Martha Stewart Slams “Irritating” Gwyneth Paltrow Goop Products
Lieberman/FilmMagic
Gwyneth Paltrow released a candle that smells like her vagina, and Martha Stewarthas some thoughts.
During an appearance on Watch What Happens Live, Stewart was asked by a caller to comment on Goop‘s new candle scent, “This Smells Like My Vagina” (which, somehow unsurprisingly, has already sold out). Given that Stewart basically written the book on running a successful, longterm lifestyle brand, it’s a fitting question. And to no one’s surprise, she’s not impressed by the candle.
“I’m sure it sold out,” Stewart said to Andy Cohen of the $75 product. “She does that kind of irritatingly—she’s trying to zhuzh up the public to listen to her and that’s great. Let her do her thing.”
Sure, she said live and let live in response to the interesting scent, but would she burn it in her own home? As she hilariously admitted, “I wouldn’t buy that candle.”
Chimed in Cohen, “So, to be clear, you don’t want a candle that smells like Gwyneth Paltrow’s vagina?”
“Not necessarily,” Stewart teased.
As the host continued, “What does it say about America that the candle is now sold out?”
In response, Stewart said, “I think it’s not America. I think it’s a lot of guys who are horny.”
Karlie Kloss appeared on the Bravo show alongside Stewart. And she also had a hot topic issue to address in the interview.
Unable to remain mum, Cohen asked Kloss about that viral moment on Project Runway where a contestant shaded the supermodel by saying, “Not even to dinner with the Kushners?“
As the star (who is married to Joshua Kushner, Jared Kushner‘s brother) said, “Well, listen, I was honored to be one of the first memes of the decade. Honestly, the real tragedy of this whole thing is that nobody is talking about how terrible that dress was! That’s why he went home! And no, I would not wear that dress to any dinner.”
Not even if the host had a vagina-scented candle.
Article via EOnline
Why Lean Became Rap’s Most Wanted Drug
Is Lean really worth it?
What’s Tacoma’s plan for tackling homelessness? There is none, judging from People’s Park
Within the last 6 to 7 months. I personally have seen People’s Park turn into a homeless camp. And guess what is across the street? AcHousing assistance Buliding. Tacoma Housing Athority. If THA doesn’t have the funds to help the homeless who will?
What is the plan?
When it comes to the city of Tacoma’s effort to respond to its declared homelessness crisis, I’m no longer convinced there is one.
I don’t see how anyone could be, at least after watching the events of the last week play out at People’s Park on Hilltop.
Fair or not, the park, which is currently being cleared of a large encampment months in the making, has become the epicenter of Tacoma’s homelessness crisis.
It also now serves as a clear representation of the city’s current ability to respond to chronic homelessness — which, at this juncture, seems to be limited to reactionary moves, stutter steps and sympathetic soundbites.
Put plainly, the city currently has no clear, cogent vision for what it’s trying to do or how it will actually get there.
You know what the really frustrating part is?
That wasn’t always the case.
Back in 2017, when Tacoma’s elected leaders first declared homelessness to be a crisis worthy of an emergency response, a much-touted three-phase approach was rolled out.
The first two phases have been accomplished, at least to varying degrees, because they were the (relatively) easy parts. A number of large unauthorized encampments have been mitigated, while the city’s Dome District stability site and now the new micro-shelter site on Hilltop have been created to provide a safer, healthier middle ground between living outdoors and the next step.
Both represent progress, but that next step — Phase 3 — is where the wheels fell off.
To date, appropriate housing for individuals to move into has failed to materialize, at least to any meaningful extent.
At the time, everyone knew housing would be the ultimate key to success. It’s the only thing that will allow people to actually flow through the system and not simply get warehoused and stuck in place.
Three years later, the lack of progress on this front comes at the continued detriment of anything else the city might try.
Worst of all, the goal of finding and creating appropriate housing for the chronically homeless seems like it’s been all but abandoned.
It’s hard. It takes a long time. It’s expensive, and it shouldn’t be Tacoma’s burden alone.
We’ve heard all the excuses, some of them valid.
