Taking paracetamol while pregnant is safe and there's no evidence it raises the risk of autism, ADHD and developmental issues in children, say experts behind a major new review.

Pregnant women "should feel reassured" by the findings, they say, which contradict controversial claims from US President Donald Trump last year that paracetamol "is no good" and pregnant women should "fight like hell" not to take it.

His views were criticised at the time by medical organisations worldwide. Experts say this latest review, in a Lancet journal, is rigorous and should end the debate over its safety.

But US health officials maintain that "many experts" have expressed concern over its use during pregnancy.

The US President shocked many doctors worldwide when he and his administration claimed paracetamol or a branded version called Tylenol - which is seen as the go-to painkiller for pregnant women - could be linked to autism in children, if taken during pregnancy.

Those claims led to confusion among women and concern among health experts, and prompted this new research.

Published in The Lancet Obstetrics, Gynaecology & Women's Health, it looked at 43 of the most robust studies into paracetamol use during pregnancy, involving hundreds of thousands of women, particularly those comparing pregnancies where the mother had taken the drug to pregnancies where she hadn't.

The researchers say using these high-quality studies of siblings means they can dismiss other factors such as different genes and family environments, which makes their review "gold-standard".

The research also looked at studies with a low risk of bias and those that followed children for more than five years to check for any link.

"When we did this analysis, we found no links, there was no association, there's no evidence that paracetamol increases the risk of autism," lead study author and consultant obstetrician Professor Asma Khalil, told the BBC.

"The message is clear – paracetamol remains a safe option during pregnancy when taken as guided," she added.

This reinforces guidance from major medical organisations in the UK, US and Europe on the safety of the common painkiller.

Any previously-reported links between the drug and an increased risk of autism are likely to be explained by other factors, rather than a direct effect of the paracetamol itself, the review says.

"This is important as paracetamol is the first-line medication we recommend for pregnant women in pain or with a fever," said Prof Khalil, professor of maternal fetal medicine at City St George's, University of London.

Health advice warns that women can run the risk of harming their baby if they don't take paracetamol to bring down a high temperature or relieve pain when pregnant. This can increase the risk of miscarriage, premature birth or developmental problems in babies.

Medical experts not involved in the research have welcomed the study's findings, saying it will help reduce worry among women.

Prof Grainne McAlonnan, from King's College London, said expectant mothers "do not need the stress of questioning whether medicine most commonly used for a headache could have far reaching effects on their child's health".

"I hope the findings of this study bring the matter to a close," she said.

Prof Ian Douglas, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said the review was "well-conducted" because it excluded studies of lower quality, where no account was taken of important differences between mothers who use or don't use paracetamol during pregnancy, such as underlying illnesses.

According to Prof Jan Haavik, molecular neuroscientist and clinical psychiatrist at the University of Bergen, the study provides "strong evidence" that use of paracetamol during pregnancy does not increase the risk of autism, ADHD or intellectual disability and "should effectively put this question to rest".

It is widely believed by scientists working in this field that autism is the result of a complex mix of factors, including genetic and environmental ones.

A spokesman from the US Department of Health and Human Services said "many experts" had expressed concern over the use of acetaminophen - the US name for paracetamol - during pregnancy.

For example, a review in August 2025 led by Dr Andrew Baccarelli, dean of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, found that using acetaminophen during pregnancy may increase children's autism and ADHD risk, and urged caution over "especially heavy or prolonged use".

Months earlier, Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr had pledged to find out the cause of a steep rise in reported autism cases.

In a controversial speech in the Oval Office in September, the US president said doctors would be advised not to prescribe the pain reliever to pregnant women.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) then issued a letter to clinicians urging them to be cautious about the use of acetaminophen in pregnancy, while also saying it was still the only drug approved for treating fevers during pregnancy.

On its website, the FDA says "a causal relationship" between the drug and neurological conditions "has not been established".

Health officials in the UK have stressed that paracetamol remains the safest painkiller available to pregnant women.

Justice Secretary David Lammy has intervened to block the transfer of a killer to an open prison after it emerged he had released drill music with lyrics referencing the murder, under a pseudonym.

Jake Fahri was sentenced to life in 2009 for killing 16-year-old Jimmy Mizen by throwing an oven dish at him that shattered and severed the arteries in his neck.

He was released on licence in 2023 but was later recalled after the Sun published a story that alleged Fahri was making music, including about the murder, as balaclava-clad artist TEN.

Two years on, the Parole Board has said he should now be moved to an open prison - but a Ministry of Justice spokesperson said Lammy's intervention was for "public protection".

In its decision summary, the board had said Farhi had initially disputed that the music was "about his own life" but after being recalled to prison, he accepted that he was the artist TEN.

It added that Farhi "needed to reflect" on "why he failed to be open and honest with the professionals managing his case" but this "could be achieved" in an open prison.

Lammy's reversal has been welcomed by Mizen's mother Margaret, who told the Sun she was "shocked" by the Parole Board's initial recommendation.

"I would much prefer this decision didn't have to be made because he would have turned his life around. I'm really sad that he hasn't," she said.

But the reversal shows Farhi had "not changed his attitude".

"He got into the witness box at his trial and lied through his teeth. Clearly, he hasn't changed, and I'm glad the justice secretary has seen through it."

Farhi had been given a minimum 14 year prison term - but, as with all minimum terms, that is the point at which release can be considered, usually with conditions attached about the criminal's behaviour outside prison.

Music by TEN was showcased on BBC 1Xtra. who were unaware of his real identity at the time of broadcast.

There is fresh paint in Reform HQ - and a fresh face in its line-up.

