NewsMakers
Why people overuse antibiotics
The overuse of antibiotics occurs due to the mistaken widespread belief that they are beneficial for a broad array of conditions and because many physicians are willing to prescribe antibiotics if patients ask for the medication, according to a Rutgers study.
The overuse of antibiotics occurs due to the mistaken widespread belief that they are beneficial for a broad array of conditions and because many physicians are willing to prescribe antibiotics if patients ask for the medication, according to a Rutgers study.
The study, published in the journal BioEssays, reviewed more than 200 peer-reviewed studies to examine the causes behind antibiotic overuse, which can lead harmful bacteria to become drug-resistant and cause harmful effects on the microbiome, the collection of beneficial germs that live in and on our bodies.
Martin Blaser, director of the Center for Advanced Biotechnology and Medicine at Rutgers and lead author, said the global use of antibiotics between 2000 and 2015 increased 39 percent, with a 77 percent increase in low- and middle-income countries. He discusses the study’s findings.
What health concerns result from the disruption of the microbiome by antibiotics?
In children, improper antibiotic use can alter the microbiome while their immunological, metabolic and neural systems are developing. Epidemiological studies associate antibiotic exposure with an increased risk of disease of allergic, metabolic and cognitive disorders that have grown more common in children during the antibiotic era.
In adults, there is increasing evidence that antibiotics may enhance risk for metabolic and neoplastic diseases, including diabetes, kidney stones and growths in the colon and rectum that can lead to cancer.
What are the trends you found in antibiotic use?
Studies in the United States, United Kingdom and China found numerous online pharmacies selling antibiotics without a prescription. This problem also is large in Iow- to middle-income countries, where 60 percent of antibiotics are sold without prescriptions, often by untrained medical practitioners.
Perhaps of special concern during the COVID-19 pandemic is the finding that telemedicine services are another potential source of questionable antibiotic sales in the United States. A recent analysis found that patients with acute respiratory infections were more often prescribed broad-spectrum antibiotics if they had a tele-health doctor visit, compared to an in-person visit.
Worldwide, antibiotic use is highest in young children, especially in low-income areas. This is often in response to the fact that young children are prone to have four to six upper respiratory tract infections each year. Although most of these infections are treated by antibiotics, 80 percent are not caused by bacteria and would therefore derive no benefit from antibiotics.
Are some practitioners more likely to prescribe antibiotics?
Our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that older physicians are more likely than their younger colleagues to prescribe antibiotics. For example, one study found that physicians over 30 were several times more likely to prescribe antibiotics for common respiratory conditions that do not necessarily require them. Another study found that physicians with over 25 years in practice were disproportionately likely to issue prescriptions of more than eight days.
What misinformation did you find among the public?
Many people believe that antibiotics are effective against bacterial and viral illnesses, lumping all types of pathogens together and adopting a “germs are germs” attitude. Others believe that taking antibiotics can’t hurt. Across Europe, for example, 57 percent of people surveyed were unaware that antibiotics were ineffective against viruses, and 44 percent did not know that antibiotics have no effect against colds or influenza.
What other reasons did you find for inappropriate prescription of antibiotics?
Antibiotics are commonly used across the world to self-treat health problems for which they were never intended, such as in Nigeria, where women are increasingly using antibiotics to reduce menstrual cramps. In low- to middle-income countries, antibiotics are often seen as strong, magical medicines, capable of both curing and preventing a range of illness. In many countries people also take them to return to work or school when ill. One of the studies found that 63 percent of Chinese university students kept a personal antibiotic stock at home.
Parents may appeal for an antibiotic for their children so that they can go to work or for the children to return to school or daycare. A U.S. study found that 43 percent of parents of a child with cold symptoms believed that antibiotics were necessary.
In addition, some doctors are inclined to prescribe an antibiotic to maintain a good relationship with patients who expect to receive medication. Patients may not demand antibiotics outright, but rather infer their need for them by how they describe the severity of their illness or note that they worked in the past for a similar issue. People have become less willing to wait and let an illness run its course. The perception that there is a pill for ills of all kinds leads the public to demand immediate relief for symptoms from practitioners and to self-medicate.
Every time an antibiotic is given, money changes hands. This is especially a problem in low- and middle-income countries, where pharmacists are happy to dispense without a prescription to their customers. The rural health practitioners in China are paid every time they dispense an antibiotic as well. Such monetary incentives favor the wide use of antibiotics.
How can antibiotic overuse be addressed?
Clinicians need to be better educated about the long-term effects on the microbiome and learn about better ways to speak with their patients about antibiotic risks and benefits. They also need to improve their communication about the consequences of antibiotic treatments and identify antibiotic alternatives.
NewsMakers
Filipinos prioritize independence as legacy for longer lives
Independence and financial freedom are viewed as the inheritance they want to leave their families, according to 88% of respondents. It rises to 95% among Filipinos aged 25 to 34, highlighting a growing shift toward self-sufficiency and long-term financial planning.
