Type 1 diabetes is a condition that cannot be treated clinically and people with diabetes receive lifelong treatment to manage symptoms and keep their blood sugar under control. However, with the joint efforts of researchers all over the world and countless studies, trials for a new drug have begun in the UK.
Right now, about 4.6 million people in the UK have diabetes, and over 270,000 of them have Type 1. Since there isn't a cure for Type 1 diabetes yet, most people need to take insulin every day to keep their blood sugar levels normal and avoid serious health problems. As you may know, insulin is a hormone responsible for turning food into energy by essentially breaking down the sugar to make it glucose.
This new drug, Teplizumab, can change the way we deal with type 1 diabetes. Instead of taking long-term treatment measures, the success of this trial could mean potentially finding a cure in the future. This treatment is happening at the Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, and it's getting help from a group called the National Institute of Health and Care Research (NIHR). This is a big step forward because it might help people put off getting full-blown Type 1 diabetes.
Also Read: 6 Personality Traits That Make Someone Cool – Are They Born With It or Can You Learn It?
Hannah Robinson, who is a dentist and a mom of two from Devon, is the first adult in the UK to try this new treatment. She found out during her pregnancy that she was starting to develop Type 1 diabetes. Familiar with the challenges of living with diabetes, Hannah hopes that taking this drug could mean she won't need to take daily insulin shots for up to three years longer than she would have otherwise. This would give her more freedom and control over her health.
Hannah, who is 36, said: "I've learned a lot about Type 1 diabetes since I was diagnosed and what it means for my future. For me, this new drug gives me more freedom and a chance to focus on my health before I have to change my life and manage things as someone who needs daily insulin. It's not just about what I eat or checking my sugar; it's also about feeling more in control and not letting my condition define me. This treatment could even lead to a cure for Type 1 diabetes, which is amazing. I feel very lucky to be part of this."
With Type 1 diabetes, your body's immune system attacks and destroys special cells in your pancreas called beta cells. These beta cells are very important because they make insulin, which helps control your blood sugar. If your blood sugar is too high or too low, it can cause serious health problems.
Also Read: Why Does Your BBL Smell? Doctor Explains 4 Reasons That Could Cause It
The new drug, Teplizumab, works by teaching your immune system to stop attacking these beta cells. By doing this, it can delay you needing insulin by up to three years. But it's very important that the drug is given very early on, before the disease has gotten too far along. Teplizumab is already approved in the USA. Hannah is the first adult in the UK to get this treatment, though a small number of children and young people here have already received it in its early stages.
Experts are saying that Teplizumab works best when it's given very early on, even before someone officially gets diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes based on high blood sugar. Dr. Nick Thomas, a top diabetes specialist at the University of Exeter, explained that this new treatment is a huge step forward. It allows doctors to step in early and change what the immune system is doing. The goal is to slow down how quickly people will need to start taking insulin.
The research happening at the Royal Devon and the University of Exeter are using things like genetics and other tests to find people who are at a high risk of getting Type 1 diabetes. This smart approach means that more people could potentially get the drug early and delay the start of the disease.
Researchers involved in the study explain that trials like these can lead to many patients having some extra insulin free years. Their ultimate goal is a future where these types of immune-system treatments become the first line of defense against Type 1 diabetes, tackling the root cause of the problem. Hopefully, in the future, early treatment could even stop some people from ever needing insulin at all.
Credit: Unsplash
Often, we underestimate the way our brain works and daydreaming has long been seen as a major sign of creativity. Many artists have used their imagination to bring their work to life. However, science offers a different perspective.
Coined in 2002 Dr. Eliezer Somer, those who experience “maladaptive daydreaming” often fantasize about celebrities, historical figures or idealized versions of themselves. Their imaginations are more elaborate, diverse, and complex as compared to other daydreamers.
A 2012 Consciousness and Cognition study found that maladaptive daydreamers spend, on average, 57 percent of their waking hours daydreaming far more than their counterparts.
