Headaches are a common symptom of a stressful lifestyle, your body not feeling well and other issues. While headaches can be dealt with easily, migraines are not so easy to handle. Migraines are a type of headache that feels like severe throbbing and pulsing sensation, almost like you are hearing your own heartbeat in your brain, usually on one side of the brain. Many people believe that migraines are not that big of a deal because you just have to deal with the pain, but that is not all migraine is, some people find it very difficult to do their daily tasks as they experience dizzying spells, nausea and extreme sensitivity to light and sound! These attacks can last hours and make it difficult for people to go about their daily lives as well. While there are medications available for migraine patients, these medications need time to take effect, so you may be in a lot of pain, but there are not many quick reliefs you can have in place other than learning the symptoms of a migraine attack and taking medication before it happens. But a new approval by the FDA may change this!

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved Symbravo, a new medicine to treat acute migraine attacks in adults. This means adults can now use Symbravo to get relief from their migraine symptoms. The FDA's decision was based on the results of three big studies, called Phase 3 trials. These trials involved over 21,000 migraine attacks, so the FDA has a lot of information about how well Symbravo works and how safe it is. The FDA only approves medicines that have been shown to be both safe and effective through a thorough testing process.

Importance of New Treatment Option

"Migraine attacks can happen suddenly and really mess up people's lives. It's estimated that over 39 million people in the U.S. alone get migraines," said Herriot Tabuteau, M.D., CEO of Axsome Therapeutics told US News. This shows how common migraines are and how important it is to have good treatments. "Symbravo gives patients and doctors a new option that can quickly stop a migraine attack, keep it away, and let people get back to their normal activities, all with just one dose." Having a medicine that can give fast and long-lasting relief from migraine pain is a big deal for millions of people. This new treatment is a real step forward in how we treat migraines.

Symbravo Trial Results, How Was It Approved

The trials took place in 3 steps, the Momentum trial study focused on people whose migraines had moderate to severe pain. The results showed that a lot more people taking Symbravo felt pain-free two hours after taking the medicine compared to those who took a placebo which is a dummy pill. Even better, many people felt relief for up to 24 and even 48 hours after just one dose. This long-lasting relief is really important for people with migraines because it means they can get back to their normal lives without worrying about the pain coming back. The study also looked at how many people were free from their worst symptom, like sensitivity to light or sound, or nausea. Symbravo worked better than the placebo in this area too.

While the intercept trial looked at people who took Symbravo when their migraine pain was still mild. Even when the pain was just starting, Symbravo was effective. The results were similar to the MOMENTUM trial, with many people getting pain relief and relief from their worst symptoms. Treating migraines early is often better because it can stop the pain from getting really bad.

And lastly the Movement trial which was to see how safe the medication is when people take it regularly. This study followed 706 people who had at least two migraines a month. The most common side effects people experienced were sleepiness and dizziness. While these side effects are important to know about, the study showed that Symbravo is generally safe for people to use on a regular basis.

U.S. vaccine advisers on Thursday, September 18, 2025, moved to change how one of the country’s key childhood vaccines is used, marking another step in Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy’s broader push to reshape national immunization policy.

The advisory panel to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended that parents should not have the option of giving children under 4 the combined measles-mumps-rubella-varicella (MMRV) shot. A separate vote on hepatitis B vaccines for newborns, which was expected the same day, has been pushed to Friday. That decision could alter decades of U.S. vaccine policy that has successfully kept annual hepatitis B cases in babies down to only a few dozen.

With these shifts under way, here’s what parents should know about their children’s vaccinations.

Kennedy Advisers Vote Against MMRV Shot for Children Under 4

An influential panel advising the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) voted Thursday, September 18, 2025, to scale back recommendations for the combined MMRV vaccine, which protects against measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox.

The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) voted 8–3 in favour of narrowing its use, with one member abstaining due to a conflict of interest.

ALSO READ: Hepatitis B Vaccination Timeline For Children Under Review Without Scientific Data, Says Former CDC Director Susan Monarez

The decision means the combined MMRV shot will no longer be recommended as the first dose for children around 12 months of age. Instead, children should receive two separate shots: one for measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR), and another for varicella (chickenpox). The combined MMRV vaccine will still be offered for the second dose, given between ages 4 and 6.

