Julia Roberts Responds To Instagram Critic With The Perfect Quip

The Oscar-winning actress is “just sayin.”

If you insult Julia Roberts, at least you should be honest. A commentator on Instagram learns that the road is difficult.

An Instagram user named Nick, who uses the handle of the vintagecostume collector, took an adjoining photo of the Roberts and Hollywood icon, Joan Crawford, dressed in similar black robes. Nick just had nice things to say, and explained that he liked "the elegant classic elegance" of Roberts' view of the red carpet at the Toronto International Film Festival over the weekend.

One of the people who commented on the image had a different opinion, although she wrote: "Joan Crawford seems to me better in a more classic style and on paper, and Julia uses ugly black nail polish!"

Maybe the person thought Roberts would never actually see the remark, but alas, stars scroll through social media feeds, too.

In response to his criticism, the Oscar-winning actress eliminated some things.

"In fact, the navy is covered with garnet crystals like an earth tone," Roberts wrote again. "In case you want to change your comment from" ugly black nail polish "to ugly paint with garnet crystals, just say" 💅 ".

Now we know how the sales associate in "Pretty Woman" felt when this happened:

What is Mesothelioma Law Firm? Best Mesothelioma Settlement Process

A Complete Guide to Mesothelioma Class Action Lawsuit

Top 5 Mesothelioma Settlement Process 

Mesothelioma settlements are benefits that are granted to victims who develop mesothelioma as a result of prolonged exposure to asbestos. These types of settlements are mainly agreed by the parties to avoid a possible test. Given the high degree of uncertainty in the tests, these settlements are a clear way to obtain compensation.

Mesothelioma Settlement Process

Filling a lawsuit: Fill out a lawsuit: at this stage, just before the trial, the defendant's attorney and the plaintiff discuss all aspects of the case. Sometimes, at this stage, the defendant may offer an agreement, which often occurs when the defendant tries to avoid the costs of the litigation or if the defendant is in another case of guilty mesothelioma.

Verdict: This often happens when the plaintiff and the defendant do not reach an agreement, and the case goes to trial. As with other civil litigation, the jury resolves at the end of the trial. The results are based primarily on the level of responsibility for the defendant's actions that resulted in the plaintiff's injury. The judgment is often the level of responsibility for determining compensation. The lawyer's job will be to prove that the parties that have initiated a legal action are responsible for the damages caused. Do the members of the jury agree that they will decide the total compensation to be paid?

Compensation and damages: After the judgment in favor of the plaintiff, the damages to be compensated are considered, that is, the actual economic losses, and the jury considers the punitive damages. The above objective is mainly to identify a general example and also to dissuade the accused from causing injuries again. In most cases, the higher the level of responsibility according to the jury, the greater the punitive damages. In some states, however, compensatory damages are limited.

Settlement decision: Any situation can lead to significant punitive damages, but this is not guaranteed. In most cases, the amount presented is much less than the expected amount, but at least compensation is guaranteed. The liquidation decision or judgment decision is often reported by a lawyer experienced in mesothelioma. It is often the client's decision to accept or reject the settlement offer. When the offer is accepted, the case ends. But the question of acceptance by the plaintiff or the family is usually answered by the plaintiff.

Attorney’s payment: Finally, after winning the case, the amount that will be paid to the lawyer is agreed. It is often a percentage of the total compensation paid to the claimant.

CONCLUSION: Mesothelioma is a cancerous disease caused by exposure to asbestos. It is often the result of the negligence of one of the parties to fulfill the duty of care. In an attempt to condone unilateral negligence, a different claim has been filed and compensation has been granted, but payment is not the solution. The solutions have the responsibility to avoid this exposure.

5 MYTHS ABOUT BIKINI LINE HAIR REMOVAL

The razor bumps. The ingrown hairs. The sensitive skin. The tough angles... There are few places on the body more challenging to maintain than the bikini line, as many women have learned struggling to shave, pluck, wax, and laser their way to smooth skin. Even more unfortunate, there are a ton of myths floating around about hair down there. Marisa Garshick, MD, a dermatologist at Manhattan Dermatology & Cosmetic Surgery, reveals the myths she hears patients repeat the most in her office. 

