Beyond Safety and Efficacy: Medical Brands Redefines Medical Self-Care Through a Human Lens
At the center of Medical Brands is the belief that effective self-care products are the most powerful when they don't burden the mind and body. For over a decade, the company has been dedicated to pioneering a new way of thinking, one rooted in convenience, innovation, and people-centrism. Continuously committed to addressing the ever-changing customer needs, Medical Brands develops, patents, trademarks, manufactures, and delivers product concepts, each one supported by substantiated clinical data.
Whether through their own brands or co-creating with established medical self-care names, Medical Brands' goal is to stand at the cutting edge of self-care innovation. Its products combine years of expertise, extensive R&D, regulatory requirements, and a dedication to addressing users' needs. Therefore, they fill the gap between brand owners and product development, making innovative self-care accessible to all. Wart Removal Pen Applicator by Medical Brands
Leveraging the favorable European regulations allowing CE-marked products for distribution across all EU countries and countries with mutual recognition, Medical Brands has grown rapidly, today offering B2B and B2C contracts across the globe. This fusion of regulatory understanding, speed-to-market acumen, and human-driven innovation is shaped by the people who built Medical Brands.
CEO and President Maikel Hendriks brings a wealth of engineering experience to the table. Today, he harnesses that knowledge to design and develop convenient applicators and innovative products. "In traditional pharma, you think immunologically, pharmacologically, and metabolically," he says. "But in engineering, you think physically. That's what makes Medical Brands so unique."
With more than 30 finished products, over 20 in the pipeline, and multiple tried and tested patents , the power of this combination is evident. Hendriks credits Medical Brands' team of 28 professionals, from engineers and designers to pharmacists and supply chain specialists, as the engine that made this success possible. With this diverse expertise, the company produces in-house with its own machinery, making production faster and more scalable. From 3D printers to active medical ingredients, it ensures full control over the final product's quality.
Results? A comprehensive suite of products that treat people as users, not patients. That mindset blends safety, efficacy, reliability, and convenience, working in harmony with the body's natural processes to enhance well-being. Hendriks illustrates that by offering product examples, for instance, a precise wart pen applicator that makes treatment a breeze. Elephant-Shaped Bottle by Medical Brands
With a complex formula locked in simple packaging, Medical Brands reimagines self-care devices by creating more than an effective treatment; it creates a unique experience. But it's also about appeal. For instance, its cough spray for kids in an elephant-shaped bottle makes the application feel more fun and lighthearted. On the other hand, its nail fungus treatment comes with an added benefit: a colored nail polish that attacks the problem while making the user happy.
The company also creates innovation by combining medical monographs with convenient applicators, making otherwise inaccessible treatment within reach for all. At its core, Medical Brands believes that with the right self-care, users can minimize the risks of illness and doctor visits. "Today, you can care for your body at home," adds Hendriks. "We're not reinventing the wheel; we're just making this process more comfortable for users' benefit."
Looking ahead, Medical Brands is planning to grow its line to wound treatment alternatives, blending the power of substance-based medical devices and electronics. Additionally, with talks of geographical expansion underway, it remains excited about redefining self-care medical devices in Europe and beyond.
