GPs in England are being urged to "think again" if they see a sick patient three times and can't pin down a diagnosis, or find their symptoms are getting worse.

The new NHS initiative, called Jess's Rule, is named after Jessica Brady who contacted her GP on more than 20 occasions after starting to feel unwell in the summer of 2020.

She was told her symptoms were related to long Covid and that she was "too young for cancer". She died from advanced stage 4 cancer later that year, aged 27.

Health Secretary Wes Streeting said her death was "a preventable and unnecessary tragedy" and the rule would improve patient safety by helping GPs "catch potentially deadly illnesses".

'Her body was failing her'

Jessica Brady was a talented engineer at Airbus, involved in the design of satellites.

Her mum, Andrea, told Radio 4's Today programme that Jess was a very healthy young woman when the pandemic hit in 2020.

But in July of that year, she didn't feel right and contacted her GP practice repeatedly over the next five months about her symptoms.

Over time they became "increasingly debilitating", Andrea says.

"She had unintentionally lost quite a lot of weight, had night sweats, chronic fatigue, a persistent cough and very enlarged lymph nodes.

"But because of her age, it was obviously considered there wasn't anything wrong."

Jess had contact with six different doctors at her GP surgery and three face-to-face consultations with a family doctor, but no referral to a specialist was made.

"Her body was failing her," says Andrea.

"It was hard for Jess to advocate for herself. She was saying 'What's the point? Nothing will happen.'"

When the family decided to arrange a private appointment and she was referred to a specialist, it was too late.

Jess was given a terminal cancer diagnosis in November and died three weeks later - just days before Christmas 2020.

The family hopes Jess's Rule will help to increase awareness of the importance of GPs acting quickly for patients who are steadily deteriorating.

"She wanted to make a difference," Andrea says.

"Jess knew her delayed diagnosis was instrumental in the fact she had no treatment options open to her, only palliative care.

"She felt strongly she didn't want this to happen to other people."

Jess's Rule is not a law, but a strong reminder to GPs to take a "three strikes and rethink approach" after three appointments, to prevent avoidable deaths.

This could mean arranging face-to-face consultations with a patient previously only spoken to on the phone, ordering extra tests or asking for a second opinion from a colleague. GPs should also consider referring patients to a specialist.

The Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP), which was involved in drawing up the guidance, said no doctor ever wanted to miss signs of serious illness, such as cancer.

"Many conditions, including many cancers, are challenging to identify in primary care because the symptoms are often similar to other, less serious and more common conditions," said Prof Kamila Hawthorne, chair of RCGP.

"If a patient repeatedly presents with the same or similar symptoms, but the treatment plan does not seem to be making them better - or their condition is deteriorating - it is best practice to review the diagnosis and consider alternative approaches."

Research suggests younger patients and people from ethnic minority backgrounds often face delays before being diagnosed with a serious condition, because their symptoms don't appear similar to white or older patients.

RCGP has worked with Jess Brady's family to develop an educational resource for GPs on the early diagnosis of cancer in young adults.

The Department of Health said many GP practices already used the correct approach, but that Jess' s Rule would make this "standard practice across the country".

Health and Social Care Secretary Wes Streeting thanked Jess's family, saying they had campaigned tirelessly through "unimaginable grief" to ensure Jessica's legacy helps to save the lives of others.

"Patient safety must be the bedrock of the NHS, and Jess's Rule will make sure every patient receives the thorough, compassionate, and safe care that they deserve, while supporting our hard-working GPs to catch potentially deadly illnesses," he said.

Paul Callaghan, from Healthwatch England, which represents people who use health and social care services, said the rule should be implemented "quickly and consistently".

"It's also imperative that specialist teams have the resources to deal with potential increases in demand, resulting from increased referrals," he said.

Britain and France's recognition of a state of Palestine at the United Nations is a historic moment in the century-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

But it is also a diplomatic gamble illustrating how major European powers believe the conflict has reached the point where it requires them to take such an unprecedented move.

Faced with the current catastrophe in Gaza, and meting out condemnation for both Israel and Hamas, French President Emmanuel Macron said "right must prevail over might".

His move, co-ordinated with the UK and under Saudi sponsorship, is meant to keep the two-state solution on life support.

They believe this long-held international formula for peace is the only path to a fair, shared future for the two societies.

The alternative, UN Secretary General António Guterres told a UN conference in New York, was a "one-state" solution, meaning Israeli domination and the "subjugation" of Palestinians.

Nothing, he said, could justify their collective punishment, starvation or any form of ethnic cleansing.

Israel is furious and is threatening to respond.

It sees the UN conference - along with recognition of a Palestinian state by the UK, France, Canada, Australia and others - as a reward for Hamas after its attack on Israel and its hostage taking of 7 October 2023.