Before Thursday, the last time Robert Jenrick walked into Millbank Tower, a fabled address in Westminster where lots of political campaigns have been run, was decades ago as an eager Conservative activist.

Now, he's Reform UK's biggest prize so far - the best-known Tory to defect, and a favourite of Conservative party members.

Like or loathe Jenrick's tactics he has campaigning guile, a knack for grabbing headlines, experience of government, knowledge of Parliament and, of course, insider knowledge of what Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch and her team are up to.

So how will this big political character adapt to a new political tribe? And could his huge move be swallowed up by a big fight on the right, at a time when Reform UK are busy trying to appeal to the whole country?

From speaking to Jenrick yesterday, he is plainly deadly serious about his political future, hitching his wagon to the biggest party in the polls right now. But any defection brings with it deep questions about whether that person can be trusted.

Some Conservatives are accusing him of lying and treachery. They say he sat in meetings with colleagues in the last seven days discussing party strategy normally.

He even, one source claimed to me, told the chief whip when challenged on the morning of his defection that it was "nonsense" and that he was "gobsmacked".

Hours later, Jenrick did appear grinning alongside Reform UK leader Nigel Farage for the public handshake sealing the deal after, remember, being sacked.

Did he serially deny thinking about going to Reform in the last few months?

Yes.

Do we know now that he'd been talking to them since the autumn?

Yes to that too.

Jenrick's answer to accusations of lying, and to the evidence he misled people, is to claim he is the one now being truly honest about the state of the country and the demise of the Conservative Party. He told us that he'd only made a final decision to leave at Christmas.

Whether you have sympathy for him, think his behaviour is appalling, or something in between, there's clearly a poisonous row raging over what he did. That row does nothing for the sense of trust in politicians.

He wouldn't be drawn on whether it was one of his own team who leaked his plans to defect, but you can be sure today won't be the last word on that.

One of the reasons for Jenrick's exit from the Tories is that he wanted to strike a more strident tone than his colleagues were willing to do. Political parties traditionally stand or fall on being able to disagree privately but agree in public. Without that discipline, it's chaos.

We asked him if he now agreed with Reform's position on benefits for bigger families – his answer was that the party "needs to think it through". Not exactly the same as the script.

And what about the NHS? Jenrick wasn't ready to agree with Farage's previous comments that it could possibly move to an insurance-based model. But it highlights an area where Reform will be under pressure to take a clearer position.

Political parties aren't just about what colour your banner or tie is, but what you believe in and stand for.

Once upon at time, Jenrick was seen as a 'Cameroon', a devotee of David Cameron's Waitrose-style politics: modern, socially liberal, middle-class-friendly. It is one thing to shift right, shaped by changes in the country and his own experience at the Home Office, for which he quit government in frustration. It's another to take the leap into a party that has a whole different system of beliefs.

And politicians are by nature ambitious people. Jenrick told me he hadn't been offered a job by Farage, but it's crackers to imagine that he doesn't want a prominent position.

How will his arrival go down with Reform's small number of other big names - Richard Tice or Zia Yusuf? Ambition - for themselves and their party, and, they'd say, the country - is what gets politicians out of bed in the morning. Sharing the spotlight is not something they all exactly love.

Jenrick told me he and Farage's previous barbs against each other were just "rough and tumble".

But given their exchanges have involved trading insults including fraud, hypocrite and unserious, we'll have to see how their working relationship evolves.

Jenrick's defection raises one of the biggest questions in politics right now; whether Reform UK can, as Jenrick says he wants to, "unite the right".

It has spent months miles ahead in the polls even as the Tories have pepped up a touch in recent weeks. But as Jenrick himself used to claim, there is a risk that if voters choose Reform that will split the votes on the right, making it easier for Prime Minister Keir Starmer to win next time round.

Truly "uniting the right" would require the Tories limping off - or, what right now seems far-fetched, the opposite. Or indeed doing a deal, which both groups swear blind they wouldn't.

There's no sign Badenoch has the appetite for anything other than a fight to the death.

As Chris Mason wrote yesterday, there is a risk that recruiting Jenrick and others gives Reform the flavour of being a repository for grumpy Conservatives, not the radical insurgent force Farage would like to claim. But nothing would suit Labour more than for the two to stay locked in combat, reminding the public of years of Tory spats and showing that both Reform and the Conservatives are focused on each other, not No 10.

Jenrick has clearly thought deeply about leaving the party that gave him his career and the opportunity to wield power. Over time, you can see that he has come to believe that the problems of the country need something more radical than either of the traditional big parties are prepared to countenance.

Reform will now have his knowledge and backing to help answer that call with a credible offer to the public. The Conservatives, in his view, need more than a fresh coat of paint.

Top image credit: Getty Images

BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. Emma Barnett and John Simpson bring their pick of the most thought-provoking deep reads and analysis, every Saturday. Sign up for the newsletter here

Plaid Cymru leader Rhun ap Iorwerth says he would prefer to form a minority government than enter a coalition with another party after the Senedd election.

His comments came after an opinion poll published earlier this week suggested Plaid was on course to win the Welsh election on 7 May.

Previous polls have suggested Plaid and Reform UK are battling to come out on top - but with neither party winning enough seats to be able to pass laws and spending plans without the support of opposition politicians.

Polling expert Dr Jac Larner from Cardiff University said the latest poll could see Plaid win 45 seats, which would leave it four seats short of a majority in the new 96-seat parliament.

Recent polls have sparked ongoing speculation around how Plaid would govern if they won the election but failed to win more than half the seats.

Speaking to the Gwleidydda podcast on BBC's Radio Cymru, ap Iorwerth said it was his party's "wish" to form a minority government made up of only Plaid ministers.

