Transcription
Breaking right now. It had to happen. Meghan Markle is being sued after those disastrous bath salts that she put together in "With Love Megan," her Netflix disaster, but they actually turned out to be so toxic, a bit like her personality, that they're actually injuring folk now. Pretty bad injuries. I'm going to get into this article from Radar Online and reveal their incredible reporting in just one moment.
But first, let me bring in royal YouTube sensation. According to Taz Tash, this is no surprise, is it? Because the problem is this is a woman who has done no research, has no scientific backing, and was putting out the most ludicrous ideas. And actually, some of them come with real risks attached. She basically created a toxic bath bomb and because there, there should have been a warning. And I know that there has been, I think one of their representatives has said that the lady in this particular article should know better to not use Epsom salts because she's diabetic.
Now, there is a bit of a warning with that, but I think it's got a lot more to do with the fact that Megan, I don't believe that she knew what she was doing because of the oils. And don't ask me why I know this, but with with oils that you put into, you know, candles or burners and things, they're fine for that. But to use them like what she was doing, you need to use a carrier oil, which basically it's like plant-based and it makes it safer for human skin contact. And she whacked in so much arnica oil and I think it was lavender oil and that's was pure. And it's, you know, it's obvious that she doesn't make that regularly. She's never made anything to put on her skin because you would know that. I mean, that is just basic. And with the Epsom salts, yes, of course. I mean, it, it was, uh, as I said, it was a toxic bath bomb. And I can't imagine that this is going to be the first case of people doing it because people do sometimes just blindly copy. They should have put a warning up. Maybe they didn't realize at the time, but once that became apparent and people spoke out, Netflix should have covered their bottoms and said, "Actually, please don't do this at home."
>> Totally. Totally. Well, let me take you through the reporting from Radar Online, which is headlined "Exclusive: Meghan Markle Fan, that's what's interesting. This was a supporter of Meghan Markle, threatens to launch $10 million lawsuit after suffering catastrophic burns by copying the Duchess's homemade bath salt recipe from the new Netflix show." And this furious fan from Maryland used the homemade bath salt recipe. Radaronline.com reveals Robin Patrick is seeking major compensation after the bath salts caused significant pain and cosmetic distress. Diabetic Patrick said Meghan had a duty of care to provide adequate warning to viewers the salts could have an adverse effect on people who carry the condition, due in part to the essential oils used within the concoction. She watched the clip of Markle making the bath salt gift from her "With Love Megan" series on X and copied the instructions using ingredients available at her home. Since the episode aired, skin care experts warned the DIY blend may pose risks.
Patrick later tested out the bath salts herself, dissolving the mixture into warm water in her walk-in bathtub, but she soon began to feel immediate discomfort and knew something was wrong. Speaking exclusively to radaronline.com, Patrick said, "Initially, I experienced a mild tingling sensation without discomfort. However, as the water level rose to cover my legs and reach my buttocks, I began feeling burning and significant discomfort in those areas. I immediately exited the tub, stopped the water, and later stirred the bath water with my right hand and arm to assess the mixture. This resulted, what a disaster, in additional burning sensations on my hand and arm. After draining the tub, I applied Gold Bond lotion which provided no relief followed by lidocaine sprays which temporarily alleviated the pain. That evening while showering, I experienced intense burning as water contacted the affected areas which had developed into ulcers."
Now, I have to be honest, Tash, I always said that this show was very painful to me, but nothing compared to this poor woman because Patrick went on to claim the alleged injuries are still giving her major discomfort. She added, "To date, the burns are that's true. I've I've got psychological trauma." She added, "To date, the burns are still not healed and quite uncomfortable. The others are just sore as heck to touch. Since the incident, I have endured persistent burning discomfort and the emergence of new blister-like sores and ulcers daily. These symptoms have disrupted my daily and nightly routines, preventing me from taking warm showers or wearing clothes over the affected areas. As an individual with an autoimmune condition and compromised immune system compounded by diabetes-related dry skin on my legs and feet, I am deeply concerned about the risk of infection, sepsis, or other complications. The pain feels as though it is burning from within."
Patrick said she is willing to resolve the matter without litigation if a financial settlement can be reached. But if her demands are not met, she intends to launch the lawsuit seeking settlement damages of a minimum of $75,000 to cover medical expenses related to treatment of the alleged injuries, compensation for the pain and suffering experienced, plus pay for future costs stemming from the long-term effects of the injury, including infection or scarring. What's more, she's also seeking $10 million from Markle, Netflix, and Archewell Productions, who make the show, for their reckless disregard for public safety, and to deter similar conduct in the future. A threatening letter to the parties added, "These damages account for emotional distress, potential post-traumatic stress disorder, loss of confidence in appearance, disfigurement, shortened life expectancy, and long-term medical care for injuries that may worsen over time."
Now, Meghan's responded to this via her lawyer, Cameron Straer, who had a stinging rebuke, claiming in a legal letter she should have been aware of the risks of taking the salts, which contain ingredients unsuitable for people suffering from diabetes. He wrote, "The use of Epsom salts is contraindicated for individuals with diabetes except on the advice of a physician. As your letter recognizes, the duty of care requires a foreseeable injury. It was not foreseeable that you would disregard the instructions on the Epsom salt packaging in attempting to make and use your own bath salts. For this separate reason, there can be no negligence claim against anyone involved in the production or distribution of the series."
So, I thought this was typical Meghan Markle in so many ways, Tash, because rather than try and sort this out in some type of humane way, given this is a woman, Meghan Markle, who claims to be a humanitarian, right? Who claims to care about her fans.
>> She's just immediately fired back at Robin Patrick. No phone call, no attempt to solve this, no worry about the fact that watching her show has actually inflicted these shocking physical injuries. And I feel like we're all due an apology for Meghan Markle, any of us who had to sit through "With Love Megan," because it is bad for the health. And I guess this is just proof of it.
Yeah, I mean, I totally agree with you there. I mean, I'm not looking forward to the next eight episodes because I believe the first eight episodes were the best of a bad bunch, but yes, I mean, her her injuries are going to take a long time to heal, especially the fact that she does have diabetes and it often takes a long time, especially on feet and legs, for those wounds to heal up. But rather than attacking her and saying she should know better because of Epsom salts, I don't believe it was just Epsom salts. If you watch that video, she put in a lot of pure oils. And pure oils like that are not safe to use on the skin. They can cause blistering and burning. And I'm just very surprised that we've not had more people come forward that have said that they have had similar incidents. They would be better off rather than coming back with an aggressive clapback like that, actually saying now on the Netflix video, putting a warning up for people to say, "Do you know what, actually, actually, please don't try this at home." But then that would show that Meghan Markle did something wrong, and we can't ever have that.
Dan, she didn't burn the milk on the stove, she didn't do something wrong. Of course not. Megan never does a thing wrong, including making toxic bath bombs.
>> Toxic bath bombs, goodness me. Then this week, Tash, there have also been claims from Annabelle Fenwick Elliot, uh, the highly regarded columnist for publications like the Daily Telegraph, who's become a bit of a TikTok sensation in recent months, uh, for her hilarious viral videos taking the piss at Meghan's latest projects. We've played a couple of them here on Outspoken. And she thinks that it's Meghan Markle herself who is targeting her to try and remove her from TikTok, saying, "Did Meghan Markle just message me?" So before I get your reaction to this, Tash, let's have a look at what Annabelle Fenwick told her.
>> Starting to look like you're racist. This again, I don't dislike Meghan Markle because she is mixed race. It's a coincidence. I also don't like, uh, to about the same extent, Blake Lively and more recently Katy Perry, only since she went into space twirling a daisy round in a dick-shaped rocket, but I put them all in the same category and there's only one mixed race person in that trio. The rest of it's kind of just boring and repetitive. So, I'm going to spare you. The reason I think this might be Meghan Markle herself is because I can't get into the brain of some normal person who has nothing to do with Meghan Markle, doesn't know her, who would spend all of this time typing out this essay to another person that she doesn't know, defending the other person that she doesn't know, who's a public figure. We're all allowed to talk about public figures, especially when they make themselves very public on purpose. I don't think I can get banned from TikTok for that. Maybe I'm wrong. We'll see. Anyway, have a great evening, everyone. Bye.
