Latest news with #Spandex
Economist
09-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Economist
What Superman tells you about American foreign policy
IT is hard to take a man in blue tights and red briefs seriously. But in a new movie, released on July 11th, Superman has taken on the extremely serious job of being the world's policeman. The Man of Steel (David Corenswet, pictured, snapping on the Spandex for the first time) stops one country from invading another. He has done a good thing, he feels, and saved lives. Yet Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan, who brings a welcome spikiness to the role) is sceptical of unilateral action: does Superman stop to think about the consequences of getting involved in other countries' conflicts, she wonders?
Perth Now
30-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Perth Now
Olivia Palermo loves wearing leather
Olivia Palermo's "uniform" is leather. The 40-year-old model loves wearing garments made from the material and insisted it is suitable for all weathers if worn in the right way. She told Britain's HELLO! magazine: "It's like my uniform. You can go anywhere in it, even in the summer, if you wear it in a light way." While the former City star is a fan of monochrome pieces, she is a particular fan of mint green clothing and insisted it is a hue that suits everyone. She said: "As a fashion person, I love black and white, but I also love colour. As a child, my favourite dress was mint green, and that still resonates. It looks beautiful on everyone." And there are some trends Olivia refuses to follow. She said: "I don't like the ugly shoe trend. That's not for me. I also think Spandex should really just be for the gym." The brunette beauty married Johannes Huebel in 2014, seven years after they first met, and they are both always happy to offer an opinion on the other's outfit choice. Asked if Johannes gives his opinion on her wardrobe, she said: "Oh yes. He worked as a model for 12 years before I showed up in his life. The Palermo-Huebl household is quality control on steroids. We always give our two cents." Olivia turned 40 in February but felt relaxed about reaching the milestone age because she looks and feels "good". She said: "Honestly, it's just a number. When it comes to age, what's the point in hiding it? Own it. I've lived a wonderful life. I feel good, I look good, I have a great team around me, and my focus is on longevity and health. "Johannes and I are a great support system for each other in that sense. We have the same views on how to live our life." Olivia isn't a fan of being called an influencer but thinks it hard to find a title which does suit her. She said: "I laugh, because when you look at my entire career, you see how much the [fashion] world has changed. Titles have changed. I've been labeled so many different things. It was nice to set a template for the world that they could take and use. "[Now] I am fashion from every direction."
Forbes
11-06-2025
- Business
- Forbes
When Food Became Fashion. Is Your Outfit Made From Corn or Crude Oil?
The future of fashion will be grown. getty The fashion industry has made huge strides to address its environmental impact but mainstream media focus has often been fast fashion, clothing manufacturing and human rights. While glossy campaigns tout conscious collections and earth tones, the lesser known challenge is a fibre problem. Most clothes are still made from synthetic materials derived from fossil fuels or water-intensive crops like cotton. The underlying fabric hasn't actually changed much, until recent years. Recently, PANGAIA, the materials science company-slash-fashion brand, has just launched its most advanced plant-based activewear to date: the 365 Seamless Activewear collection. It marks the commercial debut of a new bio-based elastane called regen™ BIO Max, an innovation made from mostly agricultural feedstocks, like industrial corn, developed by fibre specialists Hyosung. Combined with EVO® Nylon derived from castor beans, the range is then finished with the brand's signature peppermint oil treatment to reduce odour and washing frequency. The new range shows that sustainable fashion is finally growing up - not just in ethos, but also in engineering. And yet, it's taken decades for these kinds of materials to make it to market. Why? Despite Fashion's reputation for reinvention, the industry supply chain is notoriously rigid. Most clothing garments still rely on conventional cotton, polyester, and elastane-- materials that are cheap, scalable, and readily available across global manufacturing networks. Polyester alone accounts for over 50% of global fibre production. Sure, it's durable– but derived from petroleum. Traditional elastane (also known as Spandex) is also energy-intensive to produce and non-biodegradable. These materials linger in landfill long after their athleisure lifecycle has ended. Cotton, although natural, isn't entirely a get-out-of-jail-free card either. Cotton is thirsty, chemically intensive and contributes to pesticide runoff in many parts of the world. More importantly, all of these materials are deeply embedded within the industry and across all of it's major players. This is the backdrop against which alternative materials have struggled to gain traction. Like many young