Current Events in December 2007

Yet Sara Lee helps foster that confusion by marketing a Soft & Smooth Made with Whole Grain White Bread and falsely claiming that it is as nutritious as whole wheat bread, says the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI).

CSPI has served the company with formal notice that it will file suit against the company if the misleading claims continue.

Sara Lee claims that its Whole Grain White Bread has the taste and texture of white bread with the goodness of whole grain, and whole grain goodness with all the mouthwatering pleasure of scrumptious, soft, white bread.

By claiming an exciting innovation in white bread, the repeated whole grain goodness claims are particularly misleading because some new breads are in fact, made with a white whole-wheat flour that is, in fact, whole wheat. One version of a label for the Sara Lee product at issue made the patently false statement that Sara Lee Soft & Smooth Made with Whole Grain White [bread] = 100% Whole Wheat.

This whole grain bread is mostly refined white flour, the kind of flour that health authorities recommend Americans eat less of, said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. Sara Lee is attempting to put a whole grain halo on a bread that is not whole wheat. I call that a whole grain whitewash.

On breadrules.com, a web site operated by Sara Lee, a press release for a genuinely 100 percent whole wheat Sara Lee bread regretfully ruminates that seven out of 10 consumers mistakenly believe their wheat bread is 100% whole wheat, and that 50 percent of traditional wheat bread consumers mistakenly believe their bread is the best nutritional choice.

Another Sara Lee site, thejoyofeating.com, lets consumers test breads by Arnold, Natures Own, Pepperidge Farm, on a Whole-Grain-o-Meter to see if the product is 100 percent whole grain or not. While the meter rates several Sara Lee breads, its Whole Grain White Bread is absent.

A pledge form on that site gives the impression that switching to a Soft and Smooth whole grain bread is an act of nutritional virtue. But in fact, only 30 percent of the grain in Sara Lees Soft and Smooth Whole Grain White Bread is whole grain, and the rest is refined white flour, according to news reports. In fact, there is more water in this product than whole grain.

It would be more accurate to say that this Sara Lee product is brimming with the wholesome goodness of white flour and water, said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. The intent is to confuse consumers, who are denied the nutrition they think they are paying for. Its hard to see how a judge or jury would let a company get away with such an obvious fraud.

CSPIs notification to Sara Lee says it wants the company to stop the misleading whole grain claims and to donate to charity the profits it has received from Soft & Smooth Made with Whole Grain White Bread that it has earned since its introduction in 2005.

Sara Lee has 30 days to respond to CSPIs settlement offer.

December 18, 2007

Consumers arent just worried about lead in their childrens toys -- and their pets toys -- this holiday season.

Theyre also worried about lead in their Christmas decorations.

Consider this warning Cathy R. of Sickleville, New Jersey found on a box of Christmas lights she recently purchased at Target: Handling the coated electrical wire on this product exposes you to LEAD, a chemical known to the State of California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm. Wash hands after use.

Cathy is shocked that Target would sell tainted merchandise.

Normally children help when putting decorations up, which not only would expose the adults, but the children to lead, she told us. I am appalled that Target or any other store would sell such products. In this day and age with all the recalled items from China that contain lead, I can't believe that any store -- especially Target under their own brand -- would put these out for consumers.

A Colorado parent echoes those concerns. He found that same warning on a box of Christmas tree lights, which he also purchased at Target.

We were about to poison our kids because of the products that Target placed on the companys shelf, wrote Dave of Delta, Colorado. He has two young children ages three and four.

'Don't give a rip'

I feel like they don't give a rip for my safety or my little kids' safety, he said. They poisoned our home.

But a spokeswoman for Target said customer safety is the companys top priority.

We work closely with the appropriate government agencies to ensure were providing the best products -- in terms of safety and quality for our guests, said the companys Anne Rodgers.

Rodgers said Target is required -- under California's Proposition 65 to place the warning label on the lights. That law, she said, requires manufacturers to notify consumers of certain chemicals present in products sold in California.

The warning label, however, does not necessarily mean the products are dangerous, she said

The label simply indicates that certain chemicals may be present but exist in low amounts, which are below Federal safety limits, Rodgers said. Products with the label do in fact meet all applicable product safety requirements. Rodgers said Target places the required warning labels on products sold nationwide not just in the Golden State.

It is more cost and time efficient than labeling only boxes sold in California, she said.

Not just Target

Target, however, isnt the only company whose Christmas lights contain lead. Manufacturers say lead is part of the polyvinyl chloride (PVC) insulation around the wiring on Christmas lights. They also say lead is legally used to stabilize PVC so it doesnt crack or crumble with age.

Lead also acts as a fire retardant.

But a recent CNN investigation discovered four brands of Christmas lights contained high levels of lead -- enough to pose a threat to children.

CNN hired New Jersey-based Quantex Laboratories to analyze the following brands of Christmas lights for lead: Wal-Mart, GE, Sylvania, and Philips.

Quantex followed the Consumer Product Safety Commissions (CPSC) standard wipe test for lead in PVC products. Those tests revealed the surface lead levels on all four brands of lights exceeded the CPSCs recommended childrens limit of 15 micrograms, CNN reported.

• Wal-Marts brand of lights contained the highest levels of surface lead -- ranging from 86.6 to 132.7 micrograms.

• GEs lights had surface lead levels from 68 to 109.1 micrograms.

• Sylvanias lights had surface lead levels from 59 to 70.3 micrograms.

• And the Philips lights had surface lead levels ranging from 3.2 micrograms in one string to 107.2 in another.