So, I mean, we know that her gay makeup artist best friend who features in "With Love Megan," Daniel, is all over People Like You because he actually >> wrote some terrible things about you. Do, do you think Annabelle, uh, Fenwick could be correct? Annabelle Fenwick Elliot could be correct that this is actually Meghan Markle herself trying to get her removed from social media?
>> I'm not sure. I'm not sure it'd actually be Megan because she likes to keep her hands clean, but she's got minions. Like Daniel Martin is a minion and it's clearly obvious that they, she sends them out like little flying monkeys. And I believe that she's got people in the Sussex squad that also, they, they target people directly. Now, that email, well message, whatever, direct message. Yes. I mean, these people that defend Megan are that obsessive, including her friends. I do. I think that she potentially tried to get someone to go after her to, to, you know, loosely threaten her. Yes, absolutely. It was clearly obvious from Daniel's post recently that he is aware of me, my evil dark soul that I have. So, I think Megan is upset with the number of people that do talk about her. But of course she is. Anna is is completely correct here where she says that they're public figures. We are allowed to talk about public figures, especially when they shove their faces into the public every single day.
>> Yeah, it's a very good point actually. But trust me, Tash, there's no way Daniel, you know, Daniel, terrified Daniel who's like, "Megan, your cooking's amazing. Oh my goodness, you're a goddess. Just keep paying me the money and I'm going to keep telling you that you're the most wonderful woman in the world." There's no way Daniel is posting about you and your videos and your YouTube channel on Instagram if Megan doesn't know about it. You see, so that's where I have my suspicion.
>> We're being watched.
>> Yes. [Laughter] We're being watched. We are indeed. Now, Prince Harry's interview this week was astonishing for a whole load of reasons, Tash. I mean, firstly, he claimed that there was some type of establishment stitch-up. Now, given this is a member of the royal family who has had every privilege and who has had the establishment behind him for his entire life. This was pretty bizarre. Watch this.
>> I have had it described to me once people knew about the facts that this, uh, is an old-fashioned, good old-fashioned, uh, establishment stitch-up and that's what it feels like.
And of course, the BBC, the British Bashing Corporation, as I call it, was so revoltingly one-sided in its coverage, they had to apologize and there was no difficult follow-up. I mean, this is maybe the closest they went, Tash, when the BBC asked Prince Harry if he will see his father again or allow his children to.
>> Your father is ill with cancer. Will you continue to visit him alone without the family? Where does this leave things moving forward? The ability of your children to see their grandfather. Um, you know, life, life is a precious thing. Um, and I'm acutely aware of the fragility of that. Um, I, I can, I, I can only come to the UK safely if I'm invited. Um, and, you know, [snorts] there is a, a lot of, um, control and ability in, uh, in my father's hands. Ultimately, this, this, this whole thing could be resolved, uh, through, through him. Um, not necessarily by intervening, but by stepping aside, allowing the experts to do what is necessary and to carry out an R&B.
I mean, the guy is so stupid and intellectually dishonest, by the way, because of course King Charles stepping aside would be interfering. That is the point. But Tash, just before I get your reaction, I have loved some of the people who are taking on Harry's, uh, performance, shall we say, with their own interpretations. This was particularly good from Kevin O'Sullivan of Talk TV fame.
>> Shortly after hearing the court's legal judgment, a devastated Prince Harry sat down for what was an emotional and candid interview. I started by asking him how he was feeling.
>> I'm shocked by the decision. Everyone said I was going to win, and I always win. I'm always right. I'm never going to bring my wife back to Britain now, and it's your fault. And she's gutted because she wanted to flock her jam on QVC.
>> Do you want the court battle to continue?
>> I don't want any more court battles. I can't afford them. I've run out of money. My wife keeps spending it all on edible flowers. If I don't write another book soon, I'll end up like Fergie.
>> So, what's your feelings kind of moving forward? Is there any way that this could be resolved?
>> I'd love to reconcile with my family, but they all hate me. Don't know why. All I did was call them a bunch of racists. Daddy won't speak to me anymore and he won't even try Megan's jam. I mean, it's not my fault. None of this is MY FAULT. IT'S EVERYONE ELSE'S FAULT. WHY DO THEY BLAME?
