Diet plays a very important role when it comes to your health. There are many people who have to adhere to strict diets because of certain conditions they have. While the basic understanding that we need all kinds of foods to fulfill our body’s needs, sometimes these foods can also cause harm to your body. For example, lactose intolerant people cannot eat or consume any kind of dairy product as their bodies do not have the necessary compounds, known as lactose, to break down dairy foods. Similarly, there are many foods that may be ok for others to consume, but not for people who have digestive issues like IBS. But this new clinical trial may be able to help us know what food we can eat based on our blood test! The blood test, called inFoods IBS, looks for a special type of antibody in the blood. Antibodies are like tiny soldiers that our bodies make to fight off things that could make us sick.

IBS is a very common problem, affecting a large number of people. Many people know that what they eat can make their IBS symptoms worse, but it's often hard to figure out exactly which foods are the culprits. This is because everyone is different, and what triggers one person might not trigger another. Doctors hear from patients all the time, asking for help in determining which foods are causing their problems. So, finding a reliable way to pinpoint those foods is important. This test is attempting to provide that reliability.

How Does This Blood Test Work?

Basically, the test is looking for an antibody called IgG. When the gut reacts badly to a food, it makes more of this IgG antibody. The test checks for reactions to 18 common foods, like wheat, milk, and certain fruits. If the test finds high levels of the IgG antibody for a certain food, it means that food is likely causing problems. Therefore, the patient should try to remove that food from their diet.

Many people with IBS struggle to find relief from their stomach pain and discomfort. This new study looked at whether a special blood test could help. The idea was to see if the test could tell people which foods were making their IBS worse. The results were encouraging. When people changed their diets based on what the blood test showed, about 60% of them felt less stomach pain. This is better than the 42% who felt better when they just tried a general diet change. This shows that the blood test might be a useful tool for people with IBS to get real relief.

How Does This Personalized Nutrition Approach Work?

Many doctors suggest that people with IBS try elimination diets, where they cut out certain foods to see if their symptoms improve. However, these diets can be very hard to follow, because they often require people to cut out a lot of different foods. Doctors are always looking for ways to give patients care that's tailored to their specific needs. In the case of IBS, that means figuring out exactly which foods each person should avoid.

This blood test is a step in that direction. Experts are calling it a move towards "precision nutrition." This means that instead of giving everyone the same diet advice, doctors could use the blood test to create a personalized plan for each patient. While more research is needed, this test brings hope that doctors will soon be able to give much more precise dietary recommendations to those people that suffer from IBS. While this test is yet to be approved by FDA, it could be a world of comfort and ease for people who suffer with IBS.

A 43-year-old mother from Northern Ireland got diagnosed with an exceptionally rare cancer after months of pain, continual bleeding and abdominal swelling. She said that these symptoms were initially and inaccurately attributed to perimenopause, anxiety and constipation.

Nicola Crymble’s symptoms started in 2024 after she had a copper intrauterine device (IUD) inserted. The bleeding and pain became so severe that she had the device removed while she was in Kenya doing mission work. “I was constantly bleeding, there was so much pain,” Crymble said.

However, her symptoms persisted even after she returned home. She said doctors initially suggested that perimenopause and anxiety could explain what she was experiencing.

By December 2024, Crymble had noticed a lump in her abdomen. It continued to grow, making everyday activities challenging. She said people even thought she was pregnant because of the swelling. She eventually went to hospital and underwent scans, which revealed a mass near her cervix. Doctors initially thought it might be a cyst.

Crymble Got Diagnosed With FATWO, A Rare Cancer

Also read: Dr Rachna Shroff: Indian-American Cancer Researcher Who Turned Her Diagnosis Into Advocacy

Crymble underwent major surgery in February 2025 to remove the tumour. She also chose to have her ovaries and fallopian tubes removed during the procedure. A month later, she received the diagnosis that she had female adnexal tumour of probable Wolffian origin, commonly known as FATWO.

The tumour is believed to develop from remnants of the Wolffian duct, an embryonic structure involved in the development of the reproductive and urinary systems. Although these structures usually regress during female development, residual tissue can sometimes pave the way for tumour growth.

FATWO is an exceptionally rare form of cancer. There are only around 150 documented cases recorded worldwide. While many FATWO tumours do not metastatize, some can behave aggressively. In Crymble’s case, the cancer later spread to her liver and vaginal vault, the upper part of the vaginal canal.

She experienced intense pain beneath her ribs before a scan revealed that the cancer had spread. Further surgery was ruled out because the tumour growths were too close to other organs.