Myth: Hair grows back thicker if you shave it

Dr. Garshick says that shaving anywhere on your body will not cause the hair to come back in thicker; diameter will always stay the same over time. “After shaving, the ends of the hairs are simply blunted, as opposed to the natural soft tip, which may cause the hair to seem coarse,” Dr. Garshick explains. “But the actual thickness remains unchanged.” After shaving, she suggests using a mild cleanser and a gentle moisturizer to keep your skin feeling soft and smooth, even when hairs are growing back. Try CeraVe Hydrating Body Wash  and Eucerin Original Healing Rich Lotion.

Myth: Tweezing is the best treatment for ingrown hairs

Lots of women think tweezing an ingrown hair is the fastest and most effective way to deal with it, according to Dr. Garshick. They're simply wrong. “Tweezing can lead to trauma of the hair follicle, which will just cause more redness and inflammation,” she explains. “Avoid picking or squeezing as this can lead to scarring.” If you have razor bumps or ingrown hairs, Dr. Garshick says to leave them be. “Often, simply letting the hair grow a little will allow the hair to break free from being trapped in the skin,” she says, at which point you can remove it carefully. You can also use a hot compress to help the point break free. If the ingrown hasn't popped out after a week or two, call your derm, who can extract the ingrown for you.

Myth: You should shave down there every day

A lot of women believe the skin on their bikini line will get used to razoring if they do it daily, says Dr. Garshick, but all that does is bring on more irritation and razor bumps. Wait until a few millimeters of hair are visible, or about two days. To reduce your risk of sensitivity, shavein the direction of the hair growth with a clean razor blade that you replace after five to 10 shaves. “Sometimes a prescription for a topical steroid may be needed to treat razor bumps, but you should discuss this with a specialist,” says Dr. Garshick. “And if you're looking for a more long-term option, laser hair removal can help.”

Myth: It's smart to wax between laser hair removal treatments

Laser hair removal treatments from a board-certified dermatologist leave you hair-free in five to eight treatments. The key: five to eight treatments, not one or two. The laser specifically targets growing hairs, which is only a portion of your total hairs, Dr. Gars hick explains. “Although you will notice a significant improvement after your laser hair removal sessions, you may still notice some hairs that don't go away right away,” she says. “Do not attempt to remove this hair with waxing, because the laser targets the pigment in the hair. If the hair has been removed, the laser can't do its job.” Dr. Gars hick says to leave the hair alone. Don’t wax, pluck, or bleach between laser hair treatments, although it’s okay to shave, which will still allow the hair to be zapped by the laser during your next treatment.

It’s totally OK to have body hair, but if you do decide to remove it, you may not be exactly sure which method is best. Laser hair removal and waxing are two popular procedures that women and men can book at a salon or spa. Yet, there are still big misconceptions tied to them — including the rumor that laser treatment doesn’t work on black people, and wax rips your skin off. 

To debunk common myths about these two hair removal techniques, we turned to Spruce & Bond specialist Kristen Rogers to set the record straight. Scroll down to find out what we learned about the difference between laser and waxing. Then, share your hair removal stories in the comments section.

FERYJORY VIA GETTY IMAGES

It is more about the color of the hair rather than texture or complexion when determining if laser hair removal will work for you.

MYTH: Black people can’t do laser hair removal.

According to Rogers, there is no skin type or tone that laser will not work on. It is more about the color of the hair rather than texture or complexion. “There are different settings and machines for different skin types, which makes it possible for all skin tones to do laser,” she says.

FACT: The darker your body hair is, the better for laser hair removal.

Individuals with dark hair are prime clients for this method. Basically, the more contrast there is between your skin tone and hair color, the better. Rogers doesn’t believe people with blonde, red or gray hair will benefit from laser.

MYTH: You must be close-shaven before getting laser hair removal.

While Rogers says that most of her clients prefer to shave the areas where they will get laser treatment, it isn’t uncommon for the aesthetician to shave an area such as the bikini line. “It is scary and difficult for them,” she explains. “The only downside to having the specialist shave you in the room, is that it is a dry shave.”

FACT: It takes more than one laser hair removal session to see a significant reduction in hair growth. 

“Laser hair removal works as a continuous process of removing the hair follicle of the given area over a specific amount of time,” says Rogers. “The laser works under the skin’s surface to damage the hair follicles and stunt future growth.” The professional notes that you should start to see results within two weeks of your first treatment. As the hair grows back slower, it will be very patchy. She adds, “I always recommend my clients to treat at least five times, spaced apart four to six weeks, to see the best results. Each session reduces hair growth by 10 to 15 percent.”

MYTH: You won’t experience any pain during laser hair removal.

It isn’t out of the ordinary for you to experience discomfort while getting laser treatments. To help minimize pain, Rogers says that some of her clients take two Advils 30 minutes before their treatment. 

When done correctly, waxing actually grabs onto the hair and pulls the follicle. This is why the area is smoother than after a shave, according to Rogers.

FACT: It is recommended that you allow hair to grow 1/8 of an inch before waxing.

“It’s surprising how many people think they need to shave before a wax,” says Rogers.”The longer the hair, within reason, the smoother of a wax you’ll receive.”

MYTH: Waxing grabs onto the skin in order to pull hair out.

When done correctly, waxing actually grabs onto the hair and pulls the follicle. This is why the area is smoother than after a shave, according to Rogers.

FACT: Hair grows back less quickly when waxing versus shaving. 

Rogers attributes the slower growth to the hair follicle being completely removed during the wax process. “It is waiting for the next growth stage,” she adds.

MYTH: There is no need to exfoliate after waxing because the hair removal method does it for you.

Not entirely true. On the third day of post-waxing, Rogers recommends using a sugar scrub to exfoliate along with a natural form of salicylic acid like willow bark to keep the pores in the area closed and less prone to bacteria. Exfoliation also helps to minimize ingrown hairs. 

ONE STRIKING CHART SHOWS WHY PHARMA COMPANIES ARE FIGHTING LEGAL MARIJUANA

There’s a body of research showing that painkiller abuse and overdose are lower in states with medical marijuana laws. These studies have generally assumed that when medical marijuana is available, pain patients are increasingly choosing pot over powerful and deadly prescription narcotics. But that’s always been just an assumption.

Now a new study, released in the journal Health Affairs, validates these findings by providing clear evidence of a missing link in the causal chain running from medical marijuana to falling overdoses. Ashley and W. David Bradford, a daughter-father pair of researchers at the University of Georgia, scoured the database of all prescription drugs paid for under Medicare Part D from 2010 to 2013.

They found that, in the 17 states with a medical-marijuana law in place by 2013, prescriptions for painkillers and other classes of drugs fell sharply compared with states that did not have a medical-marijuana law. The drops were quite significant: In medical-marijuana states, the average doctor prescribed 265 fewer doses of antidepressants each year, 486 fewer doses of seizure medication, 541 fewer anti-nausea doses and 562 fewer doses of anti-anxiety medication.

But most strikingly, the typical physician in a medical-marijuana state prescribed 1,826 fewer doses of painkillers in a given year.

These conditions are among those for which medical marijuana is most often approved under state laws. So as a sanity check, the Bradfords ran a similar analysis on drug categories that pot typically is not recommended for — blood thinners, anti-viral drugs and antibiotics. And on those drugs, they found no changes in prescribing patterns after the passage of marijuana laws.

“This provides strong evidence that the observed shifts in prescribing patterns were in fact due to the passage of the medical marijuana laws,” they write.

In a news release, lead author Ashley Bradford wrote, “The results suggest people are really using marijuana as medicine and not just using it for recreational purposes.”

One interesting wrinkle in the data is glaucoma, for which there was a small increase in demand for traditional drugs in medical-marijuana states. It’s routinely listed as an approved condition under medical-marijuana laws, and studies have shown that marijuana provides some degree of temporary relief for its symptoms.

The Bradfords hypothesize that the short duration of the glaucoma relief provided by marijuana — roughly an hour or so — may actually stimulate more demand in traditional glaucoma medications. Glaucoma patients may experience some short-term relief from marijuana, which may prompt them to seek other, robust treatment options from their doctors.

The tanking numbers for painkiller prescriptions in medical marijuana states are likely to cause some concern among pharmaceutical companies. These companies have long been at the forefront of opposition to marijuana reform, funding research by anti-pot academics and funneling dollars to groups, such as the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America, that oppose marijuana legalization.

Pharmaceutical companies have also lobbied federal agencies directly to prevent the liberalization of marijuana laws. In one case, recently uncovered by the office of Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), the Department of Health and Human Services recommended that naturally derived THC, the main psychoactive component of marijuana, be moved from Schedule 1 to Schedule 3 of the Controlled Substances Act — a less restrictive category that would acknowledge the drug’s medical use and make it easier to research and prescribe. Several months after HHS submitted its recommendation, at least one drug company that manufactures a synthetic version of THC — which would presumably have to compete with any natural derivatives — wrote to the Drug Enforcement Administration to express opposition to rescheduling natural THC, citing “the abuse potential in terms of the need to grow and cultivate substantial crops of marijuana in the United States.”

The DEA ultimately rejected the HHS recommendation without explanation.

In what may be the most concerning finding for the pharmaceutical industry, the Bradfords took their analysis a step further by estimating the cost savings to Medicare from the decreased prescribing. They found that about $165 million was saved in the 17 medical marijuana states in 2013. In a back-of-the-envelope calculation, the estimated annual Medicare prescription savings would be nearly half a billion dollars if all 50 states were to implement similar programs.

Wonkbook newsletter

Your daily policy cheat sheet from Wonkblog.

Sign up

“That amount would have represented just under 0.5 percent of all Medicare Part D spending in 2013,” they calculate.

Cost-savings alone are not a sufficient justification for implementing a medical-marijuana program. The bottom line is better health, and the Bradfords’ research shows promising evidence that medical-marijuana users are finding plant-based relief for conditions that otherwise would have required a pill to treat.

“Our findings and existing clinical literature imply that patients respond to medical marijuana legislation as if there are clinical benefits to the drug, which adds to the growing body of evidence suggesting that the Schedule 1 status of marijuana is outdated,” the study concludes.

One limitation of the study is that it only looks at Medicare Part D spending, which applies only to seniors. Previous studies have shown that seniors are among the most reluctant medical-marijuana users, so the net effect of medical marijuana for all prescription patients may be even greater.

MEDICAL MARIJUANA FOR PAIN BEGINS IN MINNESOTA TODAY

Judy Bjerke Severson wants to be normal — visit friends and family, go to the grocery store or even sleep in her own bed — but she says the crippling pain from fibromyalgia and back surgery complications, as well as a painkiller-induced fog, have made her a shell of her former self.

Monday brings a sliver of hope to her and other Minnesota residents who have incurable pain: They can finally buy medical marijuana. Bjerke Severson will be the first to be seen Monday at a Bloomington clinic, one of eight statewide that sell the medicine.

“I could just cry I’m so excited,” the 70-year-old Edina woman said. “I don’t enjoy this life I have right now.”

Expanding the list of qualifying conditions to include intractable pain marks a critical juncture in the year-old program, which is among the most restrictive in the country. Manufacturers and patients have big hopes that it will usher in thousands of new patients, eventually bringing down high costs — which exceed $1,000 a month for some patients — and easing dependence on addictive narcotic painkillers.

Those hopes were buoyed by data from the state showing nearly 500 patients suffering intractable pain had registered in July, the first month of registration and a month before legal sales could begin. That’s more than five times the number of people who signed up in the month ahead of the program’s launch.

The Minnesota Legislature legalized medical marijuana in 2014. The law bans the plant form, but allows pills, oils and vapors to be used by patients with nine serious conditions who received their doctor’s permission.

The Legislature directed Minnesota’s health commissioner to determine if intractable pain should be added as a 10th condition within the program’s first year.

Commissioner Ed Ehlinger cited the program’s successful first few months when announcing in December that intractable pain would qualify starting Aug. 1.

Kyle Kinglsey at Minnesota Medical Solutions, one of the state’s two medical marijuana manufacturers, said he’s confident a largely problem-free first year and his company’s own outreach efforts to the medical community would make it easier in the second year. He also said he thinks doctors, many of whom patients have said are wary of the health benefits and possible drawbacks of marijuana, will be convinced it’s an attractive alternative to addictive and often deadly opiate painkillers.

“The reason why I left a comfortable job … was to help fight the opioid scourge. Medical cannabis is one of the tools that will help fight the crisis,” said Kingsley, the company’s chief executive.

The long-awaited expansion is welcome for patient advocacy organizations, though Maren Schroeder doubts whether it would have any impact on the program’s costs. Her patient advocacy group, Sensible Minnesota, is pushing to allow patients to use the plant form and has petitioned Ehlinger to add post-traumatic stress disorder as a qualifying condition next year.

For now, manufacturers and patients are focused on intractable pain, which the state defines as pain that can’t be otherwise treated or cured.

For Bjerke Severson, that means muscle spasms, tingling and fiery pain so severe she can barely walk. Having lived the last two decades with chronic pain, she struggles to describe it.

Bjerke Severson knows medical marijuana won’t be a magic cure. But she is hoping to kick the hydrocodone and get some relief.

MARIJUANA PLANTS SPOTTED GROWING IN BACK YARD FROM AIR SAY DEPUTIES

A man was arrested and charged with drug violations after Union County deputies say a plane spotted marijuana plants growing in his back yard from the air.

Rembert Dantzler Parler, 57, was charged with manufacturing marijuana by the Union County Sheriff’s Office on Friday. Deputies say they coordinated with the State Law Enforcement Division at the S.C. National Guard to fly planes to search for marijuana plants.

The pilot radioed deputies, who then went to a home in Buffalo.

Deputies say Parler was growing several plants outside his home on Mt. Lebanon Road. Deputies say he admitted to having the plants along with more pot in a refrigerator in the home.

Investigators say they removed 51 marijuana plants and 23 grams of pot from the home while arresting him.

12 STATES THAT SMOKE THE MOST WEED

Support for marijuana legalization in the United States has risen steadily over the years. Today, a majority of Americans are in favor of legalizing the drug, although the number of people actually smoking weed is far lower. Slightly more than 13% of Americans 12 years old and over report using marijuana in the past year.

1. Colorado
> Pct. using marijuana in past year: 21.6%
> Total users: 909,000 (13th highest)
> Pct. using illicit drugs other than marijuana in past month: 4.4% (the highest)
> Max. fine for possession: $100,000

2. Oregon
> Pct. using marijuana in past year: 19.9%
> Total users: 649,000 (19th highest)
> Pct. using illicit drugs other than marijuana in past month: 3.7% (10th highest)
> Max. fine for possession: $6,250

3. Vermont
> Pct. using marijuana in past year: 19.8%
> Total users: 108,000 (4th lowest)
> Pct. using illicit drugs other than marijuana in past month: 3.7% (11th highest)
> Max. fine for possession: $500,000

4. Alaska
> Pct. using marijuana in past year: 19.5%
> Total users: 114,000 (6th lowest)
> Pct. using illicit drugs other than marijuana in past month: 3.4% (20th highest)
> Max. fine for possession: $50,000

5. Washington
> Pct. using marijuana in past year: 19.5%
> Total users: 1,105,000 (9th highest)
> Pct. using illicit drugs other than marijuana in past month: 4.0% (4th highest)
> Max. fine for possession: $10,000

6. Maine
> Pct. using marijuana in past year: 19.4%
> Total users: 224,000 (15th lowest)
> Pct. using illicit drugs other than marijuana in past month: 2.9% (11th lowest)
> Max. fine for possession: $20,000

7. Rhode Island
> Pct. using marijuana in past year: 18.7%
> Total users: 170,000 (11th lowest)
> Pct. using illicit drugs other than marijuana in past month: 3.6% (13th highest)
> Max. fine for possession: $500

8. Massachusetts
> Pct. using marijuana in past year: 17.6%
> Total users: 989,000 (10th highest)
> Pct. using illicit drugs other than marijuana in past month: 2.8% (9th lowest)
> Max. fine for possession: $500

9. New Hampshire
> Pct. using marijuana in past year: 17.1%
> Total users: 194,000 (13th lowest)
> Pct. using illicit drugs other than marijuana in past month: 3.7% (9th highest)
> Max. fine for possession: $2,000

10. New Mexico
> Pct. using marijuana in past year: 15.6%
> Total users: 267,000 (19th lowest)
> Pct. using illicit drugs other than marijuana in past month: 3.4% (19th highest)
> Max. fine for possession: $5,000

11. Michigan
> Pct. using marijuana in past year: 15.6%
> Total users: 1,304,000 (6th highest)
> Pct. using illicit drugs other than marijuana in past month: 3.1% (22nd lowest)
> Max. fine for possession: $2,000

12. California
> Pct. using marijuana in past year: 14.9%
> Total users: 4,633,000 (the highest)
> Pct. using illicit drugs other than marijuana in past month: 4.2% (3rd highest)
> Max. fine for possession: $500