When was the last time you measured your waistline? If you assume that BMI is the only number to focus on when it comes to your health, think twice. New research has revealed a shocking revelation—your waist circumference might be a far better predictor of men's cancer risk than BMI.

The study finds that for each 4-inch increase in waist size, a man's risk of cancer increases by a staggering 25%. Meanwhile, BMI, commonly regarded as the gold standard for assessing obesity, raises cancer risk by only 19% for the same weight gain. So, if you've been dismissing that pesky belly fat, it's time to take notice.

But why is your waistline so important? The reason is visceral fat—the hidden, deep fat that accumulates around your organs. Unlike other body fat, visceral fat is a stealthy troublemaker, causing inflammation, insulin resistance, and abnormal blood fat levels—all of which combine to create a cancer-perfect storm.

Obesity has been associated with an increased risk of numerous health conditions, including cancer, for decades. The research, though, indicates that a specific measure of the body—waist circumference—may be an even more reliable forecaster of cancer risk in men than the more frequently employed Body Mass Index (BMI). This finding emphasizes the need to pay particular attention to the distribution of fat and not merely to the weight of the body.

BMI has been the go-to measure for years for gauging health risks related to obesity. New research, though, that appears in The Journal of the National Cancer Institute indicates that waist measurement is a better predictor of cancer risk in men. According to the research, four more inches (10 cm) around the waist will add 25% to a man's cancer risk. Conversely, a 3.7 kg/m² rise in BMI (from a BMI of 24 to 27.7) increased cancer risk by only 19%.

Why is waist circumference a better predictor, then? Unlike BMI, which measures weight relative to height, waist circumference actually measures abdominal fat—specifically, visceral fat. This type of fat encircles internal organs and is also linked to higher levels of inflammation, insulin resistance, and abnormal blood lipids, all of which are factors in cancer growth. BMI, however, does not measure fat distribution, so two individuals with the same BMI can have very different levels of health risk depending on where fat is deposited on their bodies.

Why Men Are at Higher Risk?

Interestingly, the research identified a significant difference between men and women when it came to waist circumference and cancer risk. Although waist circumference and BMI were linked with obesity-related cancers in women, the relationship was weaker than for men. An increase of 12 cm (4.7 inches) in waist size or a 4.3 rise in BMI (from 24 to 28.3) raised the cancer risk in women by just 13%—a much lower percentage than for men.

Experts credit this difference to the way that fat is stored in the body. Men are more likely to carry fat around the abdomen, especially as visceral fat, which is more metabolically active and associated with cancer-producing biological alterations. Women, by contrast, store fat in peripheral sites such as the hips and thighs, where it is less likely to drive systemic inflammation and metabolic disturbances.

A possible reason is that men tend to depot fat more in the visceral regions, whereas women tend to carry more subcutaneous and peripheral fat," wrote the researchers. "This may render waist circumference a more robust risk factor for cancer in men and account for why waist circumference provides additional risk information beyond BMI in men but not women."

Cancer Types Most Linked to Abdominal Fat

The research used the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) data to define obesity-related cancers. These cancers are esophageal (adenocarcinoma), gastric (cardia), colorectal, rectal, liver, gallbladder, pancreatic, renal, and thyroid cancers, and multiple myeloma and meningioma. In men, abdominal obesity is especially significant in raising the risk of these cancers through high levels of insulin and markers of inflammation.

For women, the research proposes that both waist circumference and hip circumference may give a more accurate estimate of visceral fat and cancer risk. "Adding hip circumference to risk models could strengthen the link between waist circumference and cancer, especially in women," researchers observed.

What This Means for Men's Health and Cancer Prevention?

With these results, doctors advise men to be more mindful of their waistline than only their BMI. Waist size is an easy method to gauge health risk, and its maintenance through lifestyle changes might be the key to cancer prevention.

How To Reduce Cancer Risk In Men?

Track Your Waist Size: Regularly measure your waist circumference and try to keep it in a healthy range (below 40 inches for men, according to medical advice).

Eat a Balanced Diet: A diet containing high fiber, lean protein, and healthy fats can assist in limiting visceral fat gain.

Exercise Consistently: Regular exercise with a combination of aerobic and strength training will help maintain a healthy waistline.

Control Stress and Sleep: Persistent stress and inadequate sleep tend to cause weight gain, especially in the midsection of the body.

Regular Health Screenings: Early identification of cancer risk factors through regular screening can greatly enhance long-term health status.

Ever wondered how your body generates antibodies in the face of a virus attack? A new study by French researchers showed that our age, biological sex, and human genetic factors can determine our immunity levels.

The human body, when exposed to a virus, defends itself by producing molecules called antibodies. Their main function is to identify pathogens and kill them.

