display

CHLOE Madeley and her rugby star ex-husband have proven there’s no bad blood between them these days.

Chloe and James Haskell – who divorced in 2023 after a five-year marriage – took to Instagram to show off some impressive moves, as Chloe used a shirtless James as a human teeterboard.

The former couple – who share daughter Bodhi, three – filmed themselves in a living room, trying to master some one-on-one acrobatics.

Both heavily into fitness, the pair were replicating another social media video of a different couple doing the same routine.

Chloe, 38, was transparent about the potentially eyebrow-raising video, captioning it: “Yea ok it’s a tad unconventional but it’s also top tier content so here we are.”

In the clip, Chloe was seen balancing on James, 41, who showed off his shirtless muscular frame in the process.

Read more about celeb exes

EX-TREME ANTICS

Celeb Ex on the Beach’s most shocking scenes from f-word rant to punch-up

EYES ON THE PRIZE

Ciaran sets his sights on ANOTHER Love Islander after Samie split

Dressed in comfy sweatpants and a hoodie, Chloe sat on the floor in front of her former spouse, facing away from him, as James held onto her arms.

Chloe then attempted to roll backwards several times without much luck, trying to contain their giggles in the process.

The pair eventually managed to pull off the trick, as Chloe rolled into James, placing her feet onto his bare stomach and launching herself upwards.

James clung onto his ex-wife before she toppled forward in fits of laughter.

The pair shocked fans when they split three years ago, after they welcomed their daughter in 2022.

Chloe – who is the daughter of TV duo Richard and Judy – has opened up about the split, branding it “really unbelievably stressful”.

Their divorce was recently finalised, with Chloe saying: “It’s fine now, but the process has been incredibly emotional and volatile.

“We have weeks where everything’s fine and we get on really well. And then we have weeks where we don’t agree on something or someone gets frustrated or angry, and then we don’t speak.”

James is set to appear on the new series of Celebs Go Dating, and insists he discussed it with Chloe ahead of signing up.

Of the decision, he said in a podcast interview earlier this month: “I loved the experience… I went on Celebs Go Dating not necessarily to find love but to showcase myself in a different light.

“I think Celebs Go Dating was a way of going on there, having fun, meeting someone, and I think being very aware that my daughter will be watching one day so being very respectful of my ex.

“I obviously talked to her about it and yeah, I’ve had five dates, they’ve all been lovely people but one I might date again.”

Following their secret split, a source said: “Chloe and James have been fighting for a long time to make a go of their marriage. 

“Having a young baby, and James being away so often would take a toll on anyone. But some of James’ behaviour was upsetting, and he knows that.

“Things are completely civil between them, and they shall remain friends. Bodhi is their number one priority.”

KATIE Price has put on a busty display during a workout after confessing she “begged doctors” for answers over her weight loss.

Over the last year the former glamour model’s shrinking frame has caused concern amongst her fans.

Katie went strength training with her husband Lee Andrews in a bright pink plunging top and matching shorts.

Lee shared the video clip to Instagram and can be heard motivating his wife and helping her to train.

And although Katie was concentrating hard on her exercises, the glamour model raised a smile when her husband joked: “You can smile, you know.”

Katie recently revealed she was too thin and had begged Doctors for help, when TV host Susanna Reid explained she was worried about the “very skinny” star when she appeared on GMB.

HEL OF A TIME

Helen Flanagan reveals Corrie comeback plans and ‘drama’ on Ex on the Beach

motor on

Katie Price drives in Dubai for first time but £180k Ferrari nowhere to be seen

After talking about her whirlwind marriage to fourth husband Lee Andrews, 41, the topic of the former pin-up’s weight came into question.

Host Susanna then revealed her concern for Katie’s tiny frame, and said: “Katie, can I ask, because I am concerned about your weight. Because you are very, very, very skinny.”

To which the star replied: “So people who follow me online will know I have lost weight. I recognise I lose weight. I look too skinny. I look gaunt.

