Covid vaccination had no effect on risk of heart attacks: Nadda tells Lok Sabha
In a written response to a question in Lok Sabha, he also clarified that data regarding heart attack cases is not maintained centrally.
Heart attack cases are not notifiable and there is no central registry for these.
The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) has informed that in order to understand the reasons for heart attack, ICMR-National Institute of Epidemiology (ICMR-NIE) conducted a multi-centric matched case-control study in 25 hospitals across India.
Cases were patients aged 18-45 years admitted in the study hospitals with newly diagnosed Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI) between October 2021 and January 2023, Nadda said.
Controls were patients aged 18-45 years admitted in the same hospital for other causes, matched for time of hospitalization.
Information was collected regarding the various risk factors.
Sharing the key findings of the study (not yet published), Nadda said that hospitalization with AMI was associated with presence of any known co-morbidity, family history of thrombotic event and ever being smoker.
'Receipt of vaccination against COVID-19 had no effect on the risk of AMI. Even in those without any comorbidities, family history of thrombotic events and ever smoking was associated with increased risk of AMI," he said.
He further informed that the ICMR in last two years has funded two centres of advanced research for research on cardiac disorders.
The National Health Mission (NHM) provides technical and financial support to the states and Union territories under the National Programme for Prevention and Control of Non-Communicable Diseases (NP-NCD), Nadda said.
Cardiovascular disease is an integral part of NP-NCD. Under the programme, 770 district NCD clinics, 6410 community health centres NCD clinics and 233 cardiac care units have been set up.
Further, a population-based initiative for prevention, control and screening for common NCDs including diabetes and hypertension has been rolled out in the country under NHM as a part of comprehensive primary health care.
Under the initiative, people above 30 years of age are targeted for their screening, Nadda said. PTI PLB ZMN
view comments
First Published:
July 25, 2025, 18:30 IST
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Time of India
Hepatitis: Adults Can Also Get Vaccinated If They Missed The Jab In Childhood
Nagpur: As the world observes World Hepatitis Day on July 28, liver disease specialists in Nagpur are urging citizens to act before it's too late — highlighting that Hepatitis B vaccination is not just for children. Adults who missed their shots earlier in life can — and should — get vaccinated now, say doctors. Dr Piyush Marudwar, consultant gastroenterologist and liver transplant physician, said that even today, millions of adults remain unaware that the Hepatitis B vaccine is safe, effective, and easily available at any age. "Hepatitis may be silent, but our response must be loud. Awareness, timely screening, and vaccination are our strongest tools in defeating this global health challenge," said Dr Marudwar. Adding a local perspective, Dr Amol Samarth, gastroenterologist and hepatologist at Super Specialty Hospital, Nagpur, said that hepatitis remains an underdiagnosed but serious threat in Vidarbha, especially because of late testing. "In Nagpur, we are seeing a growing number of patients diagnosed with Hepatitis B and C during evaluations for other illnesses. Unfortunately, many reach us when liver damage has already progressed. Routine screening and adult vaccination are the most effective ways to prevent this," said Dr Samarth. He added that public hospitals like Super Specialty Hospital offer affordable screening and consultation facilities, and that both Hepatitis B vaccination and antiviral treatment are widely accessible in Nagpur now. This year's theme, 'Hepatitis Can't Wait', underscores the urgency of acting early. Doctors warn that the post-Covid disruption in routine health check-ups has led to delays in hepatitis detection and follow-up care. "Hepatitis is one of the leading causes of end-stage liver disease and the need for liver transplantation in India," said Dr Rahul Saxena, secretary of ZTCC Nagpur and a prominent liver transplant surgeon. "Nagpur is gradually becoming a liver transplant-ready city with better awareness and infrastructure. But to reduce the burden, we must focus on prevention," he said. "Hepatitis B has a safe and effective vaccine, and Hepatitis C is now curable with oral medications. Still, many patients present late due to lack of awareness or stigma," Dr Saxena added. All specialists emphasised that testing for hepatitis should be as common as checking for diabetes or blood pressure, especially for high-risk groups such as healthcare workers, pregnant women, dialysis patients, and those who've had blood transfusions.