Scientists from the Institut Pasteur, the CNRS, and the Collège de France noted that these factors not only boost the quantity of antibodies produced in the body but also determine the specific viral regions to target.

The February 2026 study, published in the journal Nature Immunology, can pave the way for the development of personalized treatments, especially for individuals who are most vulnerable to infection.

"This study provides a detailed, integrated view of how age, sex, and human genetics shape the antibody response," said Lluis Quintana-Murci, Head of the Human Evolutionary Genetics laboratory at the Institut Pasteur.

"It shows that these factors even determine which specific regions of a given virus are targeted by antibodies, with important implications for vaccine and therapeutic design," Quintana-Murci added.

How Age And Sex Influence Immunity

The findings revealed that individuals produce antibodies that target different parts of the virus when attacked by the same virus. Age was identified as the dominant factor influencing antibody production. The team noted that more than half of the antibody repertoire varies depending on age.

Further, some antibodies were found to increase with age, while others decreased. This was seen particularly in the case of influenza H1N1 and H3N2 viruses.

In young adults, the antibodies mainly targeted a part of the viral surface protein known as hemagglutinin (HA), which evolves rapidly. In older individuals, it focused on a more stable region of the same protein known as the stalk domain.

Women were also found to produce more antibodies against HA. On the other hand, men tended to target other viral proteins (NP and M1), despite comparable vaccination rates between the two sexes.

How Human Genetics Shape Antibody Production

The team identified mutations in genomic regions known to encode the immunoglobulin repertoire. These variants determine which genes are used to produce antibodies.

Using an African cohort, the study revealed population disparities in terms of the molecular targets of their antibody repertoires.

In the case of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), antibodies were found to recognize different viral proteins depending on the geographical and epidemiological context.

This difference can be explained by the level of exposure -- Africans are more exposed to a particular strain of EBV in which the protein EBNA-4 is the primary antibody target.

How Was The Study Conducted?

The research is based on data from the Milieu Intérieur cohort, launched 15 years ago to study variations in the immune response in 1,000 healthy individuals.

Using an innovative sequencing technology, the scientists analyzed blood plasma samples to measure antibody responses against more than 90,000 fragments of viral proteins, covering a large number of viruses responsible for infections such as influenza, respiratory infections, gastroenteritis, and herpesvirus infections.

Epstein Files: After the Department of Justice (DOJ) released more files on the late sex offender and financer Jeffrey Epstein, previously unseen photographs, including medical details and a detailed timeline of his final weeks in custody have resurfaced. All of this new information has added fresh scrutiny to the case.

A 23-page long document, labelled unclassified titled Jefferey Epstein Death Investigation was prepared by the New York field officer of the FBI. The material has been examined by BBC Verify and was reported to contain close-up images of Epstein's body, notes from his post-mortem examination and psychological observations that were recorded shortly before his death in August 2019.

As per BBC, the photographs included detailed views of injuries to Epstein's neck and show medics attempting to resuscitation after he was found unresponsive in his jail cell. As per the timestamps visible in the files, the images were taken at 06:40 local time on 10 August 2019, almost 16 minutes after a prison staff discovered him.

As per the DOJ's Office of the Inspector General's review report released in June 2023, on August 10 at 6.30am, two SHU staff on duty CO Tova Noel and Material Handler Michael Thomas delivered breakfast to inmates, when Noel was delivering breakfast from the food slot of the door to Epstein's SHU tier, there was no response. Thomas unlocked the door and saw Epstein hanged. The review report mentions that he immediately "yelled for Noel to get help and call for a medical emergency". According to Noel, within seconds of Thomas calling out for the clutter she hit the body alarm, which is a button on an MCC staff member's radio that is used to signal distress or an emergency. Noel also recalled Thomas saying, "Breathe, Epstein, breathe." As per Noel, when she saw Epstein, he looked "blue and did not have a shirt or anything around his neck".

Read: Epstein Files Photos Show A Bottle Of Phenazopyridine, Why We Think This UTI Medication Was There

As per Thomas, when he entered Epstein's cell, he had an orange string, from a sheet or a shirt, around his neck that was tied t the top portion of the bunkbed. The review report notes: "Epstein was suspended from the top bunk in a near-seated position, with his buttocks approximately 1 inch to 1 inch and a half off the floor." As per Thomas, he immediately ripped the orange string from the bunkbed and Epstein's buttocks dropped to the ground, and lowered him to begin chest compressions until staff arrived.

As per the BBC reports, the location is not explicitly stated in the documents, but records indicate Epstein had already been transported to hospital at 06:39, where he was later pronounced dead, suggesting the images were likely taken there.

Some of the photographs show a tag attached to his hand with his name and date of death. In several images, however, his first name appears misspelled as “Jeffery”.

