Cancer is a large group of diseases that can start in almost any organ or tissue of the body when abnormal cells grow uncontrollably, and go beyond their usual boundaries to invade adjoining parts of the body. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), it is the second most common cause of death globally, accounting for millions of deaths every year. Lung, prostate, colorectal, stomach and liver cancer are the most common types of cancer in men, while breast, colorectal, lung, cervical and thyroid cancer are the most common among women. However, these are not necessarily the deadliest forms of cancer.

What makes cancer the deadliest depends upon how many people have it and what percentage of those people actually survive. Cancer researchers determine this on the basis of five-year relative survival. This is the percentage of people who are expected to survive the effects of a given cancer, excluding their risk of other possible causes of death, for five years past a diagnosis. It is also important to note that what makes cancer really deadly is that practically no cure for it. A cure for cancer would imply that there are no cancerous cells remaining in the body.

Here are the 5 deadliest cancers in the U.S., according to SEER five-year relative survival data for cases diagnosed between 2014 and 2020.

1. Pancreatic cancer occurs when cells in your pancreas, a gland in your abdomen that aids digestion, mutate and multiply out of control, forming a tumour. Major risk factors include smoking, obesity, diabetes, chronic pancreatitis, certain genetic mutations and environmental chemical exposure.

2. Esophageal cancer develops in the oesophagus, which is the tube that connects your throat to your stomach.

3. Liver cancer and intrahepatic bile duct cancer originate in the liver or bile ducts, often linked to hepatitis infections, heavy alcohol use, obesity, and aflatoxin exposure.

4. Lung and bronchus cancer primarily caused by smoking, secondhand smoke, and environmental pollutants, affects the lungs and airways, making it the leading cause of cancer death in the US.

5. Acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) is an aggressive blood and bone marrow cancer that progresses rapidly, often linked to genetic mutations, radiation exposure, and certain chemicals.

ALSO READ: Why Are Lifestyle Factors Making Millennials Vulnerable To Cancer?

US President is reportedly asking Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr to make more efforts to cut childhood vaccines in America, according to a media report.

The 80-year-old US president hopes to make “alleviating autism” a component of his legacy, and told Kennedy that he wasn’t making enough cuts to the US vaccination schedule, the Wall Street Journal reported. The report, citing sources, said that Trump believes cutting down the number of recommended childhood vaccines may lead to a drop in autism rates in the country.

He, thus, expressed frustration with the slow pace of progress on the issue at a mid-June Oval Office meeting with Kennedy.

“Donald Trump has been anti-vaccine at least since 2015,” said Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center and an infectious diseases physician at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. At the Republican primary debate that year, Trump said that autism had gotten “totally out of control” and vaccines should be in “smaller doses over a longer period of time”.

Further, Trump reportedly also wants to break the combination vaccine for the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination (MMR) into different shots, to reduce the risk of autism.

However, there has been no scientific evidence to prove that paring down the childhood vaccine schedule can reduce autism rates. Similarly, studies over the years have shown no connection between the MMR and autism.

Kennedy, last year, cancelled roughly $500 million in mRNA vaccine research grants and removed every single member of an immunization advisory panel.

But after White House aides told Kennedy that vaccine skepticism was less popular with voters, and they asked him to focus on more palatable topics, such as food reform, the Health Secretary has largely been mum on vaccines publicly. Trump’s recent urgency on the issue ignores his political advisers’ warnings.

CDC Makes Changes To Its Autism And Vaccine Webpage

Meanwhile, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) revised webpage on autism and vaccines is reigniting the debate over how health agencies should communicate scientific evidence.

The controversy was sparked by changes made to the CDC's autism webpage, which now states that the claim "vaccines do not cause autism" is "not an evidence-based claim" as studies have not ruled out every possible link between infant vaccines and autism.

The page also says the HHS is continuing to investigate the causes of autism.

The revised language represents a shift from the CDC's longstanding public messaging, which for years stated that extensive scientific research had found no causal relationship between vaccines and autism.

Republican Senator Bill Cassidy slammed the agency's messaging while continuing to defend the overwhelming scientific evidence that vaccines do not cause autism.

The changes have also drawn criticism from scientists, physicians, and lawmakers who fear they could weaken public confidence in routine childhood immunization.

Scientific Consensus Remains Intact

Despite the debate surrounding the CDC webpage, the broader scientific consensus has not changed. Large studies conducted over several decades in multiple countries have consistently found no evidence that routine childhood vaccines cause autism.

Major medical organizations continue to support vaccination as one of the safest and most effective public health interventions.

Health experts have also warned that ambiguous or conflicting public health messaging could further affect vaccine confidence at a time when the United States is experiencing its highest number of measles cases in more than three decades, largely driven by declining childhood vaccination rates.

The controversy highlights the growing tension between political oversight and scientific communication within U.S. public health agencies.

For public health experts, the concern extends beyond a single webpage. They argue that how government agencies present scientific evidence can directly influence vaccine confidence, healthcare decisions, and efforts to prevent outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases.

A new study suggests that nearly one in three adults in the United States could benefit from blood pressure-lowering medication under the latest treatment guidelines.

Yet millions who qualify are either not taking medication or have blood pressure that remains above recommended targets, highlighting a major gap in hypertension care.

The findings, published in JAMA, analysed data from the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) collected between 2021 and 2023.

Researchers evaluated how the updated 2025 American Heart Association (AHA) and American College of Cardiology (ACC) blood pressure guidelines would affect treatment eligibility.

Unchecked Hypertension Crisis

According to the researchers, an estimated 34 million U.S. adults, roughly one in three, meet the criteria for blood pressure medication but are not currently taking it.