Findings 'worrisome'

Dr. Leo Trasande, a specialist in children's environmental health at New York's Mount Sinai School of Medicine, said the findings surprised -- and worried -- him.

There is no level at which lead exposure is safe," he told CNN. Even at one microgram/deciliter -- the lowest level in a persons blood stream that we can detect -- that level has been associated with cognitive impairment in children.

Whats Dr. Trasandes advice to worried consumers? Leave the lights off the Christmas tree.

I wouldn't needlessly expose [children] to a lead-based hazard that could have significant lifelong consequences for that childs cognitive capacity or their attention or other health problems, he told CNN.

The four companies whose lights were tested by CNN expressed concerns about safety but also defended their products.

The special coating around electrical wires on the light sets is necessary to pass the stringent UL safety and quality regulations," Wal-Mart wrote CNN. We are in full compliance with UL regulations which set the standards for electrical coatings.

Sylvania told CNN that its lights are tested rigorously for safety and have been used safely by millions of Americans for many years.

"Holiday lights are electrical appliances. We encourage consumers to exercise common sense by keeping holiday lights and other electrical products away from the hands and mouths of children," the company wrote CNN.

GE told CNN: We can make a fairly obvious common sense observation: Lights are not toys, should not be handled by children, and are not subject to the same standards for lead. The CPSC guidelines you refer to are for products that would regularly be handled by children."

Philips said the CPSC swipe test is not a mandated measurement for our industry (it is a test to be applied to children's items and not electrical products).

The company, however, told CNN that it takes these matters seriously and is working on technologies to reduce the amount of lead in these products.

CPSC calls it 'rotten'

Meanwhile, CPSC officials criticized CNNs testing methods, saying the swipe test is like comparing apples to oranges and is rotten to the core.

CPSC officials also told CNN that Christmas lights do not pose an elevated danger of lead exposure to children.

But in previous interviews -- ones conducted with CNN before its tests -- CPSC officials said children should stay away from Christmas tree lights because they are electrical products.

There are plenty of other things kids can do to help decorate the tree," spokeswoman Julie Vallese told CNN. Lights are something that should be the responsibility of the parent.

Underwriters Laboratories, which inspects tree lights for electrical and fire hazards, told CNN that calcium and zinc could be used instead of lead in insulation. But those options would be more expensive.

Experts say consumers can reduce their lead exposure from Christmas lights by:

• Wearing gloves when they hang the lights;

• Hanging lights out of the reach of children;

• And washing their hands after handling the lights

More about safe toys ...

Sprint customers got a little surprise in their holiday stocking this week. The company announced it was removing three of the extra fees it bills to customers from their monthly charges, including fees assessed for 911 service, number portability, and costs of compliance with federal programs.

However, the company also sent along a lump of coal by offering two new fees -- an "administrative charge" of 75 cents monthly, and a "regulatory charge" of 25 cents.

According to Sprint, the administrative charge will "help defray various costs imposed on us by other telecommunications carriers" while the regulatory charge is "being assessed to help defray costs of various federal, state and local regulatory programs."

These charges are not taxes and are not amounts we are required to collect from you," the carrier said.

While customers may receive a minuscule savings from the new fees, what are they and why, if the company isn't required to charge them, does it do so?

The mysterious fees, or "unfees" as disgruntled customers call them, are basically thinly disguised price increases or, to put it a little more generously, ways to pass on increased business costs to consumers. It's a common, if unpopular, practice and is not limited to the wireless industry, though wireless carriers are certainly fond of it.

When Verizon won temporary relief from paying into the Universal Service Fund (USF), rather than pass on the savings to customers, it promptly replaced the USF fee with a new fee that almost exactly mirrored the USF fee.

BellSouth tried to do the same but both telecoms backed down after Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chair Kevin Martin threatened an investigation for violating the agency's "Truth In Billing" requirements for customer service charges.

Congress attempted to gain some relief for consumers when Senators Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) introduced the "Cell Phone Consumer Protection Act of 2007," which would ban the charging of any extra fees beyond what government regulations mandate, and require wireless carriers to spell out fees in clear, comprehensible language.

But the bill has languished since its introduction, with no sign of forward motion before Congress adjourns for the holidays.

Sprint, meanwhile, bowed to consumer pressure and competition from its larger rivals AT&T and Verizon Wireless when it recently announced that it would prorate its contract cancellation fees and not charge customers who want to change plans by locking them into new contracts.

But the "unfees" continue to frustrate those who want to pay a flat, fair price for the services they get. As one commenter at Broadband Reports put it, "If I go to a grocery store to buy something, I see the price that is charged, and I pay a sales tax ... If I wanted, I could look at other stores carrying similar items, and comparison shop based on price, knowing that another store isn't showing an artificially low price that includes an 'unfee.' "

December 17, 2007
On the heels of her Dec. 3 announcement about red blood pressure cuffs found in Fisher-Price toy medical kits, Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan is warning consumers of a similar toy that presents a potential lead poisoning hazard the green blood pressure cuff found in Sesame Street Giggle Fisher-Price toy medical kits.

Madigan urges parents to take the green blood pressure cuff toys away from their children immediately.

The toy kits are sold at retail stores nationwide, but Fisher Price has notified retailers to pull the product from store shelves only in Illinois, Madigan's office said.

Fisher-Price discovered that some of the green blood pressure cuffs from the Sesame Street medical kits contain more than 600 parts per million total lead in violation of Illinois law and immediately reported this finding to Madigan's office.