He said the latest opinion poll "confirms what I've felt for a while, which is that we can - if we fight an effective election and build trust with people - lead a minority government and do that successfully".

He added that he was "determined that that minority government would make it clear from the start to whoever else is in that part of the [political] spectrum that we want to work together".

"We'll look at who we can work with, issue by issue, policy by policy, budget by budget and so on," he added.

"I think it could be the beginning of a period of mature cooperation within government."

Ap Iorwerth's interview with Gwleidydda was part of a series the podcast is doing with prominent figures from all the major parties.

Responding to ap Iorwerth's comments, Prof Richard Wyn Jones from the Wales Governance Centre at Cardiff University told the podcast: "Of course it's easier to say that when the opinion polls suggest at the moment they aren't far from a majority.

"If you've got a small minority, it much more difficult to run a government."

He also suggested the comments could be a way to "avoid questions and accusations" from the Conservatives and Reform UK that victory for Plaid Cymru at the election would still put Labour in a position of power.

What happens if there's no majority?

No party has ever won a majority in Cardiff Bay, and the upcoming changes to the voting system make it highly unlikely that will change at this election.

Labour has won the most seats at every previous Senedd contest, but without a majority it has always had to strike a deal of some kind with an opposition party.

At times that has led to formal coalitions. This is where at least one member of an opposition party joins the government's ministerial team – giving their party a voice at the cabinet table in exchange for its continued support.

Cardiff Bay has also seen agreements short of a full coalition, with the most recent example being the cooperation deal between Labour and Plaid Cymru between 2021 and 2024.

This saw the Welsh Labour government commit to deliver some Plaid Cymru policies, in exchange for Plaid's support when it came to passing the government's annual budget.

If his party wins the election, Rhun ap Iorwerth is hoping he can avoid both of the above options and run a minority government, where votes are agreed on a case by case basis.

Ultimately what the next first minister decides to do will depend entirely on the makeup of the new Senedd.

After all, as former US President Lyndon B. Johnson said: the first rule of politics is to learn how to count.

Sienna Rose is having a good month.

Three of her dusky, jazz-infused soul songs are in Spotify's Viral Top 50. The most popular, a dreamy ballad called Into The Blue, has been played more than five million times.

If she continues on this trajectory, Rose could become one of the year's hottest new stars.

There's only one problem: All the signs indicate she's not real.

Streaming service Deezer, which has developed tools to tackle AI music, told the BBC that "many of her albums and songs on the platform are detected and flagged" as computer generated.

Look closer and you'll see the indications of an AI artist. Rose has no social media presence, has never played a gig, has no videos, and has released an improbable number of songs in a short space of time.

Between 28 September and 5 December, she uploaded at least 45 tracks to streaming services. Even Prince, an artist known for restless creative mania, would have struggled to match that figure.

Her Instagram account, which is currently deactivated, featured a strangely homogenous series of headshots, all showing the gauzy, unreal lighting that's characteristic of AI image generators.

Then there's the music itself. Songs like Into The Blue and Breathe Again sit neatly next to Norah Jones or Alicia Keys, full of jazzy guitar lines and buttery smooth vocals.

But many listeners have noted what they have identified as "AI artefacts".

Play Under The Rain or Breathe Again and you'll hear a telltale hiss running throughout the tracks.

That's a common trait of music generated on apps like Suno and Udio - partly because of the way they start with white noise and gradually refine it until it resembles music.

It's this quirk that enables Deezer to flag AI songs.

"When the [software] adds all the layers and the instruments, it introduces errors," explains Gabriel Meseguer-Brocal, a senior research scientist for the streaming company.

"They're not perceptual, we cannot listen to them, but they're easy to spot if you do a few mathematical operations."

The errors act like a fingerprint, Meseguer-Brocal says, with a "unique signature" that means it's possible to detect which piece of software was used to create any piece of music.

For casual listeners, there are other signs: Inconsistent drum patterns, bland lyrics, and a singer who never strays from the melody or lets rip on the final chorus.

That "generic" sound has been the biggest clue for some of Sienna Rose's listeners.

"I was like, 'I like this', but there was something that was very 'uncanny valley'," said TikTok music critic Elosi57.

"So I went to look [at her profile] and I was like, 'This is AI'."

Another user posted on X: "Started listening to Olivia Dean (fantastic). Within two days Spotify recommended Sienna Rose, who has a similar, but more generic sound. Took me a few songs to realise she's AI."

Broadcaster Gemma Cairney told BBC Radio 4: "The photographs of her do look a little bit unreal... And having listened to the music, is there just some of the soul in the soul missing?"

To be fair, many others have fallen for Rose's songs.

Among them is pop star Selena Gomez, who used the Rose track Where Your Warmth Begins as the background for an Instagram post about Sunday's Golden Globes.

The song was later removed when questions about Rose's identity spread online, but Gomez's post took interest in Rose and her identity to a new level.

And many of the listeners who'd been playing Rose's music reacted with dismay when they learned she might not exist.

"Please tell me she's real," pined one on Threads.

"I'm disappointed cuz a couple of her songs came on and the music isn't BAD," agreed another on Bluesky. "[But] somebody said once you know then it sounds soulless' and I agree."

AI music ban

Of course, it's entirely possible that everyone has got it wrong, and Sienna Rose is a real singer who shuns the limelight. Maybe she's in witness protection. Perhaps she's a real singer, stuck in a contractual dispute with her label, and releasing music under a pseudonym.

If so, I'm sorry. It must be crushing to have your music labelled as soulless "slop". But that's indicative of the problem facing the entire music industry right now.

