MRI scans are strong diagnostics with high-definition images of what lies inside a body. Strong magnetic fields require precaution, as brought out by an instance where a young woman suffered very serious injuries due to an oversight in a metallic core within a silicone sex toy that she happened to have before the MRI scan. This makes a stark reminder about the potentially deadly consequences of missing metal objects when such procedures are being performed. In April 2023, a 23-year-old woman went into an MRI with a silicone plug containing a metal core that was not known.

She thought that the item is made entirely out of silicone according to the advertising. However, the strong magnetic field of the MRI machine interacted with the hidden metal, dragging the object through her body and causing excruciating pain. According to reports from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the scene was harrowing, with the woman screaming in agony and requiring immediate hospitalization. Despite pre-scan screenings, which are routine prior to a scan, the patient did not inform the facility that the object existed because he presumed it was purely non-metallic. This caused serious injuries that led to the patient's law suit against the manufacturer for deceitful misrepresentations of material content.

MRI machines employ magnets between 0.5 to 3 Tesla (T). This is thousands of times stronger than the Earth's magnetic field. The tremendous force causes ferromagnetic materials, like iron and nickel, to be magnetized quickly and become strongly attracted toward the magnet. Objects as small as hairpins or paper clips will accelerate at 40 miles per hour inside the magnetic field.

The force can lead to catastrophic injuries in items lodged within the body, such as metallic implants or foreign objects. Metallic cores within devices, like pacemakers or intrauterine devices, must be disclosed to radiologists to prevent such complications.

How Metal Objects Interact with MRI Fields?

On these claims, Dr. Adam Taylor, a specialist in human anatomy, weighed his words in a international health website and added that the distance away and mass of this object would increase its velocity towards that of sound, "The acceleration would be phenomenal, but with a metallic core, it can't go anywhere near supersonic speeds. As for the size, the magnetic acceleration to the internal soft tissues would ensure that there could be severe intracranial trauma."

The injuries inflicted in this case likely involved damage to major blood vessels, nerves, or organs, highlighting the devastating impact of even minor oversight during an MRI scan.

This is not an isolated case. There are documented cases of metallic objects causing serious damage during MRI scans with a 65-year-old man with schizophrenia swallowed metal objects, including sockets and a hinge pin. The powerful magnetic field during an MRI scan caused the objects to rupture his stomach, resulting in serious injuries.

A toddler who ingested 11 small magnets perforated his bowel while undergoing a scan, making his case unique. In another deadly but extremely rare incident, there have been people who hide a firearm on themselves during MRI procedures. Magnetic attraction can trigger a discharge in a weapon and has led to some fatal injuries.

These cases emphasize the very strong need for adequate screening and patient education prior to an MRI.

Preventing MRI-Related Incidents

Medical professionals have been trained to avoid risks. This is by properly screening a patient for metallic objects. In general, most pre-scan protocols include:

• Patients are interrogated about implants, recent surgery or exposures at work related to metals.
• Radiologists sometimes use handheld metal detectors to search for hidden items.
• People who work with metal, like welders or machinists, will need additional testing to detect microscopic metal fragments within soft tissues or eyes.

The case emphasizes the importance of product labeling by manufacturers, especially those products that are likely to unintentionally cause harm to health. The patient's assumption that her device was 100% silicone points to a larger problem in consumer markets with misinformation.

It also reminds the patients to report any possible dangers to the medical professionals, no matter how the objects look non-metallic. In sensitive cases, patients can request private discussions with healthcare providers to ensure safety without discomfort.

In the end, it is a joint effort from manufacturers, healthcare professionals, and patients that can prevent such tragedies. Manufacturers must ensure truthful marketing, while healthcare providers should educate patients about the dangers of metal objects in MRI settings. For patients, understanding the risks and actively participating in pre-scan disclosures can be lifesaving.

This young woman's experience is a sobering example of the unforeseen dangers posed by MRI machines when precautions are overlooked. It serves as a wake-up call to address gaps in patient awareness, medical protocols, and product transparency. By learning from this incident, the medical community and the public can work together to ensure MRI scans remain a safe and effective diagnostic tool.

Myocardial infarction (MI) is one of the most common cardiovascular disorders, with an estimated prevalence of 3.8% in individuals aged less than 60 years and 9.5% in those aged over 60 years. MI remains a leading cause of death and is a significant public health concern worldwide.

But a heart attack isn't one single disease with one single mechanism. Being able to classify the type of myocardial infarction quickly can improve diagnosis and treatment.

In view of this, four major cardiac societies—the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA) and the World Heart Federation (WHF)—have jointly launched the Fifth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction.

The Fifth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction replaces numerical labels with three clinically meaningful categories.

The new approach aims to help healthcare professionals make more consistent diagnoses and enable patients to understand their condition better.

The new definition also aligns with the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) coding, which captures statistics on the extent, causes and consequences of different diseases.

“People may think of an MI as a heart attack caused by a blocked coronary artery but there are many different causes of MI,” explained ESC Chair, Professor Nicholas Mills from the University of Edinburgh, UK.

“The previous universal definition used a numerical system to categorize the different types of MI but this was not always easy to apply in clinical practice, leading to inconsistencies in diagnosis and treatment. The ESC, ACC, AHA and WHF have worked together to devise an updated and simplified classification system for MI, which aims to address these limitations.”

What Does the Fifth UDMI Mean?

The Fifth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction updates the classification to better reflect underlying pathophysiology, align with the clinical evaluation of patients, and incorporate objective diagnostic criteria.

Notably, it could facilitate wider study of less common mechanisms of primary MI, such as spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD), a condition occurring predominantly in women that is currently underdiagnosed.

What Are the 3 New Heart Attack Categories?

The new system considers the underlying cause of MI and aligns the diagnosis with established approaches to clinical evaluation. It recognises that MI occurs in three clinical settings: primary MI, secondary MI and procedure-related MI.

In this updated approach to MI classification, all MIs fit into one of these three clinical categories, and the new document outlines the diagnostic tests and investigations required for each.

1. Primary MI

Primary MI arises spontaneously due to an acute problem in a coronary artery. It is most commonly caused by a rupture of an atherosclerotic plaque, but there are other causes, such as a tear in the coronary wall (spontaneous coronary artery dissection [SCAD]), spasm or a clot.

2. Secondary MI

Secondary MI arises from an imbalance in oxygen supply and demand in the heart caused by another condition, such as very high or very low blood pressure or a very fast heartbeat.

3. Procedure-Related MI

The third setting—procedure-related MI—is one that occurs within 30 days of a cardiac procedure, such as coronary stenting, or a heart operation, such as coronary artery bypass surgery.

“Clinicians often do not use the previous numerical terminology—e.g. type 2 or type 4c—in patient discussions as it is rather complex. With the new approach, we can now talk with patients about the cause of their MI so that they can understand their condition and recognize why the next steps, such as further tests and treatments, are needed,” said ACC/AHA Chair, Professor Kristin Newby from Duke University Medical Center, Durham, US.

US President Donald Trump has announced drug pricing deals with nine more drug makers, including international pharmaceutical companies and smaller biotech firms, as part of his push to make healthcare more affordable.

Currently, US consumers pay nearly three times more for prescription medicines than people in other developed nations. Trump has been pressuring drug makers to bring the prices closer to those paid in other countries.

The latest deals, the White House said in a statement, bring the administration’s total to 26 drug makers. According to Trump, these represent 90% of the domestic pharmaceutical market, while the remaining 10% is “also coming in” and “have no choice.”

Which Companies Signed the Deals?

The latest agreements build on the administration’s broader “most favored nation” (MFN) drug pricing policy.

The White House said the nine companies are:

• Alcon
• Astellas Pharma
• BeOne Medicines
• BridgeBio
• CSL
• Kyowa Kirin
• Sun Pharma
• Teva Pharmaceuticals
• UCB

What Do the Deals Mean?

The White House said the agreements will lower prices on medicines used to treat costly chronic and rare diseases, including hemophilia, Parkinson’s disease, macular degeneration, glaucoma, liver disease, skin conditions and various cancers.

The deals give every state Medicaid program access to MFN prices on products from the nine companies, generating billions of dollars in savings.

The agreements also guarantee MFN pricing for all new innovative medicines the companies bring to market, which the administration says will prevent foreign price controls from benefiting from US pharmaceutical innovation.

$19.6 Billion US Manufacturing Investment

The nine companies have committed to investing at least $19.6 billion collectively in US manufacturing in the near term, according to the White House.

Astellas, Sun Pharma, Teva and UCB also agreed to donate active pharmaceutical ingredients to the federal government’s strategic reserve, known as SAPIR, aimed at reducing reliance on foreign supplies and preparing for emergencies.

Previous Drug Pricing Deals

Over the past year, the administration reached deals with 17 other drug makers, including Pfizer, Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk.

Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly reportedly agreed to price cuts in exchange for making their medicines more widely available through Medicare.

Trump also signed an executive order in May 2025 to revive the MFN policy, calling for prices to be increased outside the US and to “end global freeloading.”

The biggest savings from earlier drug pricing deals have come from weight-loss medicines.

Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly reportedly agreed to price cuts in exchange for making their medicines more widely available through Medicare.

Will Americans Pay Less?

It remains unclear how many medicines are covered by the new deals or how large the discounts will be, making the potential savings for patients and the government difficult to determine.

The White House did not release details of the agreements, while some companies described certain terms as private. The administration and several companies said the deals will also bring future savings on innovative medicines and expand US manufacturing.

Beyond weight-loss drugs, consumer watchdog Public Citizen has questioned how much price relief Americans are actually receiving from the administration’s agreements, Reuters reported.

Medicaid already receives steep discounts from drug makers under existing law, while most Medicaid beneficiaries pay little out of pocket for prescriptions.

A new Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) study based on 20 tertiary-care hospitals has found that patients with drug-resistant bacterial infections face higher mortality, longer hospital stays and substantially higher costs of treatment than those infected with drug-sensitive strains. The study analysed nearly 1.6 lakh hospitalised patients between April 2022 and April 2025.

The findings, published in The Lancet Regional Health – Southeast Asia, focused on four major Gram-negative bacteria: E. coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Of 26,213 patients with confirmed infections caused by these bacteria, 61.1% had carbapenem-resistant infections.

ICMR Says India Is Facing A 'Superbug' Crisis

The new study found that mortality was consistently higher among patients with carbapenem-resistant infections. For Klebsiella pneumoniae, mortality was 31.2% among patients with resistant infections versus 23.5% among those with susceptible infections.

For E. coli, the figures were 24.4% versus 17.3%. For Acinetobacter baumannii, mortality was 37.9% versus 32.8%, while for Pseudomonas aeruginosa, it was 28.9% versus 20.2%.

The risk was particularly severe with infections that were resistant to carbapenem, where mortality reached 46.4% to 50.8%.

Also read: H1N1 In Delhi: 166 Fresh Cases In 24 Hours, Tally Rises To 2,612

Drug Resistance Also Comes With A Bigger Treatment Cost

The study also found that antibiotic treatment costs were 1.1 to 2 times higher for drug-resistant infections. Treatment of resistant E. coli, for example, averaged $420 per patient, compared with $211 for susceptible infections.

The corresponding costs were $587 versus $505 for K. pneumoniae, $655 versus $436 for A. baumannii, and $702 versus $510 for P. aeruginosa.

Patients also spent longer in hospital. Those with resistant E. coli infections stayed an average of 23.1 days, compared with 17.8 days for susceptible infections.

Also read: Exclusive With Leading Pulmonologist: When Should You Worry About H1N1 Symptoms?

“AMR Is No Longer A Distant Threat”: ICMR

Dr Kamini Walia, senior scientist at ICMR and an author of the study, said, “Antimicrobial resistance is no longer a distant threat—it is already costing Indian lives.”

She added. “Our study shows that carbapenem-resistant infections carry substantially higher mortality and treatment costs.”

But Walia stressed that simply developing or prescribing stronger antibiotics is not enough. The answer, she said, is “better infection prevention, timely diagnostics and responsible antibiotic use.”

That is important because every time antibiotics are used, susceptible bacteria can be eliminated while resistant ones survive and multiply. Misuse or incomplete or inappropriate treatment can accelerate that process.

Also read: India Records 3,395 Active COVID-19 Cases, 26 Deaths, Kerala And Maharashtra Among Worst-Hit States

Avoid Delay In Treatment

According to The Times of India, Dr Rahul Pandit, a critical care specialist at H N Reliance Hospital said that Mumbai hospitals are also seeing more patients with carbapenem-resistant infections.

“It takes longer to treat a patient with a drug-resistant infection. Developing a culture, identifying the organism and determining its resistance pattern can take a few days, although molecular diagnostics can help us do this faster,” he said.

When the usual antibiotic no longer works, doctors may need to use combinations of drugs or newer, more expensive medicines.

ICMR Has Been Monitoring AMR For Nearly 13 Years

ICMR has been tracking antimicrobial resistance through its Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance and Research Network (AMRSN) since 2013. The agency says AMR can lead to prolonged illness, higher healthcare costs and increased mortality, while inappropriate antibiotic use remains one of the major challenges.

ICMR's current priorities include strengthening surveillance, improving infection prevention, expanding rapid diagnostics and developing alternative treatments such as bacteriophages and monoclonal antibodies.