In an early episode of the TV series “Lost,” the plane crash survivors stranded on a mysterious island are running low on water. A fight breaks out, until emerging leader Jack Shephard admonishes everyone to work together.
“If we can’t live together, we’re gonna die alone,” he says.
California lawmakers contemplating our climate future ought to take that lesson to heart.
Senate Bill 540 would help establish a regional electricity market capable of tying together the American West’s three dozen independent power grids. Supporters say it would smooth the flow of solar and wind power from the sunny, windy landscapes where they’re produced most cheaply to the cities where they’re most needed. It would help California keep the lights on without fossil fuels, and without driving up utility bills.
That may sound straightforward, but the bill has bitterly divided environmentalists. Welcome to the Wild West of energy policy.
Some consider regional power-trading a crucial market-based tool for accelerating climate progress. Others see it as a plot by greedy energy companies to enrich themselves.
Those divides didn’t stop the Senate from unanimously passing SB 540. But amendments demanded by skeptical lawmakers are now threatening to derail the bill in the Assembly — even as Gov. Gavin Newsom threw his weight behind the concept Wednesday.
Critics warn that SB 540 would result in California yielding control of its power grid to out-of-state officials and the Trump administration, who could force Californians to pay for coal-fired electricity from Utah and Wyoming. They also worry about market manipulation driving up electric rates.
Those fears are understandable. I also think they’re misguided.
California by itself can’t stop the planet from heating up. The Golden State’s decades-long campaign to slow the wildfires, floods and heat waves of the climate crisis has been predicated on the conviction that eventually, other states and nations will follow along — even oil bastions and MAGA hothouses.
In other words: If we can’t live together, we’re gonna die alone.
Fortunately, even in the wake of President Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” gutting clean energy incentives, solar and wind power are still cheaper than planet-warming coal and fossil gas. Which is why Michael Wara, a Stanford energy and climate scholar, isn’t worried that SB 540 will leave Californians drowning in dirty power. In a regional market, solar and wind will usually outcompete coal and gas.
“Any energy source that requires fuel to operate is more expensive than an energy source that doesn’t,” he said.
The 20-megawatt Maricopa West solar project in California’s Kern County.
(Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)
California also needs to prove that a grid powered entirely by clean energy is affordable and reliable. The state’s rising electric rates are already a big concern. And although the grid has been stable the last few years, thanks to batteries that store solar for after dark, keeping the lights on with more and more renewables might get harder.
Regional market advocates make a strong case that interstate cooperation would help.
For instance, a market would help California more smoothly access Pacific Northwest hydropower, already a key energy source during heat waves. It would also give California easier access to low-cost winds from New Mexico and Wyoming. Best of all, that wind is often blowing strong just as the sun sets along the Pacific.
Another benefit: Right now, California often generates more solar than it can use during certain hours of the day, forcing solar farms to shut down — or pay other states to take the extra power. With a regional market, California could sell excess solar to other states, keeping utility bills down.
“This is about lowering costs,” said Robin Everett, deputy director of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign.
When I wrote about a past regional market proposal in 2017, the Sierra Club was opposed. It believed a regional market would throw an economic lifeline to Utah and Wyoming coal plants owned by Warren Buffett’s PacifiCorp company by giving them access to new markets — including California — to sell their power.
Eight years later, things are different. High costs are driving coal toward extinction. Solar and wind cost even less. Sierra Club staff now say California should be less worried about opening new markets to coal and more worried about averting blackouts or high utility bills that could trigger an anti-renewables backlash.
“Otherwise we’re going to see more and more gas, and a push to keep coal online,” Everett said.
But here’s where the politics get tricky.
Although the Sierra Club endorsed the Pathways Initiative — the detailed regional market plan on which SB 540 is based — it hasn’t endorsed the bill. That’s because many of the club’s volunteer leaders still hate the idea.
They’re not alone.
SB 540’s opponents include the Center for Biological Diversity, Food and Water Watch and Consumer Watchdog. (Full disclosure: My father-in-law, an energy lawyer, has advocated against the bill.) Eight chapters of 350.org and 73 chapters of progressive group Indivisible stand opposed. So does the Environmental Working Group.
On the flip side, supporters include Climate Hawks Vote, the Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Nature Conservancy, the Union of Concerned Scientists and two chapters of 350.org.
Loretta Lynch, who led the state’s Public Utilities Commission during the early-2000s energy crisis, thinks SB 540 would open the door for more market manipulation, giving energy companies legally sanctioned tools to thwart climate goals and force Californians to pay for expensive fossil fuels.
Her warnings have resonated with activists frustrated by California’s investor-owned utilities, which keep raising electric rates and recently helped persuade officials to slash rooftop solar incentives. Indeed, SB 540’s supporters include Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and trade groups for major power producers.
“They want no guardrails or limits on how they can fleece California,” Lynch said.
Montana’s coal-fired Colstrip power plant.
(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)
It’s a compelling narrative. But most energy experts who have studied the bill aren’t convinced.
For one thing, electricity sales have changed dramatically since the energy crisis, with more oversight and fewer last-minute trades limiting the potential for shenanigans. Unlike with past regional market proposals, California would retain control of its grid operator, with only a few functions delegated to a regional entity. And California’s grid is already subject to federal regulation, meaning Trump could try undermining state policy at any time.