businesses, promising innovations often stalled at the intersection of cost, consistency, and scale. Many were relegated to the realm of fashion experiments or future-gazing lookbooks – merely a marketing campaign for some brands looking to greenwash some of their impact. So why are we seeing a shift now? The turning point is perhaps less about tech breakthroughs and more about mindset shifts. As climate risk becomes more urgent and regulatory scrutiny gets tighter, brands are under pressure to think beyond a one-off planet-friendly product and tackle their upstream impact. Consumers, too, are asking smarter questions: not just where a garment is made, but what it's made of and how. Patrick Baptista Pinto, Forbes 30 Under 30 honoree and cofounder of Really Clever, a company developing sustainable biomaterials from fungi and among the first globally to build a pilot factory says: 'We're seeing a real shift in the market—brands are no longer just looking for leather alternatives, but for biomaterials that can replace synthetic materials more broadly. With the consistent stream of research highlighting the harm microplastics have on our health, there's growing urgency to find better solutions." Inbound demand from consumers and brands is one thing, but perhaps the most crucial change is that new material innovators are finally delivering on functionality without compromise. They look, feel and perform just as well as the legacy materials - not just for consumers but from a commercial standpoint too. 'With the completion of our pilot factory earlier this year, we've met key industry standards and reached price parity with synthetics in select product categories,' continues Pinto, "This puts us in a strong position to help drive systemic change across the materials industry.' PANGAIA's strength lies in its R&D-forward model. It's not a fashion brand dabbling in green—it's positioned as a materials science company with a fashion arm. By working directly with fibre manufacturers, it brings some more scientific rigour to what is often a superficial space. Their model is also clear: develop innovative materials, validate performance and environmental impact, and then bring them to market in wearable, design-led formats. Although some industry voices argue PANGAIA's narrative veers into marketing gloss, this approach has earned them a loyal following and positioned them as a quiet leader in textile innovation. What sets this new collection apart is how seamlessly (pun intended) it blends performance with planet and without slipping into the tired tropes of 'eco fashion'. No hemp-heavy silhouettes. No guilt-ridden greenwashing. Just well-designed activewear that happens to be better for the planet. PANGAIA may be leading the charge, but it's not alone. Alternative materials are showing up across the consumer landscape. Stella McCartney was an early mover in mycelium leather, debuting mushroom-based Mylo handbags. Ganni has experimented with grape leather and even Hermès has quietly tested lab-grown materials. Their participation is proof that innovation isn't just for disruptors. In footwear, brands like Vivobarefoot have introduced a range of supernatural materials from micro algae, banana fibre and seashell waste. Patagonia's biobased wetsuits and Levi's hemp-blended denim also signal some much needed change within the performance and heritage categories too. What these examples show is that the idea of 'alternative materials' is becoming less fringe, and more foundational. Despite the promise, adoption is far from widespread. Most alternative materials still account for less than 1% of the market. Costs remain hig and certifications are patchy. Ultimately, any meaningful scale requires buy-in from the biggest players—not just disruptive start-ups and independent eco-friendly businesses. There's also a branding problem. Many consumers still equate 'plant-based' with weak performance or scratchy textures. There's work to be done in rebranding these innovations and positioning them as upgrades, not compromises. That's where the storytelling comes in. Brands like PANGAIA are helping to rewrite the narrative—not by dumbing down science, but by making it wearable, desirable and emotionally resonant. They've shown that you don't have to choose between function and ethics or between good looks and good impact. If we want fashion to become truly sustainable, we need more than recycled polyester and organic cotton on our shop shelves. We need a reinvention of the very fibres we have come to rely upon. That reinvention is finally underway but it won't be fast. It requires long-term investment, system-wide collaboration, and a willingness to rethink what 'normal' looks like in fashion. Brands need to back innovation but also educate their communities on why it matters. Investors need to back brands doing their bit to make systemic change. Consumers (and the communities they make) have more power than they realise. Every purchase is a vote for the type of future we want to wear. Every voice on social media is an amplification of what's important. PANGAIA's latest drop isn't just another collection—it's a signal. A signal that material innovation has matured and that alternatives are here. A signal that the fabric of fashion itself might finally be ready to change.