Chemotherapy As Surgery Was Not An Option

With surgery no longer an option, Crymble and her doctors decided to proceed with chemotherapy. She began treatment on October 13, 2026, and is expected to undergo six rounds, one every three weeks.

The family is also looking for specialist advice because there is limited information available about the rare disease and the best way to treat it. Her husband, Andrew Crymble, said doctors had little experience with the condition.

“They've never seen it before, they don't know how to treat it,” he said, explaining why the family decided to share her story publicly. They hope it will reach researchers or doctors who may have more information about FATWO.

Crymble has stopped working and has found it difficult to maintain her usual family routines while undergoing treatment. The family is also seeking financial support after discovering that their life insurance coverage will not cover the treatment.

Also read: Amgen & AstraZeneca's New Treatment Combination Cuts Advanced Lung Cancer Death Risk By 58% In Trial

Symptoms That Warrant Immediate Attention

Perimenopause can cause changes in menstrual patterns, like irregular periods. But unexplained bleeding, stubborn abdominal pain, lump or unusual swelling should not automatically be attributed to hormonal changes without seeking medical intervention.

These symptoms can occur due to many causes, and they do not necessarily indicate cancer. But worsening or unusual symptoms demand medical assessment, especially when they do not improve or when new symptoms develop.

The effects of heatwaves, air pollution, noise and overall climate change may extend beyond physical health. According to a new report by the Earth–Brain–Health Commission published in Nature Mental Health recently, they can have a significant impact on mood, cognitive function and overall psychological wellbeing.

The commission warns that environmental changes are altering the conditions in which people live. It also talks about consequences for brain health and mental wellbeing. It also calls for mental health to become a consideration in climate policy, urban planning and environmental decision making, rather than being treated only after symptoms develop.

The findings are relevant to low and middle-income countries, where exposure to environmental hazards can overlap with greater socioeconomic problems like poverty and limited access to healthcare.

“Heat and heatwaves, air and noise pollution, extreme weather and compound events, urbanization, and the loss of green and blue spaces are associated with depression, anxiety, cognitive decline, and impaired emotional and behavioral functioning,” the commission states.

Effects Of Environmental Conditions On Brain

Also read: Lancet Study Finds Air Pollution & Chemical Exposures Could Add To South Asia's Diabetes & Heart Disease Burden

From biological changes like neuroinflammation, disruption of hormones and the body's internal clock to psychological stress and due to isolation and displacement, the commission identifies several ways through which environmental conditions may impact mental health.

Heat exposure is one of the gravest concerns in current times. Heatwaves can disrupt sleep and contribute to physiological stress, while air pollution can lead to cognitive decline. Noise pollution and stressful urban environments may fuel anxiety and depression.

These exposures are compounded by people’s standard of living. A person living in poorly ventilated housing, for example, may face heat, air pollution, financial hardship and limited access to healthcare at the same time. These combined problems can be difficult to measure by studying each exposure separately.

Who Is At Risk?

Also read: Rising AQI In Delhi-NCR: Doctors Warn Of Lung And Heart Risks As Pollution Builds

Children, older adults, people with disabilities and marginalised communities may face greater exposure to environmental hazards while having fewer resources and help to cope with them.

The commission also highlights low and middle-income countries and small island developing states. These populations may face significant environmental risks but remain underrepresented in research on climate change and mental health.

Dr Vivek Benegal, senior professor of psychiatry and former head of department at the National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences (NIMHANS), Bengaluru, is among the commission's members. He said NIMHANS has been examining how climate change affects the human brain.

Benegal also pointed to a 2023 study conducted by researchers from NIMHANS and King's College London. The study found that even low levels of arsenic exposure, below World Health Organization thresholds, were associated with changes in brain structure and impaired cognitive abilities among children, adolescents and young adults.

Commission's Recommendations

The report recommends that governments should incorporate brain and mental health measures into environmental policies. Its recommendations include monitoring environmental exposures, identifying risks early in life, and designing healthier urban environments.

“The principal obstacles to action are organisational and financial rather than evidential,” the commission observes, noting that research cohorts, Earth-observation systems and environmental governance tools already exist but are often maintained separately.

COVID-19 vaccines were rolled out during the pandemic, so questions about their safety, how long they protect against infection and whether mRNA technology was tested for long enough continue to dominate public debate.

Dr Paul Offit, paediatrician and director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and former member of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, says many concerns overlook the the evidence collected before and after the vaccines were introduced.

In an interview with HealthandMe, Offit discussed how long COVID vaccine protection lasts, what scientists have learnt about rare side effects and why the technology behind mRNA vaccines was not as new as many people thought.

