Senate Bill 1164 in Texas introduces changes aimed at improving mental health interventions by allowing police to detain individuals in crisis without requiring an imminent danger. While the bill aims to provide timely support to those in need, it raises concerns regarding civil liberties and the potential for misuse.

## Senate Bill 1164: A New Approach to Mental Health Interventions

Senate Bill 1164, recently enacted in Texas, represents a significant shift in the approach to mental health crises by law enforcement.

The legislation lowers the threshold for police intervention, allowing officers to detain individuals displaying severe emotional distress or mental deterioration, even if those individuals are not an immediate danger to themselves or others.

Previously, law enforcement could only act if there was an imminent threat.

However, under SB 1164, officers can now intervene when a person is unable to recognize their need for treatment, a condition known as anosognosia.

This change aims to prevent situations where individuals in crisis fall through the cracks of the mental health system, often too ill to seek help on their own.

The bill outlines specific criteria under which police can detain individuals, including observable signs of severe distress and the inability to care for basic needs.

In addition, it mandates a formal notification process for emergency detentions, ensuring that officers document their observations and the context of the individual's behavior.

This standardized procedure is designed to provide clarity for both law enforcement and healthcare providers involved in mental health emergencies.

Supporters of SB 1164 argue that the law could be life-saving.

Advocates believe that earlier intervention can prevent more severe outcomes, such as violence, incarceration, or hospitalization.

Eric Smith, a mental health advocate, shared his personal experience, stating that he was once unable to recognize his need for help due to his mental illness.

He argues that the law is a necessary step to bridge gaps in care that previously left individuals like him without timely assistance.

However, the legislation is not without its critics.

Concerns have been raised regarding civil liberties, particularly the potential for misuse of the law to detain individuals who may not pose a genuine risk.

Critics worry that the subjective nature of police decision-making could lead to unjust detentions, especially for vulnerable populations, such as the unhoused.

Houston City Council Member Tiffany Thomas expressed fears that the law could be misused to remove unhoused individuals from public spaces without just cause.

The Houston Police Department has begun to integrate SB 1164 into their training programs, emphasizing the need for officers to understand the new guidelines.

However, the overall effectiveness of the law hinges on adequate training, oversight, and the availability of mental health resources.

Texas ranks low in mental health bed availability, raising concerns about whether the necessary support systems are in place to handle increased detentions under this new law.

In summary, SB 1164 reflects a broader national trend towards preventive mental health treatment and intervention.

As more states reconsider their policies surrounding mental health crises, the debate continues over the balance between safety and civil liberties.

The implementation of SB 1164 will be closely monitored, as advocates and critics alike seek to determine its impact on individuals in mental health crises across Texas and beyond.

If you or someone you know is struggling, help is available through the 988 mental health crisis line, which offers support for those in need of immediate assistance.

Senate Bill 1164: A New Approach to Mental Health Interventions

senate-bill-1164-a-new-approach-to-mental-health-interventions

A growing trend in medical education emphasizes the importance of nutrition, teaching students how to use food as a therapeutic tool. This movement, known as culinary medicine, is reshaping how healthcare professionals approach patient care, focusing on the benefits of diet for both physical and mental health.

## Culinary Medicine: A Recipe for Health in Medical Education

In recent years, a transformative shift in medical education has emerged, with more schools incorporating culinary medicine into their curricula.

This approach emphasizes the use of food as a therapeutic tool, highlighting the connection between nutrition and health outcomes.

As researchers increasingly uncover the profound impact of diet on both physical and mental well-being, the concept of “Food Is Medicine” has gained traction in healthcare settings across the United States.

Traditionally, nutrition was a peripheral subject in medical training, often limited to brief lectures focused on biochemistry rather than practical application.

However, experts argue that food should be at the forefront of patient care.

Dr Timothy Harlan, executive director of the Goldring Center for Culinary Medicine at Tulane University, states that food can be a powerful tool in treating conditions such as hypertension and diabetes.

He asserts that healthcare providers can use a cookbook and a sauté pan instead of relying solely on prescriptions to manage these diseases.

One notable case is that of Dr Shebani Sethi, who pioneered the field of metabolic psychiatry.

Sethi observed significant improvements in psychiatric symptoms in patients following a ketogenic diet, which she initially prescribed to help manage obesity.

