A new study published in The Lancet Digital Health suggests that biological age of different organs could predict a person's risk of diseases such as cancer, dementia, and heart disease than their actual chronological age. The research analyzed long-term data from Whitehall II study, which had been followed by over 10,000 British adults for more than 35 years.

The blood plasma samples were collected between 1997 and 1999 from participants between ages 45 to 69. Researchers have now examined a follow up data from 6,235 participants, who were by then aged 65 to 89. This was done to see how aging of specific organ may correlate with the development of diseases over two decades.

What Organs Were Studied?

The study measured the biological age of nine key organs, including:

• Heart
• Blood vessels
• Liver
• Immune system
• Pancreas
• Kidneys
• Lungs
• Intestines
• Brain

The researchers were able to find that different organs aged at different rates in different people. In many of the cases multiple organs showed signs of faster aging within the same individual. What is important to note is that those with accelerated aging in certain organs had a higher risk of developing 30 out of the 40 age-related diseases the study had tracked.

Organ Aging And Disease Risk

Some organ-disease connections were expected—people with rapidly aging lungs were more likely to develop respiratory diseases, and those with aging kidneys had an increased risk of kidney-related conditions. However, the study also found less obvious associations.

For example, individuals with fast-aging kidneys were more prone to diseases in other organs, such as the liver and pancreas. Additionally, multiple fast-aging organs were linked to an increased risk of kidney disease.

One of the most surprising findings was that dementia risk was not best predicted by an aging brain but rather by the immune system’s biological age. This suggests that factors such as chronic inflammation and immune health may play a critical role in neurodegenerative diseases.

What Is Organ Specific Blood Tests?

The study also highlights the important of the potential of developing blood tests that could assess the biological age of specific organs. Unlike previous complex methods that measured the organ health, this new approach could make things simple to detect early signs of disease.

The leader author of the study Mika Kivimaki, who is also a professor at the University College London's Faculty of Brain sciences pointed out that such tests could be helpful when it comes to guiding personalized healthcare. In a news release, Kivimaki said, "They could advise whether a person needs to take better care of a particular organ and potentially provide an early warning signal that they may be at risk of a particular disease."

The study reinforces the idea that aging does not affect all organs equally and that looking beyond chronological age could offer better insights into disease prevention. By understanding which organs are aging more rapidly, medical professionals may be able to recommend targeted interventions for individuals at higher risk of specific conditions. Future advancements in organ-specific blood testing could revolutionize how we detect and manage age-related diseases, potentially leading to more personalized healthcare strategies.

As the "tradwife" trend gains traction on social media—encouraging a return to traditional gender roles with women as homemakers and men as breadwinners—many are romanticizing the 1950s. A recent nationwide survey found that nearly half of Americans believe life was better back then, with cultural shifts often cited as a point of concern, particularly among conservatives.

While social structures have evolved dramatically since the postwar era, public health has seen remarkable improvements. Advances in medical technology, diagnostics, and treatment have led to longer life expectancies and better disease prevention. There's greater awareness around the risks of smoking, excess sugar, alcohol, and the importance of nutrition, sleep, and physical activity.

Still, not all health trends have improved. Chronic conditions like obesity and diabetes are more widespread than ever before. According to Josephine Connolly-Schoonen, executive director of the nutrition division at Stony Brook Medicine, there are five key lifestyle habits from the 1950s that could offer valuable lessons today.

1. Cook More At Home

In the 1950s, home-cooked meals were the norm. Families grew vegetables in backyard gardens, and meals were shared around the dinner table. Eating out was reserved for special occasions. Today, Americans dine out or order takeout around eight times a month, often consuming food made with lower-quality ingredients like seed oils and synthetic thickeners. Home cooking allows for more control over ingredients and better nutritional value.

ALSO READ: Is It Possible To Regrow Teeth In Humans?