“I think it is probably the best studied vaccine in human history,” Offit said. He pointed to the large number of people who received them and the safety-monitoring systems used to look for adverse effects.

Why Are People Still Getting COVID After Vaccination?

Also read: EXCLUSIVE: Ex-CDC Vaccine Advisor Says Measles Outbreak Bigger Than Reported, Slams RFK Jr’s ‘No-See Evil’ Approach

The circulation of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, is sometimes used to argue that the vaccines do not work. Offit said this misunderstands the type of infection the virus causes and the protection vaccination offers.

“It’s a short incubation period mucosal infection,” he said. “So, vaccination or natural infection will protect you for about four to six months from mild to moderate disease, should protect you for longer against severe disease.”

He compared the future of COVID to influenza, saying that infections will continue even as vaccines help protect against serious illness.

“Even if everybody in the world were vaccinated every year, that virus would still circulate,” he said. “This virus is now with us forever.”

Offit said the goal of COVID vaccination is not necessarily to prevent every infection. It is to reduce the risk of hospitalisation and death, particularly among people most likely to develop severe disease.

“The goal of the vaccine is to keep you out of the hospital and to keep you from dying,” he said.

He said that people over 75, those with chronic heart or lung disease, pregnant women and people with weakened immune systems are at higher risk of developing severe complications from COVID. He said these groups should receive a vaccine every year.

Dr Paul Offit On COVID Vaccine’s Side Effects

Also read: American COVID Drives Cases And Deaths In UK: Unusual XFG Symptoms To Watch For

When COVID vaccines were first authorised in December 2020, the clinical trials involved approximately 35,000 participants across the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna studies, Offit said. Some rare side effects of the vaccine became apparent only after the vaccines were administered to much larger populations.

One such side effect was myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle, and, less commonly, pericarditis, which affects the lining around the heart.

“Very quickly, it was found to be a rare cause, roughly 1 in 50,000 myocarditis,” Offit said, referring to mRNA COVID vaccines. He said cases were seen primarily in males aged 16 to 29 and were generally short-lived.

Current evidence confirms that myocarditis and pericarditis are rare but recognised risks associated with mRNA COVID vaccines. The risk has been observed most often in adolescent and young adult males, particularly within seven days after a second dose.

In June 2025, the US Food and Drug Administration required updated safety warnings for the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines. The FDA also noted that some patients in follow-up studies continued to show signs of heart muscle injury on MRI scans, with improvement in some cases. The long-term significance of these findings remains under investigation.

Offit also cited the example of Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccine, which was associated with a rare but serious condition involving blood clots and low platelet counts. The vaccine was no longer available in the US by May 2023.

“You're always looking and trying to find any rare side effect that's associated with the vaccine,” he said.

He added that concerns about stillbirths and pregnancy outcomes had circulated despite research examining vaccination during pregnancy.

Offit said there was “no evidence of congenital malformations, no evidence of premature birth or spontaneous abortion” in the studies he was referring to.

How Long Were mRNA COVID Vaccines Tested?

Another common concern is that mRNA COVID vaccines were developed too quickly and that the technology had not been studied for long enough. Offit disagreed, saying that the technology was not entirely new.

“I think it was studied for a long time,” he said. He pointed to research into mRNA as a vaccine platform that began decades before the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Drew Weissman and Katie Carrico met in 1997 and started working on mRNA as a vaccine platform, for which they won the 2023 Nobel Prize in Medicine,” Offit said.

He also referred to efforts to develop mRNA vaccines against SARS, the coronavirus that caused an outbreak in 2002 and 2003.

“But we really had, really since 1997, information about this vaccine, so like more than 20 years of studies of that vaccine,” he said. “People think it was a new vaccine, but it really wasn't that new.”

The technology had been studied before COVID-19, although the pandemic vaccines themselves still required clinical trials to establish their safety and effectiveness. After their introduction, researchers continued monitoring them to identify rare adverse events.

Do Benefits Of COVID Vaccines Still Outweigh The Risks?

Offit said the decision to vaccinate should take into account both the risk of side effects and the risk posed by COVID itself. “I'm an older person, so I'm going to get a COVID vaccine every year because I think that the benefits clearly outweigh the risks,” he said.

He argued that COVID continues to cause hospitalisations and deaths, making protection against severe disease an important consideration.

He said that the benefits outweigh the risks, particularly for people at higher risk of serious illness. Individual decisions should also take account of age, underlying health conditions, previous vaccination and current medical guidance.