Filipinos are shifting how they view legacy, prioritizing independence, financial freedom, and self-reliance as they plan for longer lifespans.
This is according to the Manulife Asia Care Survey 2026: Independence as the New Legacy, which gathered insights from more than 9,000 respondents across Asia, including 1,000 in the Philippines. The study explores shifting attitudes toward longevity, health, caregiving, retirement preparedness, and overall financial well-being.
It was found out in the survey that independence and financial freedom are viewed as the inheritance they want to leave their families, according to 88% of respondents. It rises to 95% among Filipinos aged 25 to 34, highlighting a growing shift toward self-sufficiency and long-term financial planning.
It was also revealed in the survey that Filipinos are increasingly associating independence with maintaining good health to avoid becoming a burden to loved ones, and having access to quality healthcare. Fifty six percent of those who prioritize independence as a legacy cited health and quality of life as their key concerns, while 53% identified unexpected expenses later in life as a major challenge.
To stay independent as you age, you need good physical and mental health, as 92% of respondents agree that preventive care and self-care habits can help extend years of self-reliance. Popular wellness practices include spending time with family and friends (52%), maintaining a balanced diet (50%), and exercising regularly (48%). However, fewer Filipinos are taking proactive steps such as preventive health screenings (26%) or building social networks to combat isolation (29%).
Pressures faced by the country’s “sandwich generation,” or individuals supporting both parents and children, were also highlighted in the survey results. Sixty seven percent of respondents provide care to a family member, averaging 32 hours per week, while 68% offer financial support to relatives, allocating nearly half of their monthly income to these responsibilities.
These caregiving and financial commitments are affecting long-term planning. Among respondents, 74% said family obligations hinder their ability to build self-reliance, while 71% reported delaying their own medical care due to caregiving and financial pressures.
With increasing spending remains a concern, 82% of Filipinos are worried about the cost of future care, significantly higher than the regional average of 66%. It was estimated that respondents would need approximately PhP34,485 per month to cover future care-related expenses. Most plan to rely on personal savings (87%) and investments (59%), while only 21% expect financial support from their children.
The survey relayed that Fiipinos are becoming more proactive in preparing for longevity, with many planning to shift toward income-generating investments, diversify their portfolios, and seek professional financial advice to strengthen retirement readiness and long-term financial security.
NewsMakers
Coffee and heart health: How many cups of caffeinated coffee are safe to drink each day?
For most adults, consuming up to 400 mg of caffeine/day (or up to 5, 8-ounce cups of caffeinated coffee per day) is safe and appears to be linked to a lower risk of cardiovascular disease for some individuals.
Previous studies have found that caffeine is the world’s most popular stimulant and psychoactive substance, and coffee is the most common way people consume caffeine. The latest research supports the conclusion that for most adults, consuming up to 400 mg of caffeine/day (or up to 5, 8-ounce cups of caffeinated coffee per day) is safe and appears to be linked to a lower risk of cardiovascular disease for some individuals.
However, higher doses of caffeine, such as levels found in energy drinks including energy shots, may cause cardiovascular harm, according to a new American Heart Association scientific statement, “Caffeine and Cardiovascular Disease,” published in the American Heart Association’s flagship peer-reviewed scientific journal Circulation.
“Caffeine consumed in coffee is a key part of daily life for millions of people, and in our review of the most recent research, for most adults, intake of up to 400 mg of caffeine/day, the equivalent of up to 5 cups of caffeinated coffee per day without added sugars or fillers, is safe and does not increase cardiovascular risk,” said Chair of the scientific statement volunteer writing group Gregory M. Marcus, M.D., M.A.S., FAHA, a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine and the associate chief of Cardiology for Research at the University of California, San Francisco Health. “However, high doses of caffeine, such as those found in energy drinks including energy shots, may have harmful effects on the heart and should be avoided.”
The statement authors note that studying the effects of caffeine on the cardiovascular system is challenging. Coffee is the main source of caffeine in most research studies, and the observed cardiovascular effects may be due to other compounds in coffee. For example, experimental studies suggest that the bioactive compounds in coffee may have antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties, which may help explain some health benefits. It’s also difficult to separate the effects of caffeine from other ingredients usually added to coffee, such as milk, cream, flavored syrups and/or sugar. In addition, most studies on caffeine are observational, meaning they cannot prove cause and effect.
Although coffee is the main source of caffeine for most adults, tea, chocolate, soda and energy drinks, as well as over-the-counter and prescription medications, also contribute to overall caffeine intake. More research is needed about other products with caffeine in order to understand caffeine content and caffeine’s impact on cardiovascular health.
