A top aide to Vladimir Putin has bizarrely declared he “feels sorry” for the UK after Britain was threatened by the Russian Embassy in London over its support for Ukraine.

Moscow’s representatives in the UK warned of the “consequences” following confirmation that British-made drones had been used in recent Ukrainian attacks in Russia.

The embassy claimed Britain was “deliberately opting for an escalation of the Ukraine crisis,” and said the “deeper its involvement in the conflict… the higher the price it will pay”.

UK prime minister Andy Burnham remained unperturbed by the threats on Tuesday, telling reporters that the UK was “providing support so that Ukraine can defend itself and that’s been the British position all the way through this conflict, by previous prime ministers – it remains the case with me”.

Asked about the spat with the UK on Wednesday, Russia’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov tried to deliver yet another threat as he again suggested Britain is directly involved in the war.

He told the media: “I feel sorry for the United Kingdom, if it is going to stand with Ukraine until the very end.

“As for the substance of our Embassy’s comment, it means only one thing: President Vladimir Putin has warned of our right to act in any area of the world’s oceans, should anyone encroach on our interests or our property.

“We have exactly the same right to regard the proudly announced direct involvement of British missile forces in strikes against the Russian Federation as participation in the war. With all the consequences that entails.”

His remarks come after a former deputy foreign minister of Russia told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that many in Moscow interpret the recent strikes from Ukraine as proof the UK is “part of the war”.

“The situation now is very dangerous, because the tension of conflict in Ukraine really is increasing,” Andrei Federov added. “The coming couple of months will face this tension, this escalation which can bring us to totally different situation unlike ever before.”

Listen to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

A documentary questioning whether attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a genuine condition or a social construct has aired on Channel 4 – and it’s proven predictably divisive.

The show, titled The Great ADHD Myth?, has prompted a wave of responses online from doctors, charities and people with the disorder who are concerned it will contribute to stigma surrounding the condition.

A reactionary survey by the charity ADHD UK in the wake of the documentary revealed that (at the time of writing), of 1,566 people who watched the show, 92% believe it has increased stigma surrounding ADHD, while 93% do not believe the show was fair in its representation of the condition.

ADHD UK’s CEO and co-founder, Henry Shelford, told HuffPost UK: “We are shocked by this programme. The fact it got commissioned at all speaks to the stigma around ADHD – a stigma that is now likely to get worse because of this show.”

The charity had previously penned an open letter to Channel 4 urging it to make a series of changes to the documentary before its release, including a review of the title and for the broadcaster to “make clear on screen where contributors’ views sit relative to mainstream clinical consensus”.

The documentary followed NHS psychiatrist and Daily Mail columnist, Dr Max Pemberton, as he spoke to medical experts who questioned the conventional narrative around ADHD.

One such expert, Dr Iona Heath, the former president of the Royal College of General Practitioners, said: “It’s certainly not a medical condition as far as I’m concerned.” Another child psychiatrist said: “In 100 years’ time people are going to wonder, ‘How could we be so gullible?’”

The show posed a number of questions including whether ADHD is a disorder or social construct, how it should be treated (including whether diet and lifestyle changes could help), whether medication is the right approach and who benefits from increasing diagnoses.

Dr Pemberton – who remains certain he doesn’t have ADHD – underwent a private assessment (costing £1,200) and was diagnosed with combined ADHD and a prescription for medication.

The documentary also followed a family who wanted to see whether holistic lifestyle changes could eliminate their 10-year-old son’s use of ADHD medication. The pills “take my fun-ness away”, he said, however the programme noted at the end he did go back on them.

ADHD UK’s survey found 80% of those surveyed said it wasn’t “responsible” for a broadcaster to film a 10-year-old stopping his ADHD medication for television.

In response, Channel 4 told HuffPost UK: “The welfare of the boy and his family were of paramount importance both before, during and after the production process. An independent doctor, his GP, and a health and safety company were consulted.

“Advice was also taken from three independent psychiatrists on the medication break. This programme was produced in compliance with the Ofcom Broadcasting Code.”

The Times’ review of the show called its arguments “convincing, or at least the start of a necessary discussion”, although they did note “there was no real counter-argument offered to the idea of ADHD as a ‘myth’”.