This innovative approach demonstrated that dietary changes could positively affect mental health outcomes, indicating that food can play a crucial role in psychiatric treatment.

The culinary medicine movement is gaining momentum, with at least ten medical schools now offering relevant courses.

These programs teach students how to prepare healthy meals and guide patients in making nutritious food choices.

This hands-on approach is vital, as many patients struggle to translate nutritional knowledge into practical dietary changes.

Research supports the benefits of home cooking.

Studies have shown that individuals who frequently prepare their own meals tend to consume more fruits and vegetables, maintain healthier weights, and experience lower calorie intake compared to those who eat out often.

This is significant, as obesity is closely linked to various chronic diseases, including diabetes and cardiovascular conditions.

Dr Rani Polak, a physician and chef at Harvard Medical School, emphasizes the importance of teaching healthcare professionals not just about nutrition science, but also practical cooking skills.

He believes that effective communication about food can empower patients to make healthier choices.

This educational approach helps bridge the gap between scientific knowledge and practical application, allowing patients to feel more confident in their dietary decisions.

Moreover, the idea that food can serve as a form of medicine is gaining traction among patients.

Dr William Li, author of "Eat to Beat Disease," highlights how certain foods can bolster the body's defenses against various illnesses.

He advocates for a diverse diet rich in whole foods to enhance overall health and prevent disease.

The benefits of culinary medicine extend beyond individual health.

By fostering a culture of cooking and nutrition, healthcare providers can contribute to community well-being.

Initiatives like the Goldring Center aim to empower individuals through cooking classes, helping them develop the skills needed to create healthy meals at home.

Despite the promising developments in culinary medicine, challenges remain.

Many healthcare providers still lack adequate training in nutrition, and patients often face barriers to accessing healthy foods.

Addressing these disparities is crucial for the long-term success of culinary medicine initiatives.

In summary, the integration of culinary medicine into medical education represents a significant step towards improving patient care.

By teaching future healthcare providers the importance of nutrition and cooking, the medical community can better equip patients to manage their health through diet.

Emphasizing the therapeutic potential of food not only enhances individual well-being but also fosters healthier communities.

As this movement continues to grow, it reaffirms the age-old adage that “an apple a day keeps the doctor away,” reinforcing the idea that what we eat has a profound impact on our health.

Culinary Medicine: A Recipe for Health in Medical Education

culinary-medicine-a-recipe-for-health-in-medical-education

The Trump administration is reportedly considering Houman Hemmati, a physician and Fox News regular, for a key role in overseeing vaccine regulations. If selected, Hemmati would succeed Vinay Prasad at the FDA, amid ongoing scrutiny over the agency's approach to vaccine approvals.

## Trump Officials Eye Fox News Regular for FDA Vaccine Role

The Trump administration is considering Houman Hemmati, an ophthalmologist and frequent Fox News guest, for a significant position overseeing vaccine regulations as the next top regulator for the nation's vaccines and treatments for complex diseases.

This potential appointment comes as current FDA official Vinay Prasad is set to leave his role at the end of April, following a tumultuous tenure marked by criticism regarding his decisions on drug approvals and vaccine policies.

Hemmati's selection would be a notable shift in leadership at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which has faced increasing scrutiny from the White House over its operational direction.

Concerns about the FDA's consistency and reliability have grown, particularly as the drug industry relies on a stable regulatory environment to navigate the approval processes for new treatments.

FDA Commissioner Marty Makary is said to favor Hemmati for the role, although no final decision has been made yet.

The search for a new head of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research has been ongoing since last month, with officials prioritizing highly qualified candidates.

Hemmati has held various positions in the medical field, including leadership roles at Optigo Biotherapeutics and Vyluma, companies focused on innovative treatments for eye diseases.

His experience also includes academic involvement as an adjunct clinical assistant professor at the University of Southern California's Keck School of Medicine.

In the past year, Hemmati has publicly expressed skepticism about the federal government's funding for additional coronavirus vaccines, suggesting that a more tailored approach should be taken, focusing primarily on high-risk groups.

He has supported a strategy that narrows vaccine recommendations to older adults and those with pre-existing health conditions.

His statements have resonated with some officials within the Trump administration who advocate for a science-based approach rather than a politicized one.

