• Phenylephrine is everywhere and every nasal decongestant contains it
• The vote deeming it ineffective paves the way for it to be pulled from market
•  READ MORE: FDA to reevaluate ineffective over-the-counter medicine

By Cassidy Morrison Senior Health Reporter For Dailymail.Com

Published: 11:36 EDT, 12 September 2023 | Updated: 14:06 EDT, 12 September 2023

Americans by wide margins say President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, violated a law against peddling foreign influence, a DailyMail.com poll shows, amid swirling allegations about the first family’s business dealings.

Fully 63 percent of voters say the president breached the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), which obliges people to declare foreign interests, when he served as vice president and his son worked with the Ukrainian energy firm Burisma.

Another 29 percent said they did not believe Biden, a Democrat, had broken the rules, and 8 percent were not sure. Republican voters overwhelmingly said Biden had committed wrongdoing, as did 38 percent of Democrats.

The results follow the claims from Hunter’s former friend business partner, Devon Archer, about how the first son raked in huge sums by selling his ties to father Joe, in a bombshell congressional testimony and interviews earlier this month.

Biden, who was then vice president in the Obama administration, was present in-person during dinner meetings and sat in on at least 20 phone calls with foreign associates, Archer told the House Oversight Committee.

After the testimony, committee chairman James Comer, a Republican, said Archer’s revelations marked a ‘huge step toward implicating Joe Biden’ in violating FARA by assisting Hunter’s dealings with Burisma, where he served on the board.

Biden this week insisted he ‘never talked business’ with Hunter or his associates.

Our DailyMail.com/TIPP poll survey of 542 US adults earlier this month focussed only on people who followed Archer’s testimony.

Those respondents were even more persuaded of wrongdoing by the president’s son.

Fully 69 percent said Hunter had broken FARA rules by representing a Chinese energy company without registering as a foreign agent.

Another 18 percent said the younger Biden had not violated FARA, and 13 percent were not sure. 

Republicans overwhelmingly found fault with Hunter, as did nearly half of Democrats.

Comer on Thursday raised the stakes on the Bidens again, saying his committee will subpoena members of the family to testify about their business dealings.

‘This was always gonna end with the Bidens coming in front of the committee. We are going to subpoena the family,’ Comer told Fox Business.

‘We know that this is going to end up in court when we subpoena the Bidens.’

Speaker Kevin McCarthy has floated the idea of launching an impeachment inquiry to give greater weight to congressional subpoena power of the Biden investigations.

In his testimony and interviews, Archer did not claim to have ever heard Joe Biden discussing business but said Hunter would use his father as a flex.

Hearing the voice of the vice president on speed dial was enough to sell the ‘brand’ to foreign executives, he said.

‘I can definitively say at particular dinners or meetings, he knew there were business associates,’ Archer told Fox News’ Tucker Carlson last week in an interview following his testimony.

‘I don’t know if it was an orchestrated call-in or not. It certainly was powerful, though, because, you know, if you’re sitting with a foreign businessperson, and you hear the vice president’s voice, that’s prize enough,’ Archer went on.

‘Sometimes it was the call was coming in and the speaker would go on,’ Archer said, detailing the conversations.

‘You understand DC, right? So the power to have that access in that conversation – it’s not in a scheduled conference call and that’s a part of your family. That’s like the pinnacle of power in DC.’

Comer claims to have found records detailing over $20 million in payments to the Biden family and their partners from foreign business leaders around the time Joe was vice president.

Weeks ago Hunter Biden’s plea deal for tax and gun crimes blew up when a judge informed him he would not be shielded from future charges, specifically mentioning a violation of FARA, or failing to register as a foreign agent.

FARA was enacted in 1938 to counter Nazi propaganda. 

It requires foreign lobbyists to register with the Justice Department. Prosecutors brought a handful of FARA cases in the postwar era, but stepped up cases in 2019 to counter rising Russian interference.

Homeowners looking to give their properties an eco-friendly makeover could save thousands of dollars over the next few years thanks to a host of new Government initiatives.

Last summer, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act which included a $9 billion rebate package aimed at incentivizing households to boost the energy efficiency in their homes.

Already homeowners can save 30 percent on the cost of installing solar panels on their roof, while motorists can benefit from a $7,500 tax credit on certain models of electric cars.

But a host of new initiatives are set to be administered separately by each state. The size of payments will depend on household income and where the owner lives. 