So in the meantime?
Here we are, mired in the same pattern that led the city down this path in the first place, and no one’s coming to save us. We’ve figured out a more humane way to shuffle and displace those with the most significant barriers to housing, with better optics for a purportedly progressive council.
At the very best, we manage to scrounge up a shelter bed, but that’s about it, and we’ve spent millions of dollars to do it.
In 2017, Tacoma’s then homeless services manager Colin DeForrest described the city’s approach as “a twisted game of hide and go seek.”
So it’s fair to ask: How much has really changed?
Certainly not enough.
Aside from putting out fires and avoiding lawsuits, the city doesn’t appear to know what it’s doing.
Need further proof? Let’s visit People’s Park, one more time.
As we know, it was a highly contentious daytime ban on tents and tent-like structures in Tacoma parks that led to this week’s cacophony of press releases and temporary fences, including the lights and TV cameras stationed at the park.
You know what’s really wild?
Roughly a week before the hotly debated ban on tents finally took effect, a temporary ban on camping in public places — dating back to July 2017 — expired with little fanfare or public knowledge.
While most elements of the city’s emergency homelessness declaration were extended by the City Council in November of last year, the temporary public camping ban, which advocates said was a necessary part of the city’s response, wasn’t among them.
So one ban ends, while another begins.
What is going on here?
Does anyone know?
According to city spokesperson Megan Snow, the temporary ban was allowed to “sunset” while “staff assesses the impact and considers whether it should be re-implemented.” Tacoma police spokesperson Wendy Haddow separately confirmed this week that Tacoma’s ban on public camping was a thing of the past.
All of this came as a surprise to several current and former City Council members who spoke to The News Tribune this week, including former at-large representative Ryan Mello and current members Chris Beale and Robert Thoms.
Reached on Tuesday, Beale said he didn’t recall city staff discussing the matter with council members, while acknowledging he might have missed a memo.
For his part, Thoms — who in the past has strongly advocated for enforcement elements to be part of the city’s approach to homelessness — said he also was surprised, describing the situation as “unfortunate.“
Most council members, Thoms said, likely believed the public camping ban was being extended back in November with everything else.
That wasn’t the case, Thoms learned and verified after being contacted by The News Tribune.
“The tool should have been extended, and I can’t imagine a scenario where we address the issues in this realm without addressing public camping,” Thoms said when asked for his reaction.
Of course, you can debate the effectiveness and constitutionality of bans on public camping until you’re blue in the face. Personally, I believe they do more harm than good, and if that’s the path a city wants go down, at the very least it better have ample alternative options to provide.
There’s a large part of me that’s happy to see it go.
Still, given the confusion and apparent disconnect between council and staff, it’s practically impossible to feel confident that Tacoma is acting with purpose and direction in its response to homelessness, isn’t it?
Don’t answer that. It’s rhetorical.
Now, for the questions we do need to answer, and fast:
Do we really want to start addressing chronic homelessness in Tacoma?
Or are we satisfied with the status quo, which includes people forced to live outdoors?
The good news is, if we choose the former, we know what it will take to start making a real difference.
The answer is housing, particularly permanent supportive housing, just as it always has been.
Making progress is a matter of city priorities.
In Olympia, a city faced with many of the same homelessness-related issues, voters in 2018 authorized a permanent sales tax increase to fund housing projects and homeless services. It’s expected to generate about $2.3 million a year.
As one of its first applications, a sizable chunk of that funding will go toward the construction of 60 units of permanent supportive housing for people who are mentally ill or homeless, according to The Olympian.
It won’t solve every problem, but at least it’s a start.
Tacoma was also feeling generous in 2018.
Here, by a comfortable margin, voters also approved a sales tax increase, expected to generate some $6 million per year.
The difference?
Championed by local officials far and wide, the money is going to increase access to the arts.
Considering the current crisis, and taking nothing away from the arts, that decision alone should be enough to make us all look in the mirror and ask ourselves — and especially our city manager and elected officials — what, exactly, our priorities are?
In other words, when it comes to addressing homelessness, what is the plan?
Or is this it?