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Time of India
Late Bhanutai Gadkari Memorial Diagnostic Centre inaugurated: MRI at Rs1,200, CT Scan at Rs800, X-ray at Rs100
Nagpur: A state-of-the-art 6,000 sq ft facility in north Nagpur will be offering essential diagnostic and dialysis services at some of the lowest rates in the country — MRI for Rs1,200, CT Scan for Rs800, and digital X-ray for just Rs100, and major blood tests at Rs300, which otherwise cost thousands. Remarkably, it is India's first diagnostic centre equipped entirely with "Made-in-India" machines. The late Bhanutai Gadkari Memorial Diagnostic Centre, which was inaugurated on Sunday, has come as a major boost for healthcare infrastructure in north Nagpur. Located at Kamal Chowk, Lashkaribagh, the centre is dedicated to memory of Bhanutai Gadkari, mother of Union minister for road transport and highways, Nitin Gadkari, who presided over the programme when chief minister Devendra Fadnavis inaugurated the facility. "This diagnostic centre will be a milestone in the healthcare sector. Combining empathy with service, it sets an example of how indigenous technology can be used to bring down the cost of essential diagnostics for the common man," said Fadnavis while praising Gadkari's initiative. Gadkari, on an emotional note, said that the centre is not a commercial project, but a service mission inspired by his mother's legacy for compassion and empathy. Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Your IQ Is 140 If You Can Answer 10 of These Questions Correctly. IQ International Undo by Taboola by Taboola "From my first day in public life, her blessings guided me to serve the poor and suffering," said Gadkari and made an appeal to include bone marrow, sickle cell and thalassaemia treatments under the Mahatma Jyotiba Phule Jan Arogya Yojana. The fully air-conditioned centre, run by the late Bhanutai Gadkari Gramin Vikas Sanstha, features a modern waiting area, paperless operations, high-capacity servers, and trained technical staff. All MRI and CT scan machines have been manufactured in India, in collaboration with AMTZ (Andhra Pradesh MedTech Zone), significantly cutting costs compared to imported equipment. "This is the first time in India that a diagnostic centre has been established with 100% indigenous machines. We used to import MRI machines for Rs6 crore. Now, we are making them at Rs2 crore and exporting them too," said Dr Jitendra Sharma, managing director of AMTZ. # WHAT CENTRE OFFERS MRI – Rs1,200: High-end 1.5 Tesla imaging with 16-channel MUSIC technology ensuring quick scans with excellent image quality CT Scan — Rs800: BIS, AERB and CDSCO-approved fast scanning machines. Full chest scans done in just 6 seconds Digital X-ray — Rs100; high-resolution, modern digital imaging Dialysis — Rs750 standard, only Rs250 if NMC provides ₹500 subsidy—free dialysis for donor-backed patients Pathology Tests — Rs300; over 40 common tests included Pharmacy — Generic medicines available at 10% discount
The Wire
5 hours ago
- The Wire
Recovery, the Unfinished Business of the Pandemic
The consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic far outlasted the health emergency. Long after infection curves flattened and emergency declarations were lifted, countries across the globe continued to wrestle with a deep economic, social and health-related fallout. In India, over 23 crore people were pushed into poverty during the pandemic years, with rural and informal sector workers bearing the brunt, and the economic spillover continues to be seen in the form of increased government debt, rising inflation, a stagnating hospitality industry and other things, even after half a decade has passed since the onset of COVID. In the health sector, the disruption to routine immunisation services led to measles outbreaks in numerous Sub-Saharan countries, while a UNICEF report warned that about 23 million children missed out on essential vaccines in 2020 alone. Mental health outcomes also deteriorated sharply. Data from the WHO shows that there was a 25% global increase in anxiety and depression in the first year of the pandemic. These aftershocks demonstrate that recovery is not a passive return to normalcy – it is a protracted and complex phase that demands sustained attention, governance and resource mobilisation. The COVID-19 pandemic has triggered worldwide efforts to mitigate the scale and impact of future health emergencies, including amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR); the creation of the Pandemic Fund and the WHO Pandemic Intelligence Hub; and the ACT-Accelerator, COVAX and One Health initiatives. The latest – and most talked-about – in this series of efforts is the WHO Pandemic Agreement, which was adopted on May 20, 2025 after three years of negotiations and discussions. It will become a legally binding international instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response once it is signed by 60 countries. After India's vote in favour of the resolution to adopt the agreement, making it an official state party to the agreement, the prime minister has talked about its importance for vulnerable populations in the Global South that disproportionately bear the effects of health challenges. In order to successfully achieve this goal, the agreement needs to accomplish two things – chart out obligations targeted towards vulnerable populations, and highlight the specific ways in which pandemics' disproportionate impact on the Global South can be mitigated. While the agreement does lay the ground for equity in both aspects, it falls short of outlining implementable measures to achieve these goals meaningfully without hindering sovereign decisions. Notably, the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) annex, a critical component tied to equity and access, still has another year to be worked out, further delaying clarity on how benefit-sharing commitments will be operationalised. Commendably, the agreement talks about the need to provide affordable health and other social support services to 'persons in vulnerable situations'. It also calls for the mitigation of the socioeconomic impacts of pandemics on such persons. However, it misses an opportunity to guide state parties on when and how this should be done at the domestic and trans-national levels, especially at the time of recovery. Integrating recovery into the pandemic agreement Article 3 of the agreement, titled 'Preparedness, health system resilience and recovery', gestures toward the importance of post-pandemic strategies. However, recovery is buried within broader health system resilience goals and mentioned only in passing. It refers vaguely to 'developing post-pandemic health system recovery strategies' without outlining how, when or by whom such strategies must be developed, implemented or monitored. This diluted treatment effectively renders recovery a discretionary task, rather than an obligation. There is no requirement for countries to assess the long-term impacts of pandemics on vulnerable populations, nor is there any architecture for coordinating recovery efforts, allocating responsibilities or ensuring accountability. In the light of this gap, recovery must be established as a clear, foundational pillar within the pandemic agreement – not a vague aspiration buried under resilience. It is important to acknowledge at the onset that international treaties cannot impose rigid mandates on sovereign states. However, by creating shared expectations and enabling frameworks, they can support states in fulfilling recovery goals without infringing on national autonomy. Rather than prescribe uniform recovery models, the agreement can promote adaptable, equity-based cooperation that complements domestic efforts while ensuring accountability and consistency across borders. The agreement should require states to develop standalone national recovery frameworks tailored to their contexts, with explicit mandates for implementation, periodic review and transparent reporting. Recovery should be understood broadly – not just as restoring health systems but as encompassing social, economic and mental health dimensions affected by pandemics. A comprehensive recovery approach must prioritise impact assessments focused on marginalised and vulnerable populations – including gender minorities, workers in the informal sector, migrants, senior citizens, homeless populations, persons with disabilities and ethnic minorities – who disproportionately suffer during crises. These assessments should directly inform targeted economic and social policies, such as livelihood restoration, social protection adjustments and reintegration support, to prevent widening inequalities in the post-crisis phase. Further, recovery goals must be multi-dimensional and should account for the wide-ranging impact of pandemics across different key areas. Accordingly, the agreement should embed principles for access to justice and redressal mechanisms for harms suffered during pandemics, the restoration of disrupted education systems, safeguards for the continuity of essential public and welfare services, mechanisms for the review of governmental decisions and actions during the state of exception, and the rebuilding of public trust through transparent and participatory governance. The absence of these dimensions risks a recovery that is piecemeal and opaque, weakening institutional integrity and leaving societies more vulnerable to future crises. International cooperation in recovery efforts In order to achieve the aim of equity, especially across the Global North-Global South divide, the international community must direct its attention to recovery efforts across national borders. The agreement must institutionalise mechanisms for international coordination and solidarity during the recovery phase, facilitating sharing of expertise, resources and data across countries to reduce regional vulnerabilities and promote equitable resilience. The bodies set up under the agreement do not account for this adequately, in terms of function or finances. The mechanisms set up under the agreement, such as PABS, deal with important functions like pathogen and data sharing, and pharmaceutical supply and distribution. There are no such systems established for recovery. The Coordinating Financial Mechanism previously established under the IHR has been envisaged as the mechanism to promote sustainable financing for the implementation of the pandemic agreement as well. Its mandate under the pandemic agreement is to 'support strengthening and expanding capacities for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, and contribute to the prompt availability of surge financing response necessary as of day zero, particularly in developing country Parties.' This conspicuously and concerningly misses recovery as a crucial stage of assessing impacts and developing strategies for rebuilding, which is especially crucial for low and middle-income countries in the Global South, including India. The cultural impact of international documents Understandably, international agreements cannot impose specific obligations in the same way that domestic laws can. Given the legally binding nature of the pandemic agreement, it should also refrain from interfering with sovereign and context-specific decisions adopted at the national and sub-national levels. At the same time, beyond policy prescriptions, international treaties play a critical role in shaping legal cultures and empowering civil society to demand justice and reform. By embedding preparedness, resilience-building and recovery within the pandemic agreement, the global community will be able to create a shared vocabulary and normative framework that activists, policymakers and courts can invoke domestically to advance equity and resilience. India's past experience has illustrated this dynamic vividly. The Vishakha Guidelines on workplace sexual harassment, which transformed protections for women, were grounded in India's commitments under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. Similarly, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has influenced landmark judicial decisions and legislative reforms enhancing disability rights and access to welfare in India. What can be done to prioritise recovery? While laying out the rules or procedure and terms of reference, the Intergovernmental Working Group empowered under the agreement must lay down specific provisions on recovery, including indicative domestic guidance, mechanisms for international cooperation and sustainable financing or recovery that recognises marginalisation and prioritises equity. Embedding principles that prioritise domestic and international efforts will shift recovery from a discretionary afterthought to a binding commitment that demands accountability without prescribing inflexible solutions. It provides states with a flexible but clear mandate to build inclusive, adaptive recovery architectures that address the deep, lasting fallout of pandemics. Shreyashi Ray is a senior resident fellow with the health team at the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy. Anchal Bhatheja is a research fellow at the centre.