Such benefits will be added to existing tax credits on offer for eco-friendly products such as heat pumps, solar panels and electric vehicles. The new rebates will last until at least 2032. 

They form part of President Joe Biden’s ambitious climate plan which aims to cut greenhouse gas emissions in half in the US by 2030. 

And more efficient homes can also help households stave off energy bills which have been pushed up as a result of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Figures from the National Energy Assistance Directors Association show that the average US household has seen its energy bills for June, July and August increase by 11.7 percent compared to last summer. For those three months, homeowners will have paid an average of $578, the data shows.

Kara Saul-Rinaldi, a clean-energy policy strategist in Washington, D.C., told the Wall Street Journal that a low-income household could claim up to $22,250 to fully cover their energy efficiency upgrades. 

A low-income household is defined as being in the bottom 20 percent of their area’s median income.

By comparison, a moderate-income household – where they earn between 80 and 150 percent the median income – could be in line for as much as $19,000 in incentives on a $32,000 project.

In a higher-income home, owners could benefit from $4,000 in rebates and $3,200 in tax credits – saving them $7,200 on a home performance retrofit. 

Currently, homeowners who have a professional ‘home energy audit’ qualify for a $150 tax credit on a $500 audit. 

IRS guidance dictates that the audit must identify the biggest energy efficiency improvements including a specific estimate of the energy and cost savings to each improvement. 

What’s more, households can also claim a 30 percent tax credit on a heat pump – up to $2,000 in a single year. A heat pump can replace both an old air conditioning unit and a gas furnace as it can function as both.

Similarly, investing in insulation or more efficient windows and doors comes with a tax credit of 30 percent – to a cap of $1,200.

And motorists looking to upgrade their car to an electric vehicle can claim back up to $7,500 in tax credits depending on the model they opt for. 

If they add an electric car charging point to their home they can claim a further 30 percent discount – up to a maximum benefit of $1,000. 

The White House has been long been plugging eco-friendly home upgrades – but so far many of these products have remained far too expensive for the average consumer.

Dailymail.com revealed that the average cost of installing a solar panel system, for example, is around $20,000 – and it can take up to a decade to break even. 

Research by the Department of Energy and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory found that just 14 percent of households with residential solar in the US had annual incomes less than $50,000 in 2021. 

Similar accusations have been leveled at electric vehicles which cost on average $65,381 according to data from car dealership Edmunds.

This is almost $20,000 more than a standard gas car which is $47,892. While these vehicles are cheaper to run in the long-run, experts warned they can also take up to a decade to break even on the initial investment.

Vanderpump Rules star Ariana Madix displays her svelte midsection in sports bra as she goes grocery shopping with Katie Maloney

By Christine Rendon For Dailymail.com

Published: 17:57 EDT, 9 August 2023 | Updated: 08:50 EDT, 10 August 2023

With the hassle of taking off shoes, separating liquids, and removing laptops from bags, getting through airport security can be a rigmarole. 

But the rules that are in place are there for good reason.

Here we break down the rationale behind the steps that travellers are required to take before passing through the scanners. Plus, we reveal a few tips for speeding up the process to ensure your holiday gets off to a flying start.

REMOVING YOUR LAPTOP FROM YOUR BAG

Why do we need to place laptops in a separate tray to the rest of our belongings when heading through security? Doug Drury, who is the Head of Aviation at CQUniversity Australia, explains that the main reason is that ‘battery and other mechanical components are too dense for X-rays to penetrate effectively – especially if the scanning system is old’. 

Writing in a piece on The Conversation, he says that with the laptop in your bag, ‘security officials can’t use the screened image to determine whether a risk is present’. 

Drury continues: ‘They’ll have to flag the bag for a physical search, which slows everything down. It’s easier if all devices are removed in the first place. A laptop inside a bag can also shield other items from view that may be dangerous. Scanning it separately reveals its internal components on the screen.’

The same applies to other large electrical items such as cameras, hairdryers and iPads.  

This rule is on its way out, however, with the introduction of advanced new scanners in airports in the U.S, Holland and in London’s City Airport and Northern England’s Teesside International Airport.

The new CT machines use X-Ray technology to take a high-resolution 3D image of luggage, allowing assessors to view it from every angle and obtain a more detailed view of the contents. Older security scanners only produce a 2D image.

The British government is requiring all major UK airports to use the technology by June 2024.