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
The £100,000 facelift that's knocked years off Kris Jenner at 69
Everybody loves a transformation story. Had Grease been written in 2025, however, Olivia Newton John would have had to do a lot more than shuck on a biker jacket and a pair of Spandex trousers to make an impact. In a world where billions are vying for attention by ever more desperate means, transformations are two a penny. These days, no diet, makeover or wardrobe glow-up in the world can compete with the impact of a really good facelift. We all know Ozempic can make us thin, and that a stylist can help us dress better. But turning back the years to look 10 years younger? That's still a mystery; a cloak-and-dagger affair whose dark magic occurs behind closed doors, by unknown hands, at unknown cost, with unknown pain and recovery time. Which is likely why so many women can talk of little else these days than Kris Jenner. From the cruise shows of Avignon and Rome to the restaurants of Mayfair to the beach bars of Ibiza, the chat is the same: how, exactly, did the 69-year-old matriarch of the Kardashian clan get her dewy, youthful, plump-yet-taut new visage? And where can we get one? While most women might buy some new clothes to wear to a hen weekend, Kris Jenner went out and bought a new face. When the hen weekend is thrown by Jeff Bezos' soon-to-be-bride Lauren Sanchez, and takes place in Paris, perhaps a Me+Em dress doesn't cut it. No matter that Sanchez, Katy Perry, Eva Longoria and Kim Kardashian were dressed up in their finest garb: they may as well have worn Shein. All eyes were fixated upon Jenner. 'She looks just like Kim!' the internet exclaimed. Which she did – despite being a quarter of a century older. On Tiktok, the hashtag #krisjennernewface has been trending ever since Jenner unveiled her new look, with 57.5 million posts and counting. How-to videos abound, with everyone from surgeons to influencers to your auntie Karen chipping in with their opinions. 'She looks like she's fresh out of the womb,' says the influencer GK Barry, in a post that's had 468.9K views. 'What kind of freaky sorcery is this?' says another user. 'Who is this surgeon, because they are an artist.' The 'artist' in question is Dr Steven Levine, the New York-based surgeon beloved by A-listers for his natural-looking facial enhancements. In a statement shared by Page Six, Levine's representatives confirmed him as the surgeon behind Jenner's most recent work, though they didn't give further details about the procedures. Which hasn't stopped people from speculating. While most celebrities are understandably tight-lipped about the work they've had done, Jenner has previously been open about going under the knife, with one of her procedures even being documented on an episode of Keeping Up With The Kardashians. It's believed that this is Jenner's fifth surgery: as for what she's had done, that depends on who you ask. 'To achieve this sort of transformation in someone who is in their late 60s would likely require a deep plane face and neck lift, blepharoplasty and fat grafting to address lower face jowling and laxity in the neck area,' claims Dr Jonny Betteridge, founder of JB Aesthetics in Mayfair, London. 'This is likely revision surgery, as she would have had surgery in previous years.' According to leading plastic surgeon Patrick Mallucci, Jenner's rejuvenated face has made an impact on account of being unusually well-balanced. 'Looking at her before and after pictures, it appears she's had a brow lift, possibly her upper eyelids operated on, and a very well-done facelift, possibly a deep plane, though it's very difficult to tell the technique by looking at a picture,' he surmises. 'When you look at the thirds of her face – the upper, middle and lower – she's got a very nice, balanced jawline. Unlike some of the facelifts of 20 years ago, where people looked very obviously overpulled and overtightened, this really brings out her good features.' Mallucci's clinic in South Kensington, London, has seen a 30 per cent increase in facelift enquiries over the last five years, as the stigma of 'going under the knife' wanes, and procedures improve in terms of results and recovery time. 'While non-surgical treatments can complement face lifting and stave off the knife until later, ultimately there comes a time when only a facelift can truly rejuvenate an ageing face requiring anatomical improvement,' he says. The 'Rolls Royce' of these is the deep plane. Where a traditional facelift tightens the skin, a deep plane lifts and repositions deeper layers of facial tissue, including sagging muscles and fat, allowing for more natural-looking results which are also longer-lasting. A traditional facelift typically lasts five to seven years: a deep plane can last for up to fifteen. Their subtle results have made 'guess the deep plane' the internet's favourite parlour game, with Nicole Kidman, Anne Hathaway and Lindsey Lohan all recently being cited as allegedly having had the procedure, though this is pure speculation. For her part, Lohan says her appearance is thanks to a healthy diet and laser treatments. Celebrities who have admitted to having deep plane facelifts include the socialite Caroline Stanbury (who had hers aged 49) and the designer Marc Jacobs (who had his at 58). 'There is no such thing as an ideal age for a deep plane facelift, but over the age of 40-45 would generally make a great candidate,' notes the consultant plastic surgeon Mark Solomos. 