2. Cut Down On Ultra-Processed Foods

Ultra-processed foods (UPFs)—such as chips, pastries, sodas, and frozen dinners—now make up about 60% of the U.S. diet. Their rise began in the 1970s with the advent of high-fructose corn syrup and cheap synthetic additives. Though affordable and convenient, UPFs are linked to heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and early death. Limiting these foods and opting for whole, minimally processed options can drastically improve health outcomes.

3. Watch Your Portions

Portion sizes have ballooned since the ’50s. A typical hamburger has tripled in size, and soft drink servings have more than doubled. Larger portions may feel like a better deal, especially in tough economic times, but they often come at the cost of long-term health. Connolly-Schoonen urges people to see value in nutrient-rich foods rather than just bigger servings.

4. Move More, Sit Less

In 1960, nearly half of private-sector jobs required moderate physical activity. Today, that number has dropped below 20%, as desk jobs and virtual meetings dominate. Physical inactivity is now a major risk factor for several chronic conditions. Whether through regular breaks or walking meetings, incorporating movement into the workday is crucial.

5. Limit Screen Time

Children in the 1950s played outdoors and were more physically active. Today, screen time dominates leisure and even mealtimes. Excessive exposure to blue light from phones and tablets disrupts sleep patterns and raises stress hormone levels, contributing to obesity. Screen-free meals and outdoor play can help re-establish healthier habits.

ALSO READ: Too Many Almonds Can Lead to Kidney Stones: Here's How Many To Consume

Dreams are often unpredictable - some can get a bit scary and others may be inspired by our desires, random thoughts or fears. The disturbing thing about dreams is that we do not often know it isn’t the reality, until after we wake up. But what about the dreams where you hold some semblance of consciousness? These are called lucid dreams. The term refers to the time that the sleeper gains awareness of their surroundings in the dream and can also control the trajectory of the dream.

How Do Lucid Dreams Affect Us?

Every night, while we sleep, we spend roughly two hours dreaming. According to a 2019 Frontiers in Psychology review, dreams reflect our inner emotions and thoughts. They explain that REM sleep is key to reprocessing emotions within dreams. This theta activity is also important for memory during wakefulness, supporting the idea that our mental processes are continuous between sleep and wakefulness. Gamma waves, another type of brain wave, appear connected to emotional processing, dream recall, and lucid dreaming.

There are conflicting views about lucid dreaming and whether it is beneficial or not. Some believe lucid dreaming is good for your well-being and can even be used as therapy. On the other hand, because lucid dreaming involves a mix of sleep and wakefulness, it has also been linked to things like strange thoughts, stress, and mental health issues.

A 2018 study published in the Frontiers asked college students about their lucid dreaming experiences, mental health (including depression, anxiety, and other symptoms), stress levels, and sleep problems. They used a Frequency and Intensity Lucid Dream questionnaire. The study revealed that how often people had lucid dreams wasn't linked to mental health issues. However, the intensity of the dreams and positive emotions during them were linked to fewer mental health symptoms. A longer term study showed that people who tried to induce lucid dreams showed an increase in dissociation and schizotypy symptoms over a two-month period.

Techniques People Use To Induce Lucid Dreaming

People who want to induce lucid dreams often have specific reason they wish to achieve like expanding their creativity, overcoming fears, practicing skills, managing nightmares, and simply enjoying the unique experience controlling one's dreams. Some ways you can induce a lucid dream with these techniques:

Reality testing: Regularly questioning your reality throughout the day to build the habit of doing the same in dreams. Asking yourself questions like ‘Am I dreaming’ and noticing your surroundings, so that the next time you dream you can identify it as one.

Wake back to bed (WBTB): Briefly waking up after 5 hours of sleep, before returning back to bed. When the alarm clock rings do any activity like reading a book to keep your mind active and go back to sleep.

Mnemonic induction of lucid dreams (MILD): Read and repeat affirmations after waking up from a 5 hour sleep to remember you're dreaming during your next dream. Assign a ‘dreamsign’ something that is unusual like flying, make a verbal acknowledgement of it so that you remember it the next time it happens.

Can You Safely Induce Lucid Dreaming?