PUTTING LIQUIDS IN 100ML CONTAINERS

This rule was put in place in 2006 after the British Metropolitan Police thwarted a terror plot to detonate liquid explosives on board a series of U.S and Canada-bound flights from the UK. 

It was revealed that, as part of the plot, a homemade mixture of chemicals was to be hidden inside run-of-the-mill soft drinks bottles.

After the plot was uncovered, several strict new security measures were put in place in airports around the world – including limiting liquids in hand luggage containers to 100ml (3.4oz). While the rules vary in different countries, the 100ml limit applies in many, including the UK and the U.S. 

Gov.uk says that if you take liquids in your hand luggage, they must be held in a single, transparent, resealable plastic bag ‘which holds no more than a litre (35oz) and measures approximately 20cm (8in) by 20cm (8in)’. It adds that ‘contents must fit comfortably inside the bag so it can be sealed’ and the ‘bag must not be knotted or tied at the top’. 

Much like the requirement to remove your laptop, however, this rule is also changing with the introduction of advanced scanners. When using these scanners at security, the limit is two litres (70oz) of liquid, rather than 100ml. This is because the new scanners’ detection algorithms call attention to any dubious items that may warrant further inspection – such as liquid explosives.

TAKING OFF YOUR SHOES

The reason why we need to remove our shoes in airport security goes back to 2001 when Richard Reid attempted to detonate an explosive device hidden in his shoes on a flight from Paris to Miami.

Passengers were able to subdue him by binding Reid – now known as the ‘shoe bomber’ – with plastic handcuffs, seatbelt extensions and headphone cords, and the plane was diverted to Logan International Airport in Boston.

The shoes-off rule was established by the U.S Department of Homeland Security in 2006, with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) noting: ‘Based on intelligence pointing to a continuing threat, TSA requires passengers to remove shoes to screen for explosives.’

The rule still stands today, with passengers wearing boots or heels likely to be asked to remove their footwear before passing through the scanners. 

The TSA website says: ‘You will have to remove your shoes. So save yourself the hassle of unbuckling, unzipping or untying and bring them slip-ons.’

And the website for London’s Gatwick Airport notes: ‘By removing shoes, metallic jewellery, belts or any other removable items you greatly reduce the chance of activating our walk-through metal detectors, therefore speeding up your journey through security.’

WHY YOUR ELECTRICAL ITEMS NEED TO BE CHARGED

If you’re travelling with electrical goods – such as a laptop – it’s important to make sure they’re charged before you travel. 

Gov.uk says: ‘If your device does not switch on when requested, you will not be allowed to take it onto the aircraft.’ 

This rule is in place to ‘prove it’s an actual working computer’ and not a security threat, aviation expert Drury wrote on The Conversation. 

HOW TO GET THROUGH SECURITY FASTER 

Many airports offer ‘fast track’ services, taking you through a dedicated lane in security so you can complete the process faster. It costs around £8 at Stansted Airport and from just £5 at Gatwick Airport. 

UK consumer watchdog Which? revealed earlier this year: ‘You’re most likely to feel the benefit of fast-track security when travelling at peak times. If your flight is leaving before 10am, this is likely to be the busiest time of day at any airport.’ 

Meanwhile, if you’ve splashed out on a business class or first class ticket, this often entitles you to pass through a priority lane in security, accelerating the process. This does depend on the airport, however. 

Frequent flyers in America ought to sign up for TSA PreCheck, which entitles them to reduced security measures – such as not having to remove their laptops or liquids from their bags – and access to a dedicated lane at security in more than 200 airports. 

The TSA PreCheck website notes that in June of this year, ’88 per cent of TSA PreCheck passengers waited less than five minutes’ to get through security. In order to qualify for it, travellers must attend a 10-minute appointment in one of the enrollment centres around the country, which involves fingerprinting for a background check.

You can also monitor the security wait times on apps such as MiFlight or MyTSA. This gives you the chance to relax with a coffee in the departure lounge and make your way through security when queues are at their shortest. 

Finally, preparation is key. Having all your liquids pre-separated into a clear plastic bag and wearing shoes that are easy to remove are just some of the ways you can make it through the process more smoothly. 

SOCIETY

How to Survive a Crisis: Lessons in Resilience and Avoiding Disaster 

by David Omand (Viking £20, 368pp) 

On Friday May 12, 2017, a young anaesthetist at the Royal London Hospital finished his lunch of curry and chips in the cafeteria and tried to log on to his emails. He found he could not do so.