AI software is becoming so sophisticated that clone artists are competing with genuine musicians.

In Sweden this week, a chart-topping song was banned from the charts after journalists discovered the artist behind it, Jacub, didn't exist.

There are many people - both in tech companies and the business side of the music industry - who want to see AI succeed.

The costs of launching an act like Sienna Rose are practically zero, but her music is making an estimated £2,000 in royalties per week.

Compare that to the K-Pop industry, where labels invest an average of $1m (£750,000) per member of a girl or boy group per year, and you can see the attraction.

Interestingly, several of Rose's songs are credited to New York indie record label Broke - who have a track record in turning viral artists like bbno$ and Ndotz into chart stars.

If you visit their website, Rose isn't listed as one of their signings - but British dance act Haven are.

If that name rings a bell, it's because they got into trouble late last year for creating a song using an AI clone of Jorja Smith's voice.

Their song, Run, was removed from streaming services after record industry bodies issued takedown notices, alleging the track violated copyright - but was re-recorded with human vocals, and entered the UK Top 10 two weeks ago.

The BBC has contacted Broke to ask about their relationship with Sienna Rose, but has yet to receive a reply.

The BBC has also contacted another label, Nostalgic Records, which lists Rose on its website.

Nostalgic Records' biography claims she is "London-based" and says she is "not just a performer, but a storyteller of the heart".

Deezer says 34% of the songs uploaded to its streaming service - about 50,000 per day - are AI-generated.

"Eighteen months ago, it was around 5% or 6%," says Meseguer-Brocal. "It's kind of shocking how quickly it's increasing."

Still, Deezer hasn't gone as far as online music store Bandcamp, which this week announced it was banning all AI-generated music.

In a statement, Spotify defended the presence of artists like Rose on its playlists.

"It's not always possible to draw a simple line between 'AI' and 'non-AI' music," a spokesperson said. "Spotify does not create or own any music, and does not promote or penalise tracks created using AI tools."

In the meantime, a backlash against AI music is growing.

Last year, artists including Paul McCartney, Kate Bush, Damon Albarn, the Pet Shop Boys and Annie Lennox released a "silent album" protesting against companies who train their AI models on copyrighted work without permission.

Speaking at the Ivor Novello Awards in 2024, pop star Raye told me she believed fans would always choose real music over algorithmically-generated filler.

"There's no reason to feel a threat," she said. "I don't write because I'm trying to be the best writer. I write because I'm trying to tell my story.

"I'm trying to lift off some weight I've been carrying or I'm trying to express myself and feel better."

At the same event, Kojey Radical said he wasn't worried about AI when he couldn't even trust his washing machine to start at the right time.

"Why is everyone trying to make me scared of the robots?" he laughed.

"I'm not scared of the robots. I will win."

It's a busy day at Woodlands Checkpoint, Singapore's main land crossing on the border with Malaysia, and thousands of cars are slowly trundling past the watchful eyes of customs officer Belinda Liaw and her team.

Suddenly Liaw steps forward, signalling at a white Toyota van to stop. Her team swarms the vehicle immediately, their blue-gloved fists knocking all over the chassis to check for false compartments. Others question the driver, rifle through his belongings and scour his mobile phone.

They are searching for vapes - which the Singapore government has spent months waging war against.

Vapes or e-cigarettes have been banned in the city-state since 2018. But in recent years drug-laced vapes, known by their street name K-pods, have become popular on the black market - unnerving a country known for its zero tolerance of drugs.

Authorities have launched a harsh crackdown, putting in place tough punishments with more targeted laws on the way. Now, if you get caught with an e-cigarette in Singapore, you could be jailed, sent to state rehab, or even caned. A massive public health campaign has blanketed the island, warning Singaporeans of the dangers of vaping.

It comes as many countries consider tighter regulation. A World Health Organization (WHO) bulletin has called Singapore's campaign a "turning point" that will "influence the next decade of global tobacco and drug policy".

Could others follow suit?

"Okay, you can go."

Back at Woodlands Checkpoint, Liaw and her team of customs officers wave off the driver they were searching - he was clean.

Most vapes come to Singapore from Malaysia. Liaw told the BBC they once found vaping supplies stacked inside air-conditioning equipment and cartons of light switches. Another time, they searched a bread van and discovered thousands of vapes nestled within trays of buns.

In recent months smugglers have changed tactics by bringing in smaller batches squirrelled away in various parts of the vehicle - hence the thorough knocking.

Elsewhere at the checkpoint, the BBC saw officers screening lorries with large X-ray machines before climbing inside to inspect cargo, slashing through plastic wrapping with pen-knives and peering inside pallets with torchlights.

"The [smugglers'] methods are evolving, so we're evolving too… we have to work harder to detect more cases and stop all these vapes from coming in," explained Liaw.

Singapore first banned vapes in 2018 as a precaution while it weighed up the evidence on its effects on health, stating it would be "irresponsible to make a hasty decision".

But an underground market for e-cigarettes continued to thrive online. Singaporean vapers have told the BBC that even after 2018 they could easily purchase vape supplies via forums and chat apps.

Then, in recent years, a new product emerged on the black market – K-pods. These are vapes laced with etomidate, a type of anaesthetic which has the same mind-numbing effect as ketamine, hence the nickname.

Soon, videos of young people passing out in public or acting erratically on public transport – all after puffing on K-pods - went viral. Last July, a random test of 100 seized vapes found about one third contained etomidate.

The news shocked Singapore. Many asked how this was possible in a country that prides itself for keeping out most drugs through severe punishments, even for marijuana use, and a mandatory death penalty for traffickers.

Authorities quickly swung into action. Prime Minister Lawrence Wong declared that vaping was now a drug issue and his government would crack down not only on K-pods but all vapes.

"The vapes themselves are just delivery devices. The real danger is what's inside," warned Mr Wong last August. "Right now, it's etomidate. In future, it could be something worse, stronger, far more dangerous drugs."

In September the government rolled out new penalties for vapers including state-mandated rehabilitation and fines of up to 10,000 Singapore dollars (£5,765; $7,780).

The punishments are more severe for sellers, particularly those caught with drug-laced vapes. They could be jailed for up to 20 years and receive up to 15 strokes of the cane - a painful punishment where convicts are flogged on their buttocks.

Foreigners face the same punishments and can also be deported.

Strict rules have been introduced in schools where students caught with vapes could face suspensions, expulsion, and also caning.

More penalties are expected in the next few months, as the government comes up with legislation targeting etomidate and other drugs that could be found in vapes.

"Vape bins" have been placed across the island for users to dispose their devices without penalty. Authorities have also been conducting roving patrols and bag checks at bus and metro stations to catch those reluctant to voluntarily give up their vapes.

A hotline has been set up for the public to report anyone suspected of vaping – more than 2,600 reports were lodged in the first nine weeks.

For the last few months, it has been hard to escape a massive anti-vaping public health campaign.

Local media outlets have run countless stories on the dangers of vaping, while adverts have been plastered everywhere on the island and on social media. Many of them reference popular movies and TV shows in an effort to reach out to youths.

One advert has the tagline "Final Destination - ICU". Another, called "Danger Things", depicts vaping as something out of a zombie movie and references the Netflix hit Stranger Things.

Yet another advert references the TV show Breaking Bad - about a chemistry teacher turned druglord - with the tagline "Breaking Dad".

These adverts highlight real-life case studies such as a father whose teen daughter died from a fall while intoxicated from using K-pods, and a vaper who needed his lungs "washed" four times.

Singaporean authorities, who arrested nearly 2,000 people for vaping offences between September and November, say their clampdown has yielded results. They point to a declining percentage of drug-laced vapes which now make up less than a tenth of seized e-cigarettes, according to police figures.

Not many in Singapore appear to publicly oppose this crackdown – the majority of Singaporeans have long supported the government's tough drug policies. But online and in private, there are some who complain that the new restrictions go too far.

One vaper, who asked to be identified with the pseudonym Michael, said it "wasn't right" that the government was "strong-arming" him into giving up vaping.

"Cigarettes are known to be bad for you, right? Yet they're legal. Vaping is a big question. So do you want something that you know is going to harm you, or will you take a chance?"

"That's a personal choice, I think, and to just blanket-ban [vapes], I think it's sloppy, it's lazy… let the people choose for themselves," said Michael, who says he uses regular vapes.

Another vaper, who wanted to be known by the pseudonym Toby, said he could understand the need for a harsh crackdown, particularly to protect teens from gaining access to drugs via vapes. "It's not the most popular move, but it certainly is the most efficient… it's cutting the head off a snake," he admitted.

But he pointed out that before the crackdown, most e-cigarette users in Singapore were, like him, using regular vapes and not K-pods.

He felt the ban was not fair because "one bad apple spoils the whole batch. I feel that for a lot of the adults who don't take drugs, they have to suffer [this ban]… and they would have to go back to smoking," said Toby, who plans to switch back to smoking cigarettes.

Other Singaporeans have also questioned if the proliferation of drug-laced vapes was in part caused by the government's 2018 ban.

An editorial in independent magazine Jom pointed out that the ban created "incentives for black marketers to create the most high-value, addictive products".

This, in turn, led to the rising popularity of K-pods and the need for a harsher crackdown, which the Jom editorial deemed "the Great Panic of 2025".

In response, a Singapore health ministry spokesperson told the BBC that the government banned vaping before it becomes as "entrenched" as cigarette smoking, to "pre-emptively stop new harmful and addictive products from entering the market and prevent a new set of associated health issues".

"The fact that a black market can sell illicit substances to a small minority cannot possibly be the justification to make abuse of the substance a legitimate mainstream habit."

The dean of the Saw Swee Hock School Of Public Health at the National University of Singapore, Teo Yik Ying, has argued that Singapore did the right thing as "an outright ban has contained the problem".

"In contrast, countries that legalised vapes saw demand explode and youth uptake surge while illicit actors thrive anyway. In other words, regulation in lieu of a ban does not prevent illicit trade – it amplifies it by creating a vast consumer base to serve," he wrote in a commentary published last year.

Singapore's stance stands in contrast to some countries, like the UK, which see vaping as a less dangerous alternative to cigarettes and thus useful for helping people quit smoking.

The National Health Service (NHS) notes that while vaping is "not completely harmless" and that non-smokers and youths should not take it up, it is "less harmful than smoking".

The NHS also states that vaping is "one of the most effective tools" for smoking cessation.

Peter Hajek, a clinical psychologist and director of the health and lifestyle research unit at the Queen Mary University of London, argues that banning vaping is "detrimental to public health".

"It stops smokers who find giving up nicotine difficult from using a method that would help them avoid smoking related cancers, heart disease and lung disease; and it protects the cigarette trade from its much less risky competitor," said Prof Hajek, who has received research funding from manufacturers of stop-smoking medications but has no links with any tobacco or e-cigarettes manufacturers.

Banning all vapes because some e-cigarettes could contain drugs was akin to "banning suitcases because some people can carry drugs in them," said Prof Hajek. "Just ban drug vapes."

But there is also growing concern about the health implications of e-cigarette use, as the number of vapers worldwide swells to an estimated 100 million.

