Latest news with #Mehta
News18
14 hours ago
- Health
- News18
Shefali Jariwala's Death: How Aesthetic Shortcuts Can Take A Toll On The Heart
Last Updated: The need for quick transformations has led to an increase in the use of steroids and injectables. However, these often come with side effects. The untimely passing of actor and fitness icon Shefali Jariwala at 42 has shaken the wellness community. While she appeared active and healthy, her sudden cardiac arrest has raised urgent questions: Could silent heart damage be hiding behind aesthetic goals and 'quick results'? According to Dr. Mickey Mehta, Global Holistic Health Guru and Spiritual Life Coach, the answer is yes. 'We live in an era of aesthetic obsession," says Dr. Mehta. 'Injectables, neurotoxins, and steroid-based treatments are now freely offered at countless clinics without proper protocols or medical supervision. The quest for quick transformation is costing people their core health." Steroids: The Silent Saboteurs Anabolic steroids, synthetic derivatives of testosterone, are often misused to accelerate muscle gain, fat loss or endurance. While they offer immediate visible changes, their long-term effects are insidious. 'Externally, they may sculpt the body, but internally they disrupt hormonal and molecular harmony," warns Dr. Mehta. 'They interfere with the body's natural communication systems, particularly the autonomic nervous system and hormonal balance." These effects often go unnoticed until it's too late. Ayurveda's Perspective: A Deeper Disruption In Ayurveda, the heart (Hridaya) is considered the seat of Ojas – the body's vital energy and immunity. According to Dr. Mehta, 'Steroids are Tikshna (sharp) and Ushna (hot). They aggravate Pitta dosha, impair Agni (digestive fire), and lead to Ama – toxic accumulation that clogs the heart's subtle channels." Over time, this toxic load not only affects the physical heart but also the energetic and emotional balance, manifesting as anxiety, burnout, aggression or deep fatigue. 'Steroid misuse disrupts the body's bio-clock and depletes Prana Shakti – our life force," Dr. Mehta adds. 'When the body is in constant repair, it forgets how to heal." The Path Forward: Strength Through Simplicity True fitness doesn't come from injections or shortcuts. It emerges from inner alignment, what Dr. Mehta calls 'the harmony of mind, body, and soul." Instead of steroid-fueled extremes, he recommends: view comments First Published: July 19, 2025, 13:04 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Newsweek
15 hours ago
- Entertainment
- Newsweek
Dog Who Acts Disgusted Every Time Owner Sneezes Wins Pet of the Week
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. This week's headlines brought us heartwarming stories—from a puppy getting saved after being used as bait in dog fights to a dog claiming the baby's bouncer—but the week wouldn't be complete without a few highlights from our readers. Follow the instructions at the end of the article to see how you can submit your pet to be featured in Newsweek's Pet of the Week. Winner Photos of a golden retriever looking at her owner in disgust after hearing her sneeze. Photos of a golden retriever looking at her owner in disgust after hearing her sneeze. Peggy McMaster This week's Pet of the Week winner couldn't be any more relatable. Many people will shudder in disgust at the sound of another person sneezing and coughing. And as one owner learned, dogs aren't fans of germs either. Owner Peggy McMaster began noticing her dog becoming a bit annoyed whenever she sneezed, coughed or cleared her throat. McMaster shared a video with Newsweek that shows her golden retriever giving her the biggest side-eye as she coughed. Grossed out by the sounds, the dog looked at her with disapproval. "My dog acts like I have the plague!" she said. Finalists Photo of two cat siblings touching paws in a precious brotherly moment. Photo of two cat siblings touching paws in a precious brotherly moment. Yash Mehta Our first finalist for this week comes from Yash Mehta, as Mehta's two pet cats, Coco Junior and Muffy, captured our hearts during their precious bonding moment. In Mehta's photo, Muffy, the white cat, was lounging on the couch with his head on the armrest. Down on the ground was the orange cat, Coco Junior. Mehta happened to catch the moment these two cats were looking longingly at each other, which ended with a gentle tap of each other's paws. Mehta called it a "brotherhood scene." Photo of a 3-month-old Yorkie rocking two blue bow ties in her hair. Photo of a 3-month-old Yorkie rocking two blue bow ties in her hair. Leticia Fernandez With the pet industry booming, there is no shortage of opportunities to buy toys, treats and even outfits for your fur babies to rock. And with her 3-month-old pup, Leticia Fernandez couldn't resist dressing her up. Fernandez decided to buy her Yorkshire terrier, Zoe, bow ties to put in her long fur. She pulled the fur up, out of her eyes and separated them into parts. She placed the blue hair clips on each section and snapped a picture. "Funny, it seemed like she stuck her tongue at me after putting the hair clips on her," she told Newsweek. Zoe beamed with pride as she rocked her new accessories. A photo of a dog named Kimbell holding a Frisbee, his favorite toy. A photo