Soon computers all over the hospital showed only a red screen with an image of a padlock and a message beginning: ‘Oops, your files have been encrypted.’ 

This was the start of the devastating cyberattack on the NHS known as WannaCry. By late afternoon, more than 80 hospital trusts and 600 GP practices and clinics had been affected.

This was a disaster that hit out of the blue, but it was also the result of what David Omand, in this revelatory book, calls a ‘slow-burn’ crisis. The NHS had long been vulnerable to this type of cyberattack.

As Omand remarks in his introduction, with something close to understatement: ‘There is no shortage of material for writing about modern crises.’

In addition to cyberattacks, we also have an ongoing war in Europe, escalating environmental problems caused by climate change, not to mention the ever-present possibility of terrorist atrocities.

Crisis is a word that may be overused in the headlines, but the potential for disaster is always there. 

And, in our increasingly connected world, ‘disruptions can quickly arrive from anywhere on the globe’. The swiftness of the worldwide spread of coronavirus is proof of that.

Few people are better qualified to examine the nature of modern crises and the ways to respond to them than Omand.

In a distinguished career in public service, he has been director of GCHQ and was the first UK Security And Intelligence Coordinator.

His book is full of insights into the reasons why emergencies so often escalate into crises.

He says people cling to the rule book when they should be prepared to tear it up if necessary. 

‘Surviving a crisis,’ Omand writes in a surprising analogy, ‘is a form of spontaneous performance art in which the cast follow an outline script . . . but then improvise the details.’

The book covers a remarkable range of material from the failures of first France and then the U.S. in Vietnam, to the Manchester Arena bombing and the Grenfell Tower disaster in West London.

One of the most terrifying possibilities he highlights is nuclear meltdown. As he points out, there have been dangerous incidents since the nuclear industry’s earliest days.

In 1952, a supervisor at the Chalk River reactor in Ottawa, Canada nearly caused a serious problem, as red warning lights flashed, when he asked his assistant to press buttons four and three instead of buttons four and one.

Five years later, Windscale in Cumbria was the scene of the worst nuclear accident in the UK’s history.

Such accidents are measured on a scale of one to seven. Windscale was a five. There have only ever been two Level 7 incidents — the disasters at Chernobyl in Ukraine in 1986 and Fukushima in Janpan in 2011.

At Chernobyl, the Soviet government’s secrecy and refusal to admit the magnitude of the problem resulted in unnecessary deaths.

The Japanese were more open about the catastrophe at Fukushima — but they were still criticised for the lack of preparedness.

As Omand makes clear, in facing any kind of potential crisis, being prepared is all.

The security operation surrounding the London Olympics in 2012, for example, was an undoubted success. 

When it was initially announced that the capital city would be bidding to hold the Games, many senior civil servants were alarmed at the prospect. 

‘Bid if you must,’ one is rumoured to have said, ‘but for God’s sake don’t win.’

The thought of protecting 15,000 athletes, more than 100 visiting heads of state and ten million-plus spectators, all in front of a TV audience of nearly half the world’s population, was just too scary.

In the event, years of the most careful preparation resulted in a triumph. MI5 reported the gist of overheard conversations in jihadist circles: 

‘The Brits have gone crazy, over the top. We are all being watched. Brothers, keep your heads down.’ There were no terrorist incidents that summer.

In its clear-sighted analysis of problems, How To Survive A Crisis can be an alarming read.

On his first page, Omand states that ‘we must expect a greater potential for disaster in the future’.

And it is hard to argue with his later comment that ‘UK governments find it hard to plan, think and act beyond the immediate needs of the moment’.

However, as his title suggests, he remains an optimist. It is possible to build up a nation’s resilience in the face of crises, whether they are sudden in their impact or ‘slow-burn’.

There is always a route to survival. WannaCry, which might have irretrievably damaged the NHS, was eventually defeated by a 22-year-old named Marcus Hutchins, a former hacker turned cybersecurity expert.

He found a ‘kill switch’ in the WannaCry code which stopped it from spreading.

Colts cut Isaiah Rodgers and Rashod Berry after the pair, plus free agent Demetrius Taylor, were banned for the ENTIRE 2023 season for betting on league games in 2022

• It follows the NFL’s revelation of six ‘key rules’ relating to its gambling policy
• There has been several players already suspended for violations in 2023 
• DailyMail.com provides all the latest international sports news 

By Patrick Djordjevic For Dailymail.Com

Published: 12:38 EDT, 29 June 2023 | Updated: 15:51 EDT, 29 June 2023

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected Republican efforts to radically reshape how elections are conducted across the country by giving state legislatures almost unchecked powers to redraw congressional maps and set electoral rules.