In the UK, a rise of vaping among students has led schools to ask the government for help in tackling what has been described as a "public health emergency".

Research in recent years indicates that vaping could potentially harm users' health by impairing blood vessels and causing lung injuries.

The WHO's current advice states that vaping has "not been proven effective" at the population level in helping smokers quit cigarettes.

Both the WHO and US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) insist that e-cigarettes are not completely safe and more research needs to be done on vaping's long-term effects on health.

Singapore's government has made up its mind.

It argues that vape pods could contain much higher doses of nicotine than cigarettes, making vaping "more addictive" and thus tougher to quit.

Singapore also argues that vapes are not safe because they contain "cancer-causing" chemicals, toxins and heavy metals. Some organisations like Cancer Research UK point out that the levels of these chemicals are low and that "there is no good evidence that vaping causes cancer".

While the level of its crackdown is rarely seen elsewhere, Singapore is far from the only country that has restricted vaping. At least 46 countries now ban the sale of vapes, while another 82 have some form of regulation.

The UK's Tobacco and Vapes Bill, which would ban the sale of vapes to under-18s and restrict vape advertising, is making its way through parliament. Australia has made e-cigarettes available only through doctors' prescriptions to quit smoking, while Belgium has banned disposable vapes with plans for further restrictions. Malaysia is targeting to ban all vapes this year.

Much of these efforts are aimed at limiting vape access for youths, a key target market for e-cigarette companies. The WHO estimates there are at least 15 million children – aged 13 to 15 years old – who use e-cigarettes, and that children are nine times more likely than adults to vape.

"If we're not careful, we're going to get a [vaping] epidemic that starts with the younger generations that would just get worse over time," said Yvette van der Eijk, who researches tobacco policies with the National University of Singapore.

She pointed out that cigarette smoking was "an example of how things can turn out if you don't nip these kind of issues in the bud", and warned the world was at risk of "repeating history" if it does not curb vaping soon. A ban like Singapore's, she said, was "more prudent".

But few places in the world are like Singapore, whose tiny size and powerful government have enabled it to effectively enforce a strict ban.

There is also the question of how long any country, let alone Singapore, could sustain a prolonged and exacting war against vapes.

In recent months following the crackdown, vapers in Singapore say it is still possible to get their supplies.

And when it gets too difficult, they can simply cross the border into Indonesian and Malaysian towns, which have reportedly seen thriving demand for vapes from travelling Singaporeans. One Indonesian tourism official has touted the nearby island of Batam as an "alternative [place] to enjoy vapes".

Toby, the vaper who is switching to cigarettes, pointed out that Singapore's crackdown treats vaping as a vice, and "any vice is like a cockroach".

"You can try to kill it, try to enforce against it - but you can never fully get rid of it."

The first crewed Moon mission in more than 50 years could be launched by Nasa as soon as the first week of February.

The Artemis II mission, which will last about 10 days, could take its astronauts further into space than anyone has been before.

It aims to set the stage for an eventual human landing on the lunar surface for the first time since the Apollo missions of the 1960s and 70s.

When does Artemis II launch?

Nasa's planned launch window opens on 6 February and runs into the spring. The US space agency wants the rocket to blast off before the end of April.

A date will not be set until final checks on its Space Launch System (SLS) rocket, the Orion capsule - which carries the crew - and ground systems are completed.

The mission will be launched from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

Who are the Artemis II crew and what will they be doing?

Artemis II's crew of four includes Nasa's commander Reid Wiseman, pilot Victor Glover and mission specialist Christina Koch. A second mission specialist, Jeremy Hansen of the Canadian Space Agency, will also be on board.

The mission involves the first crewed flight of SLS and Orion.

Once they are safely in orbit, the astronauts will test how the Orion spacecraft handles. This will involve manually flying the capsule in Earth orbit to practise steering and lining up the spacecraft for future Moon landings.

They will then head out to a point thousands of kilometres beyond the Moon to check Orion's life‑support, propulsion, power and navigation systems.

The crew will also act as medical test subjects, sending back data and imagery from deep space.

They will work in a small cabin in weightlessness. Radiation levels will be higher than on the International Space Station, which is in low‑Earth orbit, but still safe.

On return to Earth, the astronauts will experience a bumpy return through the atmosphere and a splashdown off the west coast of the US, in the Pacific.

Will Artemis II land on the Moon?

No. This mission is to lay the ground for a lunar landing by astronauts in the Artemis III mission.

Nasa says the launch of Artemis III will take place "no earlier than" 2027. However, experts believe 2028 is the earliest possible date.

The final choice of a spacecraft to take the crew down to the lunar surface has not yet been made. It will either be SpaceX's Starship lander or a craft designed by Jeff Bezos's Blue Origin.

New spacesuits made by US company Axiom are also not ready.

When Artemis III finally flies, the astronauts will be heading to the Moon's south pole.

After this, the aim is to have a sustained human presence on the Moon.

Artemis IV and V will begin building Gateway, a small space station circling the Moon. After that, there will be more Moon landings, extra sections added to Gateway, and new robotic rovers on the surface. More countries will be involved in keeping people living and working on and around the Moon for longer periods.

When was the last Moon mission?

The last crewed Moon mission was Apollo 17, which landed in December 1972 and returned to Earth later that month.

In all, 24 astronauts have travelled to the Moon and 12 of them have walked on its surface, all during the Apollo programme.

America first went in the 1960s, primarily to beat the Soviet Union to assert its geopolitical and technological dominance. Once that goal was achieved, political enthusiasm and public interest ebbed, as did the money for future Moonshots.

Artemis grew out of a desire to return humans to the Moon, this time for a longer-term presence built around new technology and commercial partnerships.

Do other countries plan to send astronauts to the Moon?

Several other countries have ambitions to put people on the Moon in the 2030s.​

European astronauts are set to join later Artemis missions and Japan has also secured seats.

China is building its own craft, targeting a first landing near the Moon's south pole by 2030.

Russia continues to talk about flying cosmonauts to the surface and building a small base sometime between about 2030 and 2035. Sanctions, funding pressures and technical setbacks mean its timetable is highly optimistic.

India has also expressed ambitions to one day see its own astronauts walking on the Moon.

Following the success of Chandrayaan 3's landing near the lunar south pole, India's space agency set out a goal of sending astronauts to the Moon by about 2040. This would be part of a push to move its human spaceflight programme beyond low Earth orbit.

Additional reporting by Kevin Church.

The Trump administration has named US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and former UK prime minister Sir Tony Blair as two of the founding members of its "Board of Peace" for Gaza.

Trump's Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and the president's son-in-law Jared Kushner will also sit on the "founding executive board", the White House said in a statement on Friday.

Trump will act as chairman of the board, which forms part of his 20-point plan to end the war between Israel and Hamas.

It is expected to temporarily oversee the running of Gaza and manage its reconstruction.

Also on the founding executive board are Marc Rowan, the head of a private equity firm, World Bank chief Ajay Banga and a US national security adviser, Robert Gabriel.

Each member would have a portfolio "critical to Gaza's stabilisation and long-term success", the White House statement said.

Trump had said on Thursday that the board had been formed, calling it the "Greatest and Most Prestigious Board ever assembled at any time, any place".

Further members of the board would be named in the coming weeks, the White House said.

Sir Tony was UK prime minister from 1997 to 2007 and took the UK into the Iraq War in 2003. After leaving office, he served as Middle East envoy for the Quartet of international powers (the US, EU, Russia and the UN).

It comes after the announcement of a separate 15-member Palestinian technocratic committee, the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), charged with managing the day-to-day governance of post-war Gaza.

Ali Shaath, a former deputy minister in the Palestinian Authority (PA) which governs parts of the occupied West Bank not under Israeli control, will head that new committee.

The statement also said that Nickolay Mladenov, a Bulgarian politician and former UN Middle East envoy, would be the board's representative on the ground in Gaza working with the NCAG.

Trump's plan says an International Stabilisation Force (ISF) will also be deployed to Gaza to train and support vetted Palestinian police forces and the White House statement said that US Major General Jasper Jeffers would head this force to "establish security, preserve peace, and establish a durable terror-free environment".

The White House said that a separate "Gaza executive board" was being formed that would help support governance and includes some of the same names as the founding executive board as well as further appointees.

The US peace plan came into force in October and has since entered its second phase, but there remains a lack of clarity about the future of Gaza and the 2.1 million Palestinians who live there.

Under phase one, Hamas and Israel agreed a ceasefire in October, as well as a hostage-prisoner exchange, a partial Israeli withdrawal, and an aid surge.

Earlier this week Witkoff said phase two would see the reconstruction and full demilitarisation of Gaza, including the disarmament of Hamas and other Palestinian groups.

"The US expects Hamas to comply fully with its obligations," he warned, noting these include the return of the body of the last dead Israeli hostage. "Failure to do so will bring serious consequences."

However the ceasefire is fragile, with both sides accusing each other of repeated violations.

Almost 450 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli strikes since it came into force, according to Gaza's Hamas-run health ministry, while the Israeli military says three of its soldiers have been killed in attacks by Palestinian groups during the same period.

And humanitarian conditions in the territory remain dire, according to the UN, which has stressed the need for the unrestricted flow of critical supplies.

The White House has released the names of the members who will form the Trump administration's new "Board of Peace" for Gaza.

With the US president as chair, the board will oversee the work of a committee of Palestinian technocrats tasked with the temporary governance of Gaza - and its reconstruction.

Each member of the "Board of Peace" is expected to be in charge of a portfolio that will be "critical to Gaza's stabilisation", the White House added. But it is not yet clear who will be responsible for which priorities.

So who is on the board?

Sir Tony Blair

Former UK Prime Minister Sir Tony Blair had long been talked about as a potential member of Trump's "Board of Peace, with the US president confirming back in September that he had expressed an interest in joining the body.

The former Labour Party leader was the UK prime minister from 1997 to 2007 and took the country into the Iraq War in 2003, a decision which means some may view his presence on the board as controversial.

After leaving office, he served as Middle East envoy for the Quartet of international powers - the United Nations, European Union, US and Russia - from 2007 to 2015.

Sir Tony is the only founding member of the executive board who is not a US citizen.

Sir Tony previously described Trump's plans for Gaza as the "best chance of ending two years of war, misery and suffering".

Marco Rubio

As US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio is central to the Trump administration's approach to foreign policy.

Before Trump's return to office, Rubio had spoken out against a ceasefire in Gaza, saying that he wanted Israel "to destroy every element of Hamas they can get their hands on".

But he has since praised the first phase of the Israel-Hamas ceasefire deal signed in October as the "best" and "only" plan.

Also in October, Rubio criticised a move by the Israeli parliament towards annexation of the occupied West Bank.

Steve Witkoff

US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff, a real estate magnate and golf partner to Trump, will also be on the board.

Earlier this month, Witkoff announced the start of phase two of Trump's plan to end the war in Gaza, adding that it would see the reconstruction and full demilitarisation of Gaza - including the disarmament of Hamas.

He added that he expects Hamas to "comply fully with its obligations" under the deal, or face "serious consequences".