"When you're driving self-care to new levels, innovation comes first," Hendriks concludes. "Conventions limit possibilities, and that stifles progress. That's why our mission is to contribute to the healthcare system by empowering people to treat themselves. That's the perfect balance between breaking the rules without breaking regulations, which is what Medical Brands is all about."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
DW
an hour ago
- DW
NATO likely to hike defense spending despite economic woes – DW – 06/05/2025
The military alliance looks set to satisfy US President Donald Trump's demands to commit to a massive increase in defense spending. Some creative counting proposed by NATO head Mark Rutte could soften the financial blow. A NATO defense ministers' meeting in Brussels on Thursday showed "broad support" for signing off a historic hike in defense spending at a crunch summit later this month. This was their response to the growing threat from Russia and a "more dangerous world" in general, the military alliance's Secretary General Mark Rutte told reporters. "I will propose an overall investment plan that would total 5% of gross domestic product in defense investment," Rutte announced, following months of pressure from US President Donald Trump for allies to more than double the present target. Current NATO guidelines encourage states to spend 2% of their economic output on their militaries. But not all of the alliance's members meet this target, raising questions of how they will reach an even higher spending goal. Splitting the bill In response, NATO chief Rutte has specified a division of the new spending goal that could allow Trump to claim a headline figure, while giving the other 31 nations room to maneuver their national budgets. Thus, of the 5%, 3.5% of national GDP could be allotted to "core defence spending", while the remaining 1.5% could be diverted to "defense- and security-related investment like infrastructure and industry," he said. Allied defense ministers gathered at the NATO headquarters in Brussels Image: Dursun Aydemir/Anadolu/picture alliance Trump has long criticized NATO allies for relying on the US' large military might as a strategy to defend the European continent. In 2023, more than two thirds of the 32 NATO countries' collective $1.3 trillion (€1.14 trillion) military spending came from Washington, according to data compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). On Thursday, US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth drove home the message to the rest of the alliance once again. "Every shoulder has to be to the plough. Every country has to contribute at that level of 5% as a recognition of the nature of threat," he said. Leaders of the world's most powerful defense alliance are set to gather in three weeks in the Dutch city The Hague. Topping the agenda will be discussions on the ongoing war in Ukraine, and Russia's resulting massive rearmament drive. It seems likely that NATO members will officially commit to the 5% goal at these upcoming talks. Giving in to pressure Under US pressure, and with Europeans alarmed by Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, NATO military spending has already burgeoned in recent years. Most countries now meet the 2% threshold, which was agreed upon 11 years ago. But around one third of the alliance still doesn't, including Portugal, Italy, Canada, Belgium, and Spain. Most NATO states had indicated willingness to spend more, but the 5% goal was considered far-fetched when Trump floated the idea earlier this year. Almost half a year on, the message seems to be resonating with many in the alliance. Earlier this week, 14 NATO states, including the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and the five Nordic states, published a joint statement in which they said they were "moving towards reaching at least 5% of GDP on defense and defense-related investments." Specter of war: Are Europeans really ready to rearm? To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Last month, German Foreign Minister Johann Wadepuhl also indicated Germany could get on board with the goal. Several NATO countries, including Poland, Estonia and Lithuania, have already committed to spending 5% or more in the future. All are former Soviet states, and two of them share a border with Russia. Since taking office in January, the "America-first" president has strained the NATO alliance with threats not to help defend alliance members that didn't meet spending targets should they be attacked. His designs on the semi-autonomous Danish territory Greenland have also alienated allies, as have his attempts at bilateral talks to find an end to Russia's war in Ukraine, which sidelined European partners and left Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy largely marginalized. Questions remain There are still many open questions to be answered, one of them being the timeline. On Thursday, Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur spoke of committing to reaching 5% within five years. "We don't have time for ten years, we don't even have time for seven years, to be honest," he said. But the official focus at this week's meeting was on working out what exact capabilities NATO would need and may currently be missing to defend itself if a member of the alliance were attacked. After the talks, Rutte spoke of the need to upgrade air defense systems and long-range missiles, among other things. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said Germany might need as many as 50,000 – 60,000 more troops in its standing forces to meet defense needs in the coming years. Increased spending amid economic downturn While consensus appears to be forming, it is also clear that increasing military spending to 5% of GDP would be an enormous strain on public finances, particularly as Europe's two major economies, Germany and France, face tough times. Paris and Berlin are touting increased defense spending as a chance to fuel economic growth in Europe, but there is a risk of public backlash. In April in Rome, the opposition Five Star Movement led a protest against an EU drive to rearm the bloc — a move supported by the government of far-right Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni — reportedly drawing tens of thousands of people. According to Cullen Hendrix, an expert from the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a US think tank, a 5% spending target would essentially put NATO countries on "war footing." US secretary of State Pete Hegseth was in Brussels for the last NATO gathering before next month's summit Image: Bob Reijnders/Middle East Images/AFP/Getty Images "In 2023, just nine countries spent 5% of GDP or more on defense: Algeria, Armenia, Israel, Lebanon, Oman, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and South Sudan," Hendrix wrote in February. "Most are, or were, at war. Five of these are authoritarian petro-states, unencumbered by competitive elections or the need to tax their populaces to fund this military largesse." There is also a risk that increased spending will make Europe less safe, Hendrix warned. "Increasing military spending to this extent would likely catalyze an arms race with those near-peer competitors." On Thursday in Brussels, Rutte argued there was little choice but to spend significantly more on defense, pointing to recent comments by the German Chief of Defense Carsten Breuer, who posited that Russia would be ready to mount an attack on NATO states by 2029. "We live in a more dangerous world," Rutte said. "We are safe today, but if we don't do this, we are not safe in the foreseeable future." Edited by: Maren Sass
Local Germany
9 hours ago
- Local Germany
Passenger compensation for flight delays set to decrease in Europe
Airline passengers in the EU enjoy the world's most generous system of compensation if their flight is delayed or cancelled. However these rights seem set to decrease after the European Council agreed to an overhaul of compensation rules, following intense lobbying from the airline industry. The agreement to extend delay times and cut compensation levels was made at a European Council summit, despite opposition from Germany and Spain. Controversially, the Council bypassed discussions with the European Parliament and made its decision legally binding using a process that has not been deployed in more than a decade. Advertisement However the European Parliament can still make changes to the new rules - it has four months to respond with a proposal that must be backed by a majority of 361 MEPs. So what changes? The ruling doesn't scrap all the customer protections, but it changes the rules on compensation payments - changing both the payment amounts and the delay time after which compensation rules kick in. Under current EU Air Passenger Rights Regulation rules, passengers can claim between €250 and €600 in compensation if a flight is delayed by at least three hours, if the delay is the fault of the airline. Under the agreed changes, compensation will only be due after a four-hour delay for flights of less than 3,500 kilometres. For longer flights, airlines would be obliged to pay compensation if flights land at least six hours late, compared to the current three-hour standard. Under the new rules, €300 compensation will apply for delays of more than four hours – while €500 will be payable for delays of more than six hours involving flights of more than 3,500km. In exchange for the higher delay thresholds, airlines will have to streamline the complex and obfuscatory compensation process - in which many airlines make it very complicated to claim financial compensation but very easy to claim airline vouchers. And what doesn't change? Other compensation rules remain unchanged, especially around the 'extraordinary circumstances' definition which covers whether airlines have to provide any compensation at all. Compensation for delays or cancellations is not paid if the problem is due to 'extraordinary circumstances' – the exact definition of this in the legislation is vague but it generally applies to situations like extreme weather, political instability, security risks or problems with air traffic control. Advertisement Strikes are usually not considered to be extraordinary circumstances, neither are routine mechanical problems or staff shortages. The rules cover airlines that are registered in the EU – such as the Ireland-based Ryanair – or flights taking off from an EU or Schengen zone country. Since Brexit the rules no longer apply to the UK, but the British government has mostly "copied and pasted" it into UK legislation. READ ALSO Fears EU plans to 'water down' air passengers' rights in review Also unchanged are rules on flight cancellations and airlines responsibility to provide food, accommodation and alternative travel for passengers whose flights are delayed or cancelled. In truth this is not well policed - passengers are often simply told to make their own arrangements for accommodation and alternative travel and submit compensation claims to the airline later. Airlines do, however, routinely provide refreshments, usually in the form of food vouchers to passengers whose flights are delayed. Why the change? In a word - lobbying. Airlines had argued that the compensation payments were too high, especially for budget airlines where the compensation may be higher than the cost of the ticket. Airlines also said that they were unable to provide a replacement aircraft and crew within three hours in many European locations, and that this can lead to additional flights being cancelled because high compensation payments have already been incurred. READ ALSO What are your rights in Europe if your flight is delayed or cancelled? When does this happen? The change is not immediate, first the European Parliament has four months to stage any objections and if no objection is received, then an introduction date will be set. So we can say for sure that this summer holiday period will still be covered by the old rules.