The justices voted 6-3 to uphold a decision made by North Carolina’s top court, saying it had not overstepped its authority in striking down a new map of congressional districts as overly partisan.

Republican lawmakers essentially asked the nation’s highest court to allow state legislatures ultimate authority, unchecked by state courts, in federal elections.

In his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote: ‘State courts retain the authority to apply state constitutional restraints when legislatures act under the power conferred upon them by the Elections Clause.’ 

‘But federal courts must not abandon their own duty to exercise judicial review.’

A different ruling could have had a major impact on the 2024 elections.

And it comes at a time when the role of partisan lawmakers in state elections is under intense scrutiny because of the way former President Donald Trump and his allies attempted to overturn the results of the 2020 and influence the 2022 midterms. 

The White House welcomed the decision.

‘We’re pleased that the Supreme Court rejected the extreme legal theory presented in this case, which would have interfered with state governments, which would have opened the door for politicians to undermine the will of the people and would have threatened the freedom of all Americans to have their voices heard at the ballot box,’ said Olivia Dalton, principal deputy press secretary.

The case before the Supreme Court relied on the ‘independent legislature theory. It is based on a hardline reading of the Constitution’s Clause, which states: ‘The times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof.’

Adherents argue that means that courts, governors or independent commissions cannot interfere in a legislature’s authority over elections, even if lawmakers gerrymander election maps or violate protections enshrined in state constitutions. 

Four of the Supreme Court’s justices have issued opinions suggesting some support for the controversial theory.

In North Carolina, the state supreme court struck down Republicans’ proposed map in February last year.

Of 14 Congressional districts, the GOP would have been in control of all but three. 

The Tar Heel state’s highest court voted 4-3 along party lines that the map was ‘unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt’ in its partisan advantage.

‘Achieving partisan advantage incommensurate with a political party’s level of statewide voter support is neither a compelling nor a legitimate governmental interest,’ the court ruled.

Instead, the midterm elections were conducted with a court-drawn map, designed to split support evenly.

Republican leaders in the legislature made their case to justices in December, arguing that the state supreme court had overstepped its authority. 

At the time, Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, told the Associated Press that ‘this case could profoundly alter the balance of power in states and prevent state courts and agencies from providing protections for people’s right to vote.’

‘There’s a wide range of ways the court could rule on this. Taken to its extreme, it would be a radical reworking of our system of running elections,’ he said. 

Former President Barack Obama also welcomed the decision.

‘This ruling rejects the far-right theory that threatened to undermine our democracy, and makes clear that courts can continue defending voters’ rights — in North Carolina and in every state,’ he tweeted.

Rioting broke out in a Paris suburb tonight after a policeman was accused of executing a teenage driver in cold blood after telling him: ‘I’m going to lodge a bullet in your head’.

The alleged killing was videoed in Nanterre, to the west of the French capital, earlier today after the youth – who is from an Algerian background – was said to have broken traffic rules.

The victim was soon identified as Nael, 17, while the officer was arrested and placed in custody.

As youths began to pour on the streets, setting fire to dustbins and buildings, Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin appealed for calm.

He told the National Assembly in Paris that the images posted on social media were ‘extremely shocking and worrying,’ and urged people to ‘respect the grief of the family and the presumption of innocence of the police’.

Angry scenes played out in Paris this evening as youths confronted police, with videos shared on social media showing pushing and shoving between young men and officers wearing riot gear.

One clip appeared to show a young woman shouting ‘I hate France’ as an officer mutters ‘return to Africa’.

Seven people have so far been arrested after protesting this evening, authorities said.

Two other people were in the vehicle with Nael at the time of the shooting. A first passenger fled, while the second, also a minor, was arrested and taken into custody.

Nanterre mayor Patrick Jarry said he was ‘shocked’ by the video images and passed his ‘sincere condolences to the boy’s mother’.

‘He hopes that the investigations opened (…) will make it possible to shed light as quickly as possible on the exact circumstances of this tragedy,’ his office said.

The 17-year-old was in the Paris suburb of Nanterre earlier today when police shot him dead after he broke road rules and failed to stop, prosecutors said.

Emergency services tried to resuscitate him at the scene but he died shortly afterwards.

The officer accused of firing on the driver has been detained on homicide charges, the Nanterre prosecutors’ office said.

