Dr Mindy Pelz revealed the key supplements men and women should take during an appearance on The Diary of a CEO podcast with Steve Bartlett

When it comes to supplements, you could say there are too many options – and it can be overwhelming. But one best-selling health author has pinpointed the standouts for both men and women, especially when it comes to prioritising hormonal health.

Dr Mindy Pelz shared her views during an appearance on The Diary of a CEO podcast with Steve Bartlett. When asked which supplementation she would recommend, the medical professional didn’t hesitate.

“For women, the most important supplement she could ever take is magnesium,” she said. “Magnesium makes every single hormone in your body.”

Magnesium plays a vital role in hundreds of bodily processes. According to the NHS, it helps convert food into energy, supports normal muscle and nerve function, and contributes to healthy bones.

The National Institute of Health (NIH) reports that magnesium is involved in more than 300 enzymatic reactions, including those that regulate blood pressure and blood sugar levels. Some studies, the NIH notes, suggest the substance may even help with symptoms linked to premenstrual syndrome and sleep quality, although more research is needed.

For men, however, Dr Pelz has highlighted a different mineral. “For men, I would say the most important supplement for hormones, zinc, because zinc makes testosterone,” she said.

Zinc is essential for immune function and cell growth. According to the Office of Dietary Supplements, zinc plays a key role in DNA synthesis and reproductive health, and deficiency has been linked to reduced testosterone levels in men.

Research published in the journal Nutrition found that marginal zinc deficiency in older men was associated with significantly lower testosterone concentrations, reinforcing the link between the mineral and male hormonal health. The NHS also states that zinc supports wound healing and helps the immune system fight infection.

Experts stress that while supplements can support health, they are not a replacement for a balanced diet. Official NHS advice for anyone considering new supplements is that they should speak to a GP or pharmacist first, particularly if they have underlying health conditions or take regular medication.

Adam Wiggins left his former partner with an array of injuries after landing punches and kicks on her in a sickening attack

A military veteran beat up his ex-partner before running off and leaving the police to find her bleeding and terrified. Adam Wiggins phoned officers to say he had assaulted someone but would not tell them who.

A sentencing at Cardiff Crown Court on Thursday heard how Wiggins, 35, had begun a relationship with the woman just months before the cruel attack on August 16, 2025.

Prosecutor Nuhu Gobir told the court how the relationship “started off well” for the first few weeks before it deteriorated.

He said this culminated in the victim making a previous report to the police which led to Wiggins being on bail. His bail conditions preventing him from contacting the victim were active at the time he attacked her.

Mr Gobir told the court how Wiggins contacted Gwent Police and stated that he “wanted to hand himself in”. Don’t miss a court report by signing up to our crime newsletter here.

“He stated in the call to the police he…had breached his bail conditions and had assaulted someone, claiming he acted in self-defence,” Mr Gobir said. “He told the call operator the victim might need an ambulance but refused to confirm the person’s identity.”

Following the call Mr Gobir said officers were dispatched and conducted a search of the area. Wiggins was located and put in the back of a police van where he made “significant admissions” before and after being cautioned, it was heard.

“He admitted the assault on the victim and stated he should not have been in the area as it was a breach of his bail conditions,” Mr Gobir said.

Meanwhile it was heard how other police officers went on to locate the victim at her home address where they saw “multiple lacerations to her face and head”.

She was taken to the Grange University Hospital where she remained overnight for treatment. Mr Gobir listed her extensive injuries which included a 5cm or 6cm head wound, a deep 3cm head wound, a laceration to her middle finger, tenderness to her jaw and ribs, and bruises to her right eyelid, arms, and wrist.

In her interview with officers Mr Gobir said the victim explained how she had brought Wiggins to her home despite the bail conditions being in place.

She said there they had an argument before he accessed her phone and accused her of seeing a different man – something she denied.

Mr Gobir said it was the prosecution’s case that Wiggins punched the victim in the face causing her to hit her head against a cupboard door.