Hemmati's alignment with the administration's views on health policy extends beyond vaccines.

Kennedy Jr's initiatives aimed at addressing public health concerns, including proposals to restrict certain purchases with food stamps.

His stance on vaccines reflects a broader trend within the Trump administration that questions traditional vaccine policies and aims to reshape the regulatory landscape.

The potential appointment of Hemmati comes at a time when the FDA is preparing to implement stricter regulations around vaccine approvals.

Recent statements from FDA officials have indicated a shift away from "rubber-stamping" approvals for new products without thorough scientific validation.

This shift has raised alarms among public health experts who worry that increased barriers to vaccine access could hinder efforts to control infectious diseases, especially for vulnerable populations.

As discussions about Hemmati's candidacy continue, the implications of his potential leadership could have lasting effects on the FDA's approach to vaccine regulation and public health policy.

The agency's credibility and the trust of the public in vaccines are critical, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has underscored the importance of effective vaccine distribution and monitoring.

In summary, the Trump administration's consideration of Houman Hemmati for a top FDA position reflects ongoing tensions within health policy discussions and the evolving landscape of vaccine regulation in the United States.

As the FDA navigates these changes, the focus remains on balancing scientific integrity with the political dynamics at play in public health decision-making.

Trump Officials Eye Fox News Regular for FDA Vaccine Role

trump-officials-eye-fox-news-regular-for-fda-vaccine-role

The acting director of the CDC, Dr Jay Bhattacharya, has delayed the publication of a study demonstrating the effectiveness of Covid vaccines in preventing severe illness. Critics suggest this move reflects a broader trend of political interference in health research under the Trump administration.

## Delay in CDC Vaccine Study Raises Concerns Over Political Interference

The acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Dr Jay Bhattacharya, has postponed the publication of a significant study showing that Covid vaccines greatly reduce the risk of severe illness.

This delay has raised alarms among health experts and former CDC officials, who fear it may signal a deeper political influence on public health research under the current administration.

Originally set for release in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), the study indicated that Covid vaccines decreased the likelihood of emergency room visits and hospitalizations for healthy adults by approximately 50% to 55% during the winter months of 2025-26.

Concerns regarding the study's methodology, particularly the observational methods employed, led Bhattacharya to hold back the report.

A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services confirmed that Bhattacharya expressed reservations about how the effectiveness of the vaccine was calculated.

Critics argue that this delay exemplifies a worrying trend of political maneuvering that undermines the CDC's credibility and scientific integrity.

Dr Fiona Havers, a former senior adviser on vaccine policy at the CDC, described the action as "an escalation of this administration's undermining of CDC science." She noted that the methodology questioned by Bhattacharya had been a standard practice in vaccine efficacy studies for nearly two decades.

The methodology in question, known as "test-negative design," compares the vaccination status of individuals who have tested positive for Covid with those who have tested negative.

This approach has been used in various CDC studies, including a recent report on the effectiveness of seasonal flu vaccines that was published a week prior to the postponed Covid study, which utilized the same methodology .

Havers, who resigned from the CDC last year in response to the administration's vaccine policies, expressed concern that Bhattacharya's decision to delay the report reflects an effort to suppress findings that contradict the administration's narrative about vaccines.

She remarked, "The report said something that this administration doesn't want to have publicized - that the Covid vaccines are effective at preventing severe illness".

The political landscape surrounding the CDC has shifted dramatically since the Trump administration took office.

Kennedy Jr, known for his controversial stance on vaccines, has been accused of attempting to weaken the CDC's vaccine-related efforts through both public and behind-the-scenes tactics.

Under his leadership, there have been significant changes in the agency's advisory committees, with members who are skeptical of vaccines being appointed to replace those with established expertise in immunization policies.

Despite the concerns about political interference, a spokesperson for the CDC defended Bhattacharya's decision-making process, stating that it is routine for CDC leadership to review and raise concerns about the methodology of MMWR papers before publication.

The spokesperson emphasized that ensuring the methodological quality of analyses is paramount and that the agency remains committed to scientific rigor and transparency.

As the delay continues, the fate of the Covid vaccine study remains uncertain.

If it is ultimately not published in the MMWR, the authors might seek alternative avenues for publication in independent medical journals.