READ THE TACOMA NEWS TRUBUNE ——–> https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/matt-driscoll/article239019388.html
How Fashion adds to the World’s clothing waste problem (Marketplace) CBC News Documentry
This is a real problem that I had was a problem!
House passes sweeping Pelosi bill to lower drug prices
The House on Thursday passed a sweeping bill aimed at lowering prescription drug prices, a step toward a long-held Democratic goal that was met with sharp Republican resistance.
The bill passed on a largely party-line vote of 230-192. The measure, which would allow the government to negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs, is one of House Democrats’ top priorities and is expected to be touted by vulnerable Democrats up for reelection next year.
The party is also looking to show that it is focused on kitchen table issues like lowering drug costs even as lawmakers prepare for an impeachment vote against President Trump.ADVERTISEMENT
“What I hear most often is not impeachment, it’s not what’s on the front page of The Washington Post, it’s ‘What are you going to do about the cost of our prescription drugs?’ ” said Rep. Kim Schrier (D-Wash.), one of several freshmen facing competitive reelection races who showcased the bill on the Capitol steps Thursday. “And this bill is an answer to my constituents.”
Two Republicans voted in favor of the bill: Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.) and Jaime Herrera Beutler (Wash.), both moderates who face competitive reelection races next year. No Democrats voted against the bill.
The measure drew support from progressives following months of negotiations that cleared the way for it to pass this week. The bill is almost certain to die in the GOP-led Senate, though, given that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has called it “socialist” and vowed to block it. Republicans warn the measure would hinder the development of new treatments and impose “price controls.”
It is possible that smaller measures to lower drug prices could become law, given a bipartisan push to do something on the topic, but a path forward remains unclear amid division and multiple competing proposals.
Pelosi had tried for months to win Trump’s support for the bill, given that he broke from Republican orthodoxy and supported government negotiation on drug prices during his 2016 campaign.
After months of talks between Pelosi’s staff and the White House, though, the administration came out against the measure, leading Democrats to say Trump is breaking his promise to support negotiation for lower prices.ADVERTISEMENT
“It’s exactly what President Trump promised on the campaign trail,” said Rep. Andy Levin (D-Mich.).
The House on Thursday passed a sweeping bill aimed at lowering prescription drug prices, a step toward a long-held Democratic goal that was met with sharp Republican resistance.
The bill passed on a largely party-line vote of 230-192. The measure, which would allow the government to negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs, is one of House Democrats’ top priorities and is expected to be touted by vulnerable Democrats up for reelection next year.
The party is also looking to show that it is focused on kitchen table issues like lowering drug costs even as lawmakers prepare for an impeachment vote against President Trump.ADVERTISEMENT
“What I hear most often is not impeachment, it’s not what’s on the front page of The Washington Post, it’s ‘What are you going to do about the cost of our prescription drugs?’ ” said Rep. Kim Schrier (D-Wash.), one of several freshmen facing competitive reelection races who showcased the bill on the Capitol steps Thursday. “And this bill is an answer to my constituents.”
Two Republicans voted in favor of the bill: Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.) and Jaime Herrera Beutler (Wash.), both moderates who face competitive reelection races next year. No Democrats voted against the bill.
The measure drew support from progressives following months of negotiations that cleared the way for it to pass this week. The bill is almost certain to die in the GOP-led Senate, though, given that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has called it “socialist” and vowed to block it. Republicans warn the measure would hinder the development of new treatments and impose “price controls.”
It is possible that smaller measures to lower drug prices could become law, given a bipartisan push to do something on the topic, but a path forward remains unclear amid division and multiple competing proposals.
Pelosi had tried for months to win Trump’s support for the bill, given that he broke from Republican orthodoxy and supported government negotiation on drug prices during his 2016 campaign.
After months of talks between Pelosi’s staff and the White House, though, the administration came out against the measure, leading Democrats to say Trump is breaking his promise to support negotiation for lower prices.ADVERTISEMENT
“It’s exactly what President Trump promised on the campaign trail,” said Rep. Andy Levin (D-Mich.).
