Mom Captures Moment With Newborn—Not Knowing Days Later She'll Be Sectioned
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A U.K. mom captured a happy moment with her baby, not knowing that, days later, she would be sectioned.
Jade Lloyd (@jadealloyd) posted a reel on Instagram smiling and playing with her newborn daughter, but, behind the scenes, the 31-year-old was falling apart.
Lloyd told Newsweek that she had struggled mentally after giving birth. At her six-week checkup, she tried to speak out, but her doctor didn't take any notice.
From left: Jade Lloyd holds her baby daughter while standing up.
From left: Jade Lloyd holds her baby daughter while standing up.
@jadealloyd
"It got progressively worse, which then started to turn into suicidal thoughts," Lloyd said.
After finally receiving a diagnosis of postnatal depression and being prescribed antidepressants, Lloyd felt pressure to appear as if she were improving.
"[I] started putting on a front, although, inside, I was falling apart," Lloyd said. "I was trying to hold it together until my brain couldn't handle it anymore, and it turned into psychosis."
Sleep deprivation, she was later told by clinicians, likely contributed to the onset of acute psychosis. "Over the period of a week, I probably slept a total of 10 hours," Lloyd added.
Lloyd was sectioned under the U.K.'s Mental Health Act and was admitted to a Mother and Baby Unit—a specialist facility where mothers can receive psychiatric care while staying with their infants.
"Initially, [it] felt like a prison, and, when I was sectioned, it meant I was unable to leave," Lloyd said.
"My daughter and I were able to stay together, which was vital for my recovery, as I kept thinking I had killed her. I couldn't imagine what it would have been like if I wasn't able to be with her."
Despite facing challenges during her stay, Lloyd said that her experience was positive overall, and she praised the staff who worked there.
"They listened, cared for myself and my daughter, and gave me space to heal. I will be forever grateful for them," she said.
Following her release after a month, Lloyd struggled with depression and found it difficult even to get out of bed.
Given that she wasn't permitted to drive for three months, Lloyd felt isolated in her small town. Thankfully, friends and family rallied around to help her find a way forward.
"Now I would say I'm in the best place I've been," Lloyd said. "I go back and volunteer [at the Mother and Baby Unit] and do the moms' nails. It's healing and rewarding at the same time."
Lloyd has also built an online platform to raise awareness and support others.
"The response has been positive, and I hope to grow this and go on to do more advocacy work to help better maternal care for mental health," Lloyd said.
To mothers who might be struggling, Lloyd offered this message: "Whether you've just given birth, or you are three years into your motherhood journey, you are doing amazing.
"Even if you're struggling with your mental health and you're just scraping by every single day, know that you are enough for your baby, and nothing can change that.
"There is light out there, and if you are in the darkness, there is a way out. It takes time and work, but you've got this," Lloyd said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
10 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Hard-to-Treat Cancers Respond to New Therapy
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A promising new combination therapy is offering new hope for patients with hard-to-treat cancers. This is thanks to scientists at the Fralin Biomedical Research Institute in Virginia who have identified a potential target for experimental drugs that block PRMT5—a naturally occurring enzyme some tumors rely more on for survival. The study could help guide the development of new therapies for some treatment-resistant lung, brain and pancreatic cancers, according to the researchers. "Using genetic screening, we found a new drug combination that seemingly works," said paper author and cancer biologist professor Kathleen Mulvaney in a statement. A 3D illustration of DNA and cancer cells. A 3D illustration of DNA and cancer cancer is by far the most fatal type of cancer in the US, accounting for about one in five of all cancer deaths. Meanwhile, the five-year survival rate is less than 15 percent for pancreatic cancer patients (although this can vary depending on the stage of cancer) and even lower for glioblastoma, a fast