India has seen a gradual overall improvement in life expectancy at birth over recent years, reflecting advances in healthcare, nutrition, and disease management. According to the latest official data, life expectancy at birth for the period 2019–23 is estimated at 70.3 years, up from 69.8 years in 2017–21. Even the 2018–22 period reported a slight rise to 69.9 years, indicating a consistent, if incremental, upward trend.

This gain is more than a figure; it is an indicator of a nation slowly emerging from past issues of infectious diseases, child and maternal mortality, and a lack of healthcare access in rural communities. However, despite the portrait of improvement painted by the national rate, a closer examination of the data shows regional and gender variations that are worth noting.

Also Read: RFK Jr., at vaccine hearings, claims ‘We Were Lied To About Everything Around COVID.’

Are Women Outliving Men Now?

Perhaps the most remarkable characteristic of India's life expectancy statistics is the persistent disparity between women and men. In all three reporting periods, women not only survive longer at birth but also have a longevity advantage even at older ages.

In 2017–21, female life expectancy at birth was 71.6 years, compared to 68.2 years for men. By 2018–22, females reached 71.9 years, with males at 68.2 years. The 2019–23 data shows a more pronounced gap: females at 72.5 years, males at 68.5 years—nearly a four-year difference at birth.

Even at 70 years of age, women still have a survival advantage of over one year over men. This continuing disparity highlights biological, social, and behavioral mechanisms that are more conducive to women's survival. Women are less likely to be exposed to lifestyle risk factors like smoking and heavy drinking, and investigations also identify protective hormonal effects and more robust immune reactions as being causative.

The broadening gap also mirrors gains in the health of mothers, disease avoidance, and medical care coverage for women in India. As women keep surviving longer than men, public health efforts need to evolve in response to their needs in terms of, among others, the care of the elderly, chronic disease care, and social support networks.

Urban-Rural and State-Level Disparities

The gains in life expectancy are not even across India. Recent data underscore significant regional disparities:

Chhattisgarh has the lowest life expectancy consistently: males 62.4–62.8 years, females 66.4–67.1 years.

Delhi and Kerala continue to lead, with females achieving 78.4 years in Kerala and males 73.0 years in Delhi.

Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, and Kerala also show high male and female life expectancy compared to the national average.

Urban-rural differentials continue but have weakened considerably over the decades. For example:

During 2017–21, urban populations averaged 72.9 years, rural populations 68.5 years—a 4.4-year disparity.

By 2019–23, the disparity decreased slightly: urban life expectancy at 73.1 years, rural at 69.1 years, a 4-year difference.

At the age of 70, urban-rural disparities are narrower, averaging 1.5–1.9 years, an indication of increased rural healthcare and preventive services access.

Even with the decrease in the gap, rural communities still lag behind in terms of lesser access to quality care, greater infectious disease prevalence, and lesser awareness of preventive health practices. The disparities underscore the requirement for policies directed towards bridging the urban-rural divide.

Life Expectancy After Birth: Trends by Age

Life expectancy is more than a birth rate; it also reflects survival chances at various ages. The data reveal:

Life expectancy at age one (having survived infancy) has risen steadily: males from 69.5 years (2017–21) to 69.5 years (2019–23), females from 73.1 years to 73.6 years.

Life expectancy at age 60 is 18.4 years across the country (17.3 years for males, 19.6 years for females), so Indian adults can realistically hope to live well into their late 70s and early 80s if they survive to older age stages.

These age-specific trends mirror the effect of reduced infant mortality, enhanced disease control, and enhanced nutrition and sanitation. They also demonstrate women's resilience in living longer than men even at later ages, furthering the gendered character of longevity benefits.

Public Health Implications

The life expectancy trends throw up the imperative implications for India's social and healthcare planning. With women living longer than men and the population fast ageing, increasing needs of geriatric health care services, chronic diseases care, and social support systems are emerging exponentially. States like Chhattisgarh, with low performance, require special intervention to redress regional gaps in terms of maternal and child health, sanitation, and rural health infrastructure.

The female longevity edge also necessitates gender-appropriate measures that focus on preventive care, mental health interventions, and supportive care to provide a quality life for older women. Rural populations, even though they are gradually improving, continue to be prone to avoidable disease, and therefore, there is a need to consolidate healthcare access, encourage preventive testing, and spread health education in villages and small towns.

What Factors Are Driving the Improvements?

A number of factors have led to the steady increase in India's life expectancy:

Increased access to healthcare: Government initiatives such as Ayushman Bharat and state-level health programs have enhanced coverage, particularly for maternal and child health.

Vaccination: Declines in infectious diseases like measles, polio, and diphtheria have helped bring down mortality among children.

Better nutrition and sanitation: Increased dietary awareness and provision of clean water have improved health outcomes overall.

Lifestyle transitions and awareness: Better awareness of smoking cessation, physical activity, and management of chronic conditions has affected survival among adults.

Nonetheless, there are challenges. Chronic diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease are on the increase, jeopardizing future increases in life expectancy. Managing these chronic health costs is necessary to maintain and augment longevity.

What Women's Longevity Advantage Means for The Society?

The reality that women currently live for almost four years longer than men at birth and well over one year even up to age 70 has profound implications in society:

• Healthcare systems have to be modified to provide for increasingly larger numbers of older women who might outnumber old men.
• Economic planning needs to factor in increased retirement lengths and possible dependency ratios, particularly for widows or sole living women.
• Preventive health attention must address age-related conditions for women, such as osteoporosis, cardiovascular disease, and dementia.

Women's longer life expectancy is a success indicator of general health enhancement, but it also demands gender-sensitive health planning to guarantee women not only live longer but have quality and independence in old age.

India's trends in life expectancy reveal a story of slow and steady progress, powered by expansion of healthcare, control of diseases, and social development. However, the continued existence of regional inequalities, urban-rural differentials, and gendered health disparities ensures that policy focus needs to remain laser-sharp. Strategies in the future must consist of:

• Scaling up preventive care in rural and low-performing states
• Gender-sensitive healthcare service promotion
• Intensifying chronic disease control programs
• Age-specific life expectancy trend monitoring to detect emerging health threats

By targeting these priorities, India can continue to raise life expectancy, narrow inequalities, and make sure men and women do not just live longer but also healthier and more productive lives.

The most recent Indian life expectancy figures show encouraging improvements and remaining disparities. Women still outlive men by a significant margin, a pattern that holds both in urban and rural areas, with regional gaps continuing to be a serious problem. The incremental increase in life expectancy at birth is encouraging, but the path to universal coverage, equitable, high-quality healthcare continues to be a long way off.

As India makes its way through the next decade of public health priorities, attention needs to be given to maintaining these gains, meeting the needs of older persons especially women and closing disparities that push behind rural and performing states. Only then can India unlock the full potential of longer, healthier lives for its people.

For this year's Delhi, the Supreme Court had lifted the blanket ban on bursting firecrackers, and allowed the citizens to burst green crackers, which emit 30 to 40% less harmful gases. The court also set a time limit between 8pm to 10pm, however, as reports show, Delhiites, very well burst crackers post the 10pm limit. As a result, Delhi pollution shot up 100 times the World Health Organization (WHO) limits, showed the data by Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC).

For instance, On Monday 10am, in Nehru Vihar, the level of PM 2.5 was at 1,753 micrograms per meter, which is 116.8 times the WHO permission limit of 15 micrograms per cubic meter for a 24-hour period.

In Patparganj area of Delhi, at 4am on Tuesday, the PM 2.5 was recorded at 1,144.8 micrograms per cubic meter, which is 76 times the WHO limit. Similarly, Ashok Vihar reported 1,353 micrograms per cubic meter at 12am on Tuesday, which is over 90 times the WHO limit.

In such a case, how can someone protect themselves? While pollution has crossed the safe limit, lives haven't stopped, people are still going out for work, and what's important is to wear protective gears to limit exposure to harmful gases in the pollution.

Surgical Mask Or N-95: Which One To Choose?

The answer to this is to wear masks. Now the question that arises is which one? Should we wear a surgical one, that comes in 3-ply protection, or should we go for an N-95 mask?

Dr Sandeep Nayar, Principal Director and HOD of Chest & Respiratory Diseases at BLK-Max Super Speciality Hospital says that N-95 should be considered. He says that normal surgical masks do not prevent you from getting exposed to smaller pollutants including PM 2.5 particles, which could directly enter your airways and may diffuse into the blood and affect all organs of your body.

What Is A Surgical Mask?

As per the US Food and Drug Administration (USFDA), a surgical mask is a loose-fitting, disposable device that creates a physical barrier between the mouth and the nose of the wearer and potential contaminants in the immediate environment. However, the FDA, notes, that they do not filter or block very small particles in the air.

A surgical mask has a different kind of thickness, and it enables the wearer to be protected from contacts with liquid. It also effects how easily you can breathe. If worn properly, it can block large-particle droplets, splashes, sprays, or splatter that could contains germs via viruses or bacteria from reaching your mouth and nose. The main function of a surgical mask is to reduce exposer of saliva and respiratory secretions to others.

What Is An N-95 Respirator?

It is a respiratory protective device designed to achieve a very close facial fit and very efficient filtration of airborne particles, notes the FDA. This is what makes it fit for use during high levels of pollution.

The edges of N-95 are designed to form a seal around the nose and mouth. Some models even have exhalation valves that can make breathing out easier and help reduce the heat build-up.

As per a 2021 study published in the Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging, the N-95 mask could block "at least 95% of very small test particles". There are various kinds of such masks, called the filtering facepiece respirators or FFRs with various numerical designation like N-95, N-99, N-100, P-95, P-99, P-100, R-95, R-99, and R-100, where the number shows the filter's minimum filtration efficiency. The letters also hold a meaning, for instance the 'N' is for not resistant to oil, 'R' is for somewhat resistant to oil, and 'P' denotes strongly resistant to oil.

Kenvue, the American company behind Tylenol, says the US Food and Drug Administration should not make proposed changes to the product’s safety label reflecting research about a possible link between its use during pregnancy and autism or ADHD diagnoses in children.

The company emphasizes that acetaminophen, the generic name for Tylenol, also called paracetamol is “one of the most studied medicines in history” and argues that adopting the proposed label warning would be arbitrary, capricious, and unlawful.

Tylenol generates roughly $1 billion annually for Kenvue and remains the company’s top-selling brand, according to Morningstar. The current label advises pregnant or breastfeeding individuals to “ask a health professional before use.”

Kenvue: Push for Label Change Sparks Attention

The call for a label change gained attention after former President Donald Trump held a news conference last month, telling pregnant women in pain to try to “tough it out” instead of taking Tylenol, even though acetaminophen is widely considered the safest over-the-counter pain reliever during pregnancy.

Trump claimed, without evidence, that taking Tylenol during pregnancy is linked to a “very increased risk of autism.” “Fight like hell not to take it,” he urged.

Most pregnant people use acetaminophen at some point, studies show. Other common pain or fever treatments, such as ibuprofen or regular-dose aspirin, can increase the risk of serious complications during pregnancy. Untreated pain or fever can also be dangerous, possibly leading to miscarriage, birth defects, or high blood pressure.

Kenvue And Tylenol: FDA and Public Health Actions

Beginning the process to change acetaminophen labels was one of several steps the Trump administration planned. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said his agency would also launch a public service campaign about the issue.

The FDA sent a letter to physicians noting that the decision to take Tylenol “still belongs with parents,” while also warning that its use during pregnancy may carry an “increased risk of neurological conditions such as autism and ADHD in children.”

However, the letter stressed that “a causal relationship has not been established” and that studies examining a potential link are “contradictory,” as per CNN.

Citizen Petition Filed

The Informed Consent Action Network, an anti-vaccine nonprofit closely tied to Kennedy, filed a citizen petition with the FDA on the same day as Trump’s news conference. Citizen petitions allow individuals, industry groups, or consumer organizations to request FDA action on specific issues.

The petition claimed that, because of “urgent public health implications,” the FDA should add a warning to acetaminophen labels stating that “studies show that frequent use of this product during pregnancy may increase your child’s risk of neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism spectrum disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.”

Kenvue Responds

On Friday, Kenvue formally asked the FDA to deny the petition, saying that the proposed label changes are unsupported by scientific evidence and would represent a departure from the FDA’s longstanding position on acetaminophen during pregnancy. The company said it had met with Kennedy in early September after he suggested a link between acetaminophen use during pregnancy and autism, and Kenvue informed him there was no such connection.

FDA Guidance and Global Response

The FDA website on acetaminophen has not been updated to reflect the Trump administration’s views. The last update, in August, states, “to date, FDA has not found clear evidence that appropriate use of acetaminophen during pregnancy causes adverse pregnancy, birth, neurobehavioral, or developmental outcomes.” Acetaminophen has been studied for decades, and according to the American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, no reputable study has concluded that its use in any trimester causes neurodevelopmental disorders in children.

Following Trump’s news conference, medicine regulatory agencies in the European Union, United Kingdom, and Canada quickly released statements confirming that acetaminophen remains safe for pregnant individuals.

Vision impairment is an issue that many people don’t understand. Most people view vision loss as absolute, either you can see or you cannot. However, there are other conditions where a person has slightly less vision and also severe visual impairment. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), 2.2 billion people in the world have near or distance impairment and according to their statistics, 1 billion of these cases could have been addressed. Taking a step towards this same cause, a new technology has been created, which could help people who have slowly lost their sight to read again.

A new study has been published in The New England Journal of Medicine, announcing a huge step forward for people with Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD). This is a common disease that causes people to lose their central vision over time. The groundbreaking result of the study was that dozens of patients who took part in the study were able to get some of their sight back. This was achieved by using a brand-new system that combines an eye implant with special smart glasses.

Also Read: Can You Get Your Covid And Flu Shots At The Same Time? Experts Explain

This technology was powerful enough to help these patients return to doing simple, everyday things they could no longer do, like reading books or solving crossword puzzles. The people who participated in this trial were all 60 years or older, had AMD in both eyes, and had very poor vision in the eye being studied.

How Can You Help Someone With Progressive Vision Loss?

To understand why this is a big deal, you need to know that AMD causes the cells in the center of the retina (the light-sensitive part at the back of the eye) to die. Once they die, vision loss is considered permanent. This new study doesn't cure AMD, but it focuses on replacing the job of those dead cells to bring some vision back. The system has two main parts:

The Implant

This is a tiny device, only about 2x2 millimeters in size, which is smaller than a small pea. It’s made of little photovoltaic solar panels. It is carefully surgically placed underneath the patient's retina.

The Smart Glasses

The patient wears these special glasses, which have a camera. The glasses capture a close-up, zoomed-in image of the world and send this image to the implant using near-infrared light.

Once the implant receives the light signal, it creates small electrical pulses. These pulses travel to the optic nerve, completely taking over the job of the dead retinal cells and allowing the brain to finally see the world again.

How Does This Technology Work?

The clinical trial started with 38 patients who got the implant. After one full year, 32 patients were still involved in the study. The results at the one-year mark were extremely encouraging:

26 out of the 32 participants, which is an 80 percent success rate, could see better than they did when they started the trial.

It’s important to note that the vision they regained isn't perfect; patients can only see a blurry image and everything is in black and white. However, outside experts have praised the achievement, with some calling the work "amazing," because it provides hope where there was previously none.

The technology was developed by a company called Science Corporation, which works on brain-computer interfaces. The CEO and founder of Science Corporation is Max Hodak, who also helped start the well-known neurotechnology company Neuralink with Elon Musk back in 2016.

Science Corporation took over this vision project in 2024. They acquired the retinal implant technology from a French company named Pixium Vision. Pixium Vision had spent ten years trying to develop the technology but eventually ran out of money. This kind of "rescue" is actually not unique in the medical world; a similar situation happened with another company, Second Sight Medical, whose abandoned vision technology was also saved by a different startup to keep its clinical trials going.