New Delhi, Aug 28: Myocardial infarction, commonly known as heart attacks, may also be triggered by infectious diseases, finds a study, which showed that dormant bacteria can cause the deadly condition.

The pioneering study by researchers from Finland and the UK demonstrated that the discovery challenges the conventional understanding of the pathogenesis of heart attacks and opens new avenues for treatment, diagnostics, and even vaccine development.

Professor Pekka Karhunen, from Tampere University in Finland, who led the study, notes that until now, it was assumed that events leading to coronary artery disease were only initiated by oxidised low-density lipoprotein (LDL), which the body recognises as a foreign structure.

“Bacterial involvement in coronary artery disease has long been suspected, but direct and convincing evidence has been lacking,” Karhunen added.

The study, published in the Journal of the American Heart Association, revealed that an infection may trigger myocardial infarction.

Using a range of advanced methodologies, the research found that, in coronary artery disease, atherosclerotic plaques containing cholesterol may harbour a gelatinous, asymptomatic biofilm formed by bacteria over years or even decades.

Dormant bacteria within the biofilm remain shielded from both the patient’s immune system and antibiotics because they cannot penetrate the biofilm matrix.

A viral infection or another external trigger may activate the biofilm, leading to the proliferation of bacteria and an inflammatory response.

The inflammation can cause a rupture in the fibrous cap of the plaque, resulting in thrombus formation and ultimately myocardial infarction.

“Our study demonstrated the presence of genetic material — DNA — from several oral bacteria inside atherosclerotic plaques,” the researcher said.

The findings were also validated by developing an antibody targeted at the discovered bacteria, which unexpectedly revealed biofilm structures in arterial tissue.

Bacteria released from the biofilm were observed in cases of myocardial infarction.

The body’s immune system had responded to these bacteria, triggering inflammation, which ruptured the cholesterol-laden plaque.

The observations pave the way for the development of novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for myocardial infarction. Furthermore, they advance the possibility of preventing coronary artery disease and myocardial infarction by vaccination, the team said.

New Delhi, Aug 28: The Centre on Thursday told the Supreme Court that state governments cannot invoke writ jurisdiction in moving the apex court against the actions of the President and the governor in dealing with the bills passed by assemblies for violation of fundamental rights.

A five-judge bench Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice BR Gavai was told by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, that the President would like to have an opinion of the apex court on whether states can file writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution for violation of fundamental rights.

He said the President would also like to have an opinion on the scope of Article 361 of the Constitution which says the President, or the Governor will not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office or for any act done.

Mehta told the bench also comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, PS Narasimha and AS Chandurkar that they have debated over these questions in the reference but the President is of the opinion that she would like to have the view of the court to know the exact legal position as issue may arise in the future.

He submitted that Article 32 petition on behalf of the state against the action of the governor and the President cannot be filed as it is not maintainable, no direction can be issued to them and thirdly the action of the governor and the President in dealing with the bills is not justiciable.

“Article 32 lies when there is violation of fundamental rights and state government in the constitutional scheme does not in itself have the fundamental right. It is a repository of functions which is to protect fundamental rights of its people,” Mehta said.

The solicitor general referred to the April 8 Tamil Nadu verdict in which states were given liberty to approach the apex court directly in case timeline is not adhered by the governor in clearing the bills passed by the assembly.

CJI Gavai said it will not say any words with regard to the two-judge verdict of April 8 but the Governor would not be justified in sitting over the bill for six months

Mehta submitted that one constitutional organ not discharging his duties, does not entitle the court to direct another constitutional organ.

The CJI said, “Yes. We know what your argument is? If this court does not decide the matter for 10 years, would it be justified for the President to issue an order.”

The hearing is underway.

On August 26, the top court wondered whether the court should sit powerless if a Governor delays assent to bills indefinitely and if the constitutional functionary’s independent power to withhold a bill would mean that even money bills could be blocked.

The court raised the questions after some BJP-ruled states defended the autonomy of Governors and President in assenting to bills passed by a legislature, submitting that “assent to a law cannot be given by court”. The state governments also contended that judiciary cannot be a pill for every disease.

The top court is hearing the Presidential reference on whether the court could impose timelines for governors and President to deal with bills passed by state assemblies.

In May, President Droupadi Murmu exercised powers under Article 143(1) to know from the top court whether judicial orders could impose timelines for the exercise of discretion by the president while dealing with bills passed by state assemblies.

Srinagar, Aug 28: According to the August 2025 edition of EY Economy Watch, the Indian economy is projected to grow significantly, reaching $20.7 trillion by 2030 and potentially $34.2 trillion by 2038. This optimistic outlook is driven by strong economic fundamentals, favourable demographics, and ongoing structural reforms.

India currently holds the position of the fourth-largest economy in the world by nominal GDP, with an estimated size of $4.19 trillion. With a median age of just 28.8 years, high savings and investment rates, and a declining debt-to-GDP ratio — expected to drop from 81.3% in 2024 to 75.8% by 2030 — India is well-positioned to surpass other major economies. The report suggests that India could become the second-largest economy globally within the next 13 years.

According to reports, among major economies, China is projected to reach $42.2 trillion GDP (measured at Purchasing Power Parity) by 2030 but faces challenges from an ageing population and rising debt. The US remains strong but contends with high debt exceeding 120 per cent of GDP and slower growth. Germany and Japan, though advanced, are constrained by older populations and heavy reliance on global trade.

Structural reforms—such as the implementation of the Goods and Services Tax (GST), the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), UPI-driven financial inclusion, and Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) schemes—are boosting industrial competitiveness across sectors. India is projected to overtake Germany by 2028 to become the world’s third-largest economy in terms of market exchange rates. Even potential headwinds, such as U.S. tariffs impacting 0.9% of GDP, are expected to have only a marginal effect, with robust domestic demand and diversified exports limiting the slowdown to just 0.1 percentage point.