An authenticated  video circulating on social media shows two police officers trying to stop the vehicle and one pointing his weapon at the driver through the window 

He shouts ‘I’m going to lodge a bullet in your head’ before firing at point blank range when as the driver steers away.

The car moved for 10 yards, before crashing to a halt, with shocked passers-by looking on.

The IGPN national police inspectorate has opened an investigation into possible intentional killing by a person holding a position of public authority.

A separate probe is being carried out by regional police into the driver’s failure to halt and alleged attempt to kill a person holding a position of public authority

Paris police chief Laurent Nunez said the action of the officer ‘raises questions’, while claiming that the officer may have ‘felt threatened.’

The family’s lawyer Yassine Bouzrou told the same channel that while all parties needed to wait for the result of the investigation the images ‘clearly showed a policeman killing a young man in cold blood.’

‘This is a long way from any kind of legitimate defence’ he said, adding the family had filed a complaint, accusing police of ‘lying’ by initially claiming the car had tried to run down the officers.

‘It’s so sad, he was so young,’ said Samia Bough, 62, the teenager’s former neighbour, who came to lay a bouquet of yellow roses at the scene.

In 2022, a record 13 deaths were recorded after refusals to stop for traffic controls. Five police officers have been charged in these cases.

Authorities and police unions blame the 2022 figures on more dangerous driving behaviour, but researchers also point to a 2017 law modifying the conditions of the use of their weapon by the police.

Two weeks ago, a 19-year-old was killed by a police officer he had injured in the legs with his car in the western town of Angouleme.

The left reacted with anger, saying police had no right to kill people simply because they refused to stop.

‘Yes, a refusal to stop is against the law. But death is not one of the sanctions provided for by the penal code,’ tweeted the coordinator of the hard left France Unbowed (LFI) party, Manuel Bompard.

‘A refusal to stop does not provide a licence to kill,’ said Socialist Party leader Olivier Faure.

Nicola Bulley drowned after accidentally falling in cold water, a coroner ruled today – after her partner said he believes she was trying to put a harness on their dog moments before. 

The 45-year-old vanished after dropping off her daughters, six and nine, at school, and taking her usual dog walk along the River Wyre in St Michael’s, Lancashire, on January 27. 

Dr James Adeley, senior coroner for Lancashire, recorded her death as accidental, saying she fell into the river and suffered ‘cold water shock’. 

He said there was ‘no evidence as to why Nikki entered the water’ but said he had been able to rule out foul play, while there was no evidence of suicide.

He said: ‘Whether or not Nikki’s first breath was above or below the water, she would have lost consciousness before reaching the first point in the River Wyre where she could have touched the bottom.’

The coroner highlighted how Ms Bulley’s Fitbit – which was recovered from her body, charged and synchronised – recorded a ‘substantially increased heart rate’ at 9.22am and stopped recording steps after 9.30am.

In addition, she had adjusted the volume on her iPhone at 9.18am.

Ms Bulley was last seen by a fellow dog walker circling the field with Willow at 9.10am. Dr Adeley highlighted how police divers testified to the ‘almost vertical’ river bank beneath the bench where Ms Bulley’s phone was found shortly after 9.30am.

Ruling out third party involvement, he highlighted how none of the villagers who were in the field at the time had seen anyone suspicious in the immediate area.

Experts had told the inquest that Ms Bulley would have died ‘in seconds’ due to the shock of entering the ‘freezing’ water.

Giving evidence earlier today, Ms Bulley’s partner Paul Ansell said he believes she was trying to put a harness on their dog moments before falling into the river. 

He said this was to stop the dog getting caught in bushes, saying: ‘With her being a springer, she’s very erratic.’ 

A lawyer representing the Bulley family had called on the coroner to deliver an accidental death verdict earlier today. 

Sophie Cartwright KC said: ‘What happened on the river bank shortly after 9.18am was a tragic accident.

‘There has been much rumour and suspicion and speculation around Nikki’s death but the family are very clearly of the view and submit to you that that rumour and speculation is allayed completely when looking at all the evidence.’

She added the family believe ‘Nikki’s death would have occurred very shortly after she entered the water’ after her body reacted in shock to the cold water. 

This morning, Ms Bulley’s sister Louise Cunningham cried as she told of her sibling’s struggles with the menopause and ‘increased alcohol use’ in the months before her death.

Giving evidence afterwards, Ms Bulley’s partner Paul Ansell said she had experienced a ‘blip’ in her mental health over Christmas but was better by January. 

He added: ‘She had a good day the day before [she went missing], came home full of beans, excited with work, with the meetings she had and plans for the year.’

Ms Bulley’s mother, Dorothy, also saw her on the evening before she went missing and said ‘everything was normal’. 

Her father, Ernest, recalled how the family shared a ‘lovely evening’ and said the last words her daughter said to him were about her plans to ‘close’ a business deal. 

Today, the inquest heard more information about Ms Bulley’s struggles with her mental health. 

A crisis response vehicle was sent to her home on January 10 after concerns were raised about her alcohol consumption. 

A day later, she went to A&E to be checked up after a fall.  

Ms Cunningham said her sister had been struggling with symptoms of the menopause over Christmas 2022. 

She told the coroner:  ‘She discussed having some symptoms with the HRT, it was back in the summer of 2022.

‘She was having headaches, she couldn’t get the balance exactly right, she mentioned having struggles sleeping. She was taking lavender spray, herbal tea, anything that would relax her before bed.’

Ms Bulley stopped taking HRT over Christmas 2022 and brought up at a family meal that she was ‘struggling’ again with it, Ms Cunningham said. 

She added: ‘She did have a bit of a blip over the Christmas period (of 2022) and come January she was getting back to herself – back to HRT medication, back to work and completely back to normal Nikki.’

A crisis response vehicle was sent to Ms Bulley’s home on January 10 after Ms Cunningham raised concerns about her escalating alcohol consumption since Christmas 2022 and not wanting to ‘engage’ with her two daughters.

She was in bed when mental health clinician Theresa Lewis Leevy went upstairs to see her and clearly ‘intoxicated’, she told the hearing.

‘She didn’t want to engage in conversation,’ she said. ‘The interaction it’s fair to say was quite brief.’ 

The following day Ms Bulley was seen at A&E at Blackpool Victoria Hospital after injuring the back of her head in a fall the previous evening, the inquest was told.

A CT scan was carried out to her head but there was no sign of injury. The inquest has not yet been told at what stage it was sustained.

Ms Cunningham said she had called the ambulance on January 10 because she was ‘concerned’ and wanted ‘peace of mind’.

She said afterwards Ms Bulley was ‘absolutely fuming’ with her for raising concerns but described it as ‘a bit of a wake-up call’ for her sister.

‘She was my sister, I was concerned,’ she said.

Ms Cunningham said she didn’t recall her sister making comments about ‘not wanting to be here’.

‘She’s never ever confided in me about any suicidal thoughts or anything like that at all.’

She said after Christmas 2022 Ms Bulley stopped taking her HRT medication as it ‘wasn’t doing a great deal’.

But after the mental health call-out she said her sister resumed taking it, reduced her alcohol content and focused back on her mortgage advisor job.

Ms Cunningham was asked by the coroner whether her sister would have deliberately abandoned Willow beside the river had she been planning to harm herself.

‘Absolutely not,’ she answered.

‘There’s no way Nikki would leave Willow unattended by choice.’

Ms Cunningham said she had been planning a spa day shortly before he sister’s death. 

‘I literally confirmed it was booked but she didn’t pick up the message,’ she said today. 

Earlier Ms Bulley’s GP, Dr Rebecca Gray, told how in late 2022 she had been struggling to sleep and complaining that her brain felt ‘overloaded’.

She first saw Ms Bulley for symptoms of anxiety in December 2018, prescribing antidepressants, but later moved her to beta blockers after experiencing tremors.

In July 2021 she began complaining of hot flushes and was diagnosed with being post-menopause and commenced on HRT.

Dr Gray said Ms Bulley had follow-up appointments to vary her prescription due to side-effects.

But shortly before Christmas she complained she was ‘struggling with her sleep’ and ‘her brain felt like it was overloaded’.

She had never spoken of being suicidal or considering self-harm, she added.

Asked if she had ever expressed suicidal thoughts, Paul Ansell said she had made ‘a couple of throwaway comments’ in the run-up to her disappearance, ‘but nothing that gave me concern’.=

Mr Ansell said his partner had ‘always been a planner’, with the kitchen calendar constantly updated with all the family’s upcoming activities, while he brought ‘spontaneous nature’ to the relationship.

He said in his witness statement: ‘Nikki was a quiet person who enjoyed the simple side of life.

‘She was a very private person and kept herself to herself.’