The new scientific statement details the most recent research primarily on caffeinated coffee and the potential impact of caffeine in coffee on high blood pressure, cholesterol, Type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, stroke, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, other arrhythmias and other cardiovascular conditions.
Caffeine and cardiovascular health: key things to know
- Based on the results of the latest research studies reviewed, consuming up to 400 mg of caffeine per day, or no more than 3 to 5, 8-ounce cups of regular black caffeinated coffee per day (without sugars, sweeteners, flavors or added fillers), is considered safe for most adults. A regular brewed, non-specialty, caffeinated coffee typically contains 9.4-20.6 mg of caffeine per fluid ounce.
- Consuming caffeinated coffee without added sugars, flavors or cream was linked to a lower risk of Type 2 diabetes, heart disease, stroke, heart failure and some irregular heart rhythms.
- Randomized trials, the most rigorous and reliable type of study design, have shown that caffeine consumption in coffee is associated with a lower risk of atrial fibrillation but also a higher risk of premature ventricular contractions.
- Adding sugar, flavored syrups, milk and/or cream to coffee likely reduces its potential health benefits, and more research is needed to understand the impact of these additives.
- Higher caffeine intake, such as levels found in energy drinks including energy shots, was associated with cardiovascular harm, such as increased risk of high blood pressure and irregular heart rhythm. Energy drink shots may contain 40-69 mg of caffeine per fluid ounce, 3-4 times more caffeine than regular caffeinated coffee.
How does caffeine affect the body?
Caffeine consumed in coffee is metabolized by the liver and generally reaches peak concentration for most people within an hour. However, how quickly individuals process caffeine depends on their genetics, metabolism, age and past caffeine use. When more caffeinated coffee is consumed regularly, some people may develop a tolerance to higher levels of caffeine.
Other people may feel stronger effects from the same amount of caffeine. Short-term effects of caffeine may include temporary increases in blood pressure, heart rate, blood sugar and alertness. Some people may experience heart palpitations and/or sleep disruption.
Specific health impacts of caffeine
- Effects on blood pressure: Studies have found that caffeinated coffee consumption may affect blood pressure differently depending on how much is consumed. In people with optimal blood pressure, drinking 1–3 cups a day was associated with an increased risk of developing high blood pressure, while drinking more than 3 cups per day was associated with a lower risk. High doses of caffeine (such as those from energy drinks or energy shots) can significantly increase blood pressure, especially in people who already have high blood pressure.
- Effects on Type 2 diabetes: Research suggests that caffeinated coffee may reduce insulin sensitivity in the short term. In addition, drinking black, caffeinated coffee (no additives, flavors or sweeteners) regularly was linked to a lower risk of developing Type 2 diabetes. However, this benefit may be due to compounds in coffee other than caffeine. More research is needed to clarify the impact on Type 2 diabetes of caffeinated coffee vs. various compounds in coffee.
- Effects on cholesterol: Data from randomized clinical trials indicate cafestol, a component in both caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee, was associated with higher levels of low-density lipoprotein (also known as “bad” cholesterol). Cafestol is present in unfiltered coffee (such as espresso, French press, Turkish coffee or boiled coffee) but not present in coffee brewed with paper filters or instant coffee. More research is needed to understand which products have higher levels of cafestol and their mechanisms.
- Effects on heart rhythm: The most recent analyses of health measures with self-reported information from participants have found that drinking 1-3 cups of caffeinated coffee per day was not associated with an increased risk of atrial fibrillation or abnormal heart rhythm. However, caffeinated coffee at that same level may be associated with more early beats from the lower chamber of the heart, called premature ventricular contractions (or PVCs). Very high doses of caffeine (such as those in caffeinated energy drinks or energy shots) have been linked to abnormal heart rhythm in people usually considered to have low cardiovascular disease risk, such as healthy adults younger than age 30.
- Effects on heart disease and stroke: Drinking 2-4 cups of caffeinated coffee per day was linked to a lower risk of heart disease, heart failure and stroke. However, drinking more than 4 cups of caffeinated coffee a day may increase the risk of heart failure.
Not all sources of caffeine are the same
More research is necessary to investigate the different health impacts of various types of caffeinated coffee and other products with caffeine, such as tea, soda, energy drinks and energy shots, and foods. There have been fewer studies focused on tea vs. coffee; however, tea has been associated with reduced risk of atrial fibrillation, heart failure and stroke, similar to caffeinated coffee. Energy drinks, bars, gels and caffeine-based supplements often contain other added ingredients that may increase the absorption of caffeine, may accelerate its effects on the body, may raise blood pressure and increase the risk of cardiovascular harm.
More randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of caffeine in coffee and other products that have caffeine on cardiovascular health are needed to better understand how caffeine affects different people and how different sources of caffeine impact heart health. The writing group emphasized that there is also a need for research focused on caffeinated energy drinks and other popular products containing caffeine. Due to the lack of sufficient, rigorous data to develop guidance on recommendations for caffeine intake, caffeine was not referenced in the Association’s 2026 Dietary Guidance to Improve Cardiovascular Health.