Labor attorney Marc Joseph, who helped lead the charge against previous regional market bills, described Lynch’s talking points as “good arguments against a thing that is no longer being proposed.”
“We’re in a different place because it’s a fundamentally different thing,” Joseph said.
Joseph represents the politically powerful International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. After years of fighting regional markets, IBEW is now a vocal supporter. What changed, Joseph said, is that SB 540 would safeguard state climate goals, thus making it a valuable tool to advance solar and wind farms — and create good-paying jobs.
Even with IBEW’s support, though, it’s not clear if SB 540 will reach Newsom’s desk.
To secure support in the Senate in May, Sen. Josh Becker (D-Menlo Park), the bill’s author, added amendments to assuage concerns about California giving up too much control of its grid. Ironically, many of the bill’s key backers now say they’re opposed unless the amendments are removed or tweaked.
Why would they say that? Because California is the biggest electricity user in the West, and other states won’t join a regional market unless they’re confident California will participate — and the amendments would make it easier for the Golden State to bail. Out-of-state utilities don’t want to waste time and money committing themselves to a California-led market only to lose California, and thus many of the economic benefits.
That’s especially true because those utilities have another option. Arkansas-based Southwest Power Pool, which operates the electric grid across much of the central U.S., is recruiting Western utilities to its own regional market. Already, utilities based in Arizona, Colorado and the Pacific Northwest have agreed to join.
Arkansas isn’t leading the West to a clean energy future. California can try — or it can close itself off to the world.
Living together is no guarantee. But dying alone is definitely worse.
This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. And listen to our “Boiling Point” podcast here.
When Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill last year that could have led to reparations for Mexican American families forced from their homes in Chavez Ravine in the 1950s, few knew the Dodgers had weighed in.
Newsom’s explanation was brief. He supported making amends for the injustice that occurred when Los Angeles officials uprooted three communities, seizing land for a housing project that would ultimately fall through before selling it to the Dodgers to enable the team’s move from Brooklyn. But the governor didn’t like that the bill would create a state-level task force rather than a local commission.
“A task force to study the events that occurred should be established at the local level,” Newsom wrote.
But previously unreported records show that the Dodgers lobbied state officials on the bill — as did the baseball team’s previous owner, Frank McCourt, who still shares ownership of the Dodger Stadium parking lots. McCourt’s lobbyists at the time included a firm led by Newsom’s friend Jason Kinney, whose French Laundry birthday dinner Newsom infamously attended at the height of the pandemic.
The records show that the Dodgers and McCourt lobbied on Assembly Bill 1950 — but not what side they took, if any. Did they oppose the legislation? And if so, did that lead to Newsom’s veto? It’s hard to know, because neither the Dodgers nor McCourt responded to my requests for comment.
As for Newsom, a spokesperson told me the governor’s office wasn’t lobbied on the bill — despite McCourt’s real estate company reporting otherwise.
Whatever actually happened, the Dodgers’ involvement raises questions about what went on behind the scenes. The public deserves answers — especially now that President Trump’s immigration raids have placed the team in the political spotlight, forcing its owners to grapple with the political and cultural power they wield.
For nearly two weeks after federal agents began rounding up brown-skinned people across the region, the team refused to comment, despite its more-than-40%-Latino fan base. For many fans, the silence felt like a betrayal — particularly after the team’s recent visit with Trump. A Dodgers employee even told Latina musician Nezza not to sign the National Anthem in Spanish before a game. (She did it anyway.)
I’ll get back to the ICE raids and reparations bill shortly. But first, let’s note that this is hardly the first time that the Dodgers have hesitated to stand for social justice — despite being the franchise of Jackie Robinson.
Since last summer, 28,000 people have signed a petition urging the team to end its relationship with oil company Phillips 66, which advertises its 76 brand gasoline throughout Dodger Stadium. State officials have accused the oil giant of participating in a “decades-long campaign” to cover up the climate crisis — a crisis that affects everybody but is especially harmful to low-income families and people of color, including L.A.’s Latino communities.
A 76 gasoline ad above the right-field scoreboard at Dodger Stadium, seen during a July 4 game against the Astros.
(Kevork Djansezian / Los Angeles Times)
In March, California Senate Majority Leader Lena Gonzalez (D-Long Beach) called on the Dodgers to drop Phillips 66 as a sponsor. In a letter to controlling owner Mark Walter, she pointed out that Angelenos breathe some of the nation’s most polluted air. She also alluded to the link between fossil fuels and more devastating wildfires.
“For decades, the Dodgers have been ahead of the curve. On issues from banning cigarette ads to making history by signing Jackie Robinson, this team has occupied a unique place in American sports,” Gonzalez wrote.
How have the Dodgers responded? At least publicly, they haven’t. Every time I’ve written about Phillips 66, they’ve declined to respond. I suspect they’re hoping the whole issue will just go away.
News flash: It’s not going away. Especially after the ICE raids.
To understand the connection between immigration and environmental justice, I’d recommend listening to Alicia Rivera. She’s an organizer with Communities for a Better Environment, and she’s spoken at rallies outside Dodger Stadium protesting Phillips 66. Even before Trump launched his harsh anti-immigrant crackdown last month, she was explaining how deportations and dirty air are part of the same system of injustices.