'You can actually do a deep plane endoscopic facelift at the age of 35 without any obvious scars in front of the ear.' Nor does any previous work tend to be a barrier. 'The only things that would matter would be treatments such as Sculptra. Hyaluronic fillers don't matter too much unless you've overdone it, likewise excessive radio frequency, which tends to burn the fat and creates problems in the subcutaneous tissue.' As for whether 'the Kris effect' means surgeons should now be braced for a wave of clients wanting to look not 10 but 30 years younger than their age, Dr Mallucci believes that managing expectations is key. 'It's very important that I understand what it is that my patients are looking for, but it's equally important that I communicate to them what's realistically achievable. Promising results which are not surgically achievable serves no purpose and only causes disappointment.' And also a depleted bank balance. While a deep plane facelift typically costs between £25,000 – £60,000, it's estimated that the bill for Kris Jenner's work cost in the region of £100,000. Small change for the world's most successful 'momager', but a prohibitively eye-watering amount for most. When your life is lived through a long lens, in the pressure cooker that is Hollywood, it takes more than 'lots of water' to look your best. For better or for worse, the six figure facelift era starts here. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
New York Post
22-05-2025
- Business
- New York Post
NASA spent almost $900K on taxpayer-funded union time last year
NASA spent more than double what it originally reported on taxpayer-funded union time — where federal employees perform union-related duties while being paid by the government — last year, fresh data from the space agency revealed. Originally, NASA reported an expense of $417,798 on union time, but now the space agency is updating that figure to $893,620 over the 12 months ending Sept. 30, The Post has learned. 'As has been the case with other federal agencies under the Biden administration, NASA bureaucrats were racking up an astronomical tab doing union time on the taxpayers' dime,' Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), whose office requested the data, told The Post. 'We need to end the absurd practice of taxpayer-funded union time across government to ensure that federal employees serve the American people, not themselves.' 3 NASA admitted that it initially undercounted its spending on union time. Getty Images 3 Sen. Joni Ernst has been probing federal spending on union time. Getty Images NASA also spent more than previously known on union activities in 2023. Initially, the space agency reported spending $477,204 in fiscal year 2023, but now the agency is updating those figures to $636,189. Meanwhile, its budget shrank from $25.4 billion in fiscal year 2023 to $24.88 billion in fiscal year 2024. Taxpayer-funded union time includes labor meetings, union-sponsored training activities, preparations for collective bargaining, work on behalf of those facing disciplinary action and more. Due to the Federal Service Labor Management Relations Statute, federal unions can't negotiate with Uncle Sam on pay or benefits, which are determined by legal and regulatory policy. Instead, federal unions negotiate over smaller-scale issues such as workplace procedures and telework policies. 'They're left negotiating for tedious things that are of zero or negative benefit to taxpayers,' Rachel Greszler, a senior research fellow on workforce and public finance at the Heritage Foundation, previously explained to The Post. 'This includes things like the height of cubicle panels, securing designated smoking areas on otherwise smoke-free campuses, and the right to wear Spandex at work.' 3 NASA saw its budget shrink between 2023 and 2024, but taxpayer-funded union time shot up. Christopher Sadowski In 2023, there were 43 employees at NASA who logged in taxpayer-funded union time, with about 6,588.5 hours of union work done that year. By 2024, that jumped to 49, with 8,780.25 union work done, according to the new data. NASA is covered by two prominent federal unions — the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers and the American Federation of Government Employees. Ernst, who chairs the Senate DOGE Caucus, has been seeking to end the practice of taxpayer-funded union time and fired off a slew of requests to 24 government agencies demanding data. NASA had been one of the first to respond. In a statement to The Post, the agency said it always 'complies with federal law.' 'In keeping with precedent, NASA is committed to providing transparency to those conducting oversight in the legislative branch,' a spokesperson said. 'NASA complies with federal law, allowing employees to be granted official time to perform certain labor union representation activities.' So far, of the agencies that have divulged data to Ernst's office, the largest expenditure on taxpayer-funded union time came from the Defense Health Agency, which spent $3.3 million on it in fiscal years 2023 and 2024. DHA is tasked with overseeing TRICARE benefits for military members. The Office of Personnel Management used to collect comprehensive data on taxpayer-funded union time, but stopped after 2019. In February, the Trump administration pushed agencies to report that data. In 2019, OPM found that the entire federal government had spent at least $135 million on taxpayer-funded union time. NASA spent $641,037 in 2019, according to the OPM data.
