Ashley Graham got emotional while recounting the time she posted an unedited photo of her pregnant body to Instagram.
Nina Dobrev is opening up about the reason behind a recent hospitalization after fans expressed concerns.
BEVERLY HILLS, Calif. — Two collectors said you're the one that I want to Olivia Newton-John's iconic "Grease" leather jacket and skintight pants at an auction Saturday in Beverly Hills.Julien's Auctions says the combined ensemble, which Newton-John's character Sandy wears in the closing number of the 1978 film, fetched $405,700 total. The leather jacket sold for $243,200 and the pants, which Newton-John famously had to be sewn into, went for $162,500.Other "Grease" memorabilia included a Pink Ladies jacket that went for $50,000 and a poster signed by Newton-John, John Travolta, director Randal Kleiser and producer and songwriter John Farrar, which sold for $64,000.The proceeds from the jacket and pants, as well as a portion of the other items sold, will go the Olivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness & Research Centre in Australia.The Associated Press
Apple has released a new set of more than 350 new emojis for its iPhone keyboard, including gender-neutral characters, mixed-race couples, people with disabilities and a period "blood drop" that campaigners have heralded as a "breakthrough in the fight against period stigma". Girl’s rights charity Plan International launched a campaign in 2017 to create a new period emoji in order to "make it easier for girls and women to talk about their period with friends, family and colleagues". More than 54,000 people cast their vote on the design to be submitted to the Unicode Consortium, which maintains and regulates the library of emojis. The original winning design of "period pants" was initially rejected, but the runner-up blood drop design – made in collaboration with the NHS – was proposed and accepted as an alternative. “We are thrilled to see the arrival of this long-awaited blood drop emoji, which signals a real breakthrough in the fight against period stigma,” said Rose Caldwell, Plan International UK’s chief executive. “Girls, women and other menstruators told us this emoji would help them talk more freely about their periods, which is why we campaigned so hard to make it a reality.” Along with the blood-drop icon, the new emojis feature characters with disabilities as part of Apple's push to make the library more inclusive “But this is only one part of the solution. We know that girls around the world are being held back because of their periods, whether that’s the one in five girls here in the UK who are bullied and teased, girls in Zimbabwe who have dropped out of school because the recent cyclone destroyed their period-friendly toilets, or those living in refugee camps in Bangladesh who can’t access period products since fleeing their homes. “Period poverty will not stop until we fix the toxic trio of affordability of products, lack of education and period shame. We hope this emoji helps to keep the conversation going.” The new period emoji arrives on iPhone with a slew of new icons submitted by Apple after the company said last year that it wanted to improve representation within its library. After consulting with charities on various issues, the new update includes allowing users to choose the gender and ethnicity of each person in the "holding hands" icon. There is also a gender-neutral option on each character emoji along with the original male and female. Insight | How are new emoji introduced? The largest addition, however, comes in the addition of characters with disabilities. The icons include hearing aids, prosthetic limbs, guide dogs and wheelchairs. On submitting its proposal to the Unicode Consortium last year, Apple said: "Currently, emoji provide a wide range of options, but may not represent the experiences of those with disabilities. "Diversifying the options available helps fill a significant gap and provides a more inclusive experience for all." The new emojis are part of Apple’s 13.2 update for iOS,which also includes its "deep fusion" camera mode, which uses artificial intelligence to improve photographs, and support for its newly announced AirPods Pro earphones.
During an epic "Airpool" Karaoke with James Corden, Kanye West almost slipped up while talking about his marriage to Kim Kardashian.
“Reunions never looked this hairy,” the actor wrote beneath a photo of her with Jason Momoa and Kit Harington.
Kelly Ripa took to Instagram to promote her husband, Mark Consuelos', show, 'Riverdale,' with a racy 'nude' photo of the herself lying in bed with him.
The 38-year-old royal has spoken about balancing life as a new mum with the pressures of being in the public eye in a new TV interview.
The 50-year-old star, best known for starring as Rachel in ‘Friends’, joined Instagram on Tuesday this week..
Ashley Graham says she's trying to embrace her "new body" while showing off her growing baby bump on Instagram.
NEW YORK — Eating red meat is linked to cancer and heart disease, but are the risks big enough to give up burgers and steak?A team of international researchers says probably not, contradicting established advice. In a series of papers published Monday, the researchers say the increased risks are small and uncertain and that cutting back likely wouldn't be worth it for people who enjoy meat.Their conclusions were swiftly attacked by a group of prominent U.S. scientists who took the unusual step of trying to stop publication until their criticisms were addressed.The new work does not say red meat and processed meats like hot dogs and bacon are healthy or that people should eat more of them. The reviews of past studies generally support the ties to cancer, heart disease and other bad health outcomes. But the authors say the evidence is weak, and that there's not much certainty meat is really the culprit, since other diet and lifestyle factors could be at play.Most people who understand the magnitude of the risks would say "Thanks very much, but I'm going to keep eating my meat," said co-author Dr. Gordon Guyatt of McMaster University in Canada.It's the latest example of how divisive nutrition research has become, with its uncertainties leaving the door open for conflicting advice. Critics say findings often aren't backed by strong evidence. Defenders counter that nutrition studies can rarely be conclusive because of the difficulty of measuring the effects of any single food, but that methods have improved."What we need to do is look at the weight of evidence — that's what courts of law use," said Dr. Walter Willett, a professor of nutrition at Harvard University who was among those calling for the papers' publication to be postponed.Willett, who has led studies tying meat to bad health outcomes, also said the reviews do not consider the particularly pronounced benefits of switching from red meat to vegetarian options.The journal, Annals of Internal Medicine, defended the work and said the request to have it pulled before publication is not how scientific discourse is supposed to happen. Guyatt called the attempt to halt publication "silly."In the papers, the authors sought to gauge the potential impact of eating less meat, noting the average of two to four servings a week eaten in North America and Western Europe. They said the evidence for cutting back wasn't compelling. For example, they found that cutting three servings of red meat a week would result in seven fewer cancer deaths per 1,000 people.Based on the analyses, a panel of the international researchers said people do not have to cut back for health reasons. But they note their own advice is weak and that they didn't take into account other factors, such as animal welfare and the toll meat production has on the environment.There was dissent even among the authors; three of the 14 panelist said they support reducing red and processed meats. A co-author of one review is also among those who called for a publication delay.Those who pushed to postpone publication also questioned why certain studies were included or excluded in the reviews. Harvard's Dr. Frank Hu also noted that about a third of American adults eat at least one serving of red meat a day. He said the benefits of cutting back would be larger for those who eat such high amounts.Still, other researchers not involved in the reviews have criticized nutrition science for producing weak and conflicting findings. Dr. John Ioannidis, a professor of medicine at Stanford University, said such advice can distract from clearer, more effective messages, such as limiting how much we eat.As for his own diet, Guyatt said he no longer thinks red or processed meats have significant health risks. But he said he still avoids them out of habit, and for animal welfare and environmental reasons.___The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.Candice Choi, The Associated Press