Dr Somer explains: "The greatest difference is the maladaptive daydreamers reported that the activity interfered with their daily life. They also reported higher rates of attention-deficit and obsessive compulsive symptoms, and more than 80% used kinesthetic activity or movement when daydreaming, such as rocking, pacing or spinning"
He further noted that while everyone experiences moments of mind-wandering, it usually does not interfere with daily life. But maladaptive daydreaming does interfere in regular life. The condition has not been classified as a mental illness and there is no treatment for it yet.
Many Reddit users have shared their experiences with maladaptive daydreaming, often asking questions such as: “Is it normal to daydream for such long hours?”
While some responses described daydreaming as a form of dissociation when bored, others relied on music or movies to fuel fantasies of being a “better version” of themselves, often struggling to return to reality.
Here are some early signs of maladaptive daydreaming to keep an eye out for:
Rachel Bennett, a member of Dr. Somer’s online community, shared she usually dreams up new episodes of her favorite Japanese animé characters and TV shows. She’s also created four families of fictional characters which have grown with her over the years.
“I’d much rather stay home and daydream than go out,” she said.
Dr. Somer noted that about one-quarter of maladaptive daydreamers are trauma survivors who use daydreaming as an escape. Many report family members with similar tendencies, as well as being shy or socially isolated.
Meanwhile, a Harvard Medical study found that 80 percent of maladaptive daydreamers have ADHD, followed by anxiety disorders, depression, and OCD. Researchers believe daydreaming often acts as a coping mechanism for pent-up emotions that cannot be expressed in real life, so they are released through imagination instead.
Experts emphasize that maladaptive daydreaming is not an extreme condition requiring formal diagnosis, but many people have shared strategies that help:
Credits: iStock
In January 2026, a Guardian investigation uncovered something deeply unsettling. Google’s AI summaries, designed to quickly answer search queries, were giving users inaccurate health information. Some of the advice was not just misleading but potentially dangerous.
One striking example involved liver function tests. The AI presented incorrect “normal ranges,” which could make someone with a serious liver infection believe their reports were fine. Following the investigation, Google quietly removed AI Overviews for certain queries such as “normal range for liver function tests” and similar searches.
Soon after, another finding raised further alarm. Researchers discovered that Google’s AI Overviews frequently relied on YouTube rather than established medical websites when responding to health questions. Considering nearly two billion people use Google search every month, the implications were hard to ignore.
For years, doctors have warned about “Dr Google” and self diagnosis. But the situation has now moved beyond search results. People are increasingly asking AI tools directly for answers to complex medical problems.
The search optimization platform SE Ranking analyzed more than 50,000 health searches in Germany. The most cited source in AI responses was YouTube, which accounted for 4.43 percent of citations. That is about 3.5 times more than netdoktor.de, one of the country’s biggest consumer health portals. It was also cited more than twice as often as the well known medical reference MSD Manuals.
Only 34.45 percent of citations in AI Overviews came from reliable medical sources. Government health institutions and academic journals together contributed roughly one percent. No hospital network, university, or medical association came close to YouTube’s citation numbers.
Read: ChatGPT Health Explained: Will This New OpenAI Feature Replace Doctors?
The concern is simple. YouTube is a video platform, not a medical publisher. While qualified doctors upload educational videos, the platform also hosts wellness influencers, life coaches, and creators without medical training.
In one particularly worrying example, Google’s AI advised pancreatic cancer patients to avoid high fat foods. Medical experts say this recommendation is the opposite of what many patients actually need and could increase mortality risk.
AI Overviews also gave incorrect information about women’s cancer screening tests. Experts warned this could lead people to dismiss serious symptoms and delay diagnosis.
The shift is not limited to search engines. Chatbots are rapidly becoming everyday health advisers. OpenAI estimates about 40 million people globally use ChatGPT for healthcare guidance each day.
A 2026 Health and Media Tracking Survey by the Canadian Medical Association found roughly half of Canadians consult Google AI summaries or ChatGPT for medical concerns.
Read: AI Therapy Gone Wrong: Psychiatrist Reveals How Chatbots Are Failing Vulnerable Teens
The outcome has not been reassuring. People who followed AI advice for self diagnosis and treatment were five times more likely to experience negative health effects than those who did not.