As drivers entered the Dodger Stadium parking lots before a game in May, she talked about her young grandson, and her fears over what kind of world he would inherit: How much worse would wildfires get? Would fossil-fueled weather disasters in other countries prompt even more refugees to flee to the U.S.?
“Workers are being detained, arrested in the middle of the street, people who don’t even identify themselves are deporting them. And these oil companies have been complicit in denying us to know the truth, paying millions to pay so-called scientists to deny that their products have caused climate change,” Rivera said.
When I asked Rivera if dumping 76 would be a worthy response to the ICE raids — a way for the Dodgers to show that they care about Latino fans — she had a simple answer: “Of course. That would be a major breakthrough.”
“I see a consistent pattern of disregard for the well-being of the people they are profiting from,” she said.
Community organizer Alicia Rivera speaks at a rally outside Dodger Stadium on Sept. 22.
(Marcus Ubungen / Los Angeles Times)
That pattern arguably goes back decades.
The Chavez Ravine bill wouldn’t have forced the Dodgers to pay a cent to displaced families or their descendants; all it would have done is create a task force to study reparations. But the team has long shied away from so much as discussing the land’s grim backstory.
Only five entities paid lobbyists to weigh in on AB 1950, per an open-source database that compiles state records. Two of them — Fieldstead and Co. and Inclusive Action for the City — went on record supporting the legislation. I confirmed that a third group, the Western Center on Law & Poverty, was also in support.
Only the Dodgers and McCourt’s real estate company, McCourt Partners, haven’t publicly taken a stance.
The Dodgers lobbied the Legislature on AB 1950, while McCourt lobbied both the Legislature and the governor’s office, the records show.
Again, it’s tough to know what happened behind the scenes. Lawmakers passed the bill overwhelmingly, but only after a Senate committee nixed plans for a local task force — exactly what Newsom claimed he wanted.
As far as Wendy Carrillo is concerned, though, the lobbying records speak for themselves.
Carrillo was the state Assembly member, no longer in office, who wrote AB 1950. When I told her what I’d learned, she was outraged. She felt the records confirmed her suspicion that the Dodgers helped kill the bill.
She accused the team of “being disconnected from the very fan base that they have.”
“That same criticism can be made toward their visit to Trump at the White House, and their lack of understanding this moment in Los Angeles amid the growing ICE raids,” Carrillo said.
Dodgers owner Mark Walter looks on as President Trump speaks at the White House in April. The team visited Washington, D.C., to celebrate its 2024 World Series championship.
(Alex Wong / Getty Images)
Indeed, many fans are far from satisfied with the team’s response to Trump’s cruelty. Which is no surprise, given that the Dodgers still seem eager to avoid angering Trump. Team president Stan Kasten was maddeningly vague in his statement touting the $1 million for immigrants, describing the raids as “what’s happening in Los Angeles” and acknowledging only that said happenings have “reverberated among thousands upon thousands of people.”
In contrast, L.A. women’s soccer team Angel City spoke up immediately about the “fear and uncertainty” created by the raids. Its players wore “Immigrant City Football Club” shirts that declared, “Los Angeles is for everyone.”
To Carrillo, the Dodgers’ latest failure to show true solidarity with its Latino fan base is another manifestation of the team’s original sin — its decades-long refusal to acknowledge the Mexican American communities of Bishop, La Loma and Palo Verde, which were bulldozed to make way for Dodger Stadium.
Carrillo, who’s running for state Senate in a district that would include Dodger Stadium, wants Walter and his co-owners — who include basketball legend Magic Johnson and tennis star Billie Jean King — to support a memorial for displaced Chavez Ravine families. And to offer more vocal support for persecuted immigrants today.
The team said its $1 million in donations would be followed by “additional announcements.” So far, crickets.
Owning up to Chavez Ravine’s sordid history would be a great step. So would getting rid of the 76 ads.
Both actions would infuriate the MAGA crowd — but so would just about anything the Dodgers might do in response to the ICE raids. In fact, the backlash has already started. A group co-founded by Trump aide Stephen Miller, the architect of Trump’s anti-immigrant policies, has filed a civil rights complaint against the Dodgers.
Whatever they do next, the Dodgers will make some enemies. Just like they did when they signed Jackie Robinson and broke baseball’s color barrier. The only question is whether they’ll once again stand for justice.
This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. And listen to our “Boiling Point” podcast here.
Grange Hill star Lee MacDonald has issued a stark warning after his latest skin cancer scare.
08:53, 07 Jul 2025Updated 08:56, 07 Jul 2025
Actor Lee MacDonald has spoken candidly about his recent cancer scare, delivering a crucial message to viewers.
With soaring temperatures expected, health experts have emphasised the vital importance of sun protection – something Lee passionately advocates following his personal ordeal.
Richard pointed out that Lee has faced two separate scares, with the 57-year-old revealing his initial concern occurred a year ago.
He explained: “It was found to be non-cancerous. Then, O2 are now doing a campaign for skin cancer awareness.
“On the back of that, I booked an appointment just for the doctors, I’ve got a little rash. It turns out it’s a keratosis, which is a pre-cancerous spot. I’m going to have it burnt out.”
Lee is best known for playing Zammo on the BBC show(Image: ITV/BBC)
The ITV presenter enquired: “So, that means it could turn cancerous?” Lee acknowledged this was indeed a possibility, reports the Manchester Evening News.
