This Is What The Golden Globe Awards Looked Like In 1997 

With the 74th annual Golden Globe Awards just around the corner, we’re feeling a little nostalgic for the ceremony’s past.

To get ourselves in the mood to for this year’s show ― and to prepare for the onslaught of award shows to come ―  we’re taking a virtual trip back to 1997. It was a year of sunglasses on the red carpet (we see you, Christine Baranski!), Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman’s love and George Clooney on crutches.

It was also the year when “The X-Files” swept  the TV categories. The sci-fi show won Best Series, Drama, and its two leads, David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson, took home top honors for their acting.

It was also the year Madonna earned a Globe for her role in “Evita,” and Tom Cruise beat out Nathan Lane for the Best Actor award in the Musical or Comedy category.

To find out who wins big this year, watch the Golden Globes ― hosted by Jimmy Fallon ― this Sunday at 8 p.m. ET on NBC.

  • Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise
    KMazur via Getty Images
  • Christine Baranski
    Ron Galella, Ltd. via Getty Images
  • Melanie Griffith and Antonio Banderas
    SGranitz via Getty Images
  • Halle Berry
    Jeff Kravitz via Getty Images
  • Courtney Love
    KMazur via Getty Images
  • David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson
    Jeff Kravitz via Getty Images
  • Juliette Binoche
    Ronald Siemoneit via Getty Images
  • Alan Rickman
    NBC via Getty Images
  • Bruce Willis and Demi Moore
    Frank Trapper via Getty Images
  • The cast of “3rd Rock from the Sun” — Elmarie Wendel, French Stewart, Simbi Khali, Kristen Johnston, Jane Curtin, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and John Lithgow
    Ronald Siemoneit via Getty Images
  • Jane Seymour
    Ron Galella, Ltd. via Getty Images
  • The cast of “Party of Five” — Lacey Chabert, Scott Wolf, Paula Devicq, Neve Campbell, Jennifer Love Hewitt and Matthew Fox
    Ron Galella via Getty Images
  • Teri Hatcher
    Ron Galella via Getty Images
  • Courteney Cox
    Frank Trapper via Getty Images
  • Patrick Stewart and former partner Wendy Neuss
    Ron Galella via Getty Images
  • Samuel L. Jackson
    NBC via Getty Images
  • Matt LeBlanc with his date
    Ron Galella via Getty Images
  • Patricia Arquette and Nicolas Cage
    Ron Galella, Ltd. via Getty Images
  • George Clooney and former girlfriend Celine Balitran
    Ron Galella, Ltd. via Getty Images
  • Kevin Bacon and Kyra Sedgwick
    Ron Galella, Ltd. via Getty Images
  • Kelly Preston and John Travolta
    Ron Galella, Ltd. via Getty Images
  • Jeff Bridges and Mira Sorvino
    NBC via Getty Images
  • John Lithgow
    NBC via Getty Images
  • Lauren Bacall and her family
    Jeff Kravitz via Getty Images
  • Kristin Scott Thomas
    Jeff Kravitz via Getty Images
  • Will Smith and Jada Pinkett
    Jeff Kravitz via Getty Images
  • Noah Wyle
    Jeff Kravitz via Getty Images
  • Debbie Reynolds
    Vince Bucci via Getty Images




Via: This Is What The Golden Globe Awards Looked Like In 1997 

Models to Know in 2017 

This was the year the supermodel made a comeback. Kendall Jenner and Gigi Hadid are now on a first-name basis with the majority of the world, and you’ll be hard-pressed to find a fashion show or major campaign these ladies aren’t cast in. But while the fierce duo definitely reigns supreme, there are lesser-known models waiting for their time to shine (and no, we aren’t talking Bella Hadid or Hailey Baldwin). Just like those It girls, they, too, have the look, the covetable wardrobe, and even the impressive résumé. Now all they need is your support. Look through for some fresh faces you’ll want to follow come 2017 and learn their names before they rise to the top.




Via: Models to Know in 2017

Can This $460 Juicy Tracksuit Trick You Into Thinking It’s Cool?

In these dark times, a glimpse back at the days when your main priority was getting your parents to buy you overpriced sweatpants offers a welcome distraction.


Enter that famous Juicy Couture velour tracksuit, which peaked in the early 2000’s (thanks Britney Spears), briefly met its demise in 2014 and made many people feel very old by attempting a comeback in 2016. Its first attempt, a line exclusive to Bloomingdale’s, is currently experiencing a hefty price cut and failed to achieve world domination despite the sweeping athleisure movement.

But you know what they say: If at first you don’t succeed, try, try making it trendier. An exclusive, much pricier collection is now being sold at Topshop, a move that’s basically the modern-day equivalent of getting approval back in the day from every popular girl in 7th grade.

Stacked with updated versions of those beloved classic suits, the line even brings back the ol’ text-on-the-butt trend. We’re having sent-to-the-principal anxiety just looking at them.


There’s one thing about this scenario that, much like our Juicy pants of yore, just doesn’t fit right. One full set from this collection will set you back $460! Spring for a set with logos, and you’re looking at an even higher price than that. Kind of makes the Bloomingdale’s collection, now rounding out at about $140 for a set, look kind of appealing, eh?

Head to Topshop to see the entire collection, and enjoy that trip down memory lane.






Via: Can This $460 Juicy Tracksuit Trick You Into Thinking It’s Cool?

Beware Allergy Or Asthma ‘Treatments’ At Alternative Medicine Clinics 


Alternative medicine practitioners like homeopaths and acupuncturists may claim to treat allergies or asthma, but a study in Canada found that many there offer remedies that are unproven or even dangerous.

“Complementary and alternative medicine continues to grow in popularity ― particularly in the areas of allergy and asthma ― despite ongoing controversies,” said lead author Timothy Caulfield, research director of the Health Law Institute at the University of Alberta.

“Both asthma and allergies can be a serious health condition,” Caulfield told Reuters Health by email. “These kind of public representations can be misleading and may lead to inappropriate care.”

The researchers write in BMJ Open that government data from 2008 found that more than 70 percent of Canadians use complementary and alternative medicine.

In the U.S., they say, people spent over $30 billion on complementary and alternative medicine in 2012 alone.

Caulfield and colleagues sought to investigate alternative medicine practitioners’ marketing claims, including those of chiropractors and acupuncturists.

They also investigated claims made by homeopaths, who use diluted plant and mineral tinctures as treatments, and naturopaths, who use a combination of various alternative medicine remedies to treat illness.

The study team performed Google searches in March and April of 2016 and identified 392 websites of alternative medicine clinics located in 10 of Canada’s largest cities.

The researchers checked to see if the websites mentioned allergy and food sensitivities or asthma, and if they claimed to be able to diagnose or treat the conditions.

Overall, alternative medicine websites were more likely to advertise that they could treat allergy or asthma rather than diagnose it.

More than half the sites claimed to treat allergy or asthma, while only a quarter claimed to diagnose allergy and about 3 percent claimed to diagnose asthma.

Naturopaths were most likely to make a claim about diagnosis or treatment, with 85 percent making claims about allergies and 64 percent about asthma.

A majority of acupuncturists, 68 percent, and homeopaths, 60 percent, made claims about diagnosing or treating allergies, while around half of both groups claimed to diagnose or treat asthma.

Chiropractors were the least likely to make claims about allergy or asthma, with a third of websites mentioning allergy and 38 percent mentioning asthma.

Many of the testing methods and treatments advertised on the alternative medicine websites do not have any research evidence to support them, the researchers write, and only two treatments mentioned are proven to work.

Some advertised treatments, including spinal manipulation and injection of hydrogen peroxide, may actually cause harm to patients, the researchers write.

The researchers also noted that some websites cited medical treatments like antibiotics and vaccinations as a cause of allergies and asthma.

“Allergies including asthma affect a high proportion of children and adults resulting in a high burden of disease and uncommon but preventable deaths,” said David Osborn, a clinical associate professor at the University of Sydney who studies allergy treatments.

“It is unethical to advertise products that do not work or may do harm, particularly if claims of benefit are being made, which they frequently are,” Osborn, who was not involved in the study, told Reuters Health by email.

Osborn added that patients often will not research whether advertised treatments actually work.

“From the medical point of view, we are highly concerned about the use of unproven and potentially harmful tests and treatments,” Osborn said.

The researchers say new policies may be needed to protect the public.

“People should be very skeptical of the marketing information found on these websites,” Caulfield said. “Seek out independent, science-based information!”

Not Liking Music Is An Actual Neurological Condition 


Many people consider music to be one of life’s greatest pleasures. Others find it… meh.

An aversion to music of any kind might seem on par with disliking puppies, ice cream or sunshine, but not everyone gets a kick from jamming out to the radio. In fact, the inability to derive pleasure from music can stem from a real neurological condition known as specific musical anhedonia.

People with musical anhedonia lack the typical emotional responses that most people show when listening to Beyoncé or The Beatles (or any other music, for that matter).

New research sheds light on the causes of the condition, and suggests it is rooted in differences in how the brain’s auditory processing and reward centers are connected. The brains of people with musical anhedonia show less-than-average connectivity between these two areas, according to a study published in a recent issue of the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Due to the lack of interaction between these two parts of the brain, a person with musical anhedonia can listen to an extremely emotionally charged song and not feel anything at all ― even if they show completely normal emotional responses in every other way.

“People with musical anhedonia will say, ‘No, music doesn’t provoke emotions,’ and ‘No, I never really want to dance when I hear music,’” Dr. Robert Zatorre, a neurologist at McGill University and one of the study’s authors, told The Huffington Post. “We found some of these individuals, there’s not very many of them but they do exist. … They’re just indifferent to the music.”

Zatorre and his colleagues discovered the phenomenon just a few years ago. They first identified musical anhedonia in a 2014 study, showing that some people can’t derive pleasure from music despite having a normal ability to enjoy other pleasurable things.

And it wasn’t just a matter of personal preference. Researchers identified a basic physiological difference between people with musical anhedonia and people who enjoyed listening to songs.

The other participants reported chills when listening to music. With our anhedonic group, they had no chills. They had no real response to music.Dr. Josep Marco-Pallares

“The other participants reported chills when listening to music,” study co-author Dr. Josep Marco-Pallares of the University of Barcelona told NPR in 2014. “With our anhedonic group, they had no chills. They had no real response to music.”

The next step for the research team was to determine what caused this inability to find pleasure in music. For the new study, 45 healthy participants answered questions about their level of sensitivity to music, and were divided into three groups based on their responses. (If you’re curious, you can test your own musical responsiveness using this quiz from the University of Barcelona team.)

Then, the participants’ brains were scanned while they listened to music and recorded their pleasure levels in real time. To make sure that the brain’s reward response was unique to music ― and not simply dampened overall ― the participants also had their brains scanned while they played a game in which they could win or lose real money.

The brain scans revealed that musical anhedonics showed less activity in the nucleus accumbens, a key structure in the brain’s reward network, when listening to music. But their reward areas were normally activated when they won money.

In the musical anhedonics, the nucleus accumbens also seemed to be disconnected from brain regions involved in auditory processing. People with a high sensitivity to music, on the other hand, showed a high level of connectivity between these two parts of the brain. The more the participants enjoyed music, the more connected were their brain’s pleasure and music-processing circuits.

Although musical anhedonia is very real, Zatorre notes that the condition shouldn’t be pathologized or seen as some sort of mental illness.

“I try to be careful not to call it a disorder,” he said. “The people I’ve spoken to who have musical anhedonia actually say they’re really grateful to the research. They’ve said to me, ‘All my life I thought I was weird, but now you’ve shown me that there are other people like me.’”

Anhedoniacs, you’re not alone.





Via: Not Liking Music Is An Actual Neurological Condition

The Joy of Complex


What did the Cizeta-Moroder V16T and the Mazda MX-3 have in common? Wait—do you even remember the Cizeta-Moroder V16T or the Mazda MX-3? I’d forgive you if you didn’t. Neither one of them made much of an impact on the automotive landscape. So here’s a brief recap. The Cizeta-Moroder V16T was a small-batch Italian supercar built by a bunch of ex-Lamborghini engineers. The Mazda MX-3 was a competitor to the Honda CRX, Geo Storm, and Nissan NX2000. Does that help at all? And if it does, if it brings some vague memories swimming back up … what did those two cars have in common?

The answer, of course, is this: unnecessary complexity. The Cizeta-Moroder V16T, shown above, had a transversely mounted “V16” that was actually two V8s driving a center-mounted transfer gear. The Mazda MX-3 contained a tiny 1.8-liter quad-cam V6 with a unique computer-controlled variable resonance intake. In neither case did this deliberately Byzantine approach to engine technology result in quantifiable benefits. The 1990 Lamborghini Diablo made similar power with a version of the aging Countach’s V12; the Nissan NX2000 was faster than the MX-3 thanks to an SR20 engine borrowed from the Sentra SE-R.

I could have added Ducati’s 916 and Honda’s RC51 to my question; the V-twin engines in those bikes were thoroughly and lovingly engineered, but they still couldn’t match the power on tap from the inline-fours available in various Suzukis, Kawasakis, and Yamahas at the time. Yet all four of these vehicles were the subject of intense interest at the time of their release and they still maintain strong, if small, followings today. Which leads me to another question: Why?


I’ve long thought that car enthusiasts could be split into “Timex people” and “Tourbillon people.” A Timex, as you know, is the watch that takes a licking and keeps on ticking. Cheap, durable, accurate. The perfected expression of the Timex philosophy is probably the Casio F-91W, a twelve-dollar watch that was given to al-Qaeda operatives upon their graduation from training. Although millions of the F-91W have been made, the watch became so closely associated with terrorism that the mere ownership of one was apparently enough to sweep a couple of suspicious-looking fellows into Guantanamo Bay. I once dated a young lady who worked for the FBI and I sent an F-91W to her house anonymously as a joke. Stuff like that is why I’m going to die alone. But that’s a discussion for another time. Time—get it?

A tourbillon, on the other hand, is an extraordinarily complex mechanical device used in very high-end watches. It will cost you at least $100,000 to get a tourbillon-equipped watch from the major Swiss brands. In fact, it’s so hard to make a tourbillon that there was some agitation in the watch press a few years back about the “$5000 Chinese tourbillons” that were supposedly going to take the prestige-timepiece industry by storm. Think about that. The Chinese can make a whole watch for under a dollar—look in a Happy Meal for proof—but it would still cost them five grand to make a tourbillon.

The tourbillon is the alpha example of what watch fans call “complications.” A complication is something that adds functionality to a traditional mechanical watch. My old IWC Spitfire UTC had a “complication” that let you see two different timezones at once. It was an additional layer of clockwork laid over top of the basic movement that literally complicated the watch.

In regular life, complications are bad. There’s even a song about it: Why’d you have to go and make things so complicated? But in watches, complications are desirable. They cost extra. People want them. They are considered to be a sign of true enthusiasm in the owner. Chances are that you’ll never use them; setting the extra time zone in my IWC was such a hassle that I never did it, even when I was actually in a different time zone and could have used the information. It’s enough to have the capability, to know that your watch is more complicated, more interesting, than the one on the wrist next to yours.

Dive into any aspect of the automotive hobby and you’ll find both Timex people and tourbillon people. Spec Miata is the ultimate group of roadracing Timexers. They just want to compete in the simplest machine possible. The NASA Championships of 2008 had about fifty Spec Miatas. It also had one guy who had built a Morgan Aero 8 into a Super Unlimited road racer. That is a tourbillon person. It didn’t bother him one bit that he was racing heads-up against a bunch of Corvettes and ASA stock cars, all of which went just as fast for between one-quarter and one-half as much money. He wanted to race a Morgan.

Many of history’s most memorable and/or unusual specialty and sports cars have been deliberate attempts to satisfy the tourbillon people. The Mosler TwinStar. The first-gen Corvette ZR1. The Cadillac XLR-V. Even the E30 M3 could be considered a “complication;” it was no faster on the street than the cheaper 325i.

You’re still our favorite

The appeal of the Mazda MX-3 wasn’t raw speed. It was the knowledge that you had this wonderfully complex little V6 humming away under your hood while everybody around you was stuck with a droning inline-four. The same is true for the Ducatis; why not have a characterful twin? It’s why I consider my VFR800 to be an “upgrade” over my old YZF600R even though it isn’t even a tiny bit faster. The V-four VFR has a unique sound and behavior.

This natural love of complication comes off like snobbishness to the Timex people out there. They just want results. If the numbers say that a Corvette Z06 and a Ferrari 458 Speciale are equal, why would you buy the Ferrari? You can’t explain tourbillon thinking to a Timex fanatic.

Nor can you explain it to car companies that are hell-bent on maintaining a profit margin in the face of blistering competition and ever-fiercer government regulation. And that, my friend, is why the bland, charmless, lumpy low-pressure turbo four-banger has become the de rigeur motivating power of everything from the Honda Civic to the BMW 5-Series. The thriving engine-design ecosystem of 20 years ago is collapsing into monoculture faster than a farmer’s field with the Monsanto seeds blowing in on the wind. Inline sixes, high-revving naturally-aspirated fours, straight-fives, even the once-omnipresent V6. They’re all fading away. It’s the triumph of the Timex people.

We should rage against the dying of this light, if we can. There are still a few cars left that offer unique engines, manual transmissions, station-wagon bodies, that sort of thing. That’s why I have a two-door, V6, manual transmission Accord; all three of those distinguishing features won’t be around much longer.

The wealthy will always have tourbillon choices like the Cizeta and its modern equivalents from Pagani et al. Those of us without trust funds, on the other hand, will have to get our complications where we can find them. And it’s getting tougher. Maybe we should bring Avril Lavigne back from obscurity so she can sing, on our angst-ridden behalf: Why’d you have to go and make things so simple?

Born in Brooklyn but banished to Ohio, Jack Baruth has won races on four different kinds of bicycles and in seven different kinds of cars




Source: The Joy of Complex

Can You Get a DUI for Drinking Too Much Coffee?

We all know you shouldn’t “drink and drive” and usually understand “drink” to be a euphemism for consuming alcohol. A man named Joseph Schwab, however, has a case that could obliterate that understanding. He has been charged in California with driving under the influence of a drug. The drug? Caffeine.

Mr. Schwab was arrested on August 5 of last year after being pulled over by a California alcoholic beverage control agent in an unmarked car. The agent claimed Schwab’s driving indicated he was under the influence of something. A breathalyzer revealed a blood alcohol content of zero. Zero point zero zero to be precise.

Convinced he was on something, authorities took Schwab to jail and drew blood which was tested in a laboratory. The blood test came back negative and that was after it had been screened for cocaine, opiates, oxycodone and all kinds of other drugs few people can pronounce. Never one to give up, law enforcement sent the sample out to another laboratory, presumably to see if they could find anything in the blood. And then they found something: caffeine.

They charged Schwab with driving while impaired.

Despite caffeine being the only thing found in Schwab’s bloodstream, the authorities are pursuing the case against him. But here is where it gets murky. The district attorney’s office insists that Schwab is not being prosecuted on the basis of the caffeine in his system. But if not caffeine, then what? Beyond the caffeine, all he had in his veins that day was blood. Good, clean, unadulterated blood.

I assure you that defendants in this country have the right to know the charges against them and the basis of those charges. It’s a fundamental right of our legal system. Schwab’s attorney has asked for any evidence beyond that which is mentioned above–the reports which are all negative except for caffeine–and so far she has been given nothing.

Now, I will point out to you that a prosecution for driving under the influence of caffeine is theoretically possible in California. This is largely because California defines “drugs” so broadly: They are any substance (excluding alcohol, which is prohibited elsewhere) affecting your brain, nervous system or muscles. And if you have those “drugs” in your system and they prevent you from operating your vehicle in the same manner as a sober person, they you are impaired. Could coffee do that to you? Seems possible. So could many cold and allergy medicines too.

Court cases like this often involve forensic toxicologists, like you might see on TV. One such toxicologist, Jeffrey Zehnder, called this case “really stupid.” He noted that in his forty-plus years of working on cases of impaired driving allegations, he has never seen one where the “drug” in question was caffeine or coffee. He suspects it is because no one has ever even bothered to study the links between coffee and driving ability. That could be because there really isn’t one. Or it could be that the Starbucks lobby is too powerful for anyone to take on.

Meanwhile, Schwab’s attorney has asked the court to throw out his case so he can get on with his life. If the case proceeds, we can all find out whether it really is illegal to drive while hopped up on coffee.

Steve Lehto is a writer and attorney from Michigan. He specializes in Lemon Law and frequently writes about cars and the law.

Source: Can You Get a DUI for Drinking Too Much Coffee?