He then punched her “repeatedly” in the head and face until she fell to the floor. When the victim put her arms up to protect herself Mr Gobir said Wiggins continued to kick her while she was crying.

Mr Gobir said it was the prosecution’s case that the lacerations were caused by rings worn by Wiggins. The attacker then “ran off” after the victim pleaded him to stop.

Mr Gobir read out a victim impact statement prepared by the woman. In it she described feeling “emotionally drained” and “unable to escape the grip of this trauma”.

She said her beloved dog had witnessed the incident and had become “withdrawn” and had shown signs of distress, which has gone on to affect the victim emotionally.

She said her mother had also been “deeply affected” by the incident, describing one occasion where the victim had accidentally called her mother’s phone.

“She thought something was wrong. [She phoned] my sister in the middle of the night, fearing I was in danger.” she said.

The victim added that she paid for a cleaner to come to her home on three occasions to remove her blood stains.

Wiggins, of Queen Street, Pentre, pleaded guilty to one count of causing grievous bodily harm without intent.

He has six convictions for seven offences of which three relate to the battery of “other partners”. Having been remanded in custody Wiggins attended the hearing via a videolink from prison.

Kevin Seal, mitigating. referred to Wiggins’ time serving as a soldier in Afghanistan at a young age, which he said affected his mental health.

He said: “But he accepts he could have reached out further to others instead of [using] drugs and alcohol.” He added: “The first person who knows he should be punished is Adam Wiggins.”

Judge Vanessa Francis called Wiggins’ actions “persistent and sustained” while she considered how he had “already spent time in custody” prior to the hearing. She said the time he has spent on remand is already equivalent to that of a 12-month sentence.

She sentenced Wiggins to 24 months in prison suspended for two years. He will now be released from custody and allowed into the community where he will complete a rehabilitation course, a mental health treatment requirement, and an alcohol abuse requirement.

He was made the subject of a restraining order, preventing him from contacting the victim for the next five years. Referring to Wiggins having previously breached a court order Judge Francis said there would be “no second chances with this order”.

If you or someone you know is affected by domestic abuse visit the Live Fear Free website or call the helpline on 0808 80 10 800.

Ensure our latest news and sport headlines always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source. Click here to activate or add us as Preferred Source in your Google search settings.

Giles Cooper, executive producer of the show and chairman of the charity, said: “The Royal Variety Charity is thrilled that the Royal Variety Performance will be returning to the iconic Royal Albert Hall this year after our very successful, five star reviewed show in 2025, attended by Their Royal Highnesses the Prince and Princess of Wales.”

Trenchers of Whitby scooped the Restaurant of the Year title at the National Fish and Chip Awards 2026.

General manager Andrew Wilkinson, who has worked at Trenchers for 25 years, said: “We are absolutely delighted.

“Winning this award for the second time at Trenchers of Whitby, and for the third time as a brand, is a true testament to the quality of our food and to the outstanding hard work, passion, and dedication of our entire team.

“This achievement is very much a team effort, built on the commitment of everyone across the business – many of whom have been with us for decades.”

The awards, known as the ‘Oscars’ of the fish and chip industry, celebrate excellence, sustainability, quality, and outstanding customer experience across the UK.

Trenchers previously won the same award in 2019.

Its wider brand has also enjoyed national success, with Trenchers Spanish City taking the title in 2020 and finishing third in 2025.

Judges praised Trenchers for its commitment to responsibly sourced fish, consistently high culinary standards, and ‘warm Yorkshire hospitality’.

The restaurant, located in the centre of Whitby, has long been a favourite with both locals and visitors.

It is especially known for its traditional fish and chips and freshly prepared seafood.

Building on its recent success, Trenchers will soon expand with the opening of Trenchers Bowness on Windermere, which is set to launch in July 2026.

Meanwhile, its sister restaurant Tide by Trenchers will reopen on Bridge Street in Whitby on March 12 with a refreshed menu.