Trump is instead supporting a more modest bipartisan bill in the Senate to lower drug prices, legislation that does not include a provision to negotiate prices.
The House bill, known as the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act, is named for the late Democratic lawmaker who was a champion of lowering drug prices.
The legislation would allow the secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate lower prices for a minimum of 50 drugs per year, up to a maximum of 250 drugs. The prices for those drugs would also be capped at 120 percent of the prices in certain other wealthy countries. The government would then negotiate to bring prices down even further below that cap.
The lower prices would apply to people on private insurance in addition to those on Medicare.
If a drug company refused to negotiate, the company would be hit with a tax up to 95 percent of the revenue for the drug.
That steep penalty has led Republicans to argue the bill is not really “negotiation” as Democrats claim, but is effectively just mandating the price that drug companies must sell their products at.
The White House said the bill would impose “price controls” in its message threatening to veto the measure.
Progressive House Democrats had resisted the bill from the other direction, arguing that the measure did not go far enough. Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), along with Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas), spent months pushing Pelosi to make the bill tougher.
In recent days they threatened to try to block a vote on the bill unless changes were made, but struck a deal with Pelosi after a meeting in the Speaker’s office Tuesday, clearing the way for the bill to pass with minimal drama. One of the changes increased the minimum number of drugs to be negotiated from 35 to 50.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found the bill would lower prices by about 50 percent for drugs subject to negotiation and save $456 billion over 10 years. The bill then invests those savings in expanding Medicare benefits to include hearing, dental and vision care.
On the other hand, the CBO also found the bill would result in eight fewer drugs being developed over a decade, out of about 300 usually introduced in that time period. ADVERTISEMENT
House Republicans put forward a competing proposal that also received a vote Thursday. Their bill is much smaller in scale. Republicans touted it as leading to lower prices without imposing “price controls” or threatening the development of new drugs.
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) called the Democratic bill a move to “appease the progressive base and have a partisan bill that denies us more cures,” while calling the GOP alternative a “practical solution” that would still allow new cures to come to market.
Democrats say polling shows the public is behind their bill. The progressive group Data for Progress on Thursday released polling testing different messages about the bill and finding strong support. Opposition never rose above 40 percent even when voters were presented with only negative messages about the bill.
Pelosi said on the House floor on Thursday that she did not know why the White House stopped working with her on the drug pricing bill.
“We were working with the interests of the White House, the administration, on all of this,” she said. “I don’t where it happened, but somewhere along the way, negotiation and the rest fell by the by. And what that could be attributed to, I don’t know what.”
Article via TheHill
Head and neck injuries due to cellphone use are rising, according to study
A recent study has found an increase in cellphone injuries, including facial cuts, bruises and fractures.
The study, published Thursday, found a spike in U.S. emergency room treatment for these mostly minor injuries.
The research was led by a facial plastic surgeon whose patients include a woman who broke her nose when she dropped her phone on her face. Dr. Boris Paskhover, of Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, said his experience treating patients with cellphone injuries prompted him to look into the problem.
Paskhover and others analyzed 20 years of emergency room data and found an increase in cellphone injuries starting after 2006, around the time when the first smartphones were introduced.
Some injuries were caused by phones themselves, including people getting hit by a thrown phone. But Paskhover said many were caused by distracted use including texting while walking, tripping and landing face-down on the sidewalk.
Most patients in the study weren’t hospitalized, but the researchers said the problem should be taken seriously.
The study involved cases in a U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission database that collects emergency room visit information from about 100 hospitals. The researchers tallied 2,500 patients with cellphone-related head and neck injuries from 1998 through 2017.
The study was published in the journal JAMA Otolaryngology.
Nationwide, they estimated there were about 76,000 people injured during that time. Annual cases totaled fewer than 2,000 until 2006, but increased steeply after that. About 40% of those injured were ages 13 to 29, and many were hurt while walking, texting or driving.
Cellphone use also has been linked with repetitive strain injuries in the hands and neck, and injuries to other parts of the body caused by distracted use.
“I love my smartphone,” Paskhover said, but he added that it’s easy to get too absorbed and avoiding injury requires common sense.