A separate vote on whether to end the long-standing recommendation that all newborns receive the hepatitis B vaccine at birth was postponed until Friday, September 19, 2025. The outcome could reshape decades of U.S. vaccine policy.

Separate Shots vs. Combined Shot: What’s the Difference?

The MMRV vaccine is a single shot that protects children against measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox. It was developed to make the vaccination process easier by reducing the number of injections a child needs.

But research has found that when toddlers receive this combined vaccine as their first dose, they face a slightly higher chance of developing febrile seizures which are brief convulsions linked to fever. Because of that risk, CDC advisers have recommended giving two separate shots instead: one for measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) and another for chickenpox (varicella).

For the second dose, usually given between ages four and six, the combined vaccine will still be available since the seizure risk is far lower in older children.

ALSO READ: WHO Guidelines On Weight Loss Drugs For Obesity

Hepatitis B Decision Still Pending

Hepatitis B is a virus that can quietly remain in the body for years while damaging the liver. Most adults who contract it recover fully, but the risks are much higher for infants. Around 9 in 10 babies infected go on to develop chronic hepatitis B, which greatly increases the chance of liver damage, cancer, or the need for a transplant later in life. Studies show that about one in four infected children die prematurely from the disease.

To prevent this, the CDC has advised since 1991 that babies receive their first hepatitis B shot within hours of birth. That recommendation has been highly effective, cutting annual infections in newborns from an estimated 18,000 to only about 20 cases today.

Still, the birth dose has been criticised by anti-vaccine groups, who argue it is unnecessary because hepatitis B is most often spread through contaminated needles or sexual contact.

What Parents Should Ask Their Paediatrician

With new vaccine recommendations being discussed, parents may want to talk through a few key points with their child’s doctor.

• Vaccine schedule: Should your child get the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and chickenpox shots separately, or is the combined MMRV vaccine a better choice later on?
• Health risks: If your child has a history of seizures or certain medical conditions, would separate shots be safer?
• Second dose: When is the right time for the booster between ages 4 and 6, and is the combined vaccine suitable at that stage?
• Hepatitis B: What is the current guidance on the birth dose of the hepatitis B vaccine, and why is it important?
• Side effects: What mild reactions should you expect after vaccination, and how can they be managed at home?

The World Health Organization (WHO) is moving toward a major policy shift. It is recommending the use of weight-loss drugs to treat obesity in adults. According to its newly released draft guidance, the agency emphasized that obesity should no longer be seen as a mere lifestyle issue but as a “chronic, progressive, and relapsing disease.” This recognition is key, as more than 1 billion people worldwide are affected by obesity, with the condition contributing to millions of preventable deaths each year.

The WHO noted that outdated attitudes have often shaped the response to obesity, leading to stigma and under-treatment. By framing obesity as a chronic disease, the draft guidelines aim to ensure that patients receive proper medical attention rather than being told to simply “eat less and exercise more.”

GLP-1 Drugs Enter the Spotlight

Central to the draft recommendations are the now widely discussed GLP-1 drugs. Originally developed for type 2 diabetes, medications from Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly have shown strong results in supporting long-term weight loss. The WHO’s expert committee concluded that these drugs can be part of the solution, especially for patients with a body mass index (BMI) of 30 or above.

The guidance stresses that the drugs are not meant to replace lifestyle interventions but rather to be used alongside counselling on diet, exercise, and behavior modification. This combination, the agency says, offers the best chance for sustainable weight management.

A First Step Toward Global Standards

For the first time, WHO is recommending these medications specifically for obesity treatment, describing it as a critical step toward building a global standard of care. The draft is open for consultation until September 27, allowing experts and the public to weigh in before final approval.

It also makes clear that further work is underway. Separate guidelines for children and adolescents are being developed, reflecting growing concern over rising obesity rates among younger populations.

Varying Thresholds Across Countries

While WHO’s draft guidance sets the BMI threshold at 30 for treatment, policies in other countries sometimes differ. In the United States, for instance, GLP-1 drugs may be prescribed to patients with a BMI between 27 and 30 if they also suffer from at least one weight-related health condition, such as hypertension or sleep apnea. This variation highlights the ongoing debate over who should qualify for these expensive treatments and at what stage of the disease.