growing type of brain tumor. While treatment options are available, the need for new types is also clear. "With one drug alone, tumors can become resistant really quickly," Mulvaney said. "In all cases, the combination is better at killing than the single agents." The findings suggest the PRMT5 inhibitor could be a powerful new approach for these hard-to-treat cancers. Many of these types of solid tumors share a genetic trait—they lack the genes CDKN2A and MTAP. Both of these are important as they suppress tumors and help to regulate cell growth. Without them, the cancers become dependent on PRMT5 and potentially vulnerable to drugs that lock the enzyme. "It's very difficult to make a drug against the absence of something, so the discovery that PRMT5 is a target we can make a drug against is very exciting to treat CDKN2A/MTAP deleted cancers," Mulvaney told Newsweek. "A new revolutionary class of inhibitors, referred to as MTA-cooperative PRMT5 inhibitors, has shown promising results in ongoing early phase clinical trials," the researchers also explained in the paper. "Nonetheless, effective cancer treatment typically requires therapeutic combinations to improve response rates and defeat emergent resistant clones. Thus, we sought to determine whether perturbation [disrupting or altering] of other pathways could improve the efficacy of MTA-cooperative PRMT5 inhibitors." Doctor showing smiling patient a lung x-ray scan image. Doctor showing smiling patient a lung x-ray scan image. stefanamer/Getty Images To inform their research, the scientists analyzed genetic data from thousands of cancer patients available through the cBioPortal, an open-access resource. They applied a gene-editing technology called CRISPR to look at biological pathways across a range of samples to determine which genes make cancer cells more vulnerable to PRMT5 inhibitors and which combinations could improve response and long-term outcomes. Mulvaney estimates that around five percent of all cancer patients—some 80,000–100,000 per year in the US—could benefit from the newly identified therapies. Using PRMT5 inhibitors with drugs that block a communication system that tells cancer cells when to grow, divide or shut down the—'MAP kinase pathway'—the scientists identified potential treatments for clinical trials. "We also discovered a number of genes that interact with PRMT5 signaling in cancer that were not previously known," said Mulvaney. As well as hopefully helping to lead to better lung, brain and pancreatic treatments, the therapy shows promise for other types of cancer. This includes melanoma—the most dangerous type of skin cancer—and mesothelioma—mainly affecting the lining of the lungs, though can also affect the lining of the stomach, heart of testicles. In both animal models and cell cultures derived from patient tissue, lab members saw success after testing potential therapies. Mulvaney explained that in the lung cancer models, for example, 75 percent of mice ended up with no detectable tumors after treatment. These responses were stable after drug withdrawal. "In all cases, the combination is better at killing cancer cells than the single agents," she said. "Only the combinations led to complete regressions." Mulvaney explained further, "We've only tested dosing concurrently in preclinical models. It will be interesting to test whether the drug dosing order matters e.g., if we can treat with one compound before adding the other for further benefit or whether concurrent dosing is better." Could there be increased side effects from the new therapy? "In the preclinical mouse models, the combination dosing was well tolerated; no weight loss was detected in the mice. It will be important to monitor potential side effects of the combination in the clinical trials." The researchers concluded in the paper, "Overall, this study identifies therapeutic combinations with MTA-cooperative PRMT5 inhibitors that may offer significant benefit to patients." Do you have a tip on a health story that Newsweek should be covering? Do you have a question about cancer? Let us know via health@ Reference Knoll, N., Masser, S., Bordas, B., Ebright, R. Y., Li, G., Kesar, D., Destefanis, E., Kania, N., Rodriguez, D. J., Jen, J., Zagar, S. E., Mensah, C., Chen, Z., Moffitt, S. J., Enakireru, E. M., He, Y., Feng, B., Chokshi, M. K., Jin, C. Y., ... Mulvaney, K. M. (2025). CRISPR-Drug Combinatorial Screening Identifies Effective Combination Treatments for MTAP-deleted Cancer. Cancer Research.