Like mentioned above, the benefits of life dreaming often encourages people to try it and knowing your reasons can help you decide if it's working for you. If it's not helping you achieve your goals, it might not be worth the risks. It's important to be honest with yourself about your reasons for wanting to lucid dream. Make sure your motivations are healthy and realistic. Here are some other considerations to keep in mind.

It has been five years since the world got succumbed to the COVID-19 pandemic. In the strange and uncertain days of early 2020, a terrifying new virus upended life as we knew it. For then, it seemed inevitable that every aspect of our lives, the way we lived, breathe, talk, meet, go to colleges, offices, schools, would be permanently changed. Five years later, while the toll of COVID-19 was devastating, claiming 220,000 lives in the UK and 7 million worldwide, we cannot ignore how it impacted in our social attitudes, trust, relationships, and these all are still unfolding.

Trust In Institutions And Politics

The pandemic also coincided with the existing trends of distrust in political institutions. Data from the British Social Attitudes (BSA) survey from 2019 to 2024 reveals a sharp decline in confidence in government. A record of 45& respondents in 2024 said they "almost never" trust a government of any party to put the country before political interests. 58% of them expressed skepticism about politicians telling the truth under pressure. In contrast, a decade earlier, only 53% felt that the government disregarded public opinion—now, that number has risen to 69%.

In fact, there has been a great sense of dissatisfaction from democracy itself. In 2013, 57% of the people felt democracy worked well in Britain, whereas in 2023, only 43% agreed.

Rising Distrust

As governments around the world implemented lockdowns and restrictions, social atomisation increased. According to sociologist Jennie Bristow, the pandemic did not cause adolescent mental health problems or institutional scepticism, but rather exacerbated them. Lockdowns fostered isolation, but stringent adherence to the law heightened public distrust. Some saw young people as possible virus carriers, while others chastised anyone who seemed to be disobeying the rules, fostering a culture of mutual antagonism.

ALSO READ: Coverage on Covid-19

But Did COVID-19 Strengthen Social Bonds?

Despite the pandemonium, some people thought the pandemic would promote societal togetherness. In late 2020, an ICM study revealed that three times as many respondents (41%) believed Covid had brought society together rather than separated it (13%). However, the sensation of oneness was transitory; by 2023-24, the proportion of persons who felt strongly attached to their local community had nearly returned to pre-pandemic levels (60-63%).

Covid-19 Lingers Even After The Pandemic

As per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Long COVID is defined as a chronic condition that occurs after SARS-CoV-2 infection and is present for at least 3 months. It includes a large variety of symptoms that could worsen or continue in the long run.

The CDC mentions that every time a person is diagnosed with COVID-19, they have a risk of developing Long COVID. While the rates of new cases of Long COVID have decreased ever since, a new study published in the Journal of Royal Society of Medicine Open revealed that pain was the symptom most frequently reported by people with Long COVID. Physical pain was more common than neuropsychological issues, fatigues, and shortness of breath.

Experts say that pain is a common symptom in Long Covid, and it includes chest pain, abdominal pain, headaches or migraine. The most common type is muscle ache pain and nerve pain, which feels like numbness, tingling or burning.

Defining long COVID remains a challenge due to its relatively recent emergence. While there is no universally agreed-upon definition, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) references the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine’s description: a chronic condition that occurs after SARS-CoV-2 infection, persists for at least three months, and involves a wide range of symptoms. These symptoms can include shortness of breath, fatigue, brain fog, muscle pain, and others.

Researchers at the University College London analyzed 1,000 people in England and Wales who had experienced symptoms for at least 12 weeks. Pain emerged as the most commonly reported symptom, accounting for over 26% of cases, with 44% of participants experiencing some form of pain.

The nature and location of pain varied widely, including throbbing, aching, or tingling sensations in areas such as the head, chest, limbs, abdomen, and back. Neuropsychological issues (18%), fatigue (14%), and shortness of breath (7%) were also among the most reported symptoms