of a dog named Kimbell holding a Frisbee, his favorite toy. April G. Van Es Finally, what is a dog without their favorite toy? April G. Van Es shared a photo of the family's beloved dog, Kimball. In the picture, Kimball is sitting on a chair, enjoying the outside with his toy in his mouth. But it's not a soft, plush toy he can snuggle. Instead, he's head over paws for the Frisbee. The orange Frisbee is bigger than his face, but he holds onto it for dear life. The edges push out his lip flaps, almost appearing uncomfortable. But Kimball doesn't mind. It's his favorite. If you think your pet could be next week's Newsweek "Pet of the Week," send us your funny and heartwarming videos and pictures of your pet, along with a bit about them to life@ and they could appear in our "Pet of the Week" lineup.
New Indian Express
20 hours ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
SG creates fake ‘SC of Karnataka' X account to flag misuse, defends blocking orders in HC
BENGALURU: To demonstrate how platform 'X' can be misused, and the necessity to curtail its misuse, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta on Friday showed the Karnataka High Court a fake account in the name of the 'Supreme Court of Karnataka' which was verified by the platform X. Making a submission before Justice M Nagaprasanna, while hearing a petition filed by X Corp questioning the series of blocking orders issued by the Union government, Mehta drew the attention of the court by giving an illustration to defend the blocking orders. Mehta explained that they opened an account in the name of 'Supreme Court of Karnataka' on X, and it is a verified account. 'Now we can post anything on it, and viewers can say that the Supreme Court of Karnataka said it. The creator of the account remains anonymous,' he submitted. However, senior counsel KG Raghavan, representing X Corp, took serious exception to the demonstration of a fake account and also the contention of the Solicitor General, who in turn contended that the fake account was created only to demonstrate the element of misuse and was not used. Interfering at this stage, the court said a fake account is only an illustration that creating such accounts on the intermediary is easy, and it will not prejudice the case of X. Later, Raghavan informed the court that the said fake account has been blocked by X. X Corp moved the Karnataka High Court, seeking to declare that Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) does not confer powers on the Union government to issue information-blocking orders under the IT Act. It prayed to the high court to declare that information-blocking orders can only be issued under Section 69A of the IT Act, read with the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009 (Blocking Rules). X Corp also requested the court to restrain the Union government from taking coercive or prejudicial action against them for not joining the censorship portal Sahyog, as the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) has attempted delegation of power that it itself does not have, and should be struck down. Further hearing was adjourned to July 25.
Hans India
a day ago
- Politics
- Hans India
Social media monitors us constantly, need to regulate: Centre tells HC
Bengaluru: There was an urgent need for regulation in the digital space, due to the constant surveillance by social media, rising cybercrime, and the evolving threat landscape, the Centre told the Karnataka High Court during a hearing on the X Corp (formerly Twitter) case over content takedown directives. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union Government, argued that internet intermediaries like 'X' must act responsibly and cannot claim the same constitutional rights as individuals. The hearing, before Justice N Nagaprasanna, pertained to X Corp's challenge to the applicability of Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act. It had earlier contended that Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, often used to justify takedown directives, cannot serve as an independent source of executive power to block content. It said that blocking orders can only be issued through due process under Section 69A read with the IT Rules and not via direct instructions under Section 79. Highlighting the extent of digital surveillance, Mehta told the court: 'Today, even a smart TV with a camera is a potential surveillance tool. Many public figures ask visitors to leave their phones outside because these devices have effectively become recorders. We are being continuously monitored by social media,' he said. The Solicitor General also touched upon the growing influence of Artificial Intelligence, calling it a developmental boon but also a potential noted that legal frameworks must evolve to address the threats posed by technological advances. Dismissing X Corp's claim that it enjoys rights under Article 19 (Freedom of Speech and Expression), Mehta asserted that such protections are reserved for individuals, not platforms. 'X is simply a notice board. Only those who post content can claim Article 19 protections,' he said, adding that the Supreme Court in Shreya Singhal v Union of India had clarified that content on public platforms can be regulated in public interest. The case will be heard again on July 18.