Newsweek
10 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Weight Loss Drugs Like Ozempic Could Have Additional Health Benefit
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Could diabetes and weight loss drugs like Ozempic (semaglutide) also protect the brain from stroke damage—or even help prevent strokes entirely? Three new studies suggest they might, with the potential of GLP-1 receptor agonists—such as Ozempic—extending beyond just blood sugar regulation and weight loss. According to a May 2024 KFF Health Tracking Poll, approximately one in eight U.S. adults (12 percent) report having used a GLP-1 agonist. Usage rates are notably higher among individuals with chronic health conditions: 43 percent of adults with diabetes, 25 percent with heart disease, and 22 percent of those who have been diagnosed as overweight or obese in the past five years have taken one of these medication. Now, emerging research suggests they may also offer significant neurological benefits. A stock image of woman injecting a Semaglutide Pen in her stomach. A stock image of woman injecting a Semaglutide Pen in her stomach. JNemchinova/iStock / Getty Images Plus Lower Stroke Mortality in Ozempic Users The first study, led by researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, analyzed stroke outcomes among patients taking Ozempic. The team compared data from two large sources: the University of Wisconsin's health system and a global health collaborative. Among more than two million stroke patients from the global dataset, those on Ozempic were found to have a dramatically lower initial death rate—just 5.26 percent compared to 21.61 percent for non-users. Long-term survival rates also favored Ozempic users, with a 77.5 percent survival rate versus 30.95 percent for those not on the drug. The university's own data mirrored this trend: stroke mortality among Ozempic users was less than 5 percent, compared to more than 26 percent in non-users. Could Ozempic Reduce the Risk of Stroke? A second study, also from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, looked at whether Ozempic could lower the chance of experiencing a stroke in the first place. Researchers analyzed emergency department records nationwide, identifying individuals likely using Ozempic and comparing their stroke incidence rates. The study found that potential Ozempic users had significantly lower odds of suffering a stroke. The research team now hopes to confirm these findings using pharmacy records, which would more precisely track who is prescribed the drug. Brain Bleed Protection and Cognitive Benefits The final study, conducted by the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, extended the investigation to brain hemorrhages—both spontaneous bleeds and those caused by aneurysms. The researchers examined the health record of patients who had experienced a stroke or hemorrhage for up to two years after the event in question. Their analysis indicated that GLP-1 agonists were associated with reduced risks of cognitive decline, seizures, repeat hemorrhages and death. "This research could introduce a new perspective to the discussion of preventing and mitigating the devastating effects of stroke and related brain injuries," paper author and neurosurgeon Dr. Matias Costa said in a statement. A Promising Frontier for GLP-1 Drugs Dr. Ahmed Elbayomy, a research fellow in neurological surgery at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and lead author on two of the studies said in a statement: "More research is certainly needed, but seeing the potential protection offered by these medications is a fascinating finding." As use of semaglutide-based drugs like Ozempic and Wegovy continues to expand, the possibility that they might also protect the brain could usher in a new era of neurological prevention—offering more than just metabolic benefits. Do you have a tip on a health story that Newsweek should be covering? Do you have a question about GLP-1 agonists? Let us know via health@
Newsweek
10 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Doubles Down on Mathematically Impossible Drug Price Cuts
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump has doubled down on his claim of reducing drug prices by amounts that are mathematically impossible. Trump told reporters on Sunday that his administration had cut the price of some prescription drugs by as much as 1,500 percent. "Well, one of the things they're going to be talking about pretty soon are the tremendous drop in drug prices. You know, we've cut drug prices by 1,200, 1,300, 1,400, 1,500 percent. I don't mean 50 percent. I mean 14-, 1,500 percent," the president said. When asked to clarify the president's remarks, White House spokesperson Kush Desai told Newsweek, "It's an objective fact that Americans are paying exponentially more for the same exact drugs as people in other developed countries pay, and it's an objective fact that no other