DW
20 hours ago
- DW
NATO likely to hike defense spending, amid economic concerns – DW – 06/05/2025
The military alliance looks set to satisfy US President Donald Trump's demands to commit to a massive increase in defense spending. Some creative counting proposed by NATO head Mark Rutte could soften the financial blow. NATO defense ministers meeting in Brussels on Thursday showed "broad support" for signing off a historic hike in defense spending at a crunch summit later this month. This was their response to the growing threat from Russia and a "more dangerous world" in general, the military alliance's Secretary General Mark Rutte told reporters. "I will propose an overall investment plan that would total 5% of gross domestic product in defense investment," Rutte announced, following months of pressure from US President Donald Trump for allies to more than double the present target. Current NATO guidelines encourage states to spend 2% of their economic output on their militaries. But not all of the alliance's members meet this target, raising questions of how they will reach an even higher spending goal. Splitting the bill In response, NATO chief Rutte has specified a division of the new spending goal that could allow Trump to claim a headline figure, while giving the other 31 nations room to maneuver their national budgets. Thus, of the 5%, 3.5% of national GDP could be allotted to "core defence spending", while the remaining 1.5% could be diverted to "defense- and security-related investment like infrastructure and industry," he said. Allied defense ministers gathered at the NATO headquarters in Brussels Image: Dursun Aydemir/Anadolu/picture alliance Trump has long criticized NATO allies for relying on the US' large military might as a strategy to defend the European continent. In 2023, more than two thirds of the 32 NATO countries' collective $1.3 trillion (€1.14 trillion) military spending came from Washington, according to data compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). On Thursday, US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth drove home the message to the rest of the alliance once again. "Every shoulder has to be to the plough. Every country has to contribute at that level of 5% as a recognition of the nature of threat," he said. Leaders of the world's most powerful defense alliance are set to gather in three weeks in the Dutch city The Hague. Topping the agenda will be discussions on the ongoing war in Ukraine, and Russia's resulting massive rearmament drive. It seems likely that NATO members will officially commit to the 5% goal at these upcoming talks. Giving in to pressure Under US pressure, and with Europeans alarmed by Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, NATO military spending has already burgeoned in recent years. Most countries now meet the 2% threshold, which was agreed upon 11 years ago. But around one third of the alliance still doesn't, including Portugal, Italy, Canada, Belgium, and Spain. Most NATO states had indicated willingness to spend more, but the 5% goal was considered far-fetched when Trump floated the idea earlier this year. Almost half a year on, the message seems to be resonating with many in the alliance. Earlier this week, 14 NATO states, including the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and the five Nordic states, published a joint statement in which they said they were "moving towards reaching at least 5% of GDP on defense and defense-related investments." Specter of war: Are Europeans really ready to rearm? To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Last month, German Foreign Minister Johann Wadepuhl also indicated Germany could get on board with the goal. Several NATO countries, including Poland, Estonia and Lithuania, have already committed to spending more 5% or more in the future. All are former Soviet states, and two of them share a border with Russia. Since taking office in January, the "America-first" president has strained the NATO alliance with threats not to help defend alliance members that didn't meet spending targets should they be attacked. His designs on the semi-autonomous Danish territory Greenland have also alienated allies, as have his attempts at bilateral talks to find an end to Russia's war in Ukraine, which sidelined European partners and left Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy largely marginalized. Questions remain There are still many open questions to be answered, one of them being the timeline. On Thursday, Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur spoke of committing to reaching 5% within five years. "We don't have time for ten years, we don't even have time for seven years, to be honest," he said. But the official focus at this week's meeting was on working out what exact capabilities NATO would need and may currently be missing to defend itself if a member of the alliance were attacked. After the talks, Rutte spoke of the need to upgrade air defense systems and long-range missiles, among other things. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said Germany might need as many as 50,000 – 60,000 more troops in its standing forces to meet defense needs in the coming years. Increased spending amid economic downturn While consensus appears to be forming, it is also clear that increasing military spending to 5% of GDP would be an enormous strain on public finances, particularly as Europe's two major economies, Germany and France, face tough times. Paris and Berlin are touting increased defense spending as a chance to fuel economic growth in Europe, but there is a risk of public backlash. In April in Rome, the opposition Five Star Movement led a protest against an EU drive to rearm the bloc — a move supported by the government of far-right Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni — reportedly drawing tens of thousands of people. According to Cullen Hendrix, an expert from the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a US think tank, a 5% spending target would essentially put NATO countries on "war footing." us secretary of State Pete Hegseth was in Brussels for the last NATO gathering before next month's summit Image: Bob Reijnders/Middle East Images/AFP/Getty Images "In 2023, just nine countries spent 5% of GDP or more on defense: Algeria, Armenia, Israel, Lebanon, Oman, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and South Sudan," Hendrix wrote in February. "Most are, or were, at war. Five of these are authoritarian petro-states, unencumbered by competitive elections or the need to tax their populaces to fund this military largesse." There is also a risk ithat increased spending will make Europe less safe, Hendrix warned. "Increasing military spending to this extent would likely catalyze an arms race with those near-peer competitors." On Thursday in Brussels, Rutte argued there was little choice but to spend significantly more on defense, pointing to recent comments by the German Chief of Defense Carsten Breuer, who posited that Russia would be ready to amount an attack on NATO states by 2029. "We live in a more dangerous world," Rutte said. "We are safe today, but if we don't do this, we are not safe in the foreseeable future." Edited by: Maren Sass