“People wouldn’t walk around reading a magazine,” he said. “Be careful.”
Article via Boston25News
Fantasia Explains Why She Is Sorry For Trying To Commit Suicide In The Past
It has been nearly a decade since music star and actress Fantasia was admitted to a medical institution, where she battled for her life after trying to commit suicide and taking an enormous amount of aspirin and sleeping pills.
The singer, who gained much fame for being the winner of the third season of the reality series American Idol back in 2004, opened up and talked about the experience of her suicide attempt and what drove her to it during an episode of Behind the Music,which aired in 2010.
Back then, the diva explained she did not have any fight in her and did not care about anything.
Fantasia also confessed she wanted to be over with her life, go to sleep, and find peace.
The R&B diva admitted that she looked in the mirror before taking all of the pills from the bottle she was holding, and she was perfectly aware of what she was doing at the time.
However, life has undoubtedly improved for Fantasia, and her suicidal thoughts are a thing of the past now.
Sitting down on Good Morning America with Robin Roberts, she explained: “I think everybody feels like I tried to harm myself over a man, but you know I’ve been in a lot of bad relationships. I think that had somewhat to do with it because it was so heavy, it was brand new information, I was already going through so much. But I think it was just six years of everything, of me holding all that stuff on the inside and not letting it out…I got very, very tired. When I woke up, I figured out, ‘Oh god, this is going to be more drama.”
While appearing on The Real, the singer revealed: “When I tried to just get away from the world. Some would say, ‘commit suicide.’ I didn’t think it was me trying to kill myself. I just wanted to be away from all the noise. If I could do that over, I would.”
In the recent interview during an episode of “The Real,” the star was asked if there were something she would change if given the opportunity.
According to Fantasia, trying to end her life was the thing she would do over if it were possible.
Currently, the singer is the proud mother of two children, a teenager, and a boy, and in 2015, she married businessman Kendall Taylor.
Besides her sixth studio album, Sketchbook, hitting the stores n the upcoming weeks, Fantasia is also participating in a tour with colleagues Robin Thicke, Tank, and The Bonfyre.
Article via CelebrityInsider
Model may need 60-inch butt amputated after illegal injections
A model who cosmetically enhanced her backside to 60-inches with illegal injections has been told by doctors she may have to have it amputated.
Courtney Barnes, also known as Miss Miami, says she is desperate to get her body back and went to see surgeons on E!’s reality show “Botched.”
But the 35-year-old, from Miami, Florida, was shocked when Dr. Terry Dubrow told her that in order to fix her botched backside, it might have to be amputated.
Stunned, she responds: “Amputate the whole booty? I’m not doing that. No, I’m not doing that. I’m not amputating butts.”
Barnes first had the risky fillers injected when she was just 22 and working as a dancer in a club.
“When I was in college I got a job dancing at a club. The first night, after really not making no money on the stage, there was a dancer who walked up to me and she told me that I needed some more booty if I wanted to make some more money,” she said. “That’s when I found out about the injections that gave me my big booty problems.
“So I made the appointment and she showed up at my hotel room. She told me she worked for a cosmetic surgeon and that’s how she was able to get her hands on what she needed. I asked her why she was doing it outside of the office and that’s when she told me the procedure was illegal. It’s foolish, definitely, but all I wanted was a big booty.”
After a year and three rounds of injections, Barnes says she noticed an improvement in her appearance — but she wanted more.
It was during her fourth round that her problems started, she said.
“This time I showed up at her house to have my injections, but after leaving my injections were beginning to leak out of my butt. My butt had so many dimples so I called the lady who injected me immediately. She told me it probably could be fixed with a few more shots and that’s how round number five got started,” Barnes explained.
“That round of injections, it seemed like it only made my butt bigger. She did not fill in the holes. Then number six happened. It made it a bit worse. There was nothing I could do to fix my butt. After six rounds of butt injections, I believe I spent about seven or eight thousand dollars to get me right here, with these big booty problems.”
Barnes decided to embrace what she had done and turned to social media where she posts sexy snaps to her nearly one million Instagram followers.
