NEW YORK — Chuck Woolery, the affable, smooth-talking game show host of “Wheel of Fortune,” “Love Connection” and “Scrabble” who later became a right-wing podcaster, skewering liberals and accusing the government of lying about COVID-19, has died. He was 83. Mark Young, Woolery's podcast co-host and friend, said in an email early Sunday that Woolery died at his home in Texas with his wife, Kristen, present. “Chuck was a dear friend and brother and a tremendous man of faith, life will not be the same without him,” Young wrote. Woolery, with his matinee idol looks, coiffed hair and ease with witty banter, was inducted into the American TV Game Show Hall of Fame in 2007 and earned a daytime Emmy nomination in 1978. In 1983, Woolery began an 11-year run as host of TV’s “Love Connection,” for which he coined the phrase, “We’ll be back in two minutes and two seconds,” a two-fingered signature dubbed the “2 and 2.” In 1984, he hosted TV’s “Scrabble,” simultaneously hosting two game shows on TV until 1990. “Love Connection,” which aired long before the dawn of dating apps, had a premise that featured either a single man or single woman who would watch audition tapes of three potential mates and then pick one for a date. A couple of weeks after the date, the guest would sit with Woolery in front of a studio audience and tell everybody about the date. The audience would vote on the three contestants, and if the audience agreed with the guest’s choice, “Love Connection” would offer to pay for a second date. Woolery told The Philadelphia Inquirer in 2003 that his favorite set of lovebirds was a man aged 91 and a woman aged 87. "She had so much eye makeup on, she looked like a stolen Corvette. He was so old he said, ‘I remember wagon trains.’ The poor guy. She took him on a balloon ride.” Other career highlights included hosting the shows “Lingo," “Greed” and “The Chuck Woolery Show,” as well as hosting the short-lived syndicated revival of “The Dating Game” from 1998 to 2000 and an ill-fated 1991 talk show. In 1992, he played himself in two episodes of TV’s “Melrose Place.” Woolery became the subject of the Game Show Network’s first attempt at a reality show, “Chuck Woolery: Naturally Stoned,” which premiered in 2003. It shared the title of the pop song in 1968 by Woolery and his rock group, the Avant-Garde. It lasted six episode and was panned by critics. Woolery began his TV career at a show that has become a mainstay. Although most associated with Pat Sajak and Vanna White, “Wheel of Fortune” debuted Jan. 6, 1975, on NBC with Woolery welcoming contestants and the audience. Woolery, then 33, was trying to make it in Nashville as a singer. “Wheel of Fortune” started life as “Shopper’s Bazaar,” incorporating Hangman-style puzzles and a roulette wheel. After Woolery appeared on “The Merv Griffin Show” singing “Delta Dawn,” Merv Griffin asked him to host the new show with Susan Stafford. “I had an interview that stretched to 15, 20 minutes,” Woolery told The New York Times in 2003. “After the show, when Merv asked if I wanted to do a game show, I thought, ‘Great, a guy with a bad jacket and an equally bad mustache who doesn’t care what you have to say — that’s the guy I want to be.’” NBC initially passed, but they retooled it as “Wheel of Fortune” and got the green light. After a few years, Woolery demanded a raise to $500,000 a year, or what host Peter Marshall was making on “Hollywood Squares.” Griffin balked and replaced Woolery with weather reporter Pat Sajak. “Both Chuck and Susie did a fine job, and ‘Wheel’ did well enough on NBC, although it never approached the kind of ratings success that ‘Jeopardy!’ achieved in its heyday,” Griffin said in “Merv: Making the Good Life Last,” an autobiography from the 2000s co-written by David Bender. Woolery earned an Emmy nod as host. Born in Ashland, Kentucky, Woolery served in the U.S. Navy before attending college. He played double bass in a folk trio, then formed the psychedelic rock duo The Avant-Garde in 1967 while working as a truck driver to support himself as a musician. The Avant-Garde, which toured in a refitted Cadillac hearse, had the Top 40 hit “Naturally Stoned,” with Woolery singing, “When I put my mind on you alone/I can get a good sensation/Feel like I’m naturally stoned.” After The Avant-Garde broke up, Woolery released his debut solo single “I’ve Been Wrong” in 1969 and several more singles with Columbia before transitioning to country music by the 1970s. He released two solo singles, “Forgive My Heart” and “Love Me, Love Me.” Woolery wrote or co-wrote songs for himself and everyone from Pat Boone to Tammy Wynette. On Wynette’s 1971 album “We Sure Can Love Each Other,” Woolery wrote “The Joys of Being a Woman” with lyrics including “See our baby on the swing/Hear her laugh, hear her scream.” After his TV career ended, Woolery went into podcasting. In an interview with The New York Times, he called himself a gun-rights activist and described himself as a conservative libertarian and constitutionalist. He said he hadn’t revealed his politics in liberal Hollywood for fear of retribution. He teamed up with Mark Young in 2014 for the podcast “Blunt