However, the ongoing scrutiny of the report and the political context surrounding its delay have already drawn significant media attention, suggesting a potential impact on public perception of vaccine science and the CDC's credibility going forward.

The implications of this incident extend beyond the immediate delay of one study.

Experts warn that continued political interference in scientific research could have long-term consequences for public health, especially as the nation navigates the ongoing challenges posed by Covid-19 and its variants.

The integrity of health recommendations and the trust of the public in vaccine safety and efficacy are at stake as the CDC grapples with these political pressures.

In conclusion, the delay in releasing the CDC study on Covid vaccine effectiveness has sparked a debate about the intersection of science and politics in public health.

As the administration continues to navigate these complex waters, the implications for vaccine policy and public trust in health agencies will remain closely monitored by experts and the public alike.

Delay in CDC Vaccine Study Raises Concerns Over Political Interference

delay-in-cdc-vaccine-study-raises-concerns-over-political-interference

The FDA has granted approval to Anumana's ECG-AI algorithm, marking a significant advancement in diagnosing cardiac amyloidosis. This technology enables healthcare professionals to identify this life-threatening condition at the point of care, potentially improving patient outcomes through earlier detection.

## FDA Approves First AI Algorithm for Diagnosing Cardiac Amyloidosis

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has cleared Anumana's ECG-AI algorithm, making it the first artificial intelligence (AI) tool approved for diagnosing cardiac amyloidosis using standard electrocardiograms (ECGs).

This breakthrough is significant, as cardiac amyloidosis is a severe condition caused by abnormal protein deposits in the heart, often leading to heart failure if not detected early.

"Cardiac amyloidosis can be challenging to detect early, especially when its signs overlap with more common heart conditions," said Dr Martha Grogan, a consultant in cardiovascular medicine at Mayo Clinic and co-principal investigator of the clinical study that supported the algorithm's approval.

The ECG-AI algorithm aids clinicians in recognizing potential cases of amyloidosis from routine ECG data, which can help facilitate earlier diagnosis and timely treatment decisions.

The algorithm was validated in a large multicenter study involving over 25,000 patients, achieving a sensitivity of 78.9% and specificity of 91.2% in identifying cardiac amyloidosis among adults presenting with relevant symptoms or comorbidities.

This level of accuracy is crucial as traditional diagnostic methods can often overlook the subtle ECG patterns indicative of the condition, leading to delays in treatment and poorer patient outcomes.

Anumana's ECG-AI algorithm is designed to integrate seamlessly into existing clinical workflows, leveraging ECGs routinely obtained during patient evaluations without requiring additional testing.

This capability allows healthcare providers to identify at-risk patients more efficiently, enhancing their clinical decision-making process.

Maulik Nanavaty, CEO of Anumana, emphasized the importance of this development, stating, "Each of our FDA-cleared algorithms addresses a specific and frequently missed cardiovascular condition, and cardiac amyloidosis represents an important addition to that portfolio".

The company aims to expand its offerings further, potentially improving the diagnosis of various cardiovascular conditions from a single ECG.

The FDA's approval of the ECG-AI algorithm is a significant step in the ongoing efforts to improve the early detection of cardiac amyloidosis, a condition often underdiagnosed due to its nonspecific symptoms.

Early diagnosis is critical, as it can lead to improved treatment options and better patient outcomes.

In addition to Anumana's ECG-AI algorithm, other innovations in the field include the EchoGo® Amyloidosis software developed by Ultromics, which also received FDA clearance for aiding in the detection of cardiac amyloidosis through echocardiography.

This tool requires less clinical information and can enhance the diagnostic process, particularly in settings with limited resources or expertise.

Cardiac amyloidosis remains a complex condition to diagnose accurately due to its overlapping symptoms with other heart diseases.

The introduction of AI-driven solutions represents a promising advancement in tackling this challenge and improving patient care for those affected by this life-threatening disease.

The FDA's clearance of Anumana's ECG-AI algorithm not only highlights the potential of artificial intelligence in transforming cardiovascular diagnostics but also underscores the importance of developing more effective tools to address underdiagnosed conditions like cardiac amyloidosis.

As AI technologies continue to evolve, they may play a pivotal role in enhancing the accuracy and efficiency of medical diagnostics, ultimately leading to better health outcomes for patients worldwide.

