I agree with those who wondered why her current editors even published it. Maybe they hate her and don't want her working in journalism anymore.

That'll do it. I hate her, I think, except for the part where I feel better about me because I'm not.

Well, I'm sure it's gotten them a gazillion more hits than they could have any other way.

Noticed at gofugyourself.com (which no longer lets people comment):

Mothers-to-be Britney, Jordan and Demi will be queuing up for this year’s most in-demand celebrity plastic surgery package.

First off, the celebrity mother gets her silicone breast implants removed early in her pregnancy to prevent stretching, then when the baby is born (usually whipped out by caesarean at eight months to prevent the mother having to get too fat) new implants are put back, liposuction is done on the arse and thighs plus a full tummy tuck to get rid of all signs of pregnancy. The new mother keeps hidden from the public for about ten days while everything heals - which, of course, is not suspicious, as she’s just given birth.

Many private hospitals around the world now offer this as part of the birth package. Nursing staff at London’s celebrity-friendly Portland Hospital have an unofficial name for the package which honours, they claim, one of its earliest adopters.

They call it the… “Mend It Like Beckham”.

(originally from popbitch, apparently)

(usually whipped out by caesarean at eight months to prevent the mother having to get too fat)

This I doubt. An ethical doctor won't risk the baby that way, and furthermore celebrity pregnances seem to be lasting the full time; otherwise the media would be all over the prematurity (as with Julia Roberts).

furthermore celebrity pregnances seem to be lasting the full time

Doesn't that depend entirely on them telling the truth about conception?

Jeff - Welcome Back!! So glad you are out of the hospital!

Jeff! So good to see you up and about.

Jeff!!! Yay!

Jeff!

Mind reading!

OK, on a very limited basis, but still kinda' freaky:

Brain Scans Helps Scientists "Read" Minds

...

Yukiyasu Kamitani of ATR Computational Neuroscience Laboratories in Kyoto, Japan, and Frank Tong of Princeton University showed subjects one of eight visual stimuli--images with stripes aligned in various orientations. They determined that the MRI data collected while the volunteers were gazing at the images showed slight differences depending on what picture they viewed. The scientists wrote a computer program that recognized the patterns and found that they could successfully predict what images subjects saw. What is more, when a volunteer was shown two sets of stripes simultaneously--but told to pay attention to just one--the team could tell which set the subject was concentrating on.

In the second experiment, John-Dylan Haynes and Geraint Rees of University College London showed volunteers two images in quick succession, with the first flashing so quickly that the subjects couldn't clearly identify it. But by analyzing their brain activity, the scientists successfully identified which image had been shown, even when the subjects themselves didn't remember seeing it. Together, the results elucidate how the brain reacts to stimuli, even when they are "invisible." If scientists could gain a true understanding of the neural basis of subjective experience, Kamitani and Tong write, it might one day "allow for reliable prediction of a person's mental state based solely on measurements of his or her brain state." --Sarah Graham