Meanwhile the Guardian said Dr Pemberton “answers his questions convincingly”, highlighting the remedies proposed at the end, such as changing diet, screen and activity levels first, adapting schools to children’s needs, and making medication the last resort “seem neither radical nor uncompassionate”.

Both publications gave the doc four stars.

The NHS says ADHD is a “complex neurodevelopmental disorder, which starts in childhood and often persists into adulthood” and “is associated with significant impairment”. It’s also recognised by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE).

It is marked by a persistent pattern (at least six months) of inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity that has a direct negative impact in more than one setting – ie. home, school, work – on academic, occupational, or social functioning. Research suggests 3-5% of the population are impacted.

Shelford, who has ADHD, said the latest Channel 4 documentary “is a travesty in its missed opportunity to help slay myths around ADHD; instead, it has added to them”.

He said ADHD “can be extraordinarily tough” and pointed to UCL-led research which showed UK adults with diagnosed ADHD have a shorter life expectancy. There was a reduction in life expectancy for men with diagnosed ADHD of between 4.5 and nine years, and between 6.5 and 11 years for women.

“Our failure to support people with ADHD should be a national scandal – instead we’re getting TV shows undermining the disorder,” he said.

“We have already complained to Ofcom and will be following up with a more detailed complaint.” The charity has also encouraged others to make complaints to the regulator.

“We are worried that this will cost lives by putting people in need off getting an ADHD assessment and from getting support,” added Shelford.

Others were quick to share their thoughts on the controversial documentary on social media after it aired.

Clinical psychologist Dr Emily Compton-Smith wrote on Instagram: “We should absolutely be able to discuss diagnosis, and where things could be improved.”

That said, she was “troubled” by “how one-sided the programme felt,” she continued, adding that “what felt missing … was the voice of the people actually living it”.

She also aired concerns that “many people will watch it and come away more sceptical of ADHD, while people with ADHD will once again be left feeling like they need to justify themselves”.

Adam Dance, the Liberal Democrat MP for Yeovil, who also has ADHD, shared a cross-party letter which he’d sent to Channel 4, saying he is “deeply concerned by the framing and language used to promote the documentary and by the potential consequences for people with ADHD and their families”.

Meanwhile others praised the show as “fantastic” and “inspirational”.

One in five (20%) people who watched the show and responded to ADHD UK’s survey said the programme had caused them ‘severe’ distress, with 38% saying it caused ‘significant’ distress.

In a statement, Professor Subodh Dave, President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, commented: “The way we speak about neurodevelopmental conditions really matters. It can fuel harmful stigma experienced by people living with the condition and risk discouraging people from seeking the support and treatment they need.”

Off the back of the documentary, the expert called for greater scrutiny of the quality of assessment patients are receiving, and whether people are able to access the right support at the right time.

He added: “The focus should be on improving access to high-quality assessments and care by addressing waiting lists that leave many people without vital support for years at a time, not questioning the legitimacy of a well-established neurodevelopmental disorder.”

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are reportedly moving back to the United Kingdom later this month, according to The Telegraph and The Sun.

The couple and their children will move to a private, non-royal residence outside of London after living in the US since 2020. Prince Archie, 7, and Princess Lilibet, 5, are set to attend a British school beginning in September.

Their move to the US came amid feuds with members of the royal family and the British press. Harry and Meghan are not set to resume any royal duties.

The planned move comes after the Duke and Duchess took a trip to the UK last month, marking the first time Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet had seen their grandfather King Charles III since 2022.

Charles, however, did not learn of the move until Sunday, according to the British outlets.

Harry has repeatedly said Buckingham Palace prevented the safe return of him and his family because it refused to provide security. It’s unclear what security arrangements the family will have now that they are moving back.

A UK Home Office spokesperson told NBC News, “It is our long-standing policy not to provide detailed information on those arrangements, as doing so could compromise their integrity and affect individuals’ security.”

Harry, Meghan and their children have been living in Montecito, California. They also have property in Portugal.

Harry and his brother, Prince William, remain estranged. William was apparently “blindsided” about the move, according to Cosmopolitan.