She has even written an autobiography about her experiences, called “I Am Not My Body — But I Wanted a Bigger Behind,” as she warns other young girls about the dangers of getting the shots.
But despite the fame, Barnes is fed up with the size, discoloration and sag of her butt and wants the fillers removed. So she turned to the “Botched” doctors for help.
Examining her rear, Dr. Dubrow explains that he is struggling to find a separation between the lumpy masses of fillers and normal tissue.
The doctor concluded that she had granulomas — or clusters of tissue that are produced in response to infection, inflammation or a foreign substance.
“Whoa, I’ve never felt anything like this before,” he says, stunned, to the camera in the episode.
He then goes on to explain to Barnes: “Because the masses are so superficially located, you absolutely can’t remove all of them. Unless you amputate … the whole booty.”
He did have some good news, however.
“The good news is that the person didn’t seem to inject much of it into the muscle — and that’s how people die. You get into the blood vessel of the buttock muscle and it goes right into the main blood vessel that goes back to your heart and your lungs. That’s how they’re killing people, so it’s very good that you don’t have that problem.”
Dr. Dubrow goes onto explain how he saw another patient who he didn’t think he would be able to help and then an idea came to him at a later date. He said they crafted a high-risk plan and went to the operating room but it was a success.
“What I would tell you is don’t give up hope,” he added.
Speaking to the camera, Dr. Dubrow says: “Hopefully we can find a way in the future we can figure out an option that won’t be too dangerous.”
Barnes adds: “I’m hopeful that Dr. Dubrow will have a solution for me but don’t take too long because I want a regular butt like a natural booty, like a nice little booty, I want one of those.”
Article via New York Post
Fitness Guru “Get Bodied By J” Shares Butt injection Removal Photos as a warning to other women
Photos Of A Pregnant Woman With A Botched Tummy Tuck GOES VIRAL!
T.I.’s Daughter, Deyjah Harris, 18, Deletes Instagram After He Talks About Monitoring Her Hymen
Article via Hollywood Life
Following her dad T.I.’s controversial comments about being taking her to the gynecologist, Deyjah previously unfollowed her dad on the social media platform.
Deyjah Harris is done with Instagram! The 18-year-old’s page “isn’t available” as of Sunday, Nov. 17 — meaning she completely deactivated her “princess_of_da_south” account, which boasted 1.5 million followers and 104 posts. The move comes after her dad T.I., 44, made controversial comments about taking her to the gynecologist to ensure her hymen is still intact. Previously, Deyjah — who is T.I’s oldest with R&B singer Ms. Niko, 39 — unfollowed her dad on Twitter and Instagram in the days after. A social media detox might be in order after the week she’s had!
Deyjah is understandably upset with her dad after the admission he made about her sexual health on the “Life Hacks” episode of the Ladies Like Us podcast last week. “Deyjah’s 18, just graduated high school now and she’s attending her first year of college, figuring it out for herself. And yes, not only have we had the conversation, we have yearly trips to the gynecologist to check her hymen,” he spilled to the hosts. Public reaction over the admission began almost immediately, spreading like wildfire on Twitter. While Deyjah hasn’t spoken out directly, her actions on social media say it all — and we an imagine she’s immensely embarrassed by her dad’s inappropriate comments.
Most the comments — including the ones on Deyjah’s Instagram — were expressing their support for the teen. “Your body your choice sis!” one follower wrote on an older photo. Deyjah, who is known to audiences from the reality series Tiny & T.I.: Family Hustle also went through posts mentioning her on social media, liking tweets critical of T.I.’s comments. Many fans also pointed out that an intact hymen doesn’t necessarily indicate virginity, as a hymen can be broken doing a number of activities, including riding a bike. It was also rumored that pornography site Pornhub.com offered Deyjah $1 million to lose her virginity on camera, but the site has since denied they the offer.
Stepmom Tiny has since responded to fans flooding her comments, wondering if Deyjah was okay given the amount of public attention the situation was receiving. Tiny simply commented back with an eye roll emoji, which suggests she’s siding with her husband of nine years on this one.