Image Credit: Canva
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.
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."
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.
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.
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.
Credit: AI
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is often characterised by digestive symptoms like abdominal pain, bloating, constipation and diarrhoea. However, the condition involves more than the digestive system.
A new review published in The Lancet explains how interactions between the gut and brain, changes in the gut microbiome, immune activity and the body's response to pain can contribute to the development of symptoms.
The review, titled Irritable bowel syndrome and related disorders of gut-brain interaction, brings focuses on biological and psychological evidence behind IBS. Researchers describe it as a disorder of gut-brain interaction, in which signals between the digestive system and the central nervous system affect gut function.
The authors also discuss chronic constipation and functional diarrhoea, which belong to the bigger group of disorders related to gut-brain interaction. These conditions may affect an estimated 20% of the global population.
Also read: Olympian Ciara Mageean Dies At 34 After Bowel Cancer Battle: Warning Signs In Young Adults
The gut and brain communicate continuously through a complex network that involves the central nervous system, autonomic nervous system, enteric nervous system and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis.
The brain can influence intestinal movement, secretion and sensitivity, while signals from the gut can affect how the brain processes pain and other sensations.
In people with IBS, this communication may become disrupted. The result can be changes in bowel movements, more sensitivity to normal digestive processes and abdominal discomfort.
The authors said, “These central and peripheral mechanisms can act in an integrated way to cause IBS symptoms, via the gut-brain axis.”
For instance, a person with IBS may experience pain or bloating even when the amount of gas or intestinal movement would not cause discomfort in someone without the condition. This is due to a condition called visceral hypersensitivity, in which the nerves supplying the digestive organs become unusually sensitive to internal sensations.
The review explains that changes in both peripheral mechanisms within the gut and central mechanisms involving the brain can contribute to symptoms.
Also read: Can Coffee Trigger Irritable Bowel Syndrome?
The gut microbiome, which consists of microorganisms living in the digestive tract, is another important part of the gut-brain connection.
Changes in the composition and activity of gut bacteria may impact intestinal function, immune responses and communication with the nervous system. The review identifies the following:
Psychological health is another component of the gut-brain axis. Stress, anxiety and other psychological difficulties can influence how the brain processes pain and communicates with the digestive system.
The HPA axis, which helps regulate the body's response to stress, plays a role in this process . Changes in stress levels can affect gut movement, secretion and sensitivity.
Currently, there is no single biomarker that can diagnose IBS. Doctors assess symptoms, medical history and clinical findings, while using tests to rule out other conditions.
The review highlights that some underlying mechanisms can already be measured through approved tests and questionnaires. These include abnormal bile acid metabolism, accelerated movement of contents through the colon and psychological conditions.
Credit: iStock
Does a patient’s chances of serious outcomes differ if they are treated by a female doctor? A recent study looks into this hypothesis to ascertain the difference between chances of a patient dying under a male and a female doctor.
According to the study, hospitalised patients treated by female doctors have a lower risk of dying within 30 days. They are also less likely to be re-hospitalised than those treated by male doctors. The study is published in JAMA Network Open.
"Past research has largely focused on surgical patients and the admitting physician only. Our findings add to the growing body of research examining the relationship between physician sex and patient outcomes, broadening the evidence beyond surgical care to a wider range of medical conditions and other physicians," says Dr. Angela Jerath, an ICES scientist, and Associate Professor, Department of Anesthesiology & Pain Medicine at the University of Toronto's Temerty Faculty of Medicine.
After analysing the health records of 958,150 adults admitted to hospitals in Ontario, Canada, between 2008 and 2022, researchers found that the 30-day mortality rate was 12.3% among patients treated by female physicians, compared to 13.7% among those treated by male physicians.
The findings also show a small difference in hospital readmissions. The 30-day readmission rate was 18.6% for patients treated by female doctors and 18.9% for those treated by male doctors.
The researchers examined outcomes across seven common medical conditions, including heart attacks, pneumonia and other acute illnesses.
They also considered the number of hospital days during which patients received care from female doctors, recognising that several doctors may be involved in a patient's treatment during an admission.
Also read: Manosphere Is A Public Health Concern: Lancet Report Says Online Misogyny Harms Men's Mental Health
After accounting for patient, physician and hospital characteristics, treatment by a female physician was linked with 12% lower adjusted odds of death within 30 days compared to treatment by a male physician.