HuffPost reached out to the UK Home Office, Buckingham Palace, Kensington Palace, and Harry and Meghan’s organisation for additional comment.

President Donald Trump’s lengthy social media rant threatening an “ECONOMIC D-DAY” over Iran on Wednesday was ripped apart by critics who seemed to see right through his rhetoric.

Mere hours after bragging that the situation was “so good” with Iran, Trump promised the country would experience “Economic Warfare and Isolation on an unprecedented scale.” He also noted that any country that “allows its financial institutions, businesses, airports, or government entities to provide any type of lifeline to Iran will itself face TREMENDOUS Economic Consequences.”

“You know who you are,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “This will be an ECONOMIC D-DAY, and we need all of our Allies to stand with the United States of America to isolate, and defeat, the Iran threat.”

Critics were quick to point out that the countries aiding Iran during the conflict were the same ones Trump often praises, including Russia. This would make it improbable that Trump would follow through with his ultimatum, thus continuing his pattern of walking back economic and military threats against Iran.

According to CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, Iran has been under international economic sanctions for decades, and there were few measures the US could take outside of sanctioning or cutting off relations with Tehran’s largest trading partners.

“Iran’s largest trading partner is China; its second largest trading partner, I believe, is Russia. It also trades with North Korea, a little bit with India. These are not countries that the Trump administration has that much influence over,” Zakaria said on Wednesday’s edition of “Anderson Cooper 360°.”

Zakaria added that it was a dubious proposition for the US to cut off trade with China over the issue of Iran.

“We’ve already seen how that would work ’cause the Chinese would cut off their exports of rare earth, and all kinds of crucial things that the United States depends on. So it seems unlikely that you’re actually gonna get at the core problem,” Zakaria said.

Read more reactions to Trump’s post here:

Andy Burnham has announced a crackdown on the criminal gangs profiting from illegal waste.

The prime minister intends to empower more police officers to seize cash, cars and houses from criminals profiting from the illegal waste sites.

Fines will be extended from their current maximum of £300 up to £5,000 and those responsible could face tougher sanctions like prosecution and imprisonment.

AI-powered drones will also be used to detect illegal activity as it happens.

Burnham wants to use the National Crime Agency and more Environment Agency officers to seek out those who dump illegally as part of his plan to fix long-ignored problems across the country.

Regional mayors will focus on their own areas with a fresh partnership between national and regional agencies which enables enhances intelligence and capability sharing.

West Yorkshire and Greater Manchester will be first to start region-led approaches to waste crime.

The prime minister has also planned to fund the clean-up of three more of the UK’s most serious illegal waste sites in West Yorkshire, Surrey and Kent.

The government says these sites hold an estimated 22,000 tonnes of illegally dumped waste and harms an estimated 2,900 people.

“These toxic dumps have blighted communities for too long,” the prime minister said. “I said we would clean them up – and that’s exactly what we’re announcing today.

“The days of making easy money out of waste are over. We’re giving authorities the powers to hunt down the people responsible. We will seize their assets and shut their operations down.

“These mountains of rubbish have been a clear sign to communities that politics hasn’t been working for them or their area. This government is going to tackle the issues that have been ignored by Westminster for too long and bring back hope.”

Environment secretary Angela Eagle said: “Communities have been subjected to horrendous conditions and denied the pride they deserve in the places they call home. This ends now.

“We are cleaning up sites, but we are also stopping the cycle, driving faster prevention and disruption, better intelligence, and stronger coordination across the system.”

Listen to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.

Sandra Bullock is reflecting on the loss of her partner of eight years, Bryan Randall.

The Oscar winner and photographer began dating in 2015, and were together until he died in 2023, three years after privately being diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), a type of motor neurone disease.

During an appearance on an upcoming episode of the podcast SmartLess, Sandra spoke about how her partner asked her “not to share” his diagnosis publicly.

“I wasn’t allowed to speak about it,” she recalled. “That was the request and I tried – I honoured it.”

Sandra said that she understands why Bryan “asked me not” to disclose his condition publicly, but admitted that it “isolated me in the process” to carry such a “huge weight” without being able to talk to anyone outside of her family about it.