Essential Medicines List: A Missed Inclusion

Earlier this year, WHO stopped short of adding these drugs to its essential medicines list for obesity treatment, which would have signalled their importance as universally accessible therapies. Instead, the organization included them only for type 2 diabetes patients with additional health conditions.

The decision reflects a careful balance: while the drugs are promising, their high cost remains a major barrier. In low- and middle-income countries, access is limited, raising concerns about global equity. WHO acknowledged that pricing remains a significant hurdle and stressed the need for broader affordability if the treatments are to make a real difference worldwide.

If finalized, the guidelines could reshape how obesity is addressed in healthcare systems globally. By formally recommending drug therapy alongside lifestyle interventions, WHO is pushing governments to rethink policies, insurance coverage, and patient access.

The move also signals a broader cultural change, recognizing obesity not as a personal failing but as a complex disease that requires medical solutions. For millions struggling with obesity, this shift could mean new hope, better treatment options, and a future where their condition is taken seriously at every level of care.

Despite affecting 6 million people globally, this disease is considered to be a neglected tropical disease by the World Health Organization. This disease is the Chagas disease, more popularly known as the ‘kissing bug’ disease.

However, health experts have noted that people who contracted the Chagas disease are not getting the help they need. The September report published by the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) shows that although Chagas is considered an endemic in 21 countries of the Americas except United States. However, what does this mean?

The CDC September report explains that US not naming Chagas an endemic, means it's a constant, local issue. This official label is misleading because there's a lot of evidence that the disease is right here in the U.S., too.

The reason why this is a big cause of worry for people is because of how dangerous the disease actually is. A report published in the 2019 Current Tropical Medicine Reports, showed that Chagas disease (CD) is a serious, often overlooked health condition caused by the parasite Trypanosoma cruzi. They explained how it is more disabling than other parasitic infections like malaria and Zika.

The report also detailed how it was considered a leading cause of heart disease in the Americas and affects over 6 million people globally, with more than 90% of cases in Latin America. The disease leads to over 7,500 premature deaths and an annual global economic cost of $8 billion.

How Many States Are Affected With Chagas Disease?

The CDC report explains that the disease is spread by blood-sucking "kissing bugs" which are found in 32 states across the southern U.S. While we don't know for sure if the number of bugs is increasing, we do know that people are encountering them more often.

• 9 out of 11 types of kissing bugs in the U.S. are naturally infected with the parasite that causes Chagas disease.
• Four of these species are commonly found in and around homes, which increases the chance of them spreading the disease to humans.
• Studies show that 30% to over 50% of kissing bugs in the U.S. carry the parasite.

Can Animals Have Chagas Disease?

The parasite isn't just in bugs; it's also common in animals across the southern U.S. Wild animals like raccoons, opossums, and armadillos carry the parasite and can pass it on to kissing bugs. This creates a cycle where the parasite can continue to spread. Dogs are also a major concern.

They've been found with the infection in 23 states, and in Texas, where animal cases were once tracked, hundreds of cases were reported in just a few years. Even zoo animals and research primates have been found to be infected. This shows that the parasite is widespread and well-established in the environment here.

How Many States Have Been Affected By Chagas Disease?

It’s clear that people are getting Chagas disease from local sources in the U.S. The disease has been found in humans in at least 8 states, with the most cases documented in Texas. Since 2013, Texas has reported 50 cases that were likely acquired within the state, not from travel.

The actual number of human cases is probably much higher because Chagas disease is not officially tracked nationwide. Only a handful of states require doctors to report cases, so many go unnoticed and uncounted. The CDC report explains why calling the US "non-endemic" for Chagas disease creates major problems.

• Doctors don't think to test for it. They are often unaware that people can get the disease locally, which leads to missed diagnoses.
• Public awareness is low. People don't know to look out for kissing bugs or the symptoms of the disease.
• It limits funding and research. By not recognizing the problem, the U.S. can't fully work on a national strategy to fight it.

How Does Naming Chagas ‘Endemic’ Help US?

The report says that officially classifying Chagas disease as endemic in the U.S. will help, but it should be specifically labeled as a "hypoendemic" problem, which means it's present at low but consistent levels. This new label would:

• Help doctors better understand the risk and diagnose the disease.
• Increase funding for research and public health programs.
• Allow us to create a plan to track cases and prevent new infections.