He continued: “It was just on the back of going and getting checked out, I think we really need to concentrate on putting skincare on and looking at blemishes on your face and going to get them checked out.”
Susanna then stressed the significance of applying sun cream before asking Lee to discuss his father’s skin cancer diagnosis.
Grange Hill’s Zammo star Lee MacDonald shares symptom as he opens up on cancer scare(Image: ITV)
The actor revealed: “My dad was a driver, for years he would sit with his arm out of the window. My mum would go on about his arm, saying it’s getting burned all the time.
“Later in life, he had skin cancer cut out from that arm.”
Richard pointed out that this cancer is incredibly common for American lorry drivers, who often dangle their arm outside the window whilst on lengthy journeys.
Nevertheless, Lee revealed that his skin cancer risk stemmed not from sun exposure, but from his sunbed usage decades earlier.
The actor detailed the importance of using skincare even when it’s cloudy(Image: ITV)
He explained: “Before I went to nightclubs years ago, I would lay on the sunbeds for an hour a week. I’d do a Tuesday and Thursday from about 17 until I was around 26 (years old).
“That’s what the doctor said it is; it’s probably the sunbeds rather than the sun; I don’t go out in the sun much because of- being aware of the risks.”
As the chat drew to a close, Lee shared with the two ITV presenters that he always applies sunscreen during fishing trips with his son, regardless of cloud cover.
Good Morning Britain continues weekdays on ITV from 6am.
BEVERLY HILLS — Julian McMahon, an Australia-born actor who performed in two “Fantastic Four” films and appeared in TV shows such as “Charmed,” “Nip/Tuck” and “Profiler,” has died, his wife said in a statement.
McMahon died peacefully this week after a battle with cancer, Kelly McMahon said in a statement provided to the Associated Press by his Beverly Hills-based publicist. He was 56, according to the New York Times.
“Julian loved life,” the statement said. “He loved his family. He loved his friends. He loved his work, and he loved his fans. His deepest wish was to bring joy into as many lives as possible.”
Additionally, he had roles in the TV shows “Home and Away,” “FBI: Most Wanted” and “Another World,” according to IMDB.
Actor Alyssa Milano, who appeared with McMahon on “Charmed,” mourned his death on social media, saying “Julian was more than my TV husband.”
“Julian McMahon was magic,” Milano said. “That smile. That laugh. That talent. That presence. He walked into a room and lit it up — not just with charisma, but with kindness. With mischief. With soulful understanding.”
Masked federal agents are snatching up immigrants. It’s been less than two weeks since the U.S. bombed Iranian nuclear facilities. President Trump’s long-threatened tariffs could finally kick in next week.
Given all that, most people probably aren’t focused on climate change.
But they should be. Because Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” which passed the Senate this week and was poised to clear the House early Thursday, would do more than gut Medicaid, cut student loan relief and increase funding for deportations. It would kill federal support for solar and wind power, undoing President Biden’s historic climate law and punishing Americans with deadlier air, more lethal heat waves and higher electric bills.
I’m usually a climate optimist. But it’s hard to find reasons for hope right now.
The Senate bill would eliminate tax credits for solar and wind farms that don’t come online by the end of 2027 — a brutal deadline for projects that take years to permit, finance and construct. That would slam the brakes on new development and also jeopardize hundreds of projects already in the works — not only solar and wind farms, but also factories to build solar panels, wind turbines, lithium-ion batteries and other clean energy technologies.
Solar and wind farms that start construction by June 2026 would get tax credits no matter when they come online, a last-minute concession to the handful of Republican senators with a modicum of sense.
As if needing to counterbalance that concession, Republican leaders added lucrative tax credits for metallurgical coal, an incredibly dirty fossil fuel that’s mostly shipped to China and other countries to make steel.
The bill would also end tax credits for rooftop solar, electric vehicles and energy-efficient home upgrades — while reducing royalty rates for coal mined on public lands, and requiring more oil and gas leasing on those lands.
“The fossil fuel industry helped pay for this government, and now they’re getting their reward,” Bill McKibben, the preeminent climate author and activist, wrote in his newsletter.
That’s part of the explanation. Another part, I think, is that most voters aren’t paying close attention.
Polls consistently show that an overwhelming majority of Americans want cleaner energy, and climate action writ large. But polls also show that climate ranks low as a priority for most Americans.
Wind turbines in the California desert, seen from Highway 58.
(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)
So when it comes time for Trump and his allies to pay for their deficit-ballooning tax cuts — which mostly benefit the rich — clean energy is an easy target. They can tell outrageous lies about solar and wind being unreliable and expensive, and many people will either believe them or not care enough to seek out the truth.
Indeed, Trump wrote on social media last month that renewable energy tax credits are a “giant SCAM.” He claimed that wind turbines “and the rest of this ‘JUNK’” are “10 times more costly than any other energy.”
That’s not even remotely true. Authoritative sources, including the investment bank Lazard, report that solar and wind are America’s cheapest sources of new electricity, even without tax credits. Those low costs help explain why solar, wind and batteries made up 94% of new power capacity in the U.S. last year. Even in Texas, they’re booming.
For now, at least. John Ketchum, president of Florida-based NextEra Energy, warned the Trump administration in March that shelving renewables and battery storage would “force electricity prices to the moon.”
