MRI scans are strong diagnostics with high-definition images of what lies inside a body. Strong magnetic fields require precaution, as brought out by an instance where a young woman suffered very serious injuries due to an oversight in a metallic core within a silicone sex toy that she happened to have before the MRI scan. This makes a stark reminder about the potentially deadly consequences of missing metal objects when such procedures are being performed. In April 2023, a 23-year-old woman went into an MRI with a silicone plug containing a metal core that was not known.

She thought that the item is made entirely out of silicone according to the advertising. However, the strong magnetic field of the MRI machine interacted with the hidden metal, dragging the object through her body and causing excruciating pain. According to reports from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the scene was harrowing, with the woman screaming in agony and requiring immediate hospitalization. Despite pre-scan screenings, which are routine prior to a scan, the patient did not inform the facility that the object existed because he presumed it was purely non-metallic. This caused serious injuries that led to the patient's law suit against the manufacturer for deceitful misrepresentations of material content.

MRI machines employ magnets between 0.5 to 3 Tesla (T). This is thousands of times stronger than the Earth's magnetic field. The tremendous force causes ferromagnetic materials, like iron and nickel, to be magnetized quickly and become strongly attracted toward the magnet. Objects as small as hairpins or paper clips will accelerate at 40 miles per hour inside the magnetic field.

The force can lead to catastrophic injuries in items lodged within the body, such as metallic implants or foreign objects. Metallic cores within devices, like pacemakers or intrauterine devices, must be disclosed to radiologists to prevent such complications.

How Metal Objects Interact with MRI Fields?

On these claims, Dr. Adam Taylor, a specialist in human anatomy, weighed his words in a international health website and added that the distance away and mass of this object would increase its velocity towards that of sound, "The acceleration would be phenomenal, but with a metallic core, it can't go anywhere near supersonic speeds. As for the size, the magnetic acceleration to the internal soft tissues would ensure that there could be severe intracranial trauma."

The injuries inflicted in this case likely involved damage to major blood vessels, nerves, or organs, highlighting the devastating impact of even minor oversight during an MRI scan.

This is not an isolated case. There are documented cases of metallic objects causing serious damage during MRI scans with a 65-year-old man with schizophrenia swallowed metal objects, including sockets and a hinge pin. The powerful magnetic field during an MRI scan caused the objects to rupture his stomach, resulting in serious injuries.

A toddler who ingested 11 small magnets perforated his bowel while undergoing a scan, making his case unique. In another deadly but extremely rare incident, there have been people who hide a firearm on themselves during MRI procedures. Magnetic attraction can trigger a discharge in a weapon and has led to some fatal injuries.

These cases emphasize the very strong need for adequate screening and patient education prior to an MRI.

Preventing MRI-Related Incidents

Medical professionals have been trained to avoid risks. This is by properly screening a patient for metallic objects. In general, most pre-scan protocols include:

• Patients are interrogated about implants, recent surgery or exposures at work related to metals.
• Radiologists sometimes use handheld metal detectors to search for hidden items.
• People who work with metal, like welders or machinists, will need additional testing to detect microscopic metal fragments within soft tissues or eyes.

The case emphasizes the importance of product labeling by manufacturers, especially those products that are likely to unintentionally cause harm to health. The patient's assumption that her device was 100% silicone points to a larger problem in consumer markets with misinformation.

It also reminds the patients to report any possible dangers to the medical professionals, no matter how the objects look non-metallic. In sensitive cases, patients can request private discussions with healthcare providers to ensure safety without discomfort.

In the end, it is a joint effort from manufacturers, healthcare professionals, and patients that can prevent such tragedies. Manufacturers must ensure truthful marketing, while healthcare providers should educate patients about the dangers of metal objects in MRI settings. For patients, understanding the risks and actively participating in pre-scan disclosures can be lifesaving.

This young woman's experience is a sobering example of the unforeseen dangers posed by MRI machines when precautions are overlooked. It serves as a wake-up call to address gaps in patient awareness, medical protocols, and product transparency. By learning from this incident, the medical community and the public can work together to ensure MRI scans remain a safe and effective diagnostic tool.

Depo Provera: The Food and Drug Administration approved a label change on Friday for Pfizer’s birth control injection, Depo-Provera, alerting patients to the risk of meningioma, a tumor that develops in the lining of the brain.