FDA Approves First AI Algorithm for Diagnosing Cardiac Amyloidosis

fda-approves-first-ai-algorithm-for-diagnosing-cardiac-amyloidosis

Nova Southeastern University has secured $1 million in funding to advance research into innovative brain cancer treatments, particularly focusing on carbon dot therapy. This funding aims to enhance targeted drug delivery methods for difficult-to-treat brain tumors, offering new hope for patients and families.

## $1 Million Boost for Brain Cancer Research Enhances Treatment Prospects

Nova Southeastern University (NSU) in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, has received a significant boost in cancer research funding, with US Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz successfully securing over $1 million for innovative projects aimed at treating brain cancer.

This funding was celebrated during a presentation at the Alan B.

Levan | NSU Broward Center of Innovation on April 8, marking a pivotal moment for cancer research at the university.

The newly allocated funds will specifically support groundbreaking research in carbon dot therapy, which presents a novel and non-invasive method for delivering drugs to treat some of the most challenging and inoperable brain cancers.

Harry Moon, MD, NSU's president and CEO, emphasized the transformative potential of this investment, stating, "This meaningful investment strengthens our commitment to drive innovation, pursue effective treatments, and provide hope to patients and families in the face of this devastating disease.".

Carbon dot treatment utilizes extremely small, nontoxic carbon nanoparticles—approximately 100,000 times smaller than a human hair.

This innovative approach may allow for safer and more cost-effective chemotherapy by enabling lower drug dosages and precise targeting of tumor cells.

Initial studies suggest that carbon dot therapy could outperform traditional chemotherapy in destroying brain tumor cells.

A major advantage of carbon dots is their ability to cross the blood-brain barrier, which opens up treatment possibilities for various tumor types, including those that are otherwise inoperable.

This advancement signifies a substantial leap towards personalized medicine, allowing clinicians to selectively target tumor cells while reducing adverse side effects.

The research effort will be led by Regina Graham, Ph.D., an associate professor at NSU's Dr Kiran C.

The funding will facilitate the acquisition of advanced imaging systems and biomedical equipment necessary for detailed cellular studies of carbon dots, thereby accelerating the development of clinical applications.

Wasserman Schultz expressed her commitment to enhancing community health through such investments, highlighting the urgent need for effective cancer treatments.

"As a cancer survivor myself, I'm proud to help provide doctors more medical tools to battle this deadly disease, and to give patients and their families the hope they need to defeat it," she stated.

Brain cancer remains one of the most challenging forms of cancer to treat, with a five-year survival rate of only 33 percent.

This is particularly alarming as brain cancer is the leading cause of cancer death among children aged 1 to 14 years.

Florida, notably, has higher rates of brain cancer compared to many other states, with Broward County ranking among the top areas for diagnoses.

In addition to this funding, NSU is advancing its cancer research initiatives with support from various donors, including a recent $1 million donation from the Royal Dames of Cancer Research.

The university hosts two major health institutes focused on cancer research, which are dedicated to tackling a range of oncology challenges from glioblastoma to innovative cell therapies.

The commitment to research innovation in brain cancer treatment is echoed by similar funding initiatives across the country.

For example, the Mark Foundation for Cancer Research recently announced $4 million in funding for glioblastoma research, highlighting the urgent need for innovative approaches in battling this aggressive cancer type.

As NSU's research initiative unfolds, the hope is that advances in carbon dot therapy will lead to more effective treatments, ultimately improving survival rates and quality of life for brain cancer patients.

This funding not only reflects a significant step towards innovative cancer therapies but also underscores the importance of community support and collaboration in advancing medical research.

With the ongoing support and dedication from local representatives, researchers, and philanthropists, the future of brain cancer treatment could see transformative changes that provide new hope for patients and their families.

$1 Million Boost for Brain Cancer Research Enhances Treatment Prospects

1-million-boost-for-brain-cancer-research-enhances-treatment-prospects

Understanding public health research study designs is crucial for interpreting clinical studies effectively. This guide outlines the major types of study designs, including randomized controlled trials and observational studies, detailing their strengths, weaknesses, and appropriate applications.

## A Comprehensive Guide to Public Health Research Study Designs

Understanding the various study designs used in public health research is essential for interpreting clinical studies and their outcomes.

This article provides a comprehensive overview of the major types of study designs, their strengths and weaknesses, and their appropriate applications in the field of public health.