So I have been to the doctors to see why am I losing this weight. I’ve done all the blood tests. I even had to do the poo one as well to find out.”

Susanna then asked: “The doctor says you’re OK?”

Katie then replied: “And I said to them, ‘everyone says I’m on Ozempic’.

“And they said, ‘well, we can tell in your blood you’re not’. I am lack of iron.

“They’re now checking the other bit.

“And I’m going through pre-menopause at the moment as well.”

Last month, Katie revealed she had actually PUT ON weight after marrying Lee.

After previously calling herself a “stick woman”, she told fans in an Instagram video: “I actually have a confession to make.

“Number one: he is a feeder,” she said pointing to self-proclaimed millionaire businessman Lee.

“I’ve been to the doctors and everything, asking why,” she trailed off, before revealing she had put on weight, and the exact figure.

“I’ve actually put on half a stone,” Katie confessed.

“So it goes to show, that when you’re happy…

“So you’ll be please to know that I’ve put on half a stone because I can’t stop eating.”

The anti-nuclear artists collective whose work is on display at Pitzer College in Claremont never predicted a nuclear proliferation crisis would break out in the Middle East during their exhibit, or how grimly topical their work would quickly become as a result.

“Atomic Dragons,” wrapping April 4 with a closing-day symposium of nuclear experts, is the work of SWANS, which stands for Slow War Against the Nuclear State. The group is made up of artists, activists and academics with ties to the nuclear industry, including children and spouses of nuclear industrial complex workers — putting a new spin on the “nuclear family.”

The show examines the environmental and human cost of the atomic era through an artistic lens, tracing present day nuclear risk back to its Cold War roots.

The SWANS’ warning call has always been clear, but ”Atomic Dragons” took on a whole new meaning when the United States and Israel launched a joint assault on Iran over its illicit stockpile of nuclear materials Feb. 28, three weeks after the show opened.

“We’re at the start of what will be an exceedingly dangerous period in terms of the Iranian nuclear program,” nuclear policy expert Scott Sagan, who co-directs Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation, said. “We’re likely to have a major, major conflict over this.”

In a time of acute nuclear anxiety, SWANS is an outlet through which the artists process the fear and gravity of our atomic reality.

Fiona Amundsen, “Yoshino Cherry Tree, Sanyo Buntokuden, Hiroshima (lovingly held),” 2025, from the series, “The Trees are Leaking Light,” 2024-25, 4 x 5 inch negative processed using seaweed, gathered from the ocean current of the Fukushima wastewater release, inkjet washi photograph.

(Chloe Shrager)

“My maybe-naive hope is that the artworks help to provide an avenue into that understanding of the severity of what it means to play with the nuclear,” said Fiona Amundsen, whose arresting film photography of three trees in Hiroshima that survived the 1945 nuclear bomb was developed using contaminated seaweed growing in the Fukushima wastewater release line.

The resulting images are dotted with delicate white flares: trace amounts of radioactive tritium that transferred to the film from the nuclear effluent during the chemical processing, bearing physical witness to the usually invisible effects of radiation.

Amundsen’s work is in keeping with the rest of the show, which fills two halls at the liberal arts school with visual and multimedia works that probe the persistence of radioactive materials. Artifacts from the birth of the nuclear age are also featured, including items recovered from postwar Hiroshima and a letter from the father of the nuclear bomb, Robert J. Oppenheimer.

The artworks are as likely to unsettle as they are to move.

Elin o’Hara slavick labored over an expansive series of photochemical drawings of every above-ground nuclear test — 528 in total, a selection of which are featured in the exhibit— on salvaged darkroom paper from Caltech, the institution that played a role in developing the detonators for the U.S. nuclear bombs dropped on Japan under the top secret Project Camel.

elin o’Hara slavick, selection from “There Have Been 528 Atmospheric Nuclear Tests to Date,” 2022, photo-chemical drawings on outdated and fogged silver gelatin paper.