Pfizer is currently facing a lawsuit from over 1,000 women who allege that the company knew about the risk but failed to warn users.

How Depo-Provera Works

Depo-Provera is administered as a progestin injection every three months. The lawsuit highlights studies dating back to 1983 linking progesterone with meningioma, claiming that Pfizer had an “unassignable duty to investigate” and should have examined the potential risks of Depo-Provera much earlier. (Progestin is a synthetic form of progesterone.)

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, roughly one in four sexually active women in the U.S. has used Depo-Provera, with Black women using it at nearly twice the national rate.

Depo Provera: Understanding Meningiomas

Meningiomas are generally non-cancerous, meaning they do not spread to other areas of the body. However, depending on their size and location, they can still be dangerous. In the U.S., about 39,000 meningiomas are diagnosed annually, though the overall risk remains small, as per CDC.

Depo Provera: Pfizer’s Response and FDA Review

Earlier this year, Pfizer requested a judge dismiss the lawsuit, stating that it became aware of the meningioma risks linked to Depo-Provera in 2023. In February 2024, the company applied to the FDA to add a warning to the injection’s label, also requesting warnings for two lower-dose pills containing medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), the active ingredient in the shot, as per NBC News.

The FDA denied the request for the pills, explaining that “the findings of the available observational studies alone do not support the addition of a warning on Meningioma risk to medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA)-containing products.”

Pfizer then amended and resubmitted the application in June 2025. In response, the FDA approved a label change this month for two injection versions — Depo-Provera CI and Depo-Subq Provera 104.

“We acknowledge receipt of your amendment dated June 12, 2025,” the FDA letter to Pfizer said. The approval “provides for the addition of information related to Meningioma risk” on the product label.

Depo Provera: Pfizer’s Statement

A Pfizer spokesperson told NBC News that “the label update reflects a recent decision by the FDA to approve the warning, which the agency had earlier denied.”

“Pfizer stands behind the safety and efficacy of Depo-Provera, which has been used by millions of women worldwide and remains an important treatment option for women seeking to manage their reproductive health,” the statement added.

Lawyers representing the women suing Pfizer said: “For years, Pfizer misled doctors, patients, and the FDA about Depo-Provera’s link to meningiomas, resulting in needless suffering for thousands of women who developed these serious brain tumors. … We applaud the FDA in finally requiring this label change to better inform and protect women.” The FDA did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Elsewhere, warnings about meningioma have already been added to Depo-Provera’s label.

In 2024, the European Medicines Agency listed meningioma as a “possible side effect” for drugs with high doses of MPA. That same year, Canada updated the drug’s label to include meningioma under “warnings and precautions,” noting that meningiomas have been reported following long-term use of progestins, including MPA.

As per NBC News, in January, South Africa’s regulatory agency recommended updating the MPA drug label to include meningioma risk as well. The judge has not yet issued a ruling in the ongoing lawsuit against Pfizer in the United States.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Tuesday withdrew its decades-old guidance that all newborns in the country should be vaccinated against hepatitis B at birth. Instead, the decision has now been shifted to parents, who are advised to consult a healthcare provider when deciding whether babies born to hepatitis B-negative mothers should receive the vaccine, including the birth dose.

The change follows a recommendation made by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s vaccine advisory panel, marking a significant shift in public health policy. Earlier this month, the panel suggested that the birth dose be limited to newborns whose mothers test positive for hepatitis B or whose infection status is unknown. The CDC approved this recommendation as official policy on Tuesday. Here is what this change means for newborns moving forward:

Also Read: Indoor Air In Delhi Is More Toxic Than Outdoor Smog, Pulmonologist Warns

CDC Ends Guidance That All Newborns Should Get Hepatitis B Vaccine

Under the updated guidance, if parents decide against vaccinating their baby at birth but later believe the shot is necessary, the CDC now advises waiting until the child is at least two months old before administering the first dose. Since 1991, U.S. health authorities have supported universal infant vaccination against hepatitis B, with the first of three doses typically given shortly after birth. CDC recommendations influence health insurance coverage decisions and serve as a key reference point for doctors when determining vaccine schedules.

Public health experts have raised concerns that the shift toward what the CDC calls “individual-based decision-making” may leave more children vulnerable to the virus and could encourage families to skip vaccination without a strong federal directive. Kennedy, who has long opposed vaccines, has already introduced sweeping changes to the country’s vaccination policies.