Lo and behold, research firm Energy Innovation estimates the Senate bill would cause average household energy costs to increase $130 annually by 2030. The firm also predicts 760,000 lost jobs by 2030.
“Families will face higher electric bills, factories will shut down, Americans will lose their jobs, and our electric grid will grow weaker,” said Abigail Ross Hopper, president of the Solar Energy Industries Assn.
The point about the grid growing weaker is key. North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, one of three Republicans to vote against the bill, mentioned a global turbine shortage that’s slowing the construction of gas-fired power plants. He stated plainly what energy executives know: that renewables and batteries are needed for a reliable grid.
“What you have done is create a blip in power service,” Tillis told his colleagues.
For one thing, solar and wind projects require big upfront investments, after which the fuel, be it sun or wind, is free. Gas plants are often less expensive to build, but they can subject consumers to huge utility bill swings when fuel costs soar — during geopolitical turmoil, for instance, or during climate-fueled weather disasters.
The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s Eland solar and storage plant, located in Kern County, generates electricity for a record-low price.
(Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times)
Also relevant: Fossil fuel subsidies are so deeply entrenched in the U.S. tax code that they rarely make news. Coal, oil and gas benefit from tens of billions of dollars in subsidies every year, by some estimates.
And that’s without accounting for the bigger wildfires, harsher droughts, stronger storms, hotter heat waves and other harms of fossil fuel combustion, including air pollution that kills millions of people worldwide each year. Oil, gas and coal companies don’t pay those costs. Taxpayers do.
So, yes, solar and wind still need a leg up. But even under Biden’s climate law, the U.S. hasn’t been reducing heat-trapping emissions enough to help keep global warming to less-than-catastrophic levels.
And now, under Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” the U.S. will be moving backward instead of forward.
So if you care about the climate crisis, what can you do?
I wish I could say California was doubling down on climate leadership, like it did during Trump’s first term. Sadly, Gov. Gavin Newsom hasn’t prioritized clean energy as he readies a possible presidential run. Again and again, he and his appointees have yielded to the fossil fuel industry and its allies — on plastics recycling, oil refinery profits, emissions disclosures and more.
Other Golden State leaders are doing no better. This week, lawmakers passed an awful law pushed by Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) that will pause new energy efficiency rules for homes until 2031. Meanwhile, a potentially transformative “climate superfund” bill — which would charge fossil fuel companies for their pollution and use the money to help Californians cope with climate disasters — is languishing in Sacramento.
The landscape is bleak. But we’re not doomed.
The planet will almost certainly warm beyond an internationally agreed upon target of 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels. But 2 degrees is a lot better than 2.5 degrees, and way better than 3 degrees. Climate change isn’t a game we win or lose. Every bit of avoided warming means safer, healthier lives for more people.
Yes, the U.S. is a climate train wreck right now. But global warming is just like immigration or healthcare: Nothing will change if most of us do nothing. So don’t tune out. Don’t surrender to despair. Bring up climate when you talk to your friends and call your representatives. Make protest signs about it. Let it guide your vote.
As McKibben wrote: “Our job from here on out … is to make ourselves heard.”
“It may not work tomorrow. It may not work until we’ve gotten more decent people into office. But it’s our job, and not to be shirked,” he wrote. “And in some sad way it’s an honor: We’re the people who get to make the desperate stand for a country and a planet that works.”
This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. And listen to our “Boiling Point” podcast here.
During his stint on MAFS, Dave Hand was open about his father Howard’s struggle with cancer. Months later, the Aussie hunk shares a devastating update on his dad’s health.
MAFS star Dave Hand made waves on the E4 show – but he’s determined to focus his efforts on bigger projects
After making waves in Married At First Sight Australia, Dave Hand has revealed his father Howard is facing his own storm as his cancer has returned.
From heartbreak to healing, Dave Hand is figuring out what comes after reality TV – one step, one trial and one walk with his dog at a time.
“It’s definitely a lot harder than I expected,” he says, “You’re not only thrown into TV and popularity, it’s like a whole new world. You’re just learning to walk again.”
New to the spotlight of the hit E4 show, Dave didn’t anticipate how fame would ripple into everyday life. “It plays out in everything you do,” he says. “You go out for coffee, you’re taking photos with somebody. Or you’re walking down the street and people are asking you for advice.”
What audiences saw on screen was a man entering the MAFS experiment with real intention. But behind his calm exterior, another story was unfolding. His father, Howard, was battling stage-four cancer.
Dave Hand’s father Howard was battling cancer during his son’s stint on MAFS AU and was unable to attend his wedding ceremony with Jamie Marinos(Image: Instagram)
“A lot of people connected with me through my dad’s sickness,” Dave says, “Cancer is a hell of a disease and it’s an eye-opener because you don’t realise how many people are going through it. It’s really nice to hear people’s stories.”
But reality TV comes with backlash. Dave says he’s experienced both the highs and lows of fan attention. “On one side, you’ve got really nice, heartwarming messages and on the other, you’ve got someone who’s so immature,” Dave says. “You choose to be mean rather than spread kindness and love. I don’t understand it.”
The online noise isn’t the only thing frustrating him. Off-screen drama between his castmates has left Dave disappointed in what could have been a supportive community.
The latest season has been one of MAFS AU’s most explosive yet – with Ryan Donnelly and Jacqui Burfoot’s feud spiralling into restraining orders and off-camera rows erupting between Jacqui, Rhi, Tim, amongst other participants.
“The cast members should be looking after one another after the show. And you’ve got people acting absolutely ridiculous towards one another. It’s a damn shame,” Dave says.
Before settling scores with on-screen rival Adrian Araouzou. “Adrian said some things about me and he absolutely copped it from the public. I feel sorry for him,” he says, “And in the meantime, he’s attacking me. This isn’t the way the group should be handling it. It’s quite scary.”
He adds: “We should be backing each other at this time and we’ve dropped the ball completely. We could have been standing up to the bad comments together.”
Dave is determined to make a difference as he teases plans to head to the UK(Image: @dth_9/Instagram)
Tensions also brewed with Tim during filming but Dave insists that chapter is far behind him. “I’ve moved on from Tim, any anybody who’s thrown shade my way. I’m not hostile,” Dave says. “If I saw him, I’d probably say ‘G’day!’ But if someone paints you a picture, don’t let them paint you another.”
He’s also made peace with the end of his relationship with Jamie Marinos, the 28-year-old digital marketing agent he was matched with.
While Jamie fell fast – telling Dave she loved him just weeks in – he struggled to match the pace. “After the show, I’ve learned that I really want to take my time with somebody,” he says, “It takes time for me. I’m not as quick as Jamie was, falling in love after six weeks.”
He continues: “You can love somebody when things are all good and happy but when things get hard, you don’t really know who this person is. Jamie said two weeks later that she didn’t love me. I feel like she loved the idea of me or the idea of someone she wanted me to be.”
Now, Dave’s focus is back where it matters the most – his father. The cancer Howard had kept at bay during filming has returned. “The tumours my dad had on the show that had previously shrunk – they’ve come back pretty quickly,” Dave says, emotion straining his voice.
“He’s on a new trial now. Only 200 people in the world are doing it. My dad’s response for doing it is, ‘if I can help somebody out, I’m going to give this trial a crack and help the future.’”
Dave says he’s no longer in touch with Jamie after the pair went their separate ways(Image: Nine)
But Dave doesn’t sugar-coat the toll it’s taken. “He’s been fighting it for five years and now it’s taken a toll on him,” Dave adds, “He’s a bit frail and now he’s got to go into battle again.”
Looking ahead, Dave is considering a bold next chapter. “I want to get over to the UK,” he says, “I’d love to do some reality TV over there. I’ll probably come out later in the year.”
As for dating? He’s in no rush. In fact, he’s more focused on mental health advocacy. “Mental health issues and depression have been in my family, I’ve witnessed it, I’ve lived it,” he says.
“But I’ve processed it, I deal with it and I know what works for me. I can help others with that. I want to get the message across that the sad days don’t stick.”
His long-term dream? A mental health charity. “I’d like to touch base on some mental health stuff and be a role model for younger kids,” he says. “I want to start a charity one day.”
Until then, Dave’s not walking alone. His five-year-old Marana dog is always by his side during his toughest days. “He’s definitely helped keep me grounded,” Dave says.
DIY cervical cancer tests will be sent to women’s homes under NHS plans to boost uptake and help eradicate the disease.
The kits will be posted to those who have ignored or missed their smear test invitation and are therefore “underscreened”.
2
Only 69 per cent of women take part in cervical cancer screening, well below the 80 per cent targetCredit: Getty
They contain a swab to self-sample the cervix for human papillomavirus (HPV), a group of viruses that cause 99 per cent of cervical cancers.
The NHS wants to eliminate the cancer entirely by 2040 using screening and vaccination.
But only 69 per cent of women take part in screening, well below the 80 per cent target.
This means that more than five million women in England are not up to date with their check-ups.
Read more on cervical cancer
The screening programme saves an estimated 5,000 lives per year in England but the number could be higher with better uptake.
Health chiefs said women may avoid their smear test for fear it will hurt or be embarrassing, or because they struggle to find the time.
The new test is a quick at-home sample that is then sent off to a lab in the post.
Health bosses hope it will help overcome barriers that prevent some women from attending cervical cancer screening appointments.
The initiative will be rolled out in January 2026.
Health Secretary Wes Streeting said: “These self-sampling kits represent healthcare that works around people’s lives, not the other way around.
Cervical cancer could be eradicated as HPV vaccine slashes 90% of cases
“They put women firmly in control of their own health, ensuring we catch more cancers at their earliest, most treatable stages.”
“We know the earlier cancer is diagnosed the better the chances are of survival.
“By making screening more convenient, we’re tackling the barriers that keep millions of women from potentially life-saving tests.”
Research has suggested that offering DIY testing kits could boost uptake.
A trial – led by King’s College London in partnership with NHS England – found that offering self-sampling kits to “under-screened” women when they attend their GP practice and by posting kits to women’s homes could boost uptake in England by about 400,000 each year.
The Department of Health and Social Care said that the new programme “specifically targets those groups consistently missing vital appointments” including younger women, those from minority ethnic backgrounds, people with disabilities and LGBTQ+ people.
At-home cervical cancer screening is part of the government’s upcoming 10 Year Health Plan, due to be published in the coming weeks, which will focus preventing illness instead of only treating it when symptoms appear.
2
Eve Appeal chief executive, Athena Lamnisos, said: “There are so many different reasons why those who are eligible aren’t responding to their cervical screening invitation letter.