(Chloe Shrager)

Slavick said she found the abandoned silver-gelatin paper, which was fogged despite being stored in closed boxes, in the basement of the university near a door labeled “Radiation Science,” which led her to believe radiation exposure from Caltech’s Manhattan Project past distorted the photographic paper.

SWANS seems to double as a support group for families impacted by the nuclear industry. Many members believe they’ve lost loved ones to radiation, or were themselves likely impacted by early-life exposure as children of Manhattan Project engineers. The tension between the anti-nuclear artwork and its artists’ familial ties to the production of the very technology they reject is an enticing dance of its own.

Judith Dancoff, “The Milk Pathway (still),” 2023, video, briefcase, antique milk bottles, and tempera.

(Chloe Shrager)

Writer Judith Dancoff links her hyperthyroidism and long-term reproductive issues from a pituitary gland tumor to childhood radiation exposure during a summer spent at the Oak Ridge uranium enrichment site in Tennessee where her father worked as a student of Oppenheimer. Her father died young of cancer, and the story is woven into her featured SWANS work.

One of the largest pieces on display at “Atomic Dragons” is Nancy Buchanan’s interactive full-wall exhibit of documents her father brought home from his government work as a Manhattan Project physicist, alongside material from the FBI file on his mysterious death, on display for viewers to read under looming red letters spelling out “SECURITY.”

Nancy Buchanan, “Security,” 1987, installation with file folders, photos, map pins, and documents.

(Chloe Shrager)

The current crisis in Iran has sent memories bubbling to the surface for the collective, and chills down the spines of viewers.

Many have expressed fears of an Orwellian-style forever war, or worse, the use of the atomic weapon invented “to end all wars” in a twisted attempt to do so, poisoning the region as a byproduct. But nuclear policy expert Sagan said the likelihood of the conflict escalating to involve nuclear weapons is “exceedingly low,” even if Iran has the capability to build them.

Iran possesses enough 60% highly-enriched uranium to build about 10 nuclear weapons if further enriched to 90% weapons grade, he said. This could take a matter of weeks to complete depending on the state of Iran’s enrichment centrifuges, which Trump claimed to have “obliterated” during air strikes in June.

Iran could also craft a primitive nuclear device out of minimally enriched materials for an offensive attack (“60% could actually create an explosion, it just wouldn’t be a very efficient one,” according to Sagan), but George Perkovich, senior fellow for the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Nuclear Policy Program and author of “How to Assess Nuclear Threats in the 21st Century,” points out that “you have to build more than one for it to be useful,” especially under the wrath of a nuclear-armed West’s expected response.

What is more likely, and probably more dangerous, experts say, is the now-heightened long-term risk of global proliferation. “This war is going to suggest to some countries that if they want to secure their sovereignty, they need nuclear weapons,” Sagan said.

elin o’Hara slavick, selection from “There Have Been 528 Atmospheric Nuclear Tests to Date,” 2022, photo-chemical drawings on outdated and fogged silver gelatin paper.

(Chloe Shrager)

Since 1968, the world nuclear order has rested on the delicate architecture of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, enforcing the international norm that countries without nuclear weapons won’t try to get them, and countries with nuclear weapons won’t help arm their allies. Now, experts say the rulebook has been thrown out.

“What this does is it breaks the old system that was based on the non-proliferation treaty,” said Perkovich, who has worked on nuclear issues for 44 years. “It’s now ‘might makes right,’ everybody’s on their own, friends versus enemies. I think the terms now change, and we’re not bargaining.”

Though the timing of the military operation in Iran with the “Atomic Dragons” exhibit could not be described as kismet as much as brutally ironic, slavick said the “sick and sad thing” is that “it’s always topical when you’re an American.”

“We do this. We wage wars. We are the leading nuclear country,” she said, speaking to the heart of the SWANS message: In a world where nuclear materials exist, it is not a matter of if humans will be harmed, but when.