Some Israeli ministers want the response to be an announcement of annexation of parts of the occupied West Bank, forever ruling out a viable Palestinian state on the territory.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's governing coalition, including far-right figures whose avowed policy is to expel Palestinians and build Jewish settlements in their place, is intent on pulling the plug on a two-state solution.

President Donald Trump's administration continues to back its Israeli ally, rejecting the Europeans' move, punishing Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas.

It barred him from attending the conference in New York and he spoke via video link instead.

The Palestine conference and the Trump administration's reaction marks the deepest ever split between Washington and its European allies over how to solve the Middle East conflict.

But the Europeans believe they have been left with little choice given the situation on the ground.

Israel is now deploying a third army division into Gaza City, with dozens of Palestinians being killed every day; Hamas continues to hold nearly 50 hostages, many of them dead; while the West Bank is in the grip of Israeli settlement expansion and settler violence.

All this nearly two years on from the 7 October attacks, with few signs that further military pressure will force the surrender by Hamas that Israel seeks.

Macron's strategy is an attempt to show that diplomacy offers a viable alternative.

First to get a workable end to the war in Gaza, followed by a longer term solution in the form of two states - Israeli and Palestinian.

The European countries argue Israel's strategy has failed, resulting only in further civilian suffering and endangering the remaining hostages.

Crucially, the UN conference was also led by Saudi Arabia and supported by the Arab League.

The French argue this shows its form of diplomacy can exert leverage over Hamas because key Arab countries at the conference have now called on the group to disarm, hand its weapons to the PA, adding it can have no future leadership role for Palestinians.

Macron believes the process therefore creates an incentive for Israel, while it also keeps the door open to a normalisation of relations with Saudi Arabia - a long desired goal for Netanyahu and Trump.

But the decision to recognise a Palestinian state against the wishes of Washington amounts to a significant diplomatic gamble.

Watching Macron at the podium in front of the United Nations, you saw a president trying to take on a global leadership role to find a way out of the "nightmare" of Gaza, as the UN secretary general put it, and find a shared Israeli-Palestinian future.

But, speaking in terms of raw power, this was the wrong president.

Without the US leading the effort, there isn't the same kind of meaningful pressure that only Washington can bring to bear on all sides.

And the Trump administration continues to reject the Europeans' approach.

Trump travels to the UN on Tuesday where he will speak and later reportedly meet Arab leaders, entirely separately from their work with the Europeans on Monday.

This lack of co-ordination between key countries adds to the sense of dysfunction, while Qatar as the previous mediator between Israel and Hamas still refuses to become involved again after Israel attacked Hamas leaders on its soil earlier this month.

Both Macron and Starmer brought up their countries' colonial legacies in the Middle East.

They recalled how, after Britain pulled out of historical Palestine in 1948, the international community recognised the state of Israel.

Now, they said, they were recognising the equal right of Palestinians to their own state.

Palestinians welcome their recognition from the Europeans nations, but they also know these are the superpowers of the past.

Their decisions don't count like they once did.

Palestinian statehood only becomes feasible if it's backed by the superpower of today, the United States.

And President Trump so far has other ideas.

Growth in the global economy is expected to be stronger this year than previously thought, an influential global policy group has said.

The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) raised its global forecast to 3.2% from the 2.9% it had predicted in June after growth was more resilient than expected in the first half of the year.

This was partly due to "front loading" of activity as firms sought to complete deals before new US tariffs kicked in. However, the OECD warned growth would "soften noticeably" in the second half of the year as the impact of higher tariffs is felt.

It also increased its UK growth forecast for this year to 1.4% from its previous estimate of 1.3%.

Responding to the OECD's forecast, Chancellor Rachel Reeves said the figures "confirm that the British economy is stronger than forecast - it has been the fastest growing of any G7 economy in the first half of the year".

The OECD still expects growth in the UK to slow to 1% next year - unchanged from its forecast in June.

It said this slowdown would be caused by a "tighter fiscal stance" - referring to either higher taxes or lower government spending - as well as increased trade costs and uncertainty.

Reeves is expected to put up taxes or cut spending at the Budget in November in order to stick to her own rules on government borrowing.

The UK inflation rate forecast for this year has been raised to 3.5% from the previous estimate of 3.1%, with the OECD noting that the UK is one of several countries seeing sharp rises in food prices.

The most recent official UK statistics indicated that food price inflation rose for the fifth month in a row in August, with beef, butter, milk and chocolate prices continuing to surge.

In the US, growth has been helped by strong investment in tech areas such as Artificial Intellgience (AI), and the OECD has increased its growth forecast for the US this year to 1.8% from 1.6%.

Globally, the US tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump this year continues to affect future prospects for growth. Tariffs are taxes on imported goods and Trump has imposed such levies on products arriving on American shores from various countries.

The OECD said US tariff rates had increased on almost all countries since May, with the overall effective rate hitting 19.5% at the end of August, the highest since 1933.