Fisher-Price has agreed to remove the toy medical kits from Illinois store shelves and offer a replacement part for families who already possess the toy. Consumers who wish to obtain a replacement blood pressure cuff can do so by contacting Fisher-Price at 800-298-0638 . Only the green blood pressure cuffs found in the Sesame Street Giggle Fisher-Price toy medical kits are affected by this alert.

I am pleased that Fisher-Price took the initiative to test its products, self-report a violation, quickly remove the affected blood pressure cuffs from store shelves, and offer replacements to consumers, Madigan said. I continue to urge manufacturers and retailers to review and tighten up their quality control procedures so consumers can be confident that the items on store shelves are safe for their children.

Madigan's office enforces the Illinois Lead Poisoning Prevention Act, which prohibits the sale of toys, clothing, jewelry or any other product intended for use by children that contains lead in excess of 600 parts per million. This law is among the strongest lead laws in the country.

Madigan stressed that there are millions of individual items already in children's homes and places they visit, such as grandparents' homes and daycare centers, that may pose a threat to children's safety.

Madigan has initiated a recall hotline at 1-888-414-7678 to help callers identify recalled products in their homes and explain how to contact companies to repair or return affected products. The hotline has received more than 500 calls in its first two months of operation and has been successful in providing information to consumers, especially those without access to the Internet. Consumers are also encouraged to sign up for e-mail alerts about the latest government recalls at www.recalls.gov.

The Senate has voted overwhelmingly to support legislation that would enable homeowners trapped by adjustable-rate mortgages or loans with subprime terms to refinance into new loans backed by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA).T

he Senate voted 93-1 to support lowering the down payments for FHA-backed loans from 3 percent to 1.5 percent. The legislation would also raise the limit on mortgages that could be backed by the FHA, from $362,000 to $417,000.

The loan limit raises were designed to target beleaguered borrowers in states with high real estate prices, such as California and New York, where "jumbo" mortgages beyond FHA limits comprise large parts of the faltering housing market.

"It was past time to approve a proposal like this that can help a good number of Americans save their homes," said Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY). "This is a good first step in the larger effort to bring relief to distressed homeowners trapped in the mortgage mess."

FHA loans have been a traditional staple for first-time homebuyers since their creation in 1934, but fell out of favor with the advent of the subprime lending industry, that promised flexible lower payments and little or no money down for their products.

But with the subprime mortgage industry now moribund due to massive defaults on loans and slowing home sales, FHA loans have come back into vogue, leading to the push to modernize their terms in order for more borrowers to qualify.

The Senate bill must be reconciled with a similar bill in the House of Representatives which offers higher loan limits for FHA-backed mortgages, and more flexible payment terms for borrowers.

The Bush administration has voiced support for raising the FHA loan limits, but it opposes the limits set in the House bill.

The Senate bill was sponsored by Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-CT), who has also introduced legislation designed to combat predatory lending abuses and reform bankruptcy rules that would enable homeowners declaring bankruptcy to protect their homes.

Bush plan

The Bush adminstration is supporting a plan championed by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson that would enable homeowners trapped by rising mortgage payments or bad loan terms to qualify for a "loan freeze" from their lender for five years.

The plan relies on voluntary cooperation from the financial and lending industries, and has been characterized as a "bailout" by Wall Street, while consumer advocates criticized the plan for not doing enough to help homeowners already falling behind on their mortgage payments.

Industry insiders say that the Bush plan's chief objective is to scuttle legislative attempts for stronger measures for homeowner protection, including the bankruptcy reform bills but Wall Street opposes the measure because it could affect the earnings of wealthy investors.

You pick up the mail and theres a postcard warning your cars warranty is about to expire. It urges you to call a toll-free number to renew it. But be careful these warnings are often just a clever scam.

These offers target seniors and other car owners with post cards and phone calls that sound urgent, said North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper, whose office is investigating the post cards and calls. They want to pressure you into buying an expensive car warranty. Dont let a high-pressure sales pitch talk you into something you dont want or need.

In the past month, Coopers office has averaged around thirty calls a week from consumers whove received these post cards in the mail or calls on the phone urging them to renew their car warranties before they expire.

Since May, a total of 25 North Carolina consumers have filed written complaints with Coopers Consumer Protection Division about the pitches. Many of these consumers got pre-recorded phone messages, mailings, or both asking them to purchase an extended warranty. The solicitations have especially targeted seniors.

The post cards and phone messages include phrases like motor vehicle notification, final notice or priority level: high in large letters to make the offer seem urgent.

When consumers who receive one of the phone messages or post cards respond by calling the number listed, they are pressured to buy an expensive extended warranty for their car.

Callers are told they must make a down payment before they can get information about the warranty. Cooper offered consumers the following tips:

• Beware of mailings that appear to come from your automobile manufacturer offering extended warrantycoverage.

• Beware of pre-recorded phone calls. In North Carolina, its illegal for telemarketers to use pre-recorded messages unless a live person first asks you if you want to listen to the recording.

• Never give out personal financial information like your bank account number or Social Security Number over the phone.

• Check to see if you already have a car warranty, or if your warranty has already expired. Many of the consumers whove gotten these offers say their car warranties expired long ago.

• When considering an extended warranty, always get information in writing before you agree to sign up or pay any money.

• Check out a business with your state Attorney Generals Office and your local Better Business Bureau before you agree to do business with them.

More Scam Alerts ...

Toyota Motor U.S.A. is recalling 15,600 2007 Toyota Tundra pickups because a transmission part could fail.

Toyota said the rear propeller shaft on four-wheel-drive Tundras could separate at a joint.

Toyota discovered the flaw after a consumer complained of abnormal noises coming from the shaft.

No accidents or injuries have been reported because of the faulty shaft.