Epstein Files: Post-Mortem Of Jeffrey Epstein And Custody Timeline

Also Read: Epstein Files: A Chat With Urologist Shows Stendra Was Prescribed To Jeffery Epstein; Why Did This Name Come Up?

The investigation file incorporates sections of an 89-page post-mortem report compiled jointly by the Department of Justice and New York’s Office of Chief Medical Examiner. Among the medical findings were scans documenting fractures in the thyroid cartilage of Epstein’s neck.

BBC Verify said it conducted reverse image searches and “could not find earlier versions” of the photos online before their recent release, indicating they had not previously circulated publicly.

The report also reconstructs Epstein’s detention inside the Metropolitan Correctional Center from his arrest on 6 July 2019 on federal sex-trafficking charges to his death five weeks later.

According to the timeline, Epstein was placed on suicide watch after a 23 July incident in which he was found injured in his cell. At the time, he claimed his cellmate — Nicholas Tartaglione — had attacked him.

Epstein Files: Jeffrey Epstein's Psychological Assessment Before His Death

The following day, during a psychological assessment, Epstein denied wanting to harm himself. BBC reported the document states he said he had “no interest in killing myself” and that it “would be crazy” to do so. Two days later, notes record him saying he was “too vested in my case” and wanted to return to his life.

Despite that, prison officials had recommended he not be housed alone and that guards perform checks every 30 minutes, including unannounced rounds.

The newly released records outline several security lapses the night before Epstein died.

His cellmate had been transferred out the previous day, leaving him alone. Prison logs show guards failed to conduct scheduled checks at 03:00 and 05:00, and the unit’s camera system was not functioning. Staff later discovered his body during a morning inspection.

The files also include two versions of the same FBI report: a full 23-page unredacted copy and a shorter 17-page redacted version that omits the psychological report and detention timeline. The reason for the dual publication has not been explained.

The Department of Justice has been contacted for comment, while the FBI declined to respond, reported BBC.

The release of the material does not change the official ruling of suicide, but its level of detail, particularly the photographs, mental-health notes and security failures — is likely to reignite debate over the circumstances surrounding Epstein’s death.

As per the American Psychological Association (APA), only 58.5 per cent of US teens always or usually receive the social and emotional support they need, as per the report by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Another National Institutes of Health (NIH, US) report notes that the most mental health disorders among children ages 3 to 17 in 2016 to 2019 were attention deficit disorder (9.8%, approximately 6 million), anxiety (9.4%, approximately 5.8 million), behavior problems (8.9%, approximately 5.5 million), and depression (4.4%, approximately 2.7 million). For adolescents, depression is concerning because 15.1% of adolescents ages 12-17 years had a major depressive episode in 2018-201.

However, not all are able to receive the help, in fact, parents too find themselves struggling when it comes to helping their children.

Despite growing concern about a mental health crisis among young people in the United States, a large national study suggests the care system continues to fall short for many families.

Researchers from the Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute in Boston found that nearly one quarter of children who require mental health treatment are not receiving it.

The findings come from survey data collected from more than 173,000 households between June 2023 and September 2024.

Many Families Recognize the Need but Cannot Get Help

The analysis showed that about one in five households, or 20 per cent, had at least one child who needed mental health support. Yet among those families, nearly 25 per cent said those needs were not met.

Even families that eventually obtained care often faced significant hurdles. Nearly 17 per cent described the process as difficult and exhausting.

The research letter was published February 16 in JAMA Pediatrics.

Household Structure Shapes Access

The study found that family circumstances strongly influenced how easy it was to navigate the health care system.

Families with multiple children reported higher unmet needs at 28 per cent, compared with 21 per cent in households with only one child. Single parent households also reported more difficulty securing appointments.

Education setting played a role as well. Homeschooled children had higher unmet needs at 31 per cent compared with 25 per cent among children attending public school. Researchers suggest this may reflect the absence of school counselors and other school based support systems.

Insurance and finances created additional barriers. About 40 per cent of families covered by Medicaid or without insurance said they could not get care specifically because it was too hard to access.

In a news release, lead author Alyssa Burnett said nearly one quarter of parents reported that at least one child did not receive needed mental health care, highlighting persistent access gaps.

Cost, Availability and Logistics Remain Major Obstacles

Researchers noted several common barriers. Families cited treatment costs, a shortage of clinicians and logistical issues such as scheduling and travel.

The study also found disparities among racial and ethnic groups. Families from minority backgrounds had higher rates of unmet needs compared with non Hispanic white households. However, Black households reported less difficulty accessing care at 13 per cent compared with 17 per cent among white households.

Bringing Care Closer to Families

Experts involved in the study say improving access may require shifting where care is delivered.

Senior author Hao Yu, an associate professor of population medicine at the institute, said states should expand the child mental health workforce and integrate mental health services into primary care settings to remove barriers and improve access to needed treatment.