Force Truth” and soon became a full supporter of Donald Trump while arguing minorities don’t need civil rights and causing a firestorm by tweeting an antisemitic comment linking Soviet Communists to Judaism. “President Obama’s popularity is a fantasy only held by him and his dwindling legion of juice-box-drinking, anxiety-dog-hugging, safe-space-hiding snowflakes,” he said. Woolery also was active online, retweeting articles from Conservative Brief, insisting Democrats were trying to install a system of Marxism and spreading headlines such as “Impeach him! Devastating photo of Joe Biden leaks.” During the early stages of the pandemic, Woolery initially accused medical professionals and Democrats of lying about the virus in an effort to hurt the economy and Trump’s chances for reelection to the presidency. “The most outrageous lies are the ones about COVID-19. Everyone is lying. The CDC, media, Democrats, our doctors, not all but most, that we are told to trust. I think it’s all about the election and keeping the economy from coming back, which is about the election. I’m sick of it,” Woolery wrote in July 2020. Trump retweeted that post to his 83 million followers. By the end of the month, nearly 4.5 million Americans had been infected with COVID-19 and more than 150,000 had died. Just days later, Woolery changed his stance, announcing his son had contracted COVID-19. “To further clarify and add perspective, COVID-19 is real and it is here. My son tested positive for the virus, and I feel for of those suffering and especially for those who have lost loved ones,” Woolery posted before his account was deleted. Woolery later explained on his podcast that he never called COVID-19 “a hoax” or said “it’s not real,” just that “we’ve been lied to.” Woolery also said it was “an honor to have your president retweet what your thoughts are and think it’s important enough to do that.” In addition to his wife, Woolery is survived by his sons Michael and Sean and his daughter Melissa, Young said.Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info A Syrian refugee who made Edinburgh his home has welcomed the fall of the Assad regime in his home country after his family are freed from brutal prisons. Dr Amer Masri moved to the capital in 2007 to study a PhD at Edinburgh University in sheep genetics before marrying his wife, Marwa, 39, in Scotland in 2008. The 43-year-old stayed following the Arab Spring and applied for refuge while warring factions wreaked violent havoc across his country of birth, reports Edinburgh Live . He was joined by his wife and their two sons, Taym, 15 and Elias, 12, on Sunday, December 8, in celebrating Bashar al-Assad being overthrown. Amar grew up in a draconian environment despite his family’s relatively high social status because of the torment caused by Assad's Alawaite minority regime. He said: "I grew up in Damascus and attended Damascus University before coming to Edinburgh in 2007. Life economically was ok back home. “In terms of my family, my father was a professor and in a good social class in the community however Syria was under the rule of Assad the son. We opened our eyes and were aware of what was going on. My parents came from a city called Hama. It is a city which was bombed heavily by Assad the father and saw massacres take place throughout the 80s. "My father always warned us not to mention the brutality of the regime as the intelligence may be listening and could come take us away. Now the regime has fallen, the media is exposing the cruelty of their reign and how bad the situation is after 53 years of Assad rule. "We have distant relatives who were killed in a very brutal way, some of them were among the 40,000 citizens from Hama who disappeared or were buried in mass graves. So many of my mother’s uncles had to flee to different countries because they were simply born in Hama. "My wife is overwhelmed, so many of her uncles and relatives were detained by the regime for over 15 years and they have been freed during the overthrow of Assad . Growing up I had friends arrested for kicking a ball against a poster of Assad on the wall. They would be taken away and interrogated by the authorities. "We had a saying back home that even the ‘walls have ears.’ You learn quickly not to criticise the regime even to those closest to you. You can never tell who was the spy and cannot trust anyone. It was horrible, you were fearful of your friends.” Throughout the civil war , Amar and his wife kept in regular contact with their family who remained in Syria. After hearing Assad had fled the country they were unwilling to accept the reality until they saw a photo of Assad in Moscow. “It took one of my aunt’s in Damascus 36 hours to accept the regime had fallen,” she said. “They were in disbelief and described it as like having a dream. It was not until he appeared in Moscow that it became real. No one truly felt confident speaking out until it was confirmed he was gone. My family now tell me they miss me and want my family to come back and join them." They plan on visiting their family at the end of the month but have admitted they are observing what happens before making any