Administration has done more to rectify this unfair burden for the American people." Why It Matters Trump's remarks signal a misunderstanding of how pricing and percentages work, which could undermine public confidence in his ability to tackle problems such as drug pricing. President Donald Trump speaks with reporters near Air Force One at the Lehigh Valley International Airport in Allentown, Pennsylvania, on August 3. President Donald Trump speaks with reporters near Air Force One at the Lehigh Valley International Airport in Allentown, Pennsylvania, on August To Know Reducing the price of a drug by 100 percent would make it free, and a reduction greater than 100 percent suggests pharmaceutical companies would pay their customers to take their prescription drugs. Commenting on Trump's claims, Jeffrey Frankel, a professor of capital formation and growth at Harvard University, told Newsweek that the numbers were "indeed mathematically impossible." On Friday, the president made similar claims of bringing drug prices down by "1,000 percent, 1,200 percent" in an interview with Newsmax's Rob Finnerty. That came a day after the White House said Trump had written to the heads of 17 pharmaceutical companies outlining steps they needed to take to bring down the prices of drugs sold in the U.S. to match the lowest price paid by a group of other economically advanced countries. According to a fact sheet the White House released on Thursday, Trump's letters said the pharmaceutical manufacturers' proposals for implementing his May executive order—which seeks to achieve "most favored nation" pricing in the United States—had "fallen short." However, it did not mention the percentage reductions the president has discussed in recent days. What People Are Saying Jeffrey Frankel, a professor of capital formation and growth at Harvard University, told Newsweek: "They are indeed mathematically impossible. If he cut prices 90 percent, the drugs would cost 1/10 as much as before. If 100 percent, then they would cost zero. If cutting 1,000 percent means a thing, then it means that the drug company pays you (a lot) to take the drug." He added: "It's almost as if Trump is making fun of his supporters, seeing what increasingly absurd statements he can get away with." Justin Wolfers, a professor of economics and public policy at the University of Michigan, told Newsweek: "This is not a question for an economist, but rather a sixth grader. After all, the Common Core curriculum standard states that students should know how to 'find a percent of a quantity as a rate per 100 (e.g., 30 percent of a quantity means 30/100 times the quantity).'" Wolfers added: "I just checked with my sixth grader (Oliver Wolfers), and he confirmed that he has studied percentages and that the president's math does not make sense 'because then the prices would be negative.' He added, 'Is he an idiot?' before returning to watching YouTube. Oliver's father agrees with Oliver's mathematical analysis and encourages him to use more positive language when engaging with fellow kids." Pau Pujolas, a professor of economics at McMaster University, told Newsweek: "If your grocery bill is $100 and you get a 50 percent reduction in price, you pay $50. If you get a 75 percent reduction, you pay $25. If you get a 99 percent reduction, you pay $1. If you get a 100 percent reduction, you pay $0. You can't get a reduction larger than that ... so 1,200 percent doesn't make sense. "Talking about bad math: Firing Erika McEntarfer, the director of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), is way worse than a POTUS not knowing how to operate with basic percentages. Let's not miss the forest for the trees." President Donald Trump said at a Republican dinner in July: "This is something that nobody else can do. We're gonna get the drug prices down—not 30 or 40 percent, which would be great, not 50 or 60 percent. No, we're gonna get them down 1,000 percent, 600 percent, 500 percent, 1,500 percent. Numbers that are not even thought to be achievable." The White House fact sheet said: "From this point forward, President Trump will only accept from drug manufacturers a commitment that provides American families immediate relief from vastly inflated drug prices and an end to the freeriding by European and other developed nations on American innovations." Journalist James Surowiecki wrote on X in response to Trump's comments on Sunday: "It's not just that the math here is nonsensical. It's that Trump hasn't actually cut drug prices yet at all. He's literally just sent letters to drugmakers telling them to cut prices. Does he know that and is lying? Or is he deluded? We have no idea." What Happens Next Trump and the White House have not clarified what he means when he says drug prices will come down by as much as 1,500 percent. The president's letters to pharmaceutical companies give them a 60-day window to present a viable plan to reduce U.S. drug prices.