Trump has argued the import taxes will boost US manufacturing and jobs, but several economists have warned it will push up prices for US consumers.

The scramble to complete trades before the tariffs led to surge in activity in the first few months of the year, the OECD said, but this is now tapering off.

It added the full impact of the tariffs has yet to be seen. Some changes are being phased in over time, it said, while some companies are accepting smaller profit margins for now.

However, it said the impact was "becoming increasingly visible in spending choices, labour markets and consumer prices".

"Growth is expected to soften noticeably in the second half of this year, as front-loading activity unwinds and higher effective tariff rates on imports to the United States and China dampen investment and trade growth," it said.

In the spy romance series Tempest, Jun Ji-hyun, one of South Korea's biggest stars, plays a diplomat trying to uncover the truth behind a deadly assassination.

"Why does China prefer war? A nuclear bomb could fall near the border," her character says in one episode of the new Disney+ series.

This fictional scene led to real consequences over the weekend, with many Chinese social media users taking it to be a malicious mischaracterisation of China as belligerent. Many are now calling for brands to sever ties with the Korean actress.

The uproar has also reignited debate over an unofficial Chinese ban on South Korean entertainment, which has been in place for nearly a decade.

While China has never admitted to a ban, the abrupt dearth of K-content since 2016 is widely believed to be a protest against South Korea's decision to deploy a US anti-missile system in 2016, which China sees as a threat to its military operations in the region.

Things had appeared to be easing in recent months, with a few South Korean performers holding concerts in China. But the controversy over Tempest has triggered a fresh wave of support for the ban.

"Keep the K-drama ban to the death, thank you," reads one Weibo comment liked by 10,000 users.

While much of the anger has coalesced around Jun's line about China, social media users have also dug up other examples from the series which they view as offensive.

For example, scenes meant to portray China's Dalian city feature a bunch of dilapidated buildings, believed to be shot in Hong Kong, which some people say paints China in a bad light.

In another scene, a group of people are seated at a table set on a red carpet with yellow stars, which social media users say resembles the Chinese flag.

When Jun recited an ancient Chinese poem in another instance, viewers criticised what they viewed as her wonky accent.

All this has led to a concerted effort against Jun on Weibo, where users are pressuring brands to punish her.

According to sharp-eyed Weibo users, American skincare brand La Mer, French luxury brand Louis Vuitton and Swiss watchmaker Piaget have all scrubbed Jun from their social media accounts.

"Besides removing Jun Ji-hyun advertisements, quickly terminate her contracts globally. Otherwise we'll boycott LV forever," reads one comment on Louis Vuitton's Weibo account.

Jun's agency told local news outlet MBC on Tuesday that the actress's brand campaigns were "unrelated" to Tempest and had ended before the show's release.

Chinese consumers are known to harness their massive spending power in pressure campaigns when they perceive insults to Chinese national pride.

Brands from Swedish fashion giant H&M to Japanese clothing chain Uniqlo and most recently Swatch - for an ad featuring an allegedly racist gesture - have all found themselves the target of such boycott campaigns.

Some people have come to Jun's defence, arguing that she was not the one who wrote the controversial line.

"Jun Ji-hyun is just an actor. It is impossible for her to understand the history of a country, the emotions of the people, and the intricate relationships between countries before making a movie," one Weibo user wrote, blaming the incident on the "ignorance" of the show's crew and writers.

But such sentiments have been drowned out by heated opposition. "Even a washing machine can't whitewash something as well as you," reads a comment to the post.

"She isn't a small-time actor. She has a choice of script, she can read the script! Who can force a popular star to do this?" another wrote.

Jun swept to stardom with the 2001 rom-com My Sassy Girl, which took Asia by storm and established her as a noughties 'it girl'. Since then, she has found enduring success with her roles, from the 2013 fantasy romance series My Love from the Star, to the 2021 Netflix thriller Kingdom.

But like many other South Korean celebrities, she has been conspicuously missing from China's entertainment scene since the 2016 ban.

Optimism had surrounded a lifting of the ban earlier this year, as bilateral ties appeared to be warming.

In March, South Korea's foreign ministry said that the two countries' foreign ministers agreed to work on restoring cultural exchanges. The following month, South Korean hip-hop band Homies became the first all-Korean group to perform in mainland China in nearly a decade.

But it's hard to say how much K-pop and K-dramas will be let back into what was once its biggest market.

In May, K-pop boy band Epex was slated to perform in Fuzhou, in what would have been a landmark concert for K-pop in China. But their show was cancelled weeks before the event, with their management agency citing "local circumstances".

Last week, when asked about the postponement of another concert in Hainan province that was set to feature multiple K-pop groups, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said that China did not oppose "beneficial cultural exchanges" with South Korea.