long term decision about returning to Syria , as they flirt with the idea of setting up an elderly care business in Syria but both are apprehensive about giving up the careers and lives they have built in the capital. On what the future holds, he added: “I’ve always said Syria is for all Syrians and should be an inclusive country with no discrimination or revenge for those with ethnic backgrounds. There should be accountability for other war criminals but also forgiveness for those deceived by the regime and were tricked into advocating for it. “It is time to rebuild and not a time to fight anymore, we need peace and prosperity. There are so many positive signals from the ground and I am optimistic. For now I am observing from afar to see what happens with the power transition. I hope there is a peaceful passing of power to a civil government which will represent every Syrian regardless of sex, faith or background. “There is a fear we could become a Libya or Iraq scenario and foreign powers like Israel are already exploiting the power vacuum of the army . My wife is worried because she received a call to say Israeli tanks were just 2km away from her family farm and they do not know if it will be taken over. We are also fearful of sleeper Isis cells or forces remaining loyal to Assad who may still be armed and can cause chaos.” Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile , select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don’t like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'. If you’re curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. Don't miss the latest news from around Scotland and beyond - Sign up to our daily newsletter here.Key details about the man accused of killing of UnitedHealthcare's CEO
A Psychologist Suggests 4 Ways To Combat Digital ‘Brain Rot’Andy Murray enters new chapter with Novak Djokovic as coach of long-time rival
None
None
Key details about the man accused of killing of UnitedHealthcare's CEO
TikTok's future in the U.S. appeared uncertain on Friday after a federal appeals court rejected a legal challenge to a law that requires the social media platform to cut ties with its China-based parent company or be banned by mid-January. Read this article for free: Already have an account? To continue reading, please subscribe: * TikTok's future in the U.S. appeared uncertain on Friday after a federal appeals court rejected a legal challenge to a law that requires the social media platform to cut ties with its China-based parent company or be banned by mid-January. Read unlimited articles for free today: Already have an account? TikTok’s future in the U.S. appeared uncertain on Friday after a federal appeals court rejected a legal challenge to a law that requires the social media platform to cut ties with its China-based parent company or be banned by mid-January. A panel of three judges on The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled unanimously that the law withstood constitutional scrutiny, rebuffing arguments from the two companies that the statute violated their rights and the rights of TikTok users in the U.S. The government has said it wants ByteDance, TikTok’s parent company, to divest its stakes. But if it doesn’t and the platform goes away, it would have a seismic impact on the lives of content creators who rely on the platform for income as well as users who use it for entertainment and connection. Here are some details on the ruling and what could happen next: What does the ruling say? In their lawsuit, TikTok and ByteDance, which is also a plaintiff in the case, had challenged the law on various fronts, arguing in part that the statute ran afoul of the First Amendment and was an unconstitutional bill of attainder that unfairly targeted the two companies. But the court sided with attorneys for the Justice Department who said that the government was attempting to address national security concerns and the way in which it chose to do so did not violate the constitution. The Justice Department has argued in court that TikTok poses a national security risk due to its connections to China. Officials say that Chinese authorities can compel ByteDance to hand over information on TikTok’s U.S. patrons or use the platform to spread, or suppress, information. However, the U.S. hasn’t publicly provided examples of that happening. The appeals court ruling, written by Judge Douglas Ginsburg, said the law was “carefully crafted to deal only with control by a foreign adversary.” The judges also rejected the claim that the statute was an unlawful bill of attainder or a taking of property in violation of the Fifth Amendment. Furthermore, Ginsburg wrote the law did not violate the First Amendment because the government is not looking to “suppress content or require a certain mix of content” on TikTok. What happens next? TikTok and ByteDance are expected to appeal the case to the Supreme Court, but it’s unclear whether the court will take up the case. TikTok indicated in a statement on Friday the two companies are preparing to take their case to high court, saying the Supreme Court has “an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech.” “We expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue,” a company spokesperson said. Alan Morrison, a professor at The George Washington University Law School, said he expects the Supreme Court to take up the case because of the novelty of the issues raised in the lawsuit. If that happens, attorneys for the two companies still have to convince the court to grant them an emergency stay that will prevent the government from enforcing the Jan. 19 divestiture deadline stipulated in the law, Morrison said. Such a move could drag out the process until the Justices make a ruling. Tiffany Cianci, a TikTok content creator who has supported the platform, said she was not shocked about the outcome of the court’s ruling on Friday because lower courts typically defer to the executive branch on these types of cases. She believes the company will have a stronger case at the Supreme Court. “I believe that the next stages are more likely to produce a victory for TikTokers and for TikTok as a whole,” Cianci said. What about Trump? Another wild card is President-elect Donald Trump, who tried to ban TikTok during his first term but said during the recent presidential campaign that he is now against such action. The Trump transition team has not offered details on how Trump plans to carry out his pledge to “save TikTok.” But spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said in a statement last month that he plans to “deliver” on his campaign promises. After Trump takes office on Jan. 20th, it would fall on his Justice Department to enforce the law and punish any potential violators. Penalties would apply to any app stores that would violate a prohibition on TikTok and to internet hosting services which would be barred from supporting it. Some have speculated that Trump could ask his Justice Department to abstain from enforcing the law. But tech companies like Apple and Google, which offer TikTok’s app on their app stores, would then have to trust that the administration would not come after them for any violations. Craig Singleton, senior director of the China program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said enforcement discretion — or executive orders — can not override existing law, leaving Trump with “limited room for unilateral action.” There are other things Trump could potentially do. It’s possible he could invoke provisions of the law that allow the president to determine whether a sale or a similar transaction frees TikTok from “foreign adversary” control. Another option is to urge Congress to repeal the law. But that too would require support from congressional Republicans who have overwhelmingly supported the prospect of getting TikTok out of the hands of a Chinese company. In a statement issued Friday, Republican Rep. John Moolenaar of Michigan, chairman of the House Select Committee on China, said he was “optimistic that President Trump will facilitate an American takeover of TikTok” and allow its continued use in the United States. Winnipeg Jets Game Days On Winnipeg Jets game days, hockey writers Mike McIntyre and Ken Wiebe send news, notes and quotes from the morning skate, as well as injury updates and lineup decisions. Arrives a few hours prior to puck drop. Is anyone trying to buy TikTok? ByteDance has said it won’t sell TikTok. And even if it wanted to, a sale of the proprietary algorithm that powers TikTok is likely to get blocked under Chinese export controls that the country issued in 2020. That means if TikTok is sold without the algorithm, its likely that the buyer would only purchase a shell of the platform that doesn’t contain the technology that made the app a cultural powerhouse. Still, some investors, including Trump’s former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and billionaire Frank McCourt, have expressed interest in buying it. This week, a spokesperson for McCourt’s Project Liberty initiative, which aims to protect online privacy, said participants in their bid have made informal commitments of more than $20 billion in capital. The spokesperson did not disclose the identity of the participants. Advertisement Advertisement
Government departments are on a collision course with unions unsatisfied with proposals to raise pay for more than a million public sector workers by 2.8% next year. Inflation is predicted to average 2.5% this year and 2.6% next year, according to forecasts from the Office for Budget Responsibility. The British Medical Association said the Government showed a “poor grasp” of unresolved issues from two years of industrial action, and the Royal College of Nursing called the pay recommendation “deeply offensive”. The National Education Union’s chief said teachers were “putting the Government on notice” that the proposed increase “won’t do”. The pay recommendations came after Chancellor Rachel Reeves called for every Government department to cut costs by 5%, as she started work on a sweeping multi-year spending review to be published in 2025. Independent pay review bodies will consider the proposals for pay rises for teachers, NHS workers and senior civil servants. The Department of Health said it viewed 2.8% as