“Although research suggests that caffeine consumption may be associated with certain cardiovascular benefits for some people, it’s important to remember that there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ strategy for safe caffeine consumption. People can respond very differently to caffeine based on various factors, such as age, medications, underlying health conditions, genetics and how quickly their bodies metabolize it. What may be a reasonable amount for one person could cause unwanted effects, such as heart palpitations, anxiety or sleep disruption, in another. That’s why it’s important to pay attention to how your body responds to caffeine and talk with your healthcare team about what is right for you,” Marcus said.
Co-authors are Vice Chair Frank B. Hu, M.D., M.P.H., Ph.D., FAHA; Rob M. van Dam, Ph.D.; Marilyn C. Cornelis, Ph.D.; Thomas A. Dewland, M.D.; JungHee Kang, Ph.D., M.P.H., R.N.; Susanna C. Larsson, Ph.D.; Robert L. Page II, Pharm.D., M.S.P.H., FAHA; and Niyati Parekh, Ph.D., FAHA. Authors’ disclosures are listed in the manuscript.
NewsMakers
Loneliness strongly linked to poorer mental health and wellbeing, study finds
Loneliness was found to be linked with worse general health, including experiencing multiple health conditions. Social isolation is associated with lower wellbeing, too.
People who feel lonely are much more likely to experience poorer mental health and lower wellbeing, a collaborative study led by the University of Bristol, Nesta and Amsterdam UMC has found. Loneliness was also found to be linked with worse general health, including experiencing multiple health conditions. Social isolation is associated with lower wellbeing, too.
Loneliness is increasingly recognised as a major public health issue, with growing evidence connecting it to poorer health. However, it is unclear whether loneliness itself contributes to poor health or whether these links are driven by other factors.
The study, in association with the universities of Oxford and Manchester, combined evidence from three different research methods, including observational analysis, sibling comparisons, and Mendelian randomisation, a genetics-based approach, to build a clearer understanding of these relationships.
Using data from the UK Biobank and large-scale genome-wide association studies, the researchers investigated how both loneliness – the quality of a person’s social relationships; and social isolation – the number of social connections, relate to health and wellbeing. The study is published in Nature Communications.
The research team found that loneliness and social isolation are linked to poorer mental health and reduced wellbeing, with loneliness also associated with worse general health. While the study found no clear evidence of effects on specific physical health conditions, these potential impacts cannot be ruled out.
The findings suggest that loneliness, and potentially social isolation, remain important public health issues, particularly because of their links with mental health, wellbeing and overall health.
As loneliness becomes an increasingly important public health challenge, tackling it could bring benefits for both individuals and society.
Dr Zoe Reed, Research Fellow in the School of Psychology and Neuroscience at the University of Bristol, and corresponding author, said: “Our findings suggest that loneliness, and possibly social isolation, are still important public health concerns, especially for mental health and general health. Supporting people who feel lonely or socially isolated could help improve mental health, wellbeing and overall health.”
Lauren Bowes Byatt, Director of Nesta’s healthy life mission, added: “This research underlines that loneliness is likely to have a detrimental impact on our mental health and wellbeing. While this link may seem obvious, the topic has long been understudied. Studies like this can help to bridge this research gap and by understanding how loneliness or social isolation may be contributing to ill-health, we can get closer to new and more effective solutions.”
The researchers suggest more research is needed to understand exactly how loneliness and social isolation affect health and to develop the most effective ways to reduce their impact.
As the study focused on middle-aged and older adults, future studies should explore whether these patterns are similar in younger people. It will also be important to investigate the effects of persistent or long-term loneliness, as the study measured loneliness at a single point in time.
The paper’s findings add to growing evidence that loneliness and social isolation are not just social issues, they are important public health concerns with wide-ranging implications for wellbeing and mental and physical health. The research reinforces the importance of addressing these issues as part of public health policy and practice.
-
Product Showcase3 weeks agoSuperbod Movement goes beyond the stage
-
NewsMakers3 weeks agoLoneliness strongly linked to poorer mental health and wellbeing, study finds
-
NewsMakers3 weeks agoPoor-quality sleep involves different parts of the brain, depending on age
-
NewsMakers3 weeks agoWeight loss drugs could help with binge eating disorder
-
Product Showcase3 weeks agoNew IKEA PS Collection brings playful functionality into your home
-
Product Showcase3 weeks agoFullerton Health celebrates two years of advancing preventive healthcare in PH
-
Product Showcase3 weeks agoCentury Tuna Superbods 2026 announces ‘Superbod Era’ finalists
-
NewsMakers5 days agoFilipinos prioritize independence as legacy for longer lives