Over the last decade, China has proven to be a pop culture juggernaut in its own right, capable of keeping its population of 1.3 billion entertained with homegrown media. And for many Chinese viewers, the ongoing controversy surrounding Tempest has given them another reason to steer away from K-content.

"It's already 2025 and you're still watching K-dramas, how tacky!" wrote a Weibo user.

Trump officials are expected to link the use of pain reliever Tylenol in pregnant women to autism, according to US media reports.

At an Oval Office event on Monday, the US president will reportedly advise pregnant women in the US to only take Tylenol, known as paracetamol elsewhere, to relieve high fevers.

At the Charlie Kirk memorial service on Sunday, Trump said he had an "amazing" announcement coming on autism, saying it was "out of control" but they might now have a reason why.

Some studies have shown a link between pregnant women taking Tylenol and autism, but these findings are inconsistent and do not prove the drug causes autism.

Tylenol is a popular brand of pain relief medication sold in the United States, Canada and some other countries. Its active ingredient is acetaminophen, which is called paracetamol outside North America.

Tylenol maker Kenvue has defended the use of the drug in pregnant women.

In a statement to the BBC, it said: "We believe independent, sound science clearly shows that taking acetaminophen does not cause autism. We strongly disagree with any suggestion otherwise and are deeply concerned with the health risk this poses for expecting mothers."

Acetaminophen is the safest pain reliever option for pregnant women, it added, and without it, women face a dangerous choice between suffering through conditions like fever or use riskier alternatives.

The BBC has contacted the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for comment.

In April, the leader of HHS, Robert F Kennedy Jr, pledged "a massive testing and research effort" to determine the cause of autism in five months.

But experts have cautioned that finding the causes of autism - a complex syndrome that has been researched for decades - would not be simple.

The widely held view of researchers is that there is no single cause of autism, which is thought to be the result of a complex mix of genetic and environmental factors.

• Tylenol-maker shares hit after report of autism link

The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology said doctors across the country have consistently identified Tylenol as one of the only safe pain relievers for pregnant women.

"[S]tudies that have been conducted in the past, show no clear evidence that proves a direct relationship between the prudent use of acetaminophen during any trimester and fetal developmental issues," the group has said.

The drug is recommended by other major medical groups as well as other governments around the world.

In August, a review of research led by the dean of Harvard University's Chan School of Public Health found that children may be more likely to develop autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders when exposed to Tylenol during pregnancy.

The researchers argued some steps should be taken to limit use of the drug, but said the pain reliever was still important for treating maternal fever and pain, which can also have negative effects for children.

But another study, published in 2024, found no relationship between exposure to Tylenol and autism.

"There is no robust evidence or convincing studies to suggest there is any causal relationship," said Monique Botha, a professor in social and developmental psychology at Durham University.

Dr Botha added that pain relief for pregnant women was "woefully lacking", with Tylenol being one of the only safe options for the population.

Autism diagnoses have increased sharply since 2000, and by 2020 the rate among 8-year-olds reached 2.77%, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Scientists attribute at least part of the rise to increased awareness of autism and an expanding definition of the disorder. Researchers have also been investigating environmental factors.

In the past, Kennedy has offered debunked theories about the rising rates of autism, blaming vaccines despite a lack of evidence.

Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger have announced they will immediately withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC), labelling it an "instrument of neo-colonialist repression".

The three military-led countries issued a joint statement, saying they would not recognise the authority of the United Nations' top court, based in The Hague.

"The ICC has proven itself incapable of handling and prosecuting proven war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes of genocide, and crimes of aggression," the three leaders said.

The court has not yet responded to the decision by the three countries, all of which with close ties to Russia whose leader Vladimir Putin has been subject to an ICC arrest warrant.

The three states said they wanted to set up "indigenous mechanisms for the consolidation of peace and justice".

They accused the ICC of targeting less privileged countries, echoing criticism from Rwanda's President Paul Kagame who has previously accused the ICC of holding an anti-African bias.

The ICC was set up in 2002 to legally pursue cases of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and aggression.

Out of 33 cases launched since its inception, all but one involved an African country.

A country's withdrawal from the ICC officially takes effect one year after the UN is notified.

Military junta forces are in control of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger, following coups in the Sahel countries between 2020 and 2023. They make up the only three members of the Confederation of Sahel States.

Their armies have faced accusations of crimes against civilians, as violence has escalated in the region against jihadist groups linked to al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.

In another coordinated move earlier this year, all three countries simulatenously withdrew from the regional bloc, the Economic Community of West African States (Ecowas).

They had rejected Ecowas' demands for them to restore democratic rule.

Russia has strengthened its ties with the three Sahel countries over recent years, which have all become increasingly isolated from the West, notably the former regional colonial power France.

In 2023, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Russia's President Vladimir Putin over alleged war crimes in Ukraine.