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.

When patients first hear the term "bone marrow transplant," they often picture a complex surgery involving the bones or spine. This is perhaps the most persistent misconception surrounding one of modern medicine's most remarkable achievements.

Unlike other organ transplants (kidney/ heart/ liver, etc), a bone marrow transplant is not a surgery at all! It is administered much like a blood transfusion, through a simple intravenous line. Yet this deceptively simple procedure can rebuild an entire blood-forming and immune system from scratch, offering a genuine cure for blood cancers and other serious blood disorders.

Bone marrow is the body's blood factory, producing the red cells that carry oxygen, the white cells that fight infection, and the platelets that prevent bleeding. At its heart lie blood-forming stem cells or the "parent cells" capable of generating every blood cell the body will ever need.

In leukemia and related cancers, these stem cells turn rogue, crowding out healthy ones. In several inherited disorders, the marrow simply fails to manufacture healthy cells at all. A transplant addresses the problem at its root, replacing defective stem cells with healthy ones.

I often explain this to patients using the language of farming. Before sowing fresh seed, a farmer clears the field of weeds. Similarly, before healthy stem cells can be transplanted, doctors must prepare the marrow through chemotherapy and, in select cases, radiation, a stage called conditioning. Once this was punishingly intensive, limiting transplants to the young and fit. Today, reduced-intensity regimens, which are carefully tailored to suit even the old or frail patients, have extended this option to older adults and those with other health conditions.

The transplant itself is almost anticlimactic in its simplicity: stem cells are infused through an IV, with no incision or operating theatre required. These cells possess a natural ability doctors call "homing": they find their own way into the bone marrow and settle there. Over two to four weeks, they begin producing healthy blood, a process called engraftment.

For decades, the greatest obstacle to transplantation was finding a matched donor. Traditionally, only a fully matched sibling would do, leaving many patients, particularly in a genetically diverse country like India, without options. That has changed decisively. Half-matched family transplants and unrelated donors identified through registries now succeed at rates that rival matched-sibling transplants. Nearly every patient today has a realistic path to a suitable donor.

Technology is reshaping this field further. Gene therapy is opening a new chapter for disorders such as sickle cell disease and thalassemia, correcting a patient's own stem cells in the laboratory rather than relying on a donor, though such therapies remain costly and available only in select countries for now.

Recovery, however, is a marathon, not a sprint. It can take months as the immune system rebuilds, requiring vigilant monitoring for infection and for graft-versus-host disease, in which transplanted immune cells attack the patient's own tissues. Advances in immunosuppressive and targeted therapies have greatly improved our ability to manage this complication, allowing most survivors to gradually return to work, education and family life.

A blood cancer diagnosis remains frightening, but treatment has advanced tremendously in two decades. Bone marrow transplantation is no longer experimental or exceptionally hazardous: it is established, evidence-based, and growing safer and more accessible across India.

Its truest achievement is not simply extending life, but restoring it: another birthday, another child watched growing up, another future reclaimed. For these patients, a transplant is quite literally a chance to begin again.

(Dr. Narendra Agrawal, Hematologist and Bone Marrow Transplant Physician and Senior Consultant and Unit Head of Haemato-Oncology at Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute & Research Centre.)

A six-in-one (hexavalent) vaccine could make India's Universal Immunization Program more efficient, convenient for families, and cost-effective if it becomes widely available at an affordable price, according to a study led by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.

The study found that while the hexavalent vaccine has higher upfront procurement costs, it could reduce the number of injections, improve operational efficiency, lower healthcare workload, and save time for caregivers.

What Is the 6-in-1 Vaccine?

The hexavalent vaccine protects children against six diseases with a single injection:

• Diphtheria
• Tetanus
• Pertussis (whooping cough)
• Hepatitis B
• Hemophilus influenzae type b (Hib)
• Polio

Combining multiple vaccines into one shot reduces the number of injections infants receive during routine immunization visits.

Key Findings

Also read: India Records 20,138 Organ Transplants In 2025; Deceased Donor Transplants Reach 3,526

Researchers found that the vaccine's price is the biggest factor determining the overall cost of introducing it into India's immunization program.

The study estimated that:

• A 50% reduction in the vaccine price would allow operational savings to outweigh the additional vaccine procurement costs under the primary immunization schedule.
• Lower vaccine prices could also make broader implementation, including booster doses, economically beneficial.

The findings were published in the peer-reviewed journal Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics.

Potential Benefits of the 6-in-1 Vaccine

According to the study, introducing the hexavalent vaccine could:

• Reduce the number of injections for infants.
• Make immunization visits more convenient for children and caregivers.
• Lower cold-chain storage requirements
• Reduce the use of syringes and other vaccination supplies.
• Save time for Auxiliary Nurse Midwives (ANMs) during vaccine administration and record-keeping
• Reduce the workload of cold-chain handlers and vaccine managers.
• Save time for parents and caregivers during vaccination visits.