“HPV self-testing will be a step change for some. Being able to do the test in their own time and following simple instructions is what many people want and need.
“Ensuring that the under-screened and never screened know about this new test is vital for Eve.”
Michelle Mitchell, chief executive of Cancer Research UK, added: “We welcome the UK government’s decision to roll out cervical cancer home screening kits in England – to help remove barriers and make cervical screening more accessible.
“The gold standard way to test for HPV is still a sample taken by a clinician and this will be suitable for most people.
“But beating cervical cancer means beating it for everyone, and this move helps to bring us closer to that goal.
“It’s important to remember that cervical screening is for people without symptoms so, if you notice any unusual changes for you, do not wait for a screening invitation – speak to your doctor.”
The NHS Cervical Screening Programme invites women and people with a cervix aged 25 to 64 for regular screening.
Under current guidelines, people aged 25 to 49 are called back for a check-up every three years if they test negative for HPV, whereas 50 to 64-year-olds are invited for checks every five years.
Nearly all cervical cancers are caused by an infection with certain high-risk types of human papillomavirus (HPV).
HPV is the name for a very common group of viruses that most people will get some type of HPV during their lives.
It’s very common and nothing to feel ashamed or embarrassed about.
You can get HPV from any kind of skin-to-skin contact of the genital area, not just from penetrative sex.
This includes:
Vaginal, oral or anal sex
Any skin-to-skin contact of the genital area
Sharing sex toys
In most cases your body will get rid of HPV without it causing any problems.
But sometimes HPV can stay in your body for a long time and some types of high risk types of HPV can cause cervical cancer.
If high risk types of HPV stay in your body, they can cause changes to the cells in your cervix. These changes may become cervical cancer if not treated.
How to lower your risk of cervical cancer
You can’t always prevent cervical cancer. But there are things you can do to lower your chances of getting cervical cancer.
Cervical screening and HPV vaccination are the best ways to protect yourself from cervical cancer.
All women and people with a cervix between the ages of 25 and 64 are invited for regular cervical screening. It helps find and treat any changes in the cells of the cervix before they can turn into cancer.
All children aged 12 to 13 are offered the HPV vaccine. It helps protect against the types of HPV that cause most cases of cervical cancer, as well as some other cancers and genital warts.
You can also lower your chance of getting cervical cancer by:
Using condoms, which lower your chance of getting HPV – but they do not cover all the skin around your genitals so you’re not fully protected
Quitting smoking – smoking can weaken your immune system and the chemicals in cigarettes can also cause cervical cancer
Source: NHS
The change comes after evidence showed that people who test negative for HPV are extremely unlikely to develop cervical cancer within the next decade.
Anyone whose sample shows traces of HPV will continue to be invited to more frequent screenings.
Digital invitations and reminders for cervical screening were also recently rolled out as part of the NHS App’s ‘ping and book’ service to boost uptake.
Cervical cancer symptoms, such as bleeding between periods and during sex, should be investigated by a GP.
Around 13 high-risk types of HPV are known to cause 99.7 per cent of cervical cancers.
They cause cell changes which can eventually turn cancerous.
Dangerous strains of the common virus can also lead to mouth, anal, penile, vulval and vaginal cancer.
Former Sky News journalist Dermot Murnaghan has opened up about his journey with stage four prostate cancer, with an important message for other men. And it’s not the first time the sporty broadcaster has shared details about his health
Dermot Murnaghan has been diagnosed with stage four cancer
Dermot Murnaghan has today revealed he has been diagnosed with stage four cancer. The 67-year-old broadcaster told how he’s undergoing treatment for prostate cancer, and urged other men to make sure they get themselves tested.
Praising his “outstanding medical team”, former Sky News reporter Dermot issued a statement via social media platform X, writing: “Some personal news……I’ve been diagnosed with Stage IV advanced prostate cancer I’m fortunate to have a simply outstanding medical team looking after me, who I can’t thank enough – they are administering the best possible care with expertise, compassion and sensitivity.”
He continued: “I’m responding positively to their excellent treatment and feeling well. I’m blessed to be fortified by the monumental love and support of my wife, family and close friends. Needless to say, my message to all men over 50, in high-risk groups, or displaying symptoms, is get yourself tested and campaign for routine prostate screening by the NHS.”
The journalist is known for his active lifestyle(Image: Getty Images)
Journalist Dermot went on to share that, going forward, he hopes to participate in Sir Chris Hoy’s fundraising charity bike ride in Glasgow this September, encouraging followers to make a donation if they can.
In a previous interview with the Mail Online, keen cyclist Dermot opened up about his health, describing himself as “fairly fit”.
He shared that his father had “lived till the ripe old age of 86”, before offering his own thoughts on the prospect of “living forever”. He reflected: “Only if everyone else I knew could. Being old without your loved ones could be very lonely. “
The Devon-born media personality also opened up about his healthy diet, which he supplements with immune-boosting vitamin C and zinc tablets, and spoke about his “worst illness or injury”, telling the publication how he was injured after a dog lunged at his bike.
He said: “A few years ago, I broke four ribs when a pitbull knocked me off my bike. The charming owner then had the audacity to reprimand me for scaring his dog. They can’t do much for broken ribs, you’re just sent off with strong painkillers. For eight weeks, sleeping was very uncomfortable and sneezing, coughing or laughing could aggravate it. Even now, when I turn to my right side, I often feel a twinge.”