Owners of the recalled Tundras will receive notification in the mail later this month, Toyota said in a statement.

The recall is not related to the previously reported rumbling sound coming from the Tundra torque converter after failing to change gears. That problem has not resulted in a recall but has prompted Toyota to replace entire transmissions.

Toyota also replaced some Tundra engines this year because of faulty camshafts.

Toyota projects 200,000 sales of the redesigned full-sized trucks this year.

It is one of the most popular toys on children's wish lists this holiday season, but independent laboratory tests show the "CSI: Crime Scene InvestigationT Fingerprint Examination Kit" contains asbestos.

The Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO) and Public Justice, a Washington, D.C. public-interest law firm, are demanding that companies involved in the distribution of the toy protect children and other customers from exposure to the substance, which has been linked to fatal lung cancer and other serious diseases. The toy is made in China.

In a letter to CBS, the toy's licensor; Planet Toys of New York City, the toy's distributor; and retailers selling the product, Public Justice Executive Director Arthur Bryant said ADAO, a California-based victims' advocacy group, wants a meeting "as quickly as possible" to discuss how the companies are going to protect children and other consumers from exposure to asbestos-contaminated toy fingerprint powder in the kit.

The letter raises the possibility of an immediate recall, refunds for customers, and a plan for the safe disposal of the asbestos-tainted powder.

"It is simply unacceptable to have asbestos in toys," said Linda Reinstein, ADAO's Executive Director and Co-Founder. "Prevention is the only cure."

ADAO commissioned independent, government-certified laboratories to examine various consumer products, including the popular CSI kit, and in late November, the organization reported that tests had detected tremolite - a deadly form of asbestos - in some of the finely ground powders in the kit. The toy kits are licensed by CBS - the network that airs the popular "CSI" series - but they are manufactured in China, where safety standards are lax.

Despite publicity about the findings, Public Justice noted that the toys are still widely available to consumers, much to ADAO's dismay.

"Potentially millions of households, and especially children, have been exposed to the fingerprint powder," wrote Bryant. "And because the product is already in powder form - and intended to be blown or dusted away by children searching for fingerprints - any asbestos contaminant is almost certain to be inhaled and widely disseminated."

The dangers of asbestos exposure have been well documented by scientists, doctors and environmentalists. The tiny fibers are easily inhaled and when drawn into the lungs, they cannot be coughed up or surgically removed.

The letter says the problem can be solved without litigation, but that "ADAO will be forced to take alternative steps" if the addressees do not respond immediately.

"Immediate action is needed to prevent further potential exposure to a deadly toxin," Bryant wrote. "We are eager to work with you to avoid .disaster, but we must act quickly."

More about safe toys ...

When a vaccine to prevent shingles was approved for use in 2006, the Food and Drug Administration recommended the vaccine for people age 60 and older who previously had chickenpox.

But two issues -- the vaccine's cost and the perception that shingles primarily affects adults with weakened immune systems -- have left some physicians undecided about whether healthy adults need the vaccine.

This uncertainty prompted a group of researchers led by Barbara Yawn, M.D., of Olmsted Medical Center in Rochester, to gather new data about the incidence and impact of shingles in unvaccinated patients.

Published in the November issue of Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Dr. Yawn's research findings suggest that shingles and the complications associated with it may have a greater impact upon healthy adults than most physicians previously assumed.

"The best way to make a decision about who we should vaccinate is by gaining a better understanding about the true impact of this virus," notes Dr. Yawn. "Physicians have access to very few recent studies that tell us how many people in the United States get shingles, what age groups the virus affects most, and how many of these people go on to develop related complications or other problems."

Shingles isn't a life-threatening condition, but it can cause a painful rash or band of blisters during an outbreak and other painful complications that can persist for months or even years.

The goal of this study was to establish accurate, up-to-date data about the incidence and impact of shingles in the United States before the vaccine was introduced. Dr. Yawn and her team recorded the number of adult residents of Olmsted County, Minn., who were diagnosed with shingles and shingles-related complications from Jan. 1, 1996, to Dec. 31, 2001. Over the course of the study, 1,669 patients were included.

Researchers calculated that shingles affects at least 1 in every 278 adults in the United States each year. Study data also showed that shingles is even more common among people ages 50 to 59, affecting about one in every 24 people each year.

"Overall, our data suggests that researchers and physicians also need to consider preventing shingles in people ages 50 to 59," says Dr. Yawn. "Future research is needed to understand the risk of recurrence of shingles to better advise people who previously had shingles about the value of receiving the shingles vaccine."

Dr. Yawn noted that study data also challenged the assumption that shingles primarily affects adults with weakened immune systems.

"More than 92 percent of the study subjects with shingles did not have any conditions like cancer or other serious illnesses that affected their immune system," says Dr. Yawn.

Post-herpetic neuralgia was the most common complication noted, occurring in about 8 percent of all people and increasing with age. This sometimes debilitating complication causes the skin to remain painful and sensitive to touch for months or even years after the rash clears up.

"About 18 percent of people age 80 or older experience pain that lasts more than 90 days beyond the shingles," explains Dr. Yawn.

A four-month investigation found that Clearwater, Florida-based Student Financial Services Inc. (SFS), which also operates under the banner of University Financial Services (UFS), had agreed to pay some of the nations top universities, school athletic departments, and sports marketing firms for generating loan applications, in a kickback scheme euphemistically known as revenue sharing.

The company had contracts at 63 colleges nationwide, 57 of which are National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I schools.