a “reasonable amount” to set aside, in its recommendations to the NHS Pay Review Body and the Doctors’ and Dentists’ Remuneration Board remit groups. A 2.8% pay rise for teachers in 2025/26 would “maintain the competitiveness of teachers’ pay despite the challenging financial backdrop the Government is facing”, the Department for Education said. The Cabinet Office also suggested pay increases for senior civil servants should be kept to no more than 2.8%. Paul Johnson, director of the influential economics think tank the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), said it was “not a bad ballpark figure” and feels “just about affordable” given the Government’s public spending plans. The downside, he said, is that public sector workers have lost out since 2010 and unions will be upset that this is not making up the gap, he told Sky News’ Politics Hub with Sophy Ridge. “But given the constraints facing the Chancellor I think it’s pretty hard to argue for more for public sector pay when public sector services ... are under real strain,” he said. Unions expressed their disappointment in the recommendations, with some hinting they could be willing to launch industrial action. The Royal College of Nursing general secretary and chief executive called for “open direct talks now” to avoid “further escalation to disputes and ballots”. Professor Nicola Ranger said: “The Government has today told nursing staff they are worth as little as £2 extra a day, less than the price of a coffee. “Nursing is in crisis – there are fewer joining and too many experienced professionals leaving. This is deeply offensive to nursing staff, detrimental to their patients and contradictory to hopes of rebuilding the NHS. “The public understands the value of nursing and they know that meaningful reform of the NHS requires addressing the crisis in nursing. “We pulled out of the Pay Review Body process, alongside other unions, because it is not the route to address the current crisis. “That has been demonstrated today. “Fair pay must be matched by structural reform. Let’s open direct talks now and avoid further escalation to disputes and ballots – I have said that directly to government today.” Professor Philip Banfield, chairman of the British Medical Association’s council, urged the sector’s pay review body to “show it is now truly independent”. “For this Government to give evidence to the doctors’ and dentists’ pay review body (DDRB) believing a 2.8% pay rise is enough, indicates a poor grasp of the unresolved issues from two years of industrial action,” he said. He said the proposal is far below the current rate of inflation and that the Government was “under no illusion” when doctors accepted pay offers in the summer that there was a “very real risk of further industrial action” if “pay erosion” was not addressed in future pay rounds. “This sub-inflationary suggestion from the current Government serves as a test to the DDRB. “The BMA expects it to take this opportunity to show it is now truly independent, to take an objective view of the evidence it receives from all parties, not just the Government, and to make an offer that reflects the value of doctors’ skills and expertise in a global market, and that moves them visibly further along the path to full pay restoration.” The NEU’s general secretary, Daniel Kebede, said teachers’ pay had been cut by more than one-fifth in real terms since 2010. “Along with sky-high workload, the pay cuts have resulted in a devastating recruitment and retention crisis. Teacher shortages across the school system hit pupils and parents too. “A 2.8% increase is likely to be below inflation and behind wage increases in the wider economy. This will only deepen the crisis in education.” In a hint that there could be a return to industrial action he added: “NEU members fought to win the pay increases of 2023 and 2024. “We are putting the Government on notice. Our members care deeply about education and feel the depth of the crisis. This won’t do.” The offer for teachers is the “exact opposite of fixing the foundations” and will result in bigger class sizes and more cuts to the curriculum, Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “The inadequacy of the proposed pay award is compounded by the Government’s intention that schools should foot the bill out of their existing allocations. “Given that per-pupil funding will increase on average by less than 1% next year, and the Government’s proposal is for an unfunded 2.8% pay award, it is obvious that this is in fact an announcement of further school cuts.” Paul Whiteman, general secretary at school leaders’ union NAHT, said: This recommendation falls far short of what is needed to restore the competitiveness of the teaching profession, to enable it to retain experienced professionals and attract new talent. Unison head of health Helga Pile said: “The Government has inherited a financial mess from its predecessors, but this is not what NHS workers wanted to hear. “Staff are crucial in turning around the fortunes of the NHS. Improving performance is a key Government pledge, but the pay rise proposed is barely above the cost of living.”