CDC New Guidance On Hepatitis B Vaccine: What Does This Mean For Newborns?

Rather than advising hepatitis B vaccination for every newborn, the CDC now formally recommends that women who test negative for the virus discuss with their healthcare providers whether their babies should receive the first dose within 24 hours of birth. According to NBC News, the agency is also evaluating another proposal from the advisory panel, which suggests parents consult doctors about testing children for hepatitis B antibodies before deciding on second doses of the vaccine. Typically, the hepatitis B vaccine is administered as a three-dose series during infancy.

Also Read: ‘Fix Your Handwriting’: Indian Doctors Told to Write Clear, Legible Prescriptions Under New Rules

This policy shift stands out as one of the clearest departures from established medical consensus reflected in current CDC guidance. During discussions, the advisory committee relied on selective data and misinformation, while overlooking decades of research showing that hepatitis B vaccines are both safe and highly effective when given soon after birth.

“Removing the recommendation for newborns increases the likelihood that case numbers will rise again. This makes America sicker,” Senator Bill Cassidy, R-La., a liver specialist who has treated hepatitis B patients, wrote on X earlier this month. Despite the change, pediatricians are still expected to encourage parents to vaccinate their newborns.

The Department of Health and Human Services has stated that the updated guidance will not change insurance coverage for the vaccine. The shots will also remain available to newborns through the Vaccines for Children Program, which provides vaccines at no cost to uninsured or underinsured families.

Last month, the CDC also revised a webpage that had previously stated clearly that vaccines do not cause autism. The updated language now says studies have not ruled out a link, despite decades of scientific evidence showing no connection between vaccines and autism.

No more scribbling, notes a BBC report from October 1, 2025, where the Punjab and Haryana court tells doctors to fix their handwriting. Now, the National Medical Commission or NMC has issued nationwide order to the doctors to ensure their prescriptions are written in a clear and legible manner.

While jokes around the notoriously bad handwriting of many doctors that only can be read by pharmacist are common in India, but after the High Court's ruling, this joke is taken seriously. The High Court noted that "legible medical prescription is a fundamental right" as it can make a difference between life and death.

Also Read: Delhi Sees Rising Cancer Burden With Sharp Increase in Oral and Lung Cancers; Breast Cancer Remains Most Common

What Are The New NMC Guidelines On Doctor's Handwriting?

Under the new directive, the NMC ordered that doctors must:

• Write prescriptions in clear, legible handwriting, avoiding ambiguity.
• Arbitrary or unclear prescription writing will no longer be acceptable, as it compromises patient safety.
• Subcommittees will be formed in all medical colleges to monitor prescription practices and ensure compliance.
• Medical students will be taught the importance of clear prescription writing, making it a core part of clinical training.

The Background Of NMC Guidelines

The Punjab and Haryana High Court ordered doctors to fix their handwritings while it was looking at a case that involved allegations of rape. While checking a medico-legal report written by a government doctor who examined the woman, the court found it incomprehensible.

Also Read: Delhi Is a Gas Chamber Where Nothing Comes In or Goes Out, Says Expert; Neighboring States Not to Blame for AQI

Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri said, "It shook the conscience of this court as not even a word or a letter was legible".

"At a time when technology and computers are easily accessible, it is shocking that government doctors are still writing prescriptions by hand which cannot be read by anybody except perhaps some chemists," said Justice Puri.

Importance Of Clear Prescriptions

The World Health Organization (WHO) identifies medication errors as a major global patient safety challenge, contributing to avoidable injuries and deaths worldwide. Illegible prescriptions are a well-recognised cause of such errors.

A clear and readable prescription also:

Prevents misinterpretation

Poor handwriting leads to misinterpretation of the intended drug name, dosage, or instructions. Many drugs have names that look or sound alike, making clarity critical.

Ensures the right dosage

Unclear instructions when it comes to dosing result in giving out doses that are ten or one hundred times the correct amount, leading to toxicity or therapeutic failure.

Empowers patient understanding

When the patients are able to clearly read and understand the prescriptions and medication labels, they are more likely to take their medications correctly, reducing the margin for errors.

Reduces healthcare costs

Medication errors resulting from unclear prescriptions lead to increased hospital admissions, prolonged lengths of stay, and additional costs, placing a significant burden on the patient and the healthcare system.