Witkoff has been a central figure in US-led efforts to negotiate a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine, including holding a five-hour meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow in December.

Jared Kushner

Jared Kushner, the US president's son-in-law, has also played a key role in the Trump administration's foreign policy negotiations.

Alongside Witkoff, Kushner has often worked as a US mediator for the Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Gaza wars.

In November, he met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss key sticking points in the peace deal.

At a talk at Harvard University in 2024, Kushner said "Gaza's waterfront property could be very valuable... if people would focus on building up livelihoods."

Marc Rowan

Billionaire Marc Rowan is the CEO of Apollo Global Management, a large private equity firm headquartered in New York.

Rowan was seen as a contender to become US treasury secretary for Trump's second term.

Ajay Banga

Ajay Banga, president of the World Bank, has advised a number of senior US politicians, including President Barack Obama, during his lengthy career.

Born in India in 1959, Banga became a US citizen in 2007, and later served as the CEO of Mastercard for more than a decade.

Former US President Joe Biden nominated him to lead the World Bank in 2023.

Robert Gabriel

Robert Gabriel, a US national security adviser, will be the final member of the "founding executive board".

Gabriel has worked with Trump since his 2016 presidential campaign, shortly after which, according to PBS, he became a special assistant to Stephen Miller, another of Trump's key current advisers.

Nickolay Mladenov

The White House statement also said that Nickolay Mladenov, a Bulgarian politician and former UN Middle East envoy, would be the board's representative on the ground in Gaza.

He will oversee a separate 15-member Palestinian technocratic committee, the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), charged with managing the day-to-day governance of post-war Gaza.

The NCAG will be led by Ali Shaath, a former deputy minister in the Palestinian Authority (PA) which governs parts of the occupied West Bank not under Israeli control, will head that new committee.

The US justice department is investigating two prominent Minnesota officials over alleged attempts to impede federal immigration agents, in an escalation of the Trump's administration's clash with Democrats.

Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey are facing an inquiry over statements they have made about Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), reports the BBC's US partner CBS.

It comes as fresh details emerged in the death of a Minneapolis woman shot last week by an ICE agent in the city, sparking nationwide protests.

Renee Good, 37, was found with at least three gunshot wounds and possibly a fourth to the head, according to official reports viewed by CBS.

Governor Walz responded on Friday to news of the inquiry against him by posting on X: "Weaponizing the justice system against your opponents is an authoritarian tactic.

"The only person not being investigated for the shooting of Renee Good is the federal agent who shot her."

The governor has urged Minnesotans to protest peacefully, although he has previously been accused by the Trump administration of inflammatory rhetoric for describing ICE as a "modern-day Gestapo". Frey has demanded that immigration agents get out of Minneapolis.

The Washington Post reports that the justice department has issued subpoenas to Walz and Frey.

The inquiry is focused on a federal statute, 18 U.S.C. § 372, which makes it a crime for two or more people to conspire to prevent federal officers from carrying out their official duties through "force, intimidation or threats", a US official told CBS.

Protests continued in Minneapolis on Friday after new details emerged about the death of Good, and local officials appealed for calm on the streets over this public holiday weekend.

An incident report from the Minneapolis Fire Department said when they responded to the shooting scene last week, it appeared Good had been shot twice in the chest, once in her left forearm and a fourth wound, possibly from a gunshot, was seen "on the left side of the patient's head".

Paramedics found Good unresponsive with an irregular pulse, and she was pronounced dead in the ambulance on the way to hospital, according to the report seen by CBS.

The Trump administration has said that Good was impeding federal law enforcement and tried to run the agent over. Local officials say Good was a legal observer who posed no danger.

Video of the incident show ICE agents approaching a car, which is blocking traffic and parked in the middle of the street. An officer instructs her to get out of the car.

As Good turns her wheel apparently trying to drive away, her Honda Pilot SUV pulls forward with one of the agents standing near the front of the vehicle. He pulls his gun and fires.

Footage from the scene shows the agent walking off afterwards.

But Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials have told CBS the officer suffered internal bleeding to the torso following the incident. No further details have been disclosed.

The FBI is investigating the incident, although there is no federal civil rights inquiry into the agent who opened fire.

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump blasted demonstrators and local leaders on Friday.

On Truth Social, he accused protesters of being "highly paid professionals", adding that Walz and Frey had "totally lost control".

Later, the Republican president told reporters at the White House that he did not plan to invoke the Insurrection Act and send in troops to quell unrest in Minnesota, after earlier this week suggesting he might do so.

"If I needed it, I'd use it. I don't think there's any reason right now to use it," he said. "It's very powerful," he added.

Thousands of ICE officers remain deployed in the state.

Democratic lawmakers travelled to the city and spent Friday condemning federal immigration operations in the state, accusing ICE of reckless and lawless actions.

Ilhan Omar, a congresswoman from Minnesota who has long feuded with Trump, claimed that ICE was trying to "provoke chaos and fear".

Adriano Espaillat, a congressman from New York, said ICE had become a "deadly weapon".

Washington congressman Pramila Jayapal said ICE agents should not be allowed to wear masks, or make arrests without warrants, and should be required to have body cameras and name tags.

The Democratic lawmakers also interviewed several residents who alleged they had been shackled and detained by ICE for hours until they could prove they were US citizens.

The BBC has contacted the DHS and ICE for comment.

DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin told CNN on Friday that if there was "reasonable suspicion" of someone who is "in the vicinity" of a person being detained by a DHS operation, they might be asked to confirm their identity.

She rejected suggestions such tactics could be discriminatory, saying "racial animus has no place in DHS".