Nearly 19 million of them have blood pressure readings of 140/90 mmHg or higher, placing them at increased risk of heart attack, stroke, kidney disease, and dementia if left untreated.

The study also found that almost 80% of adults with hypertension have blood pressure levels above the recommended treatment goal of less than 130/80 mmHg.

Also read: Not Just The Heart, Obesity In Midlife Could Be Just As Harmful To The Brain: Study

Treatment Gap

Researchers observed that many adults with high blood pressure were not taking any antihypertensive medication, despite being eligible under current guidelines.

Among those who were not receiving treatment, about two-thirds had blood pressure values within 10 mmHg of the recommended target.

The observation suggested that a combination of medication and lifestyle changes could help many get their readings down.

On the other hand, people who were already taking medication often had blood pressure levels that remained well above target, indicating that medication may need to be intensified.

The authors wrote, “Many could potentially achieve blood pressure control with initiation of antihypertensive medication and lifestyle modification.”

They further noted, “These findings highlight a large gap in hypertension control that implementation of the 2025 AHA/ACC blood pressure guideline recommendations could address.”

Also read: Smoking, Diabetes, High Blood Pressure May Fuel the Most Dangerous Type of Artery Plaque, Study Finds

High BP Is The Silent Killer

High blood pressure is often called the “silent killer” because it usually causes no symptoms while quietly damaging blood vessels and vital organs over time.

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), uncontrolled hypertension is a major contributor to heart disease and stroke, two of the leading causes of death in the country.

Researchers also pointed out that more than 80% of adults with uncontrolled blood pressure had health insurance and a regular place for medical care, suggesting that access alone does not fully explain why treatment goals are not being met.

Also read: Why Lifestyle Diseases Don't Take A Break During The Monsoon—Managing Diabetes, Hypertension, And Heart Conditions

Recommended Lifestyle Changes

The updated AHA/ACC guidelines emphasise that treatment should not rely on medication alone. Doctors recommend:

• Following a heart-healthy diet
• Reducing salt intake
• Maintaining a healthy weight
• Exercising regularly
• Avoiding alcohol
• Quitting smoking
• Taking prescribed medicines consistently
• Attending regular follow-up appointments

As hypertension continues to affect millions, researchers say earlier diagnosis, timely treatment, and sustained lifestyle changes could substantially reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease and improve long-term health outcomes.

Northern Ireland is set to restrict price promotions on unhealthy foods as part of its long-term strategy to curb rising obesity rates,

With this move, the country has joined the UK who has been making efforts to create healthier food environments.

The proposed policy is expected to limit promotions like multi-buy offers and other incentives on foods high in fat, salt and sugar (HFSS).

It could make healthier choices more accessible, reducing the influence of marketing on consumer behavior.

The policy forms part of Northern Ireland's Healthy Futures: Tackling Obesity strategy, which emphasizes prevention alongside better treatment services.

The Department of Health has recently announced the rollout of a Regional Obesity Management Service, but public health experts say clinical services alone will not reverse the obesity epidemic without stronger preventive policies.

Can This Policy Help?

Obesity remains one of Northern Ireland's biggest public health challenges. Around 65% of adults in Northern Ireland are overweight or living with obesity, while about one in four children are affected.

Excess weight significantly increases the risk of type 2 diabetes, heart disease, stroke, certain cancers and other chronic illnesses.

Policymakers and health advocates argue that supermarkets' rampant discounts and volume-based promotions on calorie-dense processed foods encourage unnecessary purchasing and higher consumption, particularly among families with constrained budgets.

Also read: Not Just The Heart, Obesity In Midlife Could Be Just As Harmful To The Brain: Study

Expectations From The Policy

The proposed restrictions are expected to target promotions on HFSS foods, including multi-buy deals such as "buy one, get one free", volume-based discounts, and other promotional tactics that encourage purchasing larger quantities of unhealthy foods.

The initiative complements broader UK policies that are already being implemented, including restrictions on junk food advertising before 9 p.m. on television and a ban on paid online advertising for unhealthy foods.

These measures aim to reduce children's exposure to unhealthy food marketing and encourage healthier eating habits.

Also read: Smoking, Diabetes, High Blood Pressure May Fuel the Most Dangerous Type of Artery Plaque, Study Finds

Reactions

Northern Ireland's plans have received strong backing from public health organizations and health advocates.

Fearghal McKinney, Head of the British Heart Foundation Northern Ireland, said, "While we welcome the announcement of the first phase of the obesity programme as a significant step forward to support people living with obesity, this alone does not go far enough in providing a long-term and multi-department government solution."

He added, "Obesity is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease and a leading cause of the increasing number of deaths in Northern Ireland."

McKinney also said, "This announcement must be accompanied by urgent delivery of actions within the Healthy Futures obesity strategy, including publishing a consultation to restrict price promotions on unhealthy foods."

Across the UK, governments are increasingly focusing on reducing consumption of unhealthy food through marketing tactics rather than focusing on individual behavior change.

Announcing England's advertising restrictions, Health Minister Ashley Dalton said, "By restricting adverts for junk food before 9pm and banning paid adverts online, we can remove excessive exposure to unhealthy foods, making the healthy choice the easy choice for parents and children."

Northern Ireland's proposed promotion restrictions are still going through implementation stages, but health experts view them as positive step towards broader obesity prevention strategy.

Combined with better medical services, education and healthier food environments, policymakers hope the measures will reduce obesity rates, lower the burden of chronic disease and ease pressure on the healthcare system.