Content cannot be displayed without consent
This, unfortunately, isn’t the only time that Dermot has found himself in peril while on the road. In 2017, the newsreader shared photographs of his bruised face after he was injured in a hit-and-run incident. He told fans at the time: “Here’s why I haven’t been on air for 2 days. A hit and run in Kentish Town yesterday. Police were fantastic.”
Delving into the incident in more detail on Sky News, Dermot explained: “Having worked on Breakfast TV for 10 years in two stints, I’ve become a bit of an early bird. So last Thursday I woke at 6am, put on my hi-vis cycling jacket got on my bike to meet my mates for a few healthy miles before work.
“Twenty minutes later, I was lying by the side of the road with a broken cycle helmet and a hobbled bike, still spinning, lights shining – and a variety of cuts, bruises and abrasions. But thankfully, no broken bones.”
He added: “On an empty road in north London, a guy in a car on a mobile phone pulled out from the side of the road without indicating. I swerved that. But a millisecond later, he U-turned into me and wiped me out.
“The Good Samaritan who saw it says the driver then sped off. I didn’t catch his name in the muddle, so if you read this, thank you from the bottom of my heart. The perpetrator was too interested in his phone to bother to stop and would have left me lying in the road.
“Police were there within five minutes and were absolutely fantastic. Took all the details and went to check the CCTV. Then drove me and my crushed bike home. Professional through and through. “
Turns out Kat Timpf is now one of the people she used to want to throw up on.
Timpf’s transformation was revealed Monday in her return to Fox News’ late-night show “Gutfeld,” where she had a regular co-host seat before going out on maternity leave in February.
That leave included a breast cancer diagnosis that came just 15 hours before she gave birth. Soon after delivery, she had a double mastectomy.
“For you keeping score, Kat had sex, which in getting pregnant cured her cancer, meaning sex cures cancer,” host Greg Gutfeld explained. That said, the show did welcome back its missing libertarian with semi-seriousness.
“We’re super happy Kat’s returned. We missed her dearly. We know the future will still be hard for her. There will be other hurdles, I’m sure, but we have faith in her, as much as I hope she has faith in us, to be here when things get rough or when things get better,” Gutfeld said, “but she still complains. So, please welcome Kat back and congratulate her for kicking out a baby and kicking cancer.”
Timpf quickly laid it all out there about what she’d done on her three-month spring break.
“So, I am boob-free,” said the co-host, who is married since 2021 to former Army Ranger Cameron Friscia. “I am cancer-free as well. So, I’m very, yeah, I’m very excited about it.
“It was, it was a hard thing to go through, and it still is, as you know, you mentioned, I still have reconstruction surgeries ahead. I still have things to go through, tough thing to go through, easy decision to make because, like, I didn’t want to risk my life for some f— 32 As.”
“Been there,” co-host Tyrus joked.
Seriously, Timpf says she loves being a mom, even with the personal drama that accompanied it.
“The whole thing, the way that it happened, it really was truly insane,” she said. “I really had a day between the cancer diagnosis and the labor, and we don’t know for sure what happened. I could have gotten cancer because I was pregnant, and even if I did, he’s still so worth it, because I love him so much. And I know that’s so cheesy, and I know that’s so gross, and I used to hear people say that, and like how I can’t imagine my life without him.
“And I used to want to throw up on them, but now I’m one of those people.”
Tyrus, left, Kat Timpf, Greg Gutfeld, Kennedy and comedian Dave Angelo on Fox News’ late-night show “Gutfeld!”
(Fox News)
“Yeah, you know what?” Gutfeld said. “It’s called a transformational experience where you couldn’t even go back in time and explain to yourself what it’s like.” (He had his own transformational experience slightly before Timpf did: The 60-year-old and wife Elena Moussa welcomed baby girl Mira in December.)
Fill-in host Kennedy, a mother of two, said she was just trying not to cry now that Timpf was back and a mom and healthy, and finally Tyrus got to welcome back his “partner in crime,” saying, “It’s been f— horrible. Thank God you’re back.” He also lobbied for Kennedy to get a permanent chair on “Gutfeld!”
Then he announced he had a surprise for the kiddo he had nicknamed “Big Ben,” thanks to a sonogram picture he saw where the baby was the same length as a wristwatch.
“I have a gift for Big Ben, because every young man starting out in the world needs to have — now, he can’t have it right now, you got to wait, but — he needs to have his own Godzilla,” the comic and former pro wrestler said. “So, this is for Big Ben’s first — this is Big Ben’s first action figure. Not a doll.”
“This ain’t girl stuff. This is an action figure for Big Ben.”
Gutfeld, meanwhile, had already given the gift of advice to Baby Timpf-Friscia. During his monologue, he noted that the little guy “came into the world already a hero, for he saved his mommy’s life.”
“If I were him, I would hold that over her head every chance I get,” Gutfeld said. He specifically suggested the child use it as leverage to get his hands on the car keys before he is legally old enough to drive and possibly to procure some Mike’s Hard Lemonade.
And, because the show has running jokes about the hosts of “The View,” he couldn’t help but compliment Timpf for tackling her cancer, noting she had “tackled it head-on, like Joy Behar shoving aside security at a KFC grand opening.”