Studies help explain why. A 2025 University of Waterloo study found GPT 4 answered open ended medical questions incorrectly about two thirds of the time. Another 2025 Harvard study showed chatbots often agreed with flawed assumptions instead of correcting users, such as confusion between acetaminophen and Tylenol.
Researchers say AI systems tend to be overly agreeable and confident, prioritizing helpful responses rather than critical reasoning.
Despite knowing AI can be wrong, many people still rely on it. Long waits for specialists, lack of family doctors, and limited access to healthcare make instant answers appealing.
The real concern is not curiosity but unquestioned trust. Looking up symptoms is one thing. Acting on AI advice without verification is another.
The technology is powerful and useful, but when confident sounding answers replace medical judgement, the consequences can affect real lives.
Credits: Canva
A new review published in The Lancet highlights how close this shift may be. The study underscores a hard truth: despite having effective medicines for years, global blood pressure control remains disappointingly poor. The real challenge, experts say, is not the absence of drugs—but problems with adherence, health systems, and long-term patient engagement.
Hypertension continues to be the leading cause of heart attacks, strokes and premature deaths worldwide. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines high blood pressure as readings at or above 140 mm Hg systolic and/or 90 mm Hg diastolic. A normal reading is below 120/80 mm Hg.
The numbers are staggering. Between 2024 and 2025, an estimated 1.4 billion adults aged 30 to 79—roughly one in three people in this age group—are living with hypertension globally. Nearly 44 percent do not even know they have it. Among those diagnosed, fewer than one in four have their blood pressure adequately controlled.
India reflects this alarming trend. The ICMR-INDIAB study (2023) estimated that about 315 million Indians—35.5 percent of the population—have hypertension. Data from NFHS-5 further showed that nearly half of hypertensive men and more than a third of hypertensive women in India do not have their condition under control.
For decades, hypertension treatment has relied on daily oral medications—often combinations of two or more drugs. These may include ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers paired with calcium channel blockers, and thiazide diuretics.
On paper, these regimens are effective. In reality, adherence is the weak link.
Many patients with hypertension also manage diabetes, obesity or high cholesterol. The result is polypharmacy—multiple pills, multiple times a day. Over time, missed doses, side effects and simple “treatment fatigue” erode consistency. Therapeutic inertia—where doctors do not intensify treatment despite poor control—further worsens outcomes.
This is where long-acting injectable therapies come in. According to Dr Mohit Gupta, cardiologist at G B Pant Hospital and UCMS, the field is now moving toward therapies that may be administered just twice a year.
Unlike traditional medicines that work downstream to reduce blood pressure numbers, these new drugs target upstream molecular pathways that drive hypertension.
One promising approach involves small interfering RNA (siRNA) therapies that inhibit angiotensinogen production in the liver. By silencing this protein, they dampen the renin–angiotensin system—central to blood pressure regulation. Zilebesiran, developed by Roche and Alnylam, is currently in global phase 3 trials.
Another candidate, ziltivekimab by Novo Nordisk, targets inflammatory pathways increasingly linked to cardiovascular risk. There are also newer strategies aimed at selectively modulating aldosterone, a hormone that increases blood volume and pressure.
The appeal is simple: durability. A twice-yearly injection could eliminate the daily burden of pill-taking, improve adherence and provide more stable blood pressure control over time.
However, excitement is tempered by concern. Cost remains a major question. The recent introduction of inclisiran, an injectable cholesterol-lowering therapy priced between Rs 1.8 and 2.4 lakh annually in India, highlights affordability challenges.
Long-term safety is another critical issue. Hypertension is lifelong. Patients may require these treatments for decades. Experts stress the need for robust long-term data across diverse populations before widespread adoption.
The promise is undeniable. A twice-yearly injection that reliably controls blood pressure could transform preventive cardiology. But its true impact will depend not only on scientific success—but on accessibility, affordability and sustained safety.
© 2024 Bennett, Coleman & Company Limited