Hindustan Times
a day ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Solicitor general creates fake ‘Supreme Court of Karnataka' X account to prove misinformation point, deletes later
Bengaluru/New Delhi : Solicitor general Tushar Mehta created a fake X account named 'Supreme Court of Karnataka' and presented it to the Karnataka high court on Friday to demonstrate online misinformation risks — only to have the platform suspend the fictional handle by the time the hearing ended. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta. (File Photo) Mehta handed his mobile phone to justice M Nagaprasanna to show the fake account, complete with the court's photograph and official-looking handle, arguing it proved how easily false content could spread online. 'We have opened one account in the name of Supreme Court of Karnataka. And Twitter (X) has opened that account. And it is a verified account by Twitter (X)... now I can post anything in that, and lakhs and lakhs of people who view that account will say Supreme Court of Karnataka has said this,' Mehta told the court. The demonstration was meant to underscore the need for stronger government oversight of social media platforms. In response, X Corp's counsel, senior advocate KG Raghavan, questioned the propriety of creating fake handles without officially placing them on record. Then, as the two-hour hearing concluded, Raghavan announced X had already suspended the fictional account. 'Just to end on a good note, that account has been suspended. We are a responsible organisation,' Raghavan told the court, much to the amusement of the bench. He also clarified that contrary to the solicitor general's claim, the account was not verified by X. Mehta clarified the account was 'purely representational' for 'demonstrative purposes' with no posts made from it, but used the episode to advance broader arguments about user anonymity and platform accountability. 'If a user posts illegal content and is anonymous, who will the aggrieved party sue? X Corp has no officers in India except a grievance officer. Where is the accountability?' he asked. The courtroom drama unfolded during X's legal challenge to the Union government's Sahyog portal, which the company calls a 'censorship portal' that bypasses constitutional safeguards. X argues the portal allows thousands of government officials to issue content takedown orders without proper oversight. Mehta criticised X for resisting Indian regulatory frameworks while complying with local laws elsewhere. 'All other intermediaries have joined the Sahyog portal. Only X Corp has refused. They object to even a non-binding mechanism,' he said. The government has revealed that 38 intermediaries including Google, Microsoft, Amazon and Telegram have joined the portal, with Meta currently testing integration. X remains the most prominent holdout. The government created Sahyog portal to handle notices under Section 79(3)(b) for quick action against illegal online content. The portal is meant to streamline the process by allowing a number of authorised officials— at the state and central levels — to dispatch notices to intermediaries who are onboarded onto the platform. The solicitor general also challenged X's fundamental right to bring the case, arguing the platform lacked legal standing as a foreign company not incorporated in India. The government contended that constitutional protections under Articles 14, 19, and 21 extend primarily to Indian citizens and, in certain cases, to entities incorporated within the country. Additionally, Mehta dismissed X's free speech arguments, contending the platform cannot invoke constitutional protections since it claims to be merely an intermediary. 'They say they are not speakers or authors of the posts, only intermediaries. If that is true, how can they invoke free speech rights?' he asked. The case stems from X's March petition challenging the government's directive mandating social media platforms join the Sahyog portal. The company argues the government is creating parallel blocking mechanisms under Section 79(3)(b) that bypass safeguards required under Section 69A, which the Supreme Court upheld in the landmark Shreya Singhal case. X has previously objected to what its lawyers called takedown orders from 'every Tom, Dick, and Harry' government official, drawing sharp criticism from government representatives. The Karnataka High Court will hear the case next on July 25, when X will file its rejoinder submissions.