Under these agreements, the company also paid for the rights to use school names, team names, colors, mascots, and logos to advertise their loans directly to students. This practice, known as co-branding, was intended to imply that the company was the official lender of the school, or that it was actually a part of the school. Schools, athletic departments, and sports marketing firms made these agreements without evaluating the quality of the loans.

When lenders use deceptive techniques to advertise their loans, they are playing a dangerous game with a students future, said Cuomo. Student loan companies incorporate school insignia and colors into advertisements because they know students are more likely to trust a lender if its loan appears to be approved by their college.

"We cannot allow lenders to exploit this trust with deceptive, co-branded marketing. A student loan is a very serious financial commitment, and choosing the wrong loan can lead to devastating consequences, he said.

Under the settlement, which was joined by Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum, SFS has agreed to:

• End all lending-related agreements at a total of sixty-three schools including Georgetown University, Wake Forest University, University of Kansas, Central Michigan University, St. Johns University, University of Washington, University of Oregon, University of Texas El Paso, Rutgers University, Georgia Tech, Florida State University, Florida Atlantic University, the University of Central Florida, and the University of Pittsburgh. SFS has until December 31, 2007 to comply;

• End all lending-related agreements with five sports marketing companies that, in some instances, were sold the right to market the schools insignia, colors, and mascot, and in turn signed an agreement with SFS. These companies are ESPN Regional Television, Inc., International Sports Properties, Inc., Host Communications, Nelligan Sports Marketing, Inc., and Learfield Communications, Inc. SFS has until December 31, 2007, to comply;

• Launch a print advertising campaign at 63 schools alerting students through their top-circulating newspapers that they must protect themselves when shopping for a loan;

• End the practice of cash-based inducements, including paying students up to $50 to refer their peers to the company and encouraging students to apply for SFS loans by creating contests where they could win up to $1,000.

Also under the settlement, SFS has agreed to adopt a new Code of Conduct that prevents false and misleading direct loan marketing to students. The Code expressly prohibits lenders and marketers from buying rights to a college or universitys name, team name, colors, logo, and mascot for loan marketing purposes.

It also requires lenders and marketers to provide important disclosures to students in connection with loan transactions and prohibits a variety of misleading and deceptive practices identified by the investigation of the industry.

Menu Foods statement infuriated the Rhode Island pet owner who is at the center of Menus decision to test this brand of cat food for acetaminophen.

I dont trust them and I think theyre hiding something, says Carol V., whose two cats nearly died earlier this year after eating Special Kitty food.

Carol purchased the cat food in February -- one month before Menu Foods recalled more than 60 million containers of tainted dog and cat food. The recall included Special Kitty food.

Melamine

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) initially blamed the contamination -- and the subsequent kidney problems and deaths of thousands of pets nationwide -- on the chemical melamine.

But earlier this month, veterinarians said the combination of two chemicals the FDA found in the tainted food -- melamine and cyanuric acid -- caused the animals deaths.

Melamine is used to make plastic. Cyanuric acid is used to chlorinate pools. Neither is approved for use in pet food.

Veterinarians said those two chemicals -- which FDA officials discovered in the imported wheat gluten and rice protein concentrated used to make pet food -- can combine and form crystals in the animals bodies. And those crystals can impair the animals kidney function.

Agrees to test

Menu Foods, however, agreed in October to test Special Kitty food specifically for acetaminophen.

That action came in response to a ConsumerAffairs.com story that revealed a Texas laboratory found the pain killer in samples of Special Kitty that Carol had feed her cats -- Smudge and Jessica.

Test results revealed that ExperTox Analytical Laboratory detected acetaminophen (pdf file) in a composite of three flavors of Special Kitty food - Special Kitty with beef and gravy, Special Kitty mixed grill in gravy, and Special Kitty with turkey and giblets in gravy.

ExperTox also found melamine in the samples of Carols Special Kitty food. It did not, however, detect any cyanuric acid.

The acetaminophen findings added to a growing number of cases in which toxicologists at ExperTox had discovered the over-the-counter pain medicine in samples of dog or cat food.

On Monday, Menu Foods refuted all of ExperTox findings regarding acetaminophen in its products.

The company posted this statement at the bottom of its Web site: Earlier this year, an individual suggested that acetaminophen was present in certain products manufactured by Menu when a single private laboratory purported to find acetaminophen in products he had tested. Those suggestions and the results of that single laboratory were refuted at the time by tests conducted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The California Animal Health and Food Safety Laboratory at the University of California Davis (UC Davis) also found no traces of acetaminophen in the products at issue in tests commissioned by Menu.

The statement continued and specifically addressed ExperToxs findings of acetaminophen in Carols cat food: The acetaminophen claims were re-cycled in October 2007 when that same private laboratory purported to find acetaminophen in another Menu-produced product that was part of the pet food recall in March 2007. Despite the previous findings and with the goal of alleviating any remaining public concern, Menu commissioned UC Davis to perform tests on the products that were the subject of the new claim. As with the prior tests conducted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and UC Davis, the most recent tests by UC Davis also found no traces of acetaminophen.

Outraged

Carol is outraged by what she calls Menus cold response.

That company poisoned my animals and they have the gall to refer to my lab results as a recycled claim, she told us late Monday. Thats a slap in the face.

This company made money off my animals for years and now theyve poisoned my pets. How dare they belittle them . . . its so insulting.

Carol also questioned the validity of Menus test results.

The company has never called me so how do they know they tested the right food the one that has same lot, style, and UPC code as my Special Kitty. she says. And it took seven weeks for this to come out, and then they (Menu) dont post their findings. I posted my findings from ExperTox.

Hired gun?

Carol further questioned Menus decision to hire UC Davis.

