism and Vaccines” on Wednesday. The website now states: “The statement ‘Vaccines do not cause autism’ is not an evidence-based claim. Scientific studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines contribute to the development of autism.

However, this statement has historically been shared by the CDC and other federal health agencies within HHS to prevent vaccine hesitancy.” The agency added that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has “launched a thorough review of the causes of autism, including investigations on plausible biological mechanisms and potential causal links.”

It also noted, “This webpage will be updated with gold-standard science.” Prior to Wednesday, the page stated there is “no link” between vaccines and autism, and no vaccine ingredients were connected to the condition, according to archived versions cited by The Washington Post.

CDC Faces Criticism

Another part of the site, “About Vaccines for Your Children,” last updated in August 2024, still asserts, “Scientific studies and reviews continue to show no relationship between vaccines and autism.” Dr. Demetre Daskalakis, a former CDC official who resigned earlier this year as head of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, criticized the changes, saying on X, “The weaponization of the voice of CDC is getting worse. DO NOT TRUST THIS AGENCY. This is a national embarrassment.” Despite the new language, the header “Vaccines do not cause autism” remains due to an agreement with Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), chair of the Senate Health Committee, who cast the deciding vote to advance Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s nomination to the full Senate floor.

CDC Staff Shocked

The revisions surprised CDC staff, including those overseeing vaccine safety and autism information, leaving them blindsided, according to The Post. “We just saw it, and everyone is freaking out,” one scientist said, as per NBC News.

While the changes could undermine public confidence in vaccines, Kennedy and Trump have historically supported this theory. Both have also warned against Tylenol use during pregnancy, claiming a link to autism, despite large-scale studies disproving any connection.

What Is The Vaccine And Autism Link About?

Autism spectrum disorder, or autism, is a condition that affects the brain, making it challenging for some people to communicate and interact with others. Experts still don’t fully understand what causes it.

The idea that vaccines might play a role largely began with a 1998 study suggesting that the MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) vaccine—or infection with the natural measles virus—could lead to autism. Since then, numerous scientific studies have shown there is no connection between vaccines or any of their ingredients and autism.

The 1998 study itself was later discredited: the research was found to be false, the doctor responsible lost his medical license, and the journal that published the paper retracted it, acknowledging it should never have been published.

Despite strong evidence showing vaccines are safe and effective, some parents still choose to delay or skip vaccinations for their children. This can be very dangerous, as diseases like measles, which vaccines prevent, are still circulating. An unvaccinated child who contracts one of these illnesses can become seriously ill or even die and may also put others at risk.

While mild reactions like a fever or rash can occur after vaccination, the chance of a serious side effect from the MMR or other recommended vaccines is very small compared to the risks of the diseases they protect against.