India's Current Immunization Program

Read More: India's National Hepatitis Program Screens Over 210.6 Million, Treats 612,000 Patients

India runs one of the world's largest immunization programs, vaccinating nearly 26 million babies every year.

The program protects children against 12 vaccine-preventable diseases, including:

• Diphtheria
• Pertussis
• Tetanus
• Polio
• Measles
• Rubella
• Tuberculosis
• Hepatitis B
• Hib-related meningitis and pneumonia
• Rotavirus diarrhea
• Pneumococcal pneumonia
• Japanese encephalitis (in endemic districts)

What the Study Evaluated

A team of researchers, including from The George Institute for Global Health India, The Gates Foundation, and Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance, assessed two implementation scenarios:

• Replacing the current pentavalent vaccine and fractional inactivated polio vaccine (fIPV) with the hexavalent vaccine during the primary immunization schedule.
• Replacing both the primary schedule and the DTP booster dose with the hexavalent vaccine.

The analysis considered costs from both government and household perspectives, including:

• Vaccine procurement
• Syringes and vaccination supplies
• Cold-chain logistics
• Healthcare worker time
• Caregiver time

The researchers noted that replacing the current pentavalent, fIPV and DTP booster vaccines with the hexavalent vaccine would initially increase vaccine procurement costs. However, these would be partially offset by savings from:

• Lower vaccine delivery costs
• Reduced syringe use
• Lower cold-chain requirements
• Time savings for healthcare workers involved in procurement, storage and vaccine administration

The team added that based on previous vaccine procurement trends, a 50% reduction in the hexavalent vaccine price would make the switch economically favorable under the primary immunization schedule. Further price reductions could also generate cost savings for the booster-dose scenario.

"Our study demonstrates that although the hexavalent vaccine carries a higher upfront procurement cost, it also generates important efficiencies by reducing injections, easing pressure on frontline health workers, lowering cold-chain requirements and saving caregivers' time. These findings provide important economic evidence that can inform future policy discussions on strengthening India's immunization program," Dr. Susmita said.

Blockbuster GLP-1 drugs, with semaglutide as the key ingredient, have shown promise in treating conditions ranging from diabetes and obesity to certain cancers.

Now, US researchers are set to test whether semaglutide can also help treat alcohol use disorder (AUD), particularly among veterans. AUD affects an estimated 400 million people worldwide, or about 7% of people aged 15 years and older.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has announced a new clinical trial to evaluate the effectiveness of semaglutide in treating AUD and is aimed directly at benefiting Veterans.

"By exploring emerging treatment options like the use of a GLP-1 for AUD, we aim to expand the tools available to help Veterans take control of their health and recovery," said VA Secretary Doug Collins.

Currently, more than 400,000 US veterans have been diagnosed with AUD, while an estimated 11% of US adults are affected by the condition.

What Does the Trial Aim to Find?

Also read: GLP-1 Weight-Loss Drugs Show Promise for 17 Million With Binge Eating Disorder, Suggests Study

The study, called the Cessation or Reduction of Alcohol Consumption in Veterans (CRACV) trial, will enroll more than 600 veterans across 18 VA medical centers in the US.

Participants aged 18 to 80 with moderate or severe AUD will receive weekly injections of either semaglutide or a placebo for 24 weeks, followed by a safety follow-up period.

Researchers will assess changes in alcohol consumption, overall health, and quality of life to determine whether semaglutide could become a new treatment option for alcohol use disorder.

Oral Semaglutide May Help Reduce Heavy Drinking

Evidence is also emerging that GLP-1 medications may influence alcohol consumption. A Phase 2 clinical trial published in the American Journal of Psychiatry in July suggests that oral semaglutide may help reduce heavy and harmful drinking, even among people who are not trying to quit alcohol completely.

The trial included 50 adults with moderate to severe alcohol use disorder who wanted to reduce or stop drinking. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either daily oral semaglutide or a placebo for eight weeks.

The semaglutide dose increased from 3 mg per day during the first four weeks to 7 mg per day during the remaining four weeks.

Read More: GLP-1 Microdosing: People Are Experimenting With Weight Loss Drugs & What Do Experts Have To Say About It?

While semaglutide did not significantly reduce laboratory-assessed craving or the average number of drinks per day compared with placebo, it significantly reduced heavy drinking days.

Compared with participants receiving placebo, those taking semaglutide had fewer heavy drinking days during the final four weeks of treatment. They also consumed fewer drinks on drinking days and reported greater reductions in everyday alcohol cravings and alcohol-related negative consequences.

"It could represent a new treatment option for alcohol use disorder, particularly for those who have not benefited from existing medications, and may reduce alcohol-related health and social harms. Importantly, even reducing heavy drinking can lead to meaningful improvements for patients and families," said Joseph Schacht, PhD, professor of psychiatry at the University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine.