British pop star Jessie J—best known for her powerhouse vocals and unfiltered honesty recently took to Instagram to share her stage-one breast cancer diagnosis, fans everywhere were left both shocked and motivated. The 37-year-old singer-songwriter, born Jessica Cornish, announced the news in typical frankness, mixing vulnerability with as she explained the surgery she'd be having after performing at Capital's Summertime Ball at London's Wembley Stadium.

Though her confession highlights the psychological burden of battling cancer under the spotlight, it also brings attention to an important discussion: the early warning signs of breast cancer that women so often miss. As a global health epidemic that claims millions of lives each year, breast cancer is more than mere lumps. The initial symptoms are often silent, confused, or ignored—particularly by young women.

Also Read: Aamir Khan Opens Up About His Son Junaid's Struggle With Dyslexia

In her heartfelt video message, Jessie shared that she has been “in and out of tests” recently and ultimately received a diagnosis of early breast cancer. “Cancer sucks in any form,” she said, “but I’m holding on to the word early.”

With a nod of dark humor, she added, "It's a very dramatic way to get a boob job," vowing followers, "I will come back with massive boobs and more music." But under the humor lay raw emotion and an earnest appeal for sympathy and understanding. "I need to process it and talk about it," she said. "I need a hug."

Having struggled with a string of serious health problems in the past, including a childhood heart condition, a stroke at age 18, Meniere's disease, and even recently being diagnosed with ADHD and OCD, Jessie J is certainly no newcomer to working through health problems. But this latest installment has introduced her to an even more intimate, more personal view.

By disclosing her diagnosis, Jessie J is part of a rising number of public figures using their influence to make health screening and breast cancer discussions more mainstream. Such openness is particularly important in light of the fact that many young women still unrealistically believe breast cancer is an "older woman's disease."

Also Read: Against Medical Evidence, Louisiana Lawmakers Deny Abortion Access To Rape Victims

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in the world and the major cause of cancer death among women, reports the World Health Organization. But even with worldwide awareness efforts, delayed diagnosis remains a big issue. And that delay has part to do with failing to notice—or completely ignore—the warning signs.

What Are the Signs Women Typically Ignore?

While a breast lump is usually the most talked-about symptom, breast cancer has many other manifestations. These less common symptoms are important to recognize, particularly for women who might not think of themselves as high-risk.

1. Swelling in the arm or collarbone area

A subtle but significant indication is repeated swelling in the underarm or near the collarbone. This can suggest that cancer has spread to the lymph nodes—even when there is as yet no lump in the breast. Although the swelling could be minor or painless, any puffiness that is apparent and does not resolve should be investigated.

2. Recurring Breast or Chest Pain

Contrary to what many believe, breast cancer may be painful. Pain that isn't related to your menstrual cycle or physical exertion—particularly sharp, burning, or persistent dull pain—can't be ignored. Although not all breast pain indicates cancer, persistent pain warrants investigation.

3. Persistent Itchiness and Skin Changes

Persistent itchiness of the armpit or breast—especially if it is followed by redness, scaling, or swelling—may indicate inflammatory breast cancer, which is a rare but vicious type. Topical remedies that fail and localized itchiness warrant a visit to the doctor.

Also Read: Try These 6 Low-Impact Cross-Training Moves That Actually Work

4. Persistent, Unexplained Fatigue

Fatigue is one of the most misdiagnosed symptoms. With the speed of life these days, it's simple to assume tiredness is caused by stress, parenting, or sleeplessness. However, persistent fatigue that is unrelieved by rest could be a sign your body is struggling with an underlying illness, such as cancer.

5. Inverted Nipple or Nipple Discharge

Any abrupt nipple changes, like turning inward or flattening, might mean that a tumor is putting pressure on the milk ducts. Similarly, spontaneous nipple discharge, particularly if bloody or unprovoked—must never be left unattended. Such symptoms might appear insignificant but can actually point to significant underlying problems.

Medical experts consistently stress the importance of becoming familiar with your own breast tissue and regularly performing self-exams. According to the UK’s NHS and the American Cancer Society, early detection is the most effective defense. That means not only attending routine mammograms after age 40 (or earlier if you’re high risk) but also being proactive about any bodily changes.

It's not just about finding a lump. It's about recognizing when something doesn't feel right—and trusting yourself enough to speak up.

Jessie J's choice to come forward wasn't for healing herself alone—it was to make others feel less isolated. "I also know how much sharing in the past has helped me," she explained. "People giving me their love and support and also their own stories."

When the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) convened a public expert panel to review the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) during pregnancy, it re-opened a long-standing and highly charged conversation. At the center of the debate: how to weigh the risks of antidepressants to fetal development against the dangers of untreated maternal depression.

With no clear outcome or regulatory shift announced at the end of the meeting, the session highlighted just how divided experts remain over SSRIs—a class of drugs that includes some of the most commonly prescribed medications in the U.S., such as Prozac, Lexapro, and Zoloft.

The FDA forum, led by Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary, brought together perinatal psychiatrists, developmental biologists, epidemiologists, obstetricians, and mental health clinicians. The focus? Whether SSRIs prescribed during pregnancy need stronger warnings, including a potential “black box” label—the FDA’s most serious caution.

Dr. Makary opened the session with a sobering observation: nearly one in four middle-aged American women is on an antidepressant, and approximately 5% of pregnant women are prescribed SSRIs. Despite the increasing use of these drugs, he pointed out that the broader mental health picture in the U.S. hasn’t improved. “The more antidepressants we prescribe, the more depression there is,” he said, urging a deeper look at root causes instead of pharmaceutical fixes alone.

Nine of the ten panelists had previously voiced public concerns about SSRI safety or expressed skepticism toward antidepressant efficacy. Many cited studies indicating potential neurodevelopmental risks in babies exposed to SSRIs in utero. These include associations with autism spectrum disorders, ADHD, and other cognitive challenges.

However, these claims were not universally accepted. Independent researchers and clinicians noted that several of the studies referenced lacked proper controls, making it difficult to determine whether adverse outcomes were caused by the medications, the underlying depression itself, or other unrelated factors like maternal stress, environmental exposures, or socioeconomic influences.

Critically, many of the panelists underemphasized—or ignored entirely—the well-documented risks of untreated perinatal depression. Suicide remains one of the leading causes of maternal death in the first year postpartum. Depression during pregnancy has also been associated with premature birth, low birth weight, and impaired bonding with the baby.

There’s no question SSRIs, like any medication, carry risk. But context matters. SSRIs aren’t prescribed casually; they’re part of a personalized treatment plan that often includes psychotherapy, lifestyle interventions, and close monitoring.

Experts caution against blanket restrictions or alarmist warnings. While acknowledging the importance of ongoing research and transparency in labeling, several physicians worry that exaggerated claims could have unintended consequences—mainly, deterring pregnant women from seeking care.

“We need to be careful not to scare patients away from treatment that might be lifesaving,” said one perinatal psychiatrist unaffiliated with the FDA panel. “Depression doesn’t disappear during pregnancy. For many women, it gets worse.”

The debate over SSRIs isn’t happening in a vacuum. It’s unfolding against a backdrop of shifting political narratives around mental health, medication, and government oversight.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., now Health and Human Services Secretary under former President Trump, has been a vocal critic of SSRIs and other psychiatric medications. His “Make America Healthy Again” initiative frames SSRIs as part of a broader pharmaceutical overreach. He’s even gone so far as to claim a link between antidepressants and school shootings—an assertion for which no scientific evidence exists.

During the FDA panel discussion, one participant echoed Kennedy’s alarmist rhetoric, declaring, “Never before in human history have we chemically altered babies like this.” Comments like these, healthcare professionals argue, blur the line between evidence-based discussion and ideological fearmongering.

The reality on the ground is more nuanced. Clinicians treating pregnant patients with depression must weigh competing risks with every prescription. Factors like a woman’s mental health history, her past response to medications, current symptoms, support system, and overall health are all taken into account.