The researchers also found that for every 10% increase in the proportion of hospital days managed by female physicians, the adjusted odds of 30-day mortality decreased by 7%. This was observed for most medical conditions that were studied. Atrial fibrillation was the only exception.
The difference in mortality was also seen at longer follow-up periods. Patients treated by female physicians had lower mortality at 90 days and one year.
The findings were observed among both male and female patients. Female patients treated by female physicians had the lowest adjusted 30-day mortality rate in the analysis.
The study did not establish why patients treated by female physicians experienced better outcomes. However, the researchers discussed possible differences in clinical practice and communication.
Female physicians may be more likely to engage in patient-focused communication, spend more time with patients, follow clinical guidelines and involve colleagues in decision-making.
These practices could influence how symptoms are studied, treatment decisions are made and coordinated during hospitalisation.
"The goal is not to favour one group of physicians over another but to identify practices and behaviours that may help improve care across the health system," says Jerath.
"An important strength of this study is that, unlike surgical care, patients admitted to hospital for medical conditions are generally assigned physicians based on rotating schedules rather than patient or referring physician preferences, helping to minimize referral bias."
Credit: AI
Eli Lilly's experimental weight-loss drug retatrutide, being referred to as ‘Godzilla’, continues to outperform its rivals like Ozempic.
According to a recent head-to-head Phase 3 clinical trial involving adults with type 2 diabetes, it delivered more than twice the average weight loss achieved with Ozempic.
Participants who took the highest dose of retatrutide lost an average of 20.9% of their body weight over 80 weeks, compared to 9.4% among those receiving Ozempic's highest approved dose for type 2 diabetes.
The trial, called TRANSCEND-T2D-2, involved more than 1,000 adults with type 2 diabetes. It compared once-weekly injections of retatrutide at doses of 9 mg and 12 mg with semaglutide, the active ingredient in Ozempic, at 2 mg.
At the end of 80 weeks, participants taking retatrutide 9 mg lost an average of 44.3 pounds (20.1 kg), while those receiving the 12 mg dose lost 47.4 pounds (21.5 kg). The Ozempic group lost an average of 20.9 pounds (9.5 kg).
The findings mark the first Phase 3 head-to-head comparison of retatrutide with another medicine in this class.
Also read: ‘Godzilla’ Drug Retatrutide Reverses Sleep Apnea In 1 In 4 Diabetes Patients
The trial found that retatrutide also resulted in produced greater reductions in HbA1c, a measure of average blood glucose over approximately three months.
At 80 weeks, participants taking either dose of retatrutide recorded an average HbA1c reduction of 2.2%, compared to 1.8 % among those receiving Ozempic.
The experimental drug also resulted in greater improvements in cardiovascular risk factors like non-HDL cholesterol, triglycerides and systolic blood pressure.
The most commonly reported side effects of retatrutide were gastrointestinal symptoms like diarrhoea, nausea, constipation, vomiting and indigestion.
Diarrhoea was reported in 28.3% of participants receiving the 9 mg dose and 32.7% receiving 12 mg, compared to 26.4% in the Ozempic group. Nausea occurred in 21.2%, 23.8% and 21.3% of participants, respectively.
Researchers also reported a higher incidence of dysesthesia, an abnormal sensation that can include tingling, burning or skin sensitivity, among participants taking retatrutide.
Treatment discontinuation because of side effects occurred in 4.8% of the 9 mg group and 7.9% of the 12 mg group, compared to 2.7% of the Ozempic group.
Retatrutide is a once-weekly injectable drug that targets three hormone receptors involved in regulating appetite, blood sugar and metabolism. They are GLP-1, GIP and glucagon.
GLP-1 helps regulate appetite and blood sugar while slowing the process of stomach emptying. GIP also plays a role in glucose regulation and insulin release. Glucagon is involved in controlling blood glucose and energy metabolism.
Ozempic, manufactured by Novo Nordisk, acts on the GLP-1 receptor. Eli Lilly's Mounjaro and Zepbound, which contain tirzepatide, target both GLP-1 and GIP receptors.
Retatrutide remains an investigational drug and has not been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or other regulatory authorities.
Eli Lilly plans to submit the drug for FDA approval in early 2027. The company said detailed results from the trial would be presented at a future medical meeting and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
© $2026 Times Horizon Private Limited