Public health research can be broadly categorized into two main types: descriptive and analytical studies.

Descriptive studies primarily aim to describe characteristics of a population or phenomenon without attempting to establish causal relationships.

These studies include case reports, case series, and cross-sectional studies, which provide valuable information on prevalence and incidence but do not measure the impact of interventions or exposures on health outcomes.

In contrast, analytical studies seek to quantify relationships between exposures and outcomes.

They are further divided into observational and interventional studies.

Observational studies, such as cohort studies and case-control studies, involve observing subjects without manipulating any variables, while interventional studies, like randomized controlled trials (RCTs), involve actively applying an intervention to a group of subjects.

RCTs are considered the gold standard in clinical research.

In an RCT, participants are randomly assigned to either a treatment group receiving the intervention or a control group receiving a placebo.

This design helps to eliminate biases and confounding factors, allowing researchers to draw causal inferences about the effectiveness of the intervention.

However, RCTs can be expensive and time-consuming.

Ethical considerations may also limit their applicability, especially in situations where it is impractical or unethical to assign participants to certain exposures or interventions.

Observational studies are essential when RCTs are not feasible.

These studies aim to find associations between exposures and outcomes without manipulating the study environment.

Cohort studies involve following a group of individuals over time to assess the effects of certain exposures.

These studies can be either prospective or retrospective.

They allow researchers to evaluate the temporal relationship between exposure and outcome, making them powerful for studying the effects of risk factors on health outcomes.

However, cohort studies can be resource-intensive and may suffer from challenges such as loss to follow-up and confounding variables.

They are best suited for examining common outcomes rather than rare diseases.

Case-control studies are designed to identify factors that may contribute to a health outcome by comparing individuals with the outcome (cases) to those without (controls).

This retrospective design is particularly useful for studying rare diseases, as it allows researchers to investigate multiple exposures.

Despite their efficiency, case-control studies are prone to biases, such as recall bias, where participants may not accurately remember past exposures.

This can complicate the identification of a true association between exposure and outcome.

Cross-sectional studies assess exposure and outcome simultaneously within a defined population.

They are particularly useful for measuring the prevalence of diseases and health-related characteristics at a specific point in time.

While they provide valuable insights, cross-sectional studies cannot establish causality due to their simultaneous measurement of exposure and outcome.

They are often limited by survival bias, as they may not account for individuals who have died or otherwise exited the population before the study.

Qualitative research plays a critical role in public health by providing insights into community norms, perceptions, and values.

This type of research often involves interviews and focus groups, allowing for an in-depth understanding of behaviors and motivations that quantitative methods might miss.

Qualitative methods are particularly important in formative research and program evaluations, helping to identify barriers to intervention acceptance and effectiveness.

While they do not offer quantifiable data, they provide rich, contextual information that can inform public health strategies.

Understanding public health research study designs is crucial for interpreting clinical studies effectively.

Topic

Medicine

Recent articles:

Culinary Medicine: A Recipe for Health in Medical Education

Trump Officials Eye Fox News Regular for FDA Vaccine Role

Delay in CDC Vaccine Study Raises Concerns Over Political Interference

FDA Approves First AI Algorithm for Diagnosing Cardiac Amyloidosis

$1 Million Boost for Brain Cancer Research Enhances Treatment Prospects

A Comprehensive Guide to Public Health Research Study Designs

America's Healthcare Costs: A Call for Reform

CDC Vaccine Panel Overhaul Reflects Growing Skepticism Under Kennedy

Tackling the Soaring Cost of Medicine in America

Measles Outbreak in Utah: Unvaccinated Populations Hit Hard

AI and Biology: Pioneering a New Era in Health and Medicine

Trump Administration Cuts Drug Prices for GLP-1 and Fertility Medications

Going Green: Promoting Mental Health Awareness This May

How to Use SMS and AI in Healthcare While Staying HIPAA-Compliant

Americans Face Soaring Medicine Costs: Solutions Needed

Utah Leads the Way in Regulating Mental Health AI Technologies

Celebrity Endorsements of GLP-1 Drugs: A Misguided Trend

EMA and FDA Forge Common AI Principles for Medicine Development

Celebrity-Endorsed GLP-1 Ads: A Harmful Trend in Weight Loss Marketing