UC-Davis gets a half-a-million dollars in grants from the pet food industry, she says. Why are they using them? Why not use a lab that has nothing to do with the pet food industry?

But Dr. Bob Poppenga, professor of veterinary toxicology at UC Davis, said the California Animal Health and Food Safety Laboratory does not receive any funding from the pet food industry.

And all its test results are objective and not influenced by any outside sources.

The lab is independent, Dr. Poppenga told us on Thursday. It does not receive a penny from the pet food industry. The funding for the lab comes from the state. We also get some federal grants.

He added: Other entities at UC-Davis (the nutrition program and research) may get funding from the pet food industry. And thats why I think some of these misconceptions (about the lab) may occur.

The lab, however, does have clients in the pet food industry including Menu Foods.

We do testing for them that they cannot get done anywhere else, Dr. Poppenga said. And there is a fee we charge them.

Out-of-state clients like Menu Foods are charged a higher fee than those from California, he said.

Thats because the taxpayers of California support us, Dr. Poppenga said. The clients in the state of California are charged less.

What about the labs results on the Special Kitty food?

I cant discuss those because Menu Foods is our client, Dr. Poppenga said.

The company responds

In a written statement to ConsumerAffairs.com, Menu Foods said it will not publicly disclose the lab results on the Special Kitty food it tested.

Menu Foods has provided a summary of the findings on its website, the company wrote.

Menu Foods also said ExperToxs results contained the date and time codes of the Special Kitty food it tested. Thats how the company knew which cat food to analyze.

The California Animal Health and Food Safety Laboratory at the University of California Davis ("UC Davis") tested products with date and time codes in close proximity to those identified in the ExperTox (report) - ensuring the products tested by UC Davis were manufactured and filled from the same ingredient sources as those identified in the ExperTox report, the company said.

The ExperTox analysis was a composite of three different products manufactured on three different days. UC Davis' analysis was conducted on the individual products of the ExperTox composite analysis.

Menu Foods added: Acetaminophen was non-detectable in all three samples.

The company said it has not contacted Carol about her cat food because of a federal court order issued in May.

This court order prohibits Menu Foods from contacting the consumer regarding the pet food she had tested and the test results she obtained, UC Davis' test results, any pet food in her possession, and any other information related to her claim, the company wrote.

Carol, however, has not filed a claim -- or taken any legal action -- against Menu Foods.

We also asked the company why it still had recalled pet food in its possession and how it normally disposes these products.

Menu Foods is a defendant in ongoing litigation related to the recall, and currently cannot dispose of recalled product, the company wrote. Prior to the March recall, Menu has never before been involved in a food safety recall and as such, has no experience in 'doing' anything with its recalled product.

"At such time as Menu Foods is permitted to dispose of the product recalled this spring, it will do so in accordance with FDA guidelines, it said.

Meanwhile, Carol continues searching for answers about what made her cats so sick. She recently hired another lab to test samples of the Special Kitty food -- which she has stored in her freezer -- for acetaminophen and other toxins.

Time, however, is not on her side.

Jessica is not doing well, she told us Monday. Shes starting to fail. She is probably not going to survive another monthits like were revisiting this all over again.

Jessica first became sick in mid-February when Carol detected a strange odor on the cats breath.

It smelled uremic, like a kidney dialysis patient, Carol recalled. We also noticed that Jessica was outside drinking water from a melting puddle. I remember commenting that wed never seen either cat drink before. But Jessica was so desperate for water that she was drinking from a puddle outside.

And then we noticed that she couldnt stand on her own.

Carol rushed the 15-year-old Tabby cat to the familys veterinarian.

He did a urinalysis and discovered her kidneys were failing, Carol said. We thought we would have to euthanize her. But our vet said that because Jessica seemed fine the day before, he wanted to presume this was something he could treat.

For the next few days, Jessica received fluids, potassium supplements, the heartburn medicine Pepcid AC, and an antibiotic.

We decided that if this didnt workif she was sufferingwe wouldnt continue with the treatment, Carol said. But Jessicas condition slowly improved.

Her back legs were getting stronger and she seemed to be getting better. So we continued giving her more fluids and sticking with this same treatment program.

Force-feeding

Carols vet also emphasized the importance of getting Jessica to eat.

So I tried to force-feed her the Special Kitty food, Carol said, adding this occurred a few weeks before Menu Foods announced its recall. Jessica refused. I even poured tuna fish oil on the Special Kitty food to entice her to eat, but she walked away.

Smudge, however, continued to gobble up the Special Kitty food. And on March 12 -- four days before Menu Foods announced its recall -- the Calico cat suddenly became seriously ill.

She could hardly stand up, she was staggering, and her breath smelled foul, Carol said. I thought that she had whatever Jessica hadthat maybe it was a virus.

But Carols vet discovered another -- much more serious -- problem. Smudge was in renal failure.

He said she was much worse than Jessica was and he didnt think that shed last through the day, Carol said. He said it looked like shed gotten into some antifreeze. But he did a test and that proved it wasnt antifreeze poisoning. The family took aggressive measures to save the 13-year-old cat. They authorized their vet to follow the same protocol he used to treat Jessica.

Slowly, Smudge started to improve.

Our vet said he didnt know what was going on with Smudge, Carol said. He was baffled. And I think I asked him if it could be something we were feeding the cats.

Suspicions confirmed

Carols suspicious were confirmed a few days later.

I was watching the news and heard about Menu Foods recall and that the food was causing renal failure in pets.

Carol said she immediately contacted Menu Foods, but the company didnt respond.