RUBEN AMORIM gave Manchester United five out of ten for Sunday’s performance at Ipswich. The coach looked frustrated as the Red Devils struggled in the 1-1 draw — his first game in charge — against the Premier League new boys. Amorim delivered his verdict on the average display in the Portman Road dressing room, where he also revealed he was blown away by the intensity of the top flight. A source said: "Amorim said their performance was a five out of ten. "He was impressed with Ipswich and thought the game was played at an incredible intensity. "But he added that it showed just how much United need to improve." Former Sporting Lisbon boss Amorim, who replaced axed Erik ten Hag as boss this month, is realistic about the major task ahead of him. But he warned his players that they must improve and learn quickly. The Portuguese, 39, acknowledged that if 18th-placed Ipswich are one of the Prem’s lesser teams, then it showed the job he has on his hands to turn Man Utd 's fortunes around. He took his first training session last Monday , with the international break only halfway through. CASINO SPECIAL - BEST CASINO WELCOME OFFERS The source added: "He was critical of one or two players for losing the ball and not being in the right positions. "But he also said, ‘Some of you I’ve had for two days, some two weeks’, so he was realistic. "He did say they were going to have to learn quickly." MANCHESTER UNITED began the Ruben Amorim era with a 1-1 draw away at Ipswich. Marcus Rashford needed just 81 seconds to put the Red Devils in front at Portman Road, tapping home an Amad Diallo cross. But Ipswich hit back when Omari Hutchinson's strike flew in via a deflection off Noussair Mazraoui. And it was the newly-promoted side who looked likelier to get a winner in the second half. Here is how SunSport's Charlie Wyett saw the performances of the Man Utd players... ANDRE ONANA - 7/10 United’s best player. Two key stops to deny Liam Delap but no chance for the deflected Omari Hutchinson goal. Then delivered an 87th minute save to keep out an effort from Conor Chaplin. NOUSSAIR MAZRAOUI - 5 Slotted in on the right of the three-man defence but unfortunate with the deflection for the goal. MATTHIJS DE LIGT - 5 Has been suspect this season and will probably be better suited to a back three although still given a tough time by Delap. JONNY EVANS - 5 The 36-year-old was targeted by Ipswich for his lack of pace and no surprise he was replaced. AMAD DIALLO - 6 Did incredibly well to bomb past Jens Cajuste and deliver the cross for Rashford’s early goal but offered little else. CHRISTIAN ERIKSEN - 5 Some nice touches going forward but too lightweight in this position in front of the back three. CASEMIRO - 4 Lucky to start ahead of Manuel Ugarte and was really poor. Struggled throughout before being subbed and could maybe have got a block to the Hutchinson shot. DIOGO DALOT - 5 Not suited to left wing-back although stayed there when Luke Shaw arrived because the English international replaced Evans in the back three. BRUNO FERNANDES - 5 Some of his link-up play was fine but United need a captain who can inspire this team and Fernandes is not the man. Sent a free-kick flashing past the post with 12 minutes left. ALEJANDRO GARNACHO - 5 Twice called over by Ruben Amorim in the first half for instructions. Denied by a decent save from Aro Muric 50 seconds into the second half. MARCUS RASHFORD - 6 Criticised for his basketball trip to New York so to score after 80 seconds was two fingers up at his critics - but did not offer much after that. Subs Ugarte (for Casemiro 56 mins) - 6 Shaw (for Evans 56 mins) - 6 Hojlund (for Rashford 67 mins) - 5 Zirkzee ( for Eriksen 67 mins) - 5 Mount (for Garnacho 87 mins) - 5
Local Artists Celebrate Nature at 'Wetlands for the Holidays' Exhibit in Clark County's Wetlands ParkMore consumers hope to cut out self-gifting this year. They may be making a mistake.Edgewell Personal Care's chief supply chain officer sells stock for $165,266