Mr Ansell became tearful and was unable to continue his evidence after being asked whether she ‘adored’ nothing more than walking with Willow or her family.

Proceedings were adjourned briefly so he could compose himself.

The barrister representing Ms Bulley’s family told the coroner their belief was now that she had fallen into the water and drowned almost immediately, asking him to record a conclusion of accidental death.

She added that her family drew comfort from their belief that her death would have taken ‘seconds’, and said that based on the evidence heard at the inquest the outlandish theories which have swirled around her disappearance could now be dismissed.

Sophie Cartwright KC, representing Mr Ansell, Ms Bulley’s parents and her sister, said that ‘what occurred on the riverbank shortly after 9.18am was a tragic accident for Nikki’.

She cited evidence that Ms Bulley increased the volume on her handset at that point.

What happened next ‘must in some way be linked to the location of the dog harness’, which was later found on the ground between the bench and the river, she added.

Ms Cartwright said the family agreed with evidence given yesterday by experts on drowning that Ms Bulley would have inhaled a lethal amount of water on plunging unexpectedly into the icy river.

‘There has been much rumour and suspicion and speculation, particularly bearing in mind the time it took before Nikki’s body was found and identified,’ she said.

But she said the family were ‘very clearly of the view’ that the evidence heard at the inquest ‘completely’ allays the suspicion which has swirled around the case since Ms Bulley’s disappearance.

In addition, they are ‘comforted’ by the knowledge that her death would have happened within 30 seconds of slipping into the river, she said.

Ms Cartwright said the contention was supported by eye witness accounts, mobile phone analysis, the post mortem and evidence about the treacherous state of the riverbank.

In addition, she had been in ‘good spirits’ that morning and making plans for the rest of the day and coming weekend.

She asked the coroner to formally dismiss the account of two villagers who reported hearing screams from the direction of the river between 9.35am and 9.55am as ‘irrelevant’.

The first day of the inquest yesterday heard how Ms Bulley’s dog, Willow, was found at a bench near to a ‘cliff edge’ – making it almost impossible for anyone who had fallen in to get out without assistance.

Upon being told in a call that her phone and Willow were discovered, her partner Paul Ansell said: ‘She’s struggling, the inquest heard.

Retired care worker Susan Jones said at around 10am on January 27 she was called by Penny Fletcher who found Willow and the phone.

She then ran into Ms Fletcher’s daughter-in-law, referenced only as Anne-Marie, who recognised Ms Bulley from the phone’s lock screen photo.

Anne-Marie rang the local school as well as speaking to Mr Ansell – who had said ‘she’s struggling’. The mortgage adviser’s body was found more than three weeks later and just over a mile downstream.

As Mr Ansell, 44, and parents Dot and Ernie wiped away tears, a pathologist ruled out assault or foul play, saying she was alive when she entered the water.

Two witnesses told the hearing they independently heard a brief scream coming from towards the river around the time she was last seen.

But the inquest was told a police timeline suggested it was likely she was already in the water at that point.

Ms Bulley vanished after dropping her daughters, aged six and nine, in St Michael’s-on-Wyre, then taking her usual dog walk.

Just after 9.30am a local businesswoman found Willow ‘giddy’ and loose near the river.

Her phone, still connected to her morning Teams call, was found on a nearby bench. Hundreds of volunteers joined a police search, but with no sign of her body, amateur sleuths took to social media to spread outlandish theories.

Police faced criticism after revealing she had been experiencing ‘significant issues with alcohol’ brought on by her struggle with the menopause.

Her body was found on February 19 and identified by dental records.

At the inquest at County Hall in Preston, police diver PC Matthew Thackray said the riverbank at the point where Ms Bulley is believed to have vanished had a steep ‘cliff edge’ into the ‘freezing’ water.

Senior coroner Dr James Adeley asked: ‘If you were in the water trying to get a foothold, would it be possible?’ ‘Not at all,’ he answered.

Professor Michael Tipton, an expert on the effects of falling into cold water, said just two breaths underwater in the river – which was just 3.6C (38.5F) that day – would have been ‘the lethal dose for drowning’.

‘In my opinion, if Nikki fell into the water at the point we’ve seen, there’s a very good chance the first gasp would have occurred with her head under the water,’ he said.

Dr Patrick Morgan, medical director of HM Coastguard, told the hearing even if she had managed to gasp air before she went under, it was unlikely she could have held her breath for more than ten seconds.