All Menu Foods was publicly telling pet owners to do was save their receipts. But this wasnt about money. It was about saving our pets and nothing was happening.

Carol also contacted the FDA -- several times.

I offered to give the FDA my cats food, but they said they didnt want it. I told them I have the food thats on the recall list and I also have two really sick cats. I begged and pleaded with them to test my food, but they didnt want it.

Apathy at FDA

At one point, an FDA employee even chastised Carol for calling.

The person who answered the phone said why are you calling me about this. What really bothered me was how these agencies could be reporting information about the pet food recall if they werent taking any information -- at least not from me. I didnt expect this from the people who supposedly were the investigators on this.

The FDA finally returned Carols calls but only after she sent numerous e-mails and contacted Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse.

Five minutes after contacting the Senators office, I received a call from a woman at the FDA, Carol said. She told me my previous messages apparently didnt get through.

This whole experience has been so frustrating. Its like being on a merry-go-round and I keep going to back to square one. And all I really wanted was for someone to test my cats food.

That someone turned out to be The Pet Food Products Safety Alliance, a new organization created to raise public awareness of pet food safety issues.

That group hired ExperTox to test Carols food. Spokesman Don Earl called the labs findings significant for two reasons.

To my knowledge, this is the first time acetaminophen has been detected in the presence of melamine, said Earl, who has extensively researched this issue since his cat, Chuckles, died in January. Chuckles went into kidney failure after eating Pet Pride cat food that wasnt included in the recall.

ExperToxs results also added to the growing list of pet foods that have recently tested positive for acetaminophen, including:

• About a half-dozen samples of pet food tested in May. ExperTox did not disclose the brands of those foods because of a confidentiality agreement. But Earl confirmed that two of those samples were Menu Foods Pet Pride "Turkey and Giblets Dinner" and Pet Pride "Mixed Grill that he sent to the lab for analysis. Menu Foods and the FDA disputed ExperToxs findings. But we learned the FDA couldnt confirm it tested the same lots and brands in which ExperTox detected the pain medication.

• A sample of pet food -- identified as CANIDAE dog food. ExperTox, however, said the sample arrived in a Ziploc bag and it could not confirm the pet food was a CANIDAE product. The lab's customer, who was not identified because of a confidentiality agreement, listed the sample as CANIDAE pet food on ExperToxs forms. CANIDAE denied its products contain acetaminophen, but said it would test samples of its food for the painkiller.

ConsumerAffairs.com asked the FDA what action the agency will take in response to ExperToxs findings of acetaminophen in Carols cat food. A spokeswoman told us the agency does not comment on pending legislation, litigation, or citizen petitions.

The FDA, however, suggested that Carol contact the agencys Consumer Complaint Coordinator about getting her food tested.

Carol took that action in October and said the FDA initially responded. But she hasnt heard from that agency in more than six weeks.

Battling with the FDA and Menu Foods, however, arent Carols immediate concerns right now.

Shes focused on keeping Jessica comfortable. Like I said, Jessica is probably not going to survive another month.

A stroll through the Scam Alerts archives finds it's been Christmastime all year for the world's scam artists. The Federal Trade Commission tells us that scams hit 30.2 million adults -- 13.5 percent of the adult population -- during the last year for which it has added up its complaints.

While the FTC's latest figures are for 2006, there's certainly no reason to think the number declined in 2007. Human ingenuity is constantly on the prowl, after all, seeking new ways to fleece the unwary, the gullible and those looking to get rich quickly.

But of course it's not just the greedy and the gullible who get taken. The poor and desperate are also falling victim to modern-day bandits those in grimy boiler rooms as well as corporate board rooms.

The dictionary definition of a scam is a fraudulent business scheme designed to make a quick profit. In making our list and checking it twice, we combed our database of nearly 300,000 consumer complaints to find the scams that made great strides forward, roping in new victims and increasing their take in 2007.

So, here they are -- ConsumerAffairs.com's Top 10 Scams of 2007:

1. Weight Loss Scams
With Americas mushrooming obesity problem, perhaps its only natural that scammers would dream up all manner of bogus weight loss schemes, in an effort to separate overweight Americans from their money. In 2007 there seemed to be no limit to how outlandish these scams could be.

For example, Transdermal Products International marketed a patch that was supposed to make the wearer lose weight. The FTC said the company provided about two dozen domestic and foreign retailers with sample deceptive advertising and bogus substantiation materials, including purported expert endorsements and cooked-up clinical studies. Among the bogus claims, the FTC noted, was that sea kelp contained in the patch had been approved for weight loss by the Food and Drug Administration.

And, of course, marketing maestro Kevin Trudeau got in on the act. The FTC accused Trudeau and marketers of his book, The Weight Loss Cure They Dont Want You to Know About, of misrepresenting the books contents in their infomercial. The ad claims that the weight-loss plan outlined in the book is easy to do, can be done at home, and ultimately allows readers to eat whatever they want.

However, when consumers purchased the book, they found instead a complex, grueling plan that requires severe dieting, daily injections of a prescription drug that consumers cannot easily obtain, and lifelong dietary restrictions.

The FTC sued the same defendants in 2004, alleging that they made deceptive advertising claims for two dietary supplements and billed consumers credit cards without authorization.

The FTC also took legal action against the marketers of various Hoodia products, including companies in Canada, and Australia. The companies claimed their pills would not only help consumers lose weight, but reverse the aging process.

Back to the top

2. Work At Home Scams
The unemployment rate may be low, but Americans increasingly long to fire their boss, bail out of the rat race and work from home. That mood set up one of this years ripest growth areas for scammers marketing bogus business opportunities and work at home schemes. According to an FTC survey, many victims fell for more than one of these scams.