Many OB-GYNs and psychiatrists recommend continuing SSRIs during pregnancy if the patient has a history of severe depression or has responded well to the medication. The cost of relapse—both emotionally and physically—can be high. In contrast, women with milder symptoms might consider tapering off or trying non-drug therapies under medical supervision.

And while some studies suggest a possible association between SSRI use and neurodevelopmental issues in children, the evidence is not conclusive. In many cases, what appears to be a risk may be confounded by the effects of the illness itself.

Despite the heated debate, the FDA did not announce any immediate regulatory action following the panel meeting. An agency spokesperson emphasized that the session was part of “broader efforts to apply rigorous, evidence-based standards” in evaluating drug safety, particularly during sensitive periods like pregnancy.

Still, the session underscored a growing demand for more nuanced research and improved labeling that fully informs patients without generating unnecessary fear. The agency’s next steps remain unclear, but stakeholders on all sides agree: this is a conversation that’s far from over.

Can SSRIs Harm Unborn Babies?

The question of whether selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) can harm unborn babies is complex—and not definitively answered. SSRIs are widely prescribed to manage depression and anxiety, including during pregnancy. But recent scrutiny by an FDA advisory panel has reignited concerns about their safety, particularly in the first trimester when fetal development is most vulnerable.

Studies over the years have linked SSRI use in pregnancy to a small but possible increased risk of complications such as low birth weight, premature birth, neonatal adaptation syndrome (withdrawal-like symptoms in newborns), and persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn (PPHN). Some data even suggest a potential link between early SSRI exposure and neurodevelopmental issues, including autism spectrum disorders, though these findings are inconclusive and often confounded by the severity of maternal depression itself.

On the flip side, untreated depression during pregnancy also carries serious risks—for both mother and child. It can lead to poor prenatal care, higher rates of substance use, inadequate nutrition, and increased risk of suicide or self-harm. These factors can impact fetal outcomes as well.

As public health agencies and professionals continue to assess the benefits and risks of SSRIs during pregnancy, one thing is clear: blanket judgments and politicized narratives don’t help patients. What pregnant individuals need is clear, evidence-based guidance—and compassionate, personalized care that prioritizes both maternal and fetal health.

The question of whether selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) can harm unborn babies is complex—and not definitively answered. SSRIs are widely prescribed to manage depression and anxiety, including during pregnancy. But recent scrutiny by an FDA advisory panel has reignited concerns about their safety, particularly in the first trimester when fetal development is most vulnerable.

Studies over the years have linked SSRI use in pregnancy to a small but possible increased risk of complications such as low birth weight, premature birth, neonatal adaptation syndrome (withdrawal-like symptoms in newborns), and persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn (PPHN). Some data even suggest a potential link between early SSRI exposure and neurodevelopmental issues, including autism spectrum disorders, though these findings are inconclusive and often confounded by the severity of maternal depression itself.

On the flip side, untreated depression during pregnancy also carries serious risks—for both mother and child. It can lead to poor prenatal care, higher rates of substance use, inadequate nutrition, and increased risk of suicide or self-harm. These factors can impact fetal outcomes as well.

SSRIs aren’t inherently harmful, but their use during pregnancy must be carefully evaluated. For some, the benefits outweigh the risks—especially when mental health is at stake. Always consult a healthcare provider for personalized guidance.

The UK’s National Health Service (NHS) is launching a renewed and urgent call to vaccinate hundreds of thousands of young people against the human papillomavirus (HPV)—a virus linked to cervical and multiple other cancers. Despite robust efforts in schools, data from the last three years reveals that more than 418,000 children in the UK left school without receiving the HPV vaccine, prompting a national outreach initiative targeting those now aged 16 to 25.

This large-scale effort is not just about catching up; it’s part of a far-reaching goal- eliminating cervical cancer in the UK by 2040. With HPV responsible for 99.7% of cervical cancer cases and also linked to cancers of the throat, anus, penis, vagina, and mouth, the campaign reflects a bold public health strategy rooted in decades of scientific progress.

Also Read: New Parkinson's Treatment Is Like A Pacemaker To The Brain

HPV is one of the most common sexually transmitted infections globally. By age 45, about 80% of people—both men and women—will have contracted some form of HPV. While most of these infections are harmless and cleared naturally by the immune system, high-risk strains can linger and mutate healthy cells, leading to cancer.

In the cervix, HPV causes a gradual change in skin cells—a process called cervical dysplasia. This is where the transformation zone (the meeting point of squamous and glandular cells in the cervix) becomes the site of potential cancerous growth. If left unchecked, these abnormal cells can progress from CIN1 (mild dysplasia) to CIN2 or CIN3 (moderate to severe), and eventually become malignant.

What makes HPV particularly dangerous is its ability to evade apoptosis, the normal process where damaged cells self-destruct. Instead, it integrates its own genetic material into cervical cells, making them immortal and prone to uncontrollable growth.

In 2022 alone, 130,000 women across the European Economic Area (EEA)—which includes the EU, Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway—were newly diagnosed with cervical cancer, and 14,000 died. Even more alarming are the HPV-related head and neck cancers, which impacted 86,000 people in the region, 74% of them men, causing about 26,000 deaths.

The World Health Organization (WHO) defines cervical cancer elimination as fewer than four cases per 100,000 women. Current rates in the EEA sit at 56 per 100,000. Europe may reach the WHO's goal by 2050—but only if vaccination and screening efforts scale up dramatically.

The NHS is using every tool available to close this immunization gap. GP practices across England are now contacting unvaccinated individuals aged 16–25 through letters, emails, texts, and even the NHS App. The message is clear: one dose can save your life.

According to Dr. Amanda Doyle, NHS National Director of Primary Care and Community Services, "Too many lives are lost to cervical cancer… this vaccine is hugely important—not just for girls and women, but for boys and men too."

Previously, the vaccine required two doses, but as of 2023, a single dose is now recommended for most. This simplifies logistics and removes a barrier for many. National data from the 2023/24 academic year reveals progress, but also stark disparities. Among Year 10 students (ages 14–15):

• 76.7% of girls and 71.2% of boys were vaccinated.
• In Year 8 (ages 12–13), uptake was slightly lower: 72.9% of girls, 67.7% of boys.

Yet coverage varies dramatically by region:

• In London, Year 10 uptake for girls is just 64.9%, and only 58.9% for boys.
• In contrast, the South East boasts 82.7% (girls) and 77.3% (boys).
• At a hyperlocal level, places like Lambeth in London saw just 38.7% of girls vaccinated, compared to 97.6% in Northumberland.
• For boys, rates ranged from 28.2% (Lambeth) to 92.2% (West Berkshire).

This patchwork points to deep-rooted health inequalities—a challenge public health officials must address to ensure the vaccine’s promise reaches all communities.

Why It Is Important To Reinforce the Safety and Efficacy of the New Vaccine?

Since 2021, the UK has been administering an updated HPV vaccine that research shows is significantly more effective than earlier versions. Compared to the previous vaccine, the current one is expected to reduce women’s cancer cases by 16% and lower HPV-related deaths by 9%. What makes this advancement even more compelling is real-world data from England, which indicates the vaccine prevents up to 90% of cervical cancer cases. In practical terms, this means that for individuals who receive the vaccine before being exposed to the virus, the risk of developing cervical cancer is not just lowered—it’s almost entirely eliminated.

While cervical cancer remains the primary concern, the HPV vaccine offers protection against a wider range of serious health issues, including genital warts, anal cancer, penile cancer, and head and neck cancers—particularly those affecting the mouth and throat. This broader protection underscores the importance of vaccinating not just girls and women, but also boys and men. They face direct risks and also play a significant role in transmitting the virus to sexual partners, potentially putting others at risk for HPV-related cancers.

To accelerate progress, the NHS has outlined a clear roadmap in its 10-Year Health Plan. Key goals include achieving 90% HPV vaccine coverage among girls by 2040 and increasing participation in cervical screening programs. In a move to streamline access and engagement, the NHS recently rolled out a ‘ping and book’ system through its App, allowing eligible individuals to receive digital invitations and reminders for cervical screening appointments. Public health minister Ashley Dalton called the HPV vaccine “our most powerful tool” in eliminating cervical cancer but acknowledged that “there is still a long way to go” in reaching full coverage and equity.

And that’s the real message here: the science is ready. The infrastructure exists. What’s missing is participation—from parents, from young adults, and from the health systems that must ensure equitable access.

The effort to eliminate cervical cancer is no longer a medical fantasy—it’s a public health reality within reach. But it will take collective action, clear messaging, and targeted strategies to overcome gaps in access and awareness.

If you're between 16 and 25 in England and missed the jab in school, this is your moment. If you're a parent, ask your child’s GP. If you're a policymaker, look at your region’s numbers because the truth is simple: a single vaccine dose today could save a life tomorrow.

In a major leap for Parkinson’s disease treatment, a new form of brain implant is transforming the way patients experience relief from symptoms like tremors, stiffness, and slowness of movement. Often likened to a “pacemaker for the brain,” this breakthrough, known as adaptive deep brain stimulation (aDBS), is being hailed as a personalized, real-time therapy that adjusts to the brain's needs moment by moment.

From Reluctance to Relief: One Patient’s Journey

As the Scientific American reports, Keith Krehbiel had lived with Parkinson’s disease for nearly 25 years before agreeing to undergo a surgery he had long avoided. In 2020, as his symptoms worsened, he reluctantly said yes to a deep brain stimulation (DBS) implant, unaware he’d soon be part of a historic medical trial.

Just as he was preparing for surgery, neurologist Helen Bronte-Stewart of Stanford University received approval to launch a new trial testing an upgraded form of DBS. She offered Krehbiel the chance to be the first participant. His response: “Boy, do I!”

Five years on, the clinical trial, known as ADAPT-PD, involving 68 participants is now under review for publication. But the initial results have already been powerful enough to earn regulatory approval in both the U.S. and Europe.

Also Read: Rakesh Roshan Undergoes Angioplasty, Shares Health Update And Asks People Over 40 To Get Regular CT Scan

What Makes Adaptive DBS Different?

As per the American Parkinson Disease Association (APDA), traditional DBS works by sending electrical impulses to parts of the brain that control movement, helping correct abnormal brain activity. But until now, it operated on fixed settings, adjusted manually by doctors based on patient feedback during clinic visits. That’s where adaptive DBS is changing the game.

This next-generation implant not only stimulates the brain but also listens to it. Using Medtronic’s BrainSense™ technology, the system continuously reads brain signals called local field potentials (LFPs), particularly in the beta-band frequency range, which has been linked to motor symptoms in Parkinson’s patients.

When the system detects brainwave patterns that suggest tremor, stiffness, or slowness, it automatically tweaks the stimulation levels in real-time.

“It’s like a smart pacemaker for the brain,” Bronte-Stewart explained. The goal is simple but revolutionary: deliver just the right amount of stimulation when it’s needed most, and ease off when it’s not.

A New Era for Parkinson’s Care

The implications of this adaptive technology are wide-reaching. APDA notes, over one million people in the U.S. and 1.2 million in Europe live with Parkinson’s, a progressive neurological disorder that often grows resistant to medications over time. While traditional DBS has helped around 200,000 patients worldwide, only 40,000 devices implanted since 2020 are equipped with the adaptive capability, and many of them haven’t even activated the feature yet.

With the ADAPT-PD trial results clearing regulatory hurdles, that’s poised to change. Krehbiel’s own experience is one reason why: after his surgery, his symptoms significantly improved, and his quality of life followed suit.

The benefits of adaptive DBS extend beyond Parkinson’s. Neurologists believe this “closed-loop” approach could also be effective for other movement disorders like Tourette’s syndrome, and even psychiatric conditions such as obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and depression — though more trials are needed.

Experts believe the evolution of adaptive DBS is just beginning. Next on the horizon is the integration of artificial intelligence. By learning individual brain patterns, AI could help predict when symptoms are about to worsen, and adjust stimulation preemptively.