The Miss Congeniality star claimed that she “started grieving Bryan four years before he passed”, pointing out that he was “ill for half of our relationship”.

“My person left a lot earlier than the body left,” she recalled. “I don’t think I ever dealt with that until after he passed, because you’re just on this treadmill, you know?”

She also shared how caring for her parents in the past meant that illness “doesn’t scare me”, but claimed the difficult thing was her own children, as well as Bryan’s, living through the experience with them.

“I can see and be around just about anything,” she continued. “But I had two young kids that were navigating it, especially a little girl who saw [Bryan] as a father figure.”

“When the physical illness was then coupled with the mental health aspect of things – and it’s something that people don’t talk about – it was a trifecta that was pretty dark,” she then added.

After Bryan died, his family put out a joint statement which read: “Bryan chose early to keep his journey with ALS private and those of us who cared for him did our best to honor his request.

“We are immensely grateful to the tireless doctors who navigated the landscape of this illness with us and to the astounding nurses who became our roommates, often sacrificing their own families to be with ours.”

Back in 2021, while Bryan was privately struggling with his illness, Sandra called him the “love of my life”.

“I am someone who went through the divorce process,” she said on Red Table Talk, while discussing the fact that she and Bryan were not married. “[And then] I found the love of my life.

“We share two beautiful children, three children, he’s got his older daughter. It’s the best thing ever. I don’t want to say do it how I do it, but I don’t need a paper to be a devoted partner and a devoted mother.”

Sandra Bullock’s full interview with SmartLess will be released on 24 August.

Keir Starmer’s former chief of staff Sue Gray has called the environment within No.10 “unbearable” in a new interview.

Gray, once the most powerful adviser within Downing Street, has spoken out with searing honesty about what has often been described as a “boys’ club” culture at the heart of the last government.

The former Starmer aide told the Political Currency podcast: “I was thrust into the limelight in a way I had never experienced.

“It was definitely unbearable, particularly for me, and it was just affecting me and my life.”

Gray, a Labour peer, was one of the first high-profile figures to leave Starmer’s side back in 2024 following a series of leaks about her salary exceeding his own and her supposedly turbulent relationship with colleagues.

A former civil servant, she was already well-known to the public for leading the partygate enquiry into Boris Johnson’s government before she was given a top job by Starmer.

She quit in October 2024, less than three months after Labour’s landslide election victory, claiming speculation around her had become a “distraction” for government.

Gray was replaced as chief of staff by Morgan McSweeney, often described as her arch-rival in No.10. He had to resign later over his role in helping appoint Peter Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to the US.

Asked about speculation she tried to get McSweeney moved further away from the PM, Gray said: “I had always taken a view as a civil servant and actually as a special adviser that you should be able to speak freely in rooms … I couldn’t recall those sort of discussions being briefed out, and yet here I found myself.

“Stories about supposedly trying to move Morgan McSweeney to the back of the building. Actually, that was a genuine … ‘I can’t believe so many of you are going to sit in this small room. Let’s find a better room for you.’ It just got to the point where you know everything you say, you feel somebody is recording it.”

Asked if Starmer understood her fears about the briefings against her, she said: “I talked to him but I was disappointed. And I really believe that advisors should not be the story.”

She added that “none of that briefing came from me”.

When asked about what she thought had gone wrong with the last prime minister, Gray said: “I think government and opposition are very different, and I’m not sure I would say they shouldn’t have survived, but I do think that we needed bigger people, people with bigger experience to be heads of, whether it was comms or policy or strategy. Government is very, very different.”

Starmer has not given an interview since leaving office last month, but he said last year that he was “wrong” to give Gray the role.

He said: “Not everyone thought it was a good idea when I appointed her … It was my call, my judgement, my decision, and I got that wrong. Sue wasn’t the right person for this job.”

There has been speculation that Gray might be brought back into Burnham’s administration as an advisor.

However, she told the podcast she was enjoying life outside of government, though Gray added that she was “still taking part in many aspects of public life”.

Listen to Commons People, the podcast that makes politics easy. Every week, Kevin Schofield and Kate Nicholson unpack the week’s biggest stories to keep you informed. Join us for straightforward analysis of what’s going on at Westminster.