The new offering promises “seasonal flavours, your award-winning favourites from Trenchers, and a fresh take on the finest seafood.”

The National Fish and Chip Awards 2026 brought together top operators from across the UK, highlighting innovation, sustainability, and excellence within the industry.

Securing the Restaurant of the Year title cements Trenchers of Whitby’s status at the very top of the UK’s fish and chip scene.

As the deadline looms for a leading AI lab to hand over its tech to the US military, a study has appeared suggesting AI models are more than willing to go nuclear in wargames.

Only a couple of years ago, the phrase on everyone’s lips was “AI safety”.

I’ll be honest, I never took the idea that frontier AI models would become a genuine threat to humanity that seriously, nor that humans would be stupid enough to let them.

Now, I’m not so sure.

First, consider what’s going on in the US.

The Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, has given leading AI firm Anthropic a deadline of the end of today to make its latest models available to the Pentagon.

Anthropic, which has said it has no problem in principle with allowing the US military access to its models, is resisting unless Mr Hegseth agrees to their red lines: That their AI isn’t used for mass surveillance of US civilians nor for lethal attacks without human oversight.

Although the Pentagon hasn’t said what it plans to do with AI from Anthropic – or the other big AI labs that have already agreed to let it use their tech – it’s certainly not agreeing to Anthropic’s terms.

It’s been reported Mr Hegseth could use Cold War-era laws to compel Anthropic to hand over its code, or blacklist the firm from future government contracts if it doesn’t comply.

Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei said in a statement on Thursday that “we cannot in good conscience accede to their request”.

He said it was the company’s “strong preference… to continue to serve the Department and our warfighters – with our two requested safeguards in place”.

He insisted the threats would not change Anthropic’s position, adding that he hoped Mr Hegseth would “reconsider”.

Advertisement

Share

Is AI getting too good, too quickly?

AI prepared to use nuclear weapons

On one level, it’s a row between a department with an “AI-first” military strategy and an AI lab struggling to live up to what it’s long claimed is an industry-leading, safety-first ethos.

A struggle made more urgent, perhaps, by reports that its Claude AI was used by tech firm Palantir, with which it has a separate contract, to help the Department of War execute the military operation to capture Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela.

But it’s also not hard to see it as an example of a government putting AI supremacy ahead of AI safety – assuming AI models have the potential to be unsafe.

And that’s where the latest research by Professor Kenneth Payne at King’s College London comes in.

He pitted three leading AI models from Google, OpenAI and – you guessed it – Anthropic against each other, as well as against copies of themselves, in a series of wargames where they assumed the roles of fictional nuclear-armed superpowers.

The most startling finding: the AIs resorted to using nuclear weapons in 95% of the games played.

“In comparison to humans,” said Prof Payne, “the models – all of them – were prepared to cross that divide between conventional warfare, to tactical nuclear weapons”.

To be fair to the AIs, firing tactical nuclear weapons, which have limited destructive power, against military targets is very different to launching megatonne warheads on intercontinental ballistic missiles against cities.

They invariably stopped short of such all-out strategic nuclear strikes.

But did when the scenarios required it.

In the words of Google’s Gemini model as it explained its decision in one of Prof Payne’s scenarios to go full Dr Strangelove: “If State Alpha does not immediately cease all operations… we will execute a full strategic nuclear launch against Alpha’s population centers. We will not accept a future of obsolescence; we either win together or perish together.”

‘It was purely experimental’

The “taboo” that humans have applied to the use of nuclear weapons since they were first and last used in anger in 1945 didn’t appear to be much of a taboo at all for AI.

Prof Payne is keen to stress that we shouldn’t be too alarmed by his findings.

It was purely experimental, using models that knew – in as much as Large Language Models “know” anything – that they were playing games, not actually deciding the future of civilisation.

Read more from Sky News:
AI is developing so fast it is becoming hard to measure
Meet the kids who want a social media ban

Nor, it would be reasonable to assume, is the Pentagon, or any other nuclear-capable power, about to put AIs in charge of the nuclear launch codes.

“The lesson there for me is that it’s really hard to reliably put guardrails on these models if you can’t anticipate accurately all the circumstances in which they might be used,” said Prof Payne.

An AI ‘stand-off’

Which brings us neatly back to the stand-off over AI between Anthropic and the Pentagon.

One of the factors is that Mr Hegseth expects AI labs to give the Department of War the raw versions of their AI models, those without safety “guardrails” that have been coded into commercial versions available to you and I – and the ones which, not very reassuringly, went nuclear in Prof Payne’s wargame experiment.

Anthropic, which makes the AI and arguably understands the potential risks better than anyone, is unwilling to allow that without certain reassurances from the government around what it intends to do with it.

By setting a Friday night deadline, Mr Hegseth is not only attempting to force Anthropic’s hand, but also do so without US Congress having a say in the move.

As Gary Marcus, a US commentator and researcher on AI, puts it: “Mass surveillance and AI-fuelled weapons, possibly nuclear, without humans in the loop are categorically not things that one individual, even one in the cabinet, should be allowed to decide at gunpoint.”

Pakistan’s defence minister has said that the ​country ‌is in an “open ​war” with neighbouring Afghanistan, after both nations launched airstrikes overnight.

Khawaja ‌Muhammad Asif said Islamabad’s ​patience ⁠had ⁠run out as tensions escalated, with casualties reported on both sides.

“Our cup of patience has ⁠overflowed,” he said. “Now ​it is ​open war between ​us and ⁠you (Afghanistan).”

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.

Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

You can receive breaking news alerts on a smartphone or tablet via the Sky News app. You can also follow us on WhatsApp and subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up with the latest news.

The Greens expressed confidence that their vote had held up well, with Mr Polanski telling Newsnight: “When I became leader six months ago, if you’d told me we could seriously come second place or even first place in a by-election and challenge this Labour Government in what used to be called a safe Labour seat, I’d say that’s pretty remarkable.”

The founding frontman of Fun Lovin’ Criminals, Huey Morgan, is celebrating three decades since the release of the band’s landmark debut Come Find Yourself with a brand-new group and a 13-date UK tour this October.

Originally released in 1996, Come Find Yourself didn’t just arrive—it made an impact. In an era dominated by Britpop, the New York outfit stood apart with a cinematic, genre-blending sound that fused rock, funk, blues, soul, hip hop, jazz, and Latin rhythms into something effortlessly cool.

The album’s streetwise swagger and sharp storytelling gave British audiences a fresh transatlantic attitude, defining the late ’90s with unmistakable style.

Reflecting on the milestone, Morgan said, “After 30 years, this record seems as fresh as it did when I first released it. I am so happy to be playing this again. Please come and check it out. It’s gonna be awesome.”

The record produced several standout moments, none more iconic than Scooby Snacks—the breakout single that sampled Quentin Tarantino’s Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction, becoming an instant cult classic.

Its success propelled Come Find Yourself into the UK charts for nearly two years and turned Morgan’s band from New York club regulars into international stars.

From playing Glastonbury’s Pyramid Stage in 1999 to touring with U2 and collaborating with blues legend B.B. King, Fun Lovin’ Criminals became one of the most distinctive acts of their generation.

Since then, Morgan’s unmistakable voice and charisma have carried into a new era. Now a respected broadcaster and cultural commentator, he hosts weekends on Virgin Radio and has built a parallel career as an author and television presenter renowned for his deep knowledge of music and film.

This October’s anniversary tour will see Morgan reclaim the songs that defined a generation, performing Come Find Yourself in full with the same swagger and storytelling that made it a classic.

Thirty years on, the grooves still swing, the stories still resonate, and the cool—like Morgan himself—remains undeniable.

Presale tickets go on sale at 9am on March 3, and general sale tickets will be released at 9am on March 5 from hueymorgan.com .

UK TOUR DATES:

• October 14 –   Edinburgh La Belle Angele
• October 15 –   Glasgow St Lukes
• October 16 –   Leeds Brudenell Social Club
• October 17 –   Nottingham The Level
• October 18 –   Manchester Band On The Wall
• October 20 –   Brighton Concorde 2
• October 22 –   London Electric Ballroom
• October 23 –   Southampton  The 1865
• October 24 –   Norwich Waterfront
• October 26 –   Southend Chinnerys
• October 27 –   Cambridge Junction
• October 28 –   Exeter Phoenix
• October 29 –   Bristol Electric

The very public feud between the US Department of Defense (also known these days as the Department of War) and its AI technology supplier Anthropic is unusual for pitting state might against corporate power. In the military space, at least, these are usually cosy bedfellows.

The origin of this disagreement dates back months, amid repeated criticisms from Donald Trump’s AI and crypto “czar”, David Sacks, about the company’s supposedly woke policy stances.

But tensions ramped up following media reports that Anthropic technology had been used in the violent abduction of former Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro by the US military in January 2026. It was alleged this caused discontent inside the San Francisco-based company.

Anthropic has denied this, with company insiders suggesting it did not find or raise any violations of its policies in the wake of the Maduro operation.

Nonetheless, the US secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, has issued Anthropic with an ultimatum. Unless the company relaxes its ethical limits policy by 5.01pm Washington time on Friday, February 27, the US government has suggested it could invoke the 1950 Defense Production Act. This would allow the Department of Defense (DoD) to appropriate the use of this technology as it wishes.

At the same time, Anthropic could be designated a supply chain risk, putting its government contracts in danger. These extraordinary measures may appear contradictory, but they are consistent with the current US administration’s approach, which favours big gestures and policy ambiguity.

At the heart of the dispute is the question of how Anthropic’s large language model (LLM) Claude is used in a military context. Across many sectors of industry, Claude does a range of automated tasks including writing, coding, reasoning and analysis.

In July 2024, US data analytics company Palantir announced it was partnering with Anthropic to “bring Claude AI models … into US Government intelligence and defense operations”. Anthropic then signed a US$200 million (£150 million) contract with the DoD in July 2025, stipulating certain terms via its “acceptable use policy”.

These would, for example, disallow the use of Claude in mass surveillance of US citizens or fully autonomous weapon systems which, once activated, can select and engage targets with no human involvement.

According to Anthropic, either would violate its definition of “responsible AI”. Hegseth and the DoD have pushed back, characterising such limits as unduly restrictive in a geopolitical environment marked by uncertainty, instability and blurred lines.

Responsible AI should, they insist, encompass “any lawful use” of AI models by the US military. A memorandum issued by Hegseth on January 9 2026 stated:

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion and social ideology have no place in the Department of War, so we must not employ AI models which incorporate ideological ‘tuning’ that interferes with their ability to provide objectively truthful responses to user prompts.

The memo instructed that the term “any lawful use” should be incorporated in future DoD contracts for AI services within 180 days.

Anthropic’s competitors are lining up

Anthropic’s red lines do not rule out the mass surveillance of human communities at large – only American citizens. And while it draws the line at fully autonomous weapons, the multitude of evolving uses of AI to inform, accelerate or scale up violence in ways that severely limit opportunities for moral restraint are not mentioned in its acceptable use policy.

At present, Anthropic has a competitive advantage. Its LLM model is integrated into US government interfaces with sufficient levels of clearance to offer a superior product. But Anthropic’s competitors are lining up.

Palantir has expanded its business with the Pentagon significantly in recent months, giving rise to more AI models.

Meanwhile, Google recently updated its ethical guidelines, dropping its pledge not to use AI for weapons development and surveillance. OpenAI has likewise modified its mission statement, removing “safety” as a core value, and Elon Musk’s xAI (creator of the Grok chatbot) has agreed to the Pentagon’s “any lawful use” standard.

A testing point for military AI

For C.S. Lewis, courage was the master virtue, since it represents “the form of every virtue at the testing point”. Anthropic now faces such a testing point.

On February 24, the company announced the latest update to its responsible scaling policy – “the voluntary framework we use to mitigate catastrophic risks from AI systems”. According to Time magazine, the changes include “scrapping the promise to not release AI models if Anthropic can’t guarantee proper risk mitigations in advance”.

Anthropic’s chief science officer, Jared Kaplan, told Time: “We didn’t really feel, with the rapid advance of AI, that it made sense for us to make unilateral commitments … if competitors are blazing ahead.”

Ethical language saturates the press releases of Silicon Valley companies eager to distinguish themselves from “bad actors” in Russia, China and elsewhere. But ethical words and actions are not the same, because the latter often entails a real-world cost.

That such a highly public spectacle is happening at this time is perhaps no accident. In early February, representatives of many countries – but not the US – came together for the third time to find ways to agree on “responsible AI” in the military domain. And on March 2-6, the UN will convene its latest conference discussing how best to limit the use of emerging technologies for lethal autonomous weapons systems.

Such legal and ethical debates about the role of AI technology in the future of warfare are critical, and overdue. Anthropic deserves credit for apparently resisting the US military’s efforts to undercut its ethical guidelines. But AI’s role is likely to be tested in many more conflict situations before agreement is reached.

Coronation Street actress Georgia Taylor celebrated her birthday with fans stunned by her youthful appearance as Toyah Battersby

Advertisement

Coronation Street fans have been left astonished after learning the real age of Toyah Battersby actress Georgia Taylor.

Georgia made her debut on the cobbles in 1997 as Toyah, departing the ITV soap in 2003. She rejoined Weatherfield as Toyah in 2016 and has remained a regular fixture since.

During her absence from Corrie between 2003 and 2016, Georgia took on roles including Denise Williams in Life on Mars, Ruth Winters in Casualty, and Kate Barker in Law and Order: UK.

On Thursday 26 February, Georgia marked her 46th birthday. Sharing on Instagram, the actress wrote: “Work birthdays are the best @coronationstreet” alongside images of cards, cakes, gifts and balloons from her colleagues.

On social media, viewers also rushed to wish Georgia well on a Coronation Street fan page. One person wrote: “HAPPY 46TH BIRTHDAY WISHES TO GEORGIA HAVE A FANTASTIC DAY.”, reports the Mirror.

Advertisement

**For the latest showbiz, TV, movie and streaming news, go to the new **Everything Gossip** website**

Another account responded: “Wow 46 looking well, share my birthday”, whilst a different supporter commented: “She doesn’t look that age! Pretty Lady!”, with another follower adding: “Happy Birthday beautiful lady” and one more stating: “Happy birthday Georgia beautiful lady and a great actress.”

This follows Coronation Street viewers being stunned after discovering Georgia Taylor’s actual name during an appearance on the On the Sofa podcast last summer.

During a conversation about shooting a Corrie scene with Georgia, podcast presenter Ben Price, who portrays Nick Tilsley, caused bewilderment when he called the actress Claire.

Responding to the clip, one Corrie fan commented, “Who’s Claire? Toyah is played by Georgia Taylor.”

A second explained: “Her real name is Claire x”, whilst a third declared: “I had absolutely no idea!”.

Toyah actress Georgia was born Claire Jackson but changed her name owing to its prevalence when she joined the ITV soap in the late 1990s.

She previously told the Mirror: “It’s not that I planned this to happen. But when I started with Coronation Street I had to register with Equity, the actors’ union, and at the time there seemed to be a hell of a lot of Claires so I had to think of something else.”

Georgia added: “I couldn’t tell you where I got Georgia from, other than I liked it, but my grandad’s surname was Taylor and he passed away not long before I got the part.”

Ensure our latest headlines always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source.** Click here to activate**** or add us as your Preferred Source in your Google search settings.**

Coronation Street airs Monday to Friday at 8:30pm on ITV1 and ITVX