He's probably worried that the jam's poisoned, Tash, but I mean, when you actually listen to the BBC's questions out of context there, given we've got Kevin O'Sullivan's great performance as Prince Harry. Oh my goodness, Tash. No wonder they had to apologize. There was no genuine follow-up. There was no challenging of what were absolute fanciful claims backed up by zero evidence. So a week on from this interview, do you think we can now say that Harry's credibility is forever smashed with the public who increasingly, Tash, are demanding, demanding that King Charles strips them both Harry and Meghan of their HRH titles?
>> I can understand why the public is angry. I mean, in, in one way, the BBC just showed themselves up. Um, obviously, like you said, I mean, the lack of actual questions that were fired back to him. I think I heard the other one I heard was when they, when he said there's people in the family that want history to repeat itself, and they're like, "Oh, that's a bold statement. Oh, you think? You think?" But then they didn't double down on it again. They didn't ask any more questions. And this is why mainstream media is completely dying. We don't trust programs like that anymore. We don't really trust the newspapers that much anymore. But with with Harry, he doesn't deserve the titles because he doesn't work for the royal family. He's a prince and let him keep his princely title, but there are some people that want him stripped of that. I believe that the dukedom was only given to them because they were to be working royals because that's what they told the royal family that they wanted. And we obviously since found out that they were plotting and planning Mexit, possibly, I would say, even before the wedding. So they tricked them into getting what, in a way, I would say are job titles. If Harry and Meghan had been honest and said, "We want to get married, but we want to go to America and explore our own business ventures," which they should have done, and they might have had a bit more respect, and they might have actually still been slightly successful. I mean, their ventures are still boring and terrible.
Lifestyle television has always encouraged viewers to try recipes, crafts, home projects, and wellness ideas. Most of the time, those projects are harmless. But once you're showing people how to make products that may come into contact with the skin, the conversation changes. Many viewers naturally assume that if something appears on a professionally produced streaming platform, it has been properly researched or reviewed. That assumption may or may not be accurate. The key point is that audiences often place a high level of trust in what they see. Whether that trust is justified depends on the circumstances, and that's why the story has attracted so much attention.
One of the biggest debates centers on warnings. Some people argue that viewers have a responsibility to read product labels, follow manufacturer instructions, and understand their own medical conditions before trying DIY projects. Others believe that when a recipe involves ingredients that can affect the skin, creators should include clear safety guidance encouraging viewers to exercise caution. Those are two very different perspectives. Neither automatically answers the legal questions involved, but they do highlight why this issue has sparked such strong reactions. Sometimes a brief safety disclaimer can prevent misunderstandings before they happen.
Regardless of how any legal matter unfolds, there is another issue unfolding in plain sight: public perception. Celebrity brands depend heavily on trust. People buy products, watch shows, and follow recommendations because they believe the person behind the brand is credible. Whenever a controversy emerges, that trust is tested. Even if someone ultimately faces no legal liability, questions about judgment and credibility can linger. That may prove to be the biggest challenge here because rebuilding confidence is often harder than defending against criticism.
For Meghan Markle, critics argue that this latest story fits into a broader pattern. Over the past several years, almost every major project involving the Sussexes has generated headlines well beyond the project itself: the Oprah interview, the Netflix documentary, Prince Harry's memoir, business ventures, lifestyle branding. Now, the Netflix series itself is generating legal headlines. Supporters argue that Meghan attracts an extraordinary level of scrutiny that few public figures experience. Critics argue that recurring controversies reflect recurring problems. Whichever view people hold, one thing is difficult to dispute: the controversies themselves have become part of the Sussex brand, and that's rarely an ideal position for any public figure.
At this stage, the legal claims remain allegations, and it will ultimately be for the appropriate legal process to determine what, if any, responsibility exists. But from a public relations standpoint, this controversy may already be significant. It shifts the conversation away from reviews of a television series and toward questions about responsibility, trust, and celebrity influence. Whether this becomes a short-lived headline or a lasting issue remains to be seen. One thing is certain, however: when public figures invite audiences to recreate what they see on screen, expectations about safety, clarity, and communication become part of the conversation. And in today's world, those expectations matter more than ever.
What do you think? Should celebrities and streaming platforms include clearer safety guidance for DIY wellness projects, or is it ultimately the viewer's responsibility to follow product instructions and seek appropriate advice? Share your thoughts respectfully in the comments below.