There is a historic relationship between visual art and nuclear war, said Jim Walsh, a senior research associate at the MIT Security Studies Program on nuclear weapons risk issues in Iran and North Korea, who is also a speaker at the exhibit’s closing symposium. As the world enters a “more disruptive period” after the post-Cold War cooling of nuclear tensions, he expects to soon see “a flowering of artistic projects,” as nuclear risk reaches a local peak. “It’s a super powerful thing involving life and death, the planet, the entire environment, love and hate,” he said.

“Atomic Dragons,” which also features work created decades ago, highlights questions that are as relevant today as they were at the dawn of the nuclear era: Can we make the world safe enough so we can once again dream? Is the strength of a country found in its military rather than its culture? Is fear our gross national product?

U.S. hockey star Jack Hughes might have lost more than a couple of teeth during the gold-medal-winning victory against Canada at the Milan-Cortina Olympics last month.

The puck that Hughes smacked into the net in overtime to give the United States its first men’s Olympic hockey gold since the 1980 “Miracle on Ice” was seemingly forgotten amid the raucous celebration.

But this week, the Hockey Hall of Fame began displaying that puck along with the one Megan Keller knocked into the net in overtime to give the U.S. women’s team gold in Milan. The International Ice Hockey Federation apparently secured the frozen vulcanized rubber disks immediately after the games and handed them to the Hall of Fame located in Toronto.

Hughes is happy “his” puck surfaced but believes he is the rightful owner of a piece of memorabilia that David Kohler, president of SCP Auctions, estimated might be worth $1 million.

“I don’t see why Megan Keller or I shouldn’t have those pucks,” Hughes told ESPN. “I’m trying to get it. Like, that’s [B.S.] that the Hockey Hall of Fame has it, in my opinion. Why would they have that puck?”

Hughes might not like the answer. The provenance of the puck is similar to that of a basketball or football used in a notable moment. It is dissimilar to a historic home run because a baseball leaves the field of play, and the owner becomes the fortunate fan.

“Because of the increasing value of memorabilia, ownership of items has become standardized over the last decade or so,” said an expert who agreed to speak anonymously because they work in the acquisition of such items. “Whoever purchased the puck owns it. Jerseys belong to the team, shoes and gloves to the player, the puck to whoever supplied it to the Olympics.”

That would be the International Ice Hockey Federation, the governing body of the Olympics hockey tournament. The IIHF employees who immediately secured those precious pucks amid gold-medal bedlam apparently did their job well.

“The puck was designated for archival preservation with the Hockey Hall of Fame to ensure its long-term safekeeping and historical recognition,” an IIHF spokesperson said.

The pucks are featured in an “Olympics ‘26” display that also contains a hockey stick used by Brady Tkachuk of the U.S. team and a U.S. jersey worn by four-time Olympian Hilary Knight.

It might strike some as odd that the display is in Canada, where fans are mourning the loss to the United States, but that’s been the location of the Hall of Fame since it was established in 1943. HOF president Jamie Dinsmore said in a statement that the display contains “donated items,” although it is unclear whether the IIHF has donated or merely loaned the pucks to the HOF.

“The Olympics ’26 display will help ensure that these unforgettable Olympic moments are preserved for our guests from around the world to experience,” Dinsmore said.

Meanwhile, Hughes told ESPN he wants the puck to become the property of one particular fan — his father, who collects memorabilia for him and his brothers Quinn and Luke. All three play in the NHL.

“I wouldn’t even want it for myself. I’d want it for my dad. I know he’d just love, love having it,” Hughes said. “When I look back in my career, I don’t collect too many things for myself, but my dad’s a monster collector for the three of us. I know he would have a special place for it.”

Or it could be sold at auction, where certainly it would pay for any dental work Hughes needs after getting teeth knocked out during the gold-medal game. Various auction houses have estimated the value of the puck to be from $40,000 to $1 million.

Should he acquire the puck, though, Hughes might not even consider selling it. The first pick of the 2019 NHL draft, he signed an eight-year, $64 million contract extension with the New Jersey Devils four years ago.