Not all of these are envelope-stuffing schemes. Robert, of Durham, North Carolina, signed up with a company that promised to train him and give him a technical job working from his home.

[The] company guaranteed employment and technical training materials, he told ConsumerAffairs.com. It took our money, provided nothing, then offered refund checks which bounced.

Randy, of Springfield, Oregon, found his work-at-home directions very unappealing: They needed $32.95 to send the materials I would need. What I got was a letter telling me to basically do the same thing to other people.

Others lost much larger sums of money. Two people faced federal charges of tricking more than 1,300 consumers into paying between $5,000 and $25,000 for a bogus franchise to sell business cards. Using Internet and classified ads, telemarketers, and income projection spreadsheets, the pair claimed that consumers could earn $150,000 in their first year and recoup their initial investments within three to five months.

Others seeking employment on online job sites like Careerbuilder.com continued to get lured into home-based jobs, presented not only as highly paid but also incredibly easy. All they had to do is receive large checks donations to feed the worlds orphans, for example and deposit them in their personal bank account before wiring the money out of the country. The checks, of course, were counterfeit. The victims had to repay the money that had been wired to the scammer.

Meanwhile, the tried-and-true envelope stuffing scam is still reeling in victims. An Arkansas court fined a woman $1.3 million for running an envelope stuffing scam from that state. Customers paid $99 to be part of the program and were led to believe they would receive $10 for every advertisement they mailed out for the company. Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel said work at home schemes are becoming an increasing problem and urged consumers to use caution when considering any such offer.

Back to the top

3. Fake Lottery Scams
This scheme, which topped our list in 2006, falls to number three this year, but continues to claim thousands of victims who have lost millions of dollars. Canadian scammers this year came up with something new -- a phony lottery in which "winners" are chosen from among local utility company customers.

In one such scam a company called Capital One Corp., based in Massachusetts, sends a letter claiming that the recipient has won $50,000 through a random drawing based on account numbers of local utility customers.

As with many of these scams, a check is enclosed for a portion of the "winnings," in this case about $4,000. The recipient is urged to keep the prize secret, and to call an enclosed phone number for more details about their winnings.

Unfortunately, the check is a counterfeit, copied from a legitimate bank in Massachusetts.

Despite the American address posted at the top of the letter, a listed branch office and the included phone number can both be traced to Canada, the origin of many foreign-lottery scams.

Anyone who calls the number will likely be instructed to deposit the phony check and wire money to help process their prize. This is the classic hook of a lottery scam. A anyone who sends money will lose the money they send and will soon learn the check they cashed was phony. A prize? Don't think so. Consumers who remember that it is impossible to win a lottery or sweepstakes they didnt enter are much less likely to get burned.

While many of these lottery scams are remarkably similar, one especially brazen con man set himself apart when he included an impersonation of Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson as part of his scheme. In August Edmondson received a complaint from a consumer who was notified she had won $800,000 in a Readers Digest lottery. She then received a call from someone purporting to be the Attorney General, who said he could verify the legitimacy of her winnings.

We are investigating this scam, and if we are able to track this con man down, its a sure bet he will get more than a call from the attorney generals office, Edmondson said. "He will get to meet one of our investigators face to face.

Back to the top

4. Craigslist Scam
This one could also be called the Thrifty Nickel Scam, or classified ad scam, but with craigslist becoming the classified ad medium of choice, the online service is also becoming the scammers vehicle of choice.

The scam almost always works like this: someone renting an apartment or selling a big ticket item will be contacted by an interested party from out of town. Without any haggling, the buyer/renter sends a large check much more than required. The victim is told to deduct the asking price and then pay an additional expense. In the case of the purchase of a piano, they are told to pay the shipping then wire the balance back to the other party.

The large check is counterfeit, but thats usually not discovered until the victim wires the money, which cant be recovered. The scam has become so common that craigslist has a page on its site warning users to avoid these scams.

Most scams involve one or more of the following, according to the Web site:

• inquiry from someone far away, often in another country
• Western Union, Money Gram, cashier's check, money order, shipping, escrow service, or a "guarantee"
• inability or refusal to meet face-to-face before consummating the transaction.

When someone says craigslist will guarantee the transaction, its a dead giveaway that youre dealing with a scammer. The company says it never has any role in any transaction.

Back to the top

Blue Hippo
If you were new to the world of personal computers, you might be unaware that prices for PCs have been tumbling, and that complete systems start around $500. If you had poor or no credit, you might be sucked into a scheme to sell you a computer for more than $2,000 and not send it to you until you had made several months worth of payments. Or maybe, not ever send it to you at all! Welcome to the world of Blue Hippo, Financing Alternatives and their imitators.

BlueHippo, part of Edison Worldwide, is a Baltimore-based company that sells computers and TVs to consumers who have poor or no credit. Its customers are mostly individuals who have trouble managing money, do not have enough cash to pay the purchase price and don't qualify for credit from more traditional retailers.

The company's advertising has been spattered across American TVs since the BlueHippo's birth in April 2003. Since then, the ceaseless waves of complaints have flooded almost every ear that will listen. As late as last month, complaints were still rolling in at ConsumerAffairs.com.

In August 2007 I started the layaway process with the infamous Blue Hippo company, Roberto, of San Leandro, told ConsumerAffairs.com. When I spoke with the sales rep I was quoted a computer at $1,700. This included shipping and all accessories and taxes. When I received the paper work the actual price was a staggering $2,178.

Roberto said he was told he would receive his computer in eight weