Leganes players to promote testicular cancer awareness with special logo on crotches
Their shorts will bear a special logo right in the crotch of two spheres joined by a cancer awareness bow and encircled by 'Testicular Cancer Society.'
The public awareness campaign in support of testicular cancer awareness month announced by Madrid-based club on Thursday is called 'Tenemos un par' ('We have a pair').
Leganes hosts Barcelona in La Liga on Saturday.
The Testicular Cancer Society says it is the most common form of cancer for men aged 15 to 35 and encourages regular self-examination.
'Some teammates didn't know how to self-explore before this campaign,' Leganes captain Sergio González told the club website. 'If this manages to save a life it is worth more than any title.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
New York Giants vs. New England Patriots: Live coverage, breaking news, and highlights
Cam Skattebo and Jaxson Dart have entered the building. Expecting Dart to play a bunch in the first half, possibly even start. #Giants #Patriots #NFL The New York Giants close out their preseason on Thursday night against the New England Patriots at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey. After the game, head coach Brian Daboll & Co. will have to begin making decisions on 53-man roster cuts, which are due on Tuesday afternoon. Accordingly, Thursday's game against the Patriots will be of the utmost importance. "We've got some guys we still want to take a look at, and that'll be important. This week, leading up to the cuts, is an important week for a lot of people. It's also a tough week for a lot of people," Daboll said this week. "I think you have empathy towards a lot of these guys that have done everything they could do since they've been here, starting in the OTAs, training camp, all the rehab, the workouts, all those type of things. "There's decisions to be made and we'll make those decisions, but I know it's weighing probably on a lot of guys. It always does every year. Again, you have some empathy towards that, but you've got to do what's best for your team. We'll do that for this game and take care of next week, next week." Arrivals "Admin, what's up" 😎 What TV channel is Giants vs. Patriots on today? The Giants and Patriots play Thursday in Week 3 of the 2025 NFL preseason, concluding their three-game exhibition slate before the regular season begins next month. Although starters will play, most of the game will see backups on the field as they battle for a spot on the 53-man roster. Streaming options for the game include Amazon Prime and Fubo, which offers a free trial. The simulcast broadcast crew will consist of Bob Papa (play-by-play), Carl Banks (analyst), Phill Simms (analyst), Howard Cross (sideline), and Bruce Beck (sideline). Listen to Giants-Patriots The WFAN broadcast team will be Paul Dottino (play-by-play), Shaun O'Hara (analyst), and Madelyn Burke (reporter). The Spanish broadcast will air on WXNY-FM 96.3 FM with Nestor Rosario (play-by-play) and Francis Adames (analysis) providing coverage. Pre- (Giants Gameday) and postgame (Giants Extra Point) coverage will be handled by John Schmeelk and Tiki Barber. Out-of-market fans can listen to the game on the following affiliate stations: Giants vs. Patriots start time The Giants and Patriots will kick off at 8:00 p.m. ET at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey. Quarterback Russell Wilson will start for Big Blue before giving way to Jaxson Dart and Jameis Winston. Giants preseason schedule Below is the New York Giants' preseason schedule. Giants regular season schedule Below is the New York Giants' regular season schedule.
CNBC
2 hours ago
- CNBC
Supreme Court allows Trump's cuts to health research grants over DEI policies
The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed Trump administration broad cuts to National Institutes of Health grants as part of the federal government's campaign against diversity, equity and inclusion policies. But in a mixed decision the court left in place a different part of the lower court judge's ruling that threw out the administration's guidance document that introduced the policy, raising questions about whether it can be applied moving forward. The justices, on a 5-4 vote, granted in part an emergency request filed by the administration seeking to put a Massachusetts-based federal judge's ruling on hold. The court did not fully explain its reasoning, but the majority indicated that groups seeking to challenge the funding cuts have to file separate lawsuits in a different federal venue — the Court of Federal Claims. Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett was the deciding vote in crafting the decision. Four justices, all conservatives, said they would have granted the Trump administration's application in full, while four others — conservative Chief Justice John Roberts and the court's three liberals — would have denied it in full. "As today's order states, the District Court likely lacked jurisdiction to hear challenges to the grant terminations, which belong in the Court of Federal Claims," Barrett wrote in a concurring opinion. But, she added, "the Government is not entitled to a stay of the judgments insofar as they vacate the guidance documents." The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a collection of agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services that receives billions of dollars from Congress to fund medical research at universities, hospitals and other institutions. When President Donald Trump took office in January, he vowed to end so-called diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, policies, saying that rather than fostering equality as intended, they are a form of discrimination, primarily against white people. He has also taken aim at policies recognizing transgender rights, including access to gender transition care. The NIH then conducted a review of grants and determined that more than 1,700 of them were not consistent with Trump's directives and terminated them, including studies into HIV prevention and gender identity among teens. The moves were challenged by 16 states led by Massachusetts and the American Public Health Association, among others. After a trial, U.S. District Judge William Young in Massachusetts ruled that the government had failed to follow correct legal processes in implementing the policy, in violation of a law called the Administrative Procedure Act. In rushing to implement Trump's agenda, NIH "simply moved too fast and broke things, including the law," Young wrote. He also said that DEI was "an undefined enemy," noting that government lawyers had not been able to explain exactly what it meant. Young found that there was "pervasive racial discrimination" and "extensive discrimination" against gay, lesbian and transgender people in how grants were selected for termination. He also found "an unmistakable pattern of discrimination against women's health issues." Young declined to put his ruling on hold, as did the Boston-based 1st U.S Circuit Court of Appeals, which also kept the grants intact. In asking the Supreme Court to intervene on behalf of the Trump administration, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that the case is similar to another that arose in Massachusetts in which a judge blocked Trump administration plans to terminate teacher training grants on anti-DEI grounds. The Supreme Court in April blocked that ruling on a 5-4 vote. "This application presents a particularly clear case for this court to intervene and stop errant district courts from continuing to disregard this court's rulings," Sauer wrote. Lawyers for the states pushed back on Sauer's narrative, saying it "bears little resemblance to reality, with Young's ruling a "run-of-the mill" example of a court intervening when the government violates the law. The justices Thursday disagreed over whether the April decision governed the outcome in the latest case. In a brief opinion, Roberts, who dissented in the earlier case, said it was different, with Young's findings "well within the scope of the district court's jurisdiction." But conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, in his own separate opinion, criticized Young for failing to abide by the April decision. "Lower court judges may sometimes disagree with this court's decisions, but they are never free to defy them," he wrote. The Trump administration has regularly turned to the Supreme Court when its broad use of executive power is challenged in court and has prevailed in the majority of cases. Trump and his allies have also harshly criticized judges who have ruled against him.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
New Jacksonville-area Girl Scout badges to show girls 'who they are,' not how they look
The Jacksonville-based Girl Scouts of Gateway Council has launched a Body Appreciation Program, complete with badges, to help girls value their abilities over their appearance. The Gateway Council, which serves about 6,500 girls in 35 North Florida counties, cited survey data from the Girl Scouts of the USA. 'Research makes it clear that body image pressures starts as early as 7 years old, and those pressures and influences can shape how girls see themselves for years to come," Gateway CEO Wendy Dordel said. "Girls deserve to grow up knowing their worth isn't tied to how they look, but to who they are and what they can do." Each of the new badges available to the different age levels of Girl Scouts have distinct goals. Among the badges are "Beyond the Mirror," which teaches cadette level scouts to "see through the hype" of beauty standards in the media and be authentic. A senior level badge called "Mind, Body, Me" shows them how to use the mind-body connection to boost overall wellness. Flamingo, a women's body care company, donated $1 million to support the program. "We believe self-care goes beyond products — it's about showing up for yourself with confidence and compassion," Vice President Vikki Williams Cornwall said. Wakefield Research surveyed 1,000 U.S. girls ages 5 to 13 over a two-week period in June. Here is more of the data: About 96% of the girls said they like their appearance, but 37% wish they could change something about it — a number that increases to 50% for girls ages 11 to 13. The girls were asked if they get more compliments on their appearance or their abilities. Half of girls ages 5 to 7 said they receive more praise about how they look, but that reversed in older girls. About 66% of the girls ages 8 to 10 and 64% of ages 11 to 13 reported that people focused more on their abilities than their appearance. "These mixed messages can erode girls' self-worth, making it essential to shift the focus toward valuing bodies for their abilities, not their appearance," according to the Gateway council. The girls were asked how they wanted to be described: About 36% of them in all age groups surveyed said smart, while 17% said funny and another 17% said creative. Girls as young as 5 years old said they heard the women in their lives talk negatively about the way they look. That increased with older age groups: 52% of girls ages 8 to 10 reported that they heard negative comments "a lot or sometimes" and 41% of ages 11 to 13 said they hear them "all the time or sometimes." The Body Appreciation program and its badge curriculum program was developed with expert mental health and youth development advisors. Also, "insight" from a national pilot program with troop leaders and scouts was used, according to Gateway. bcravey@ (904) 359-4109 This article originally appeared on Florida Times-Union: Girl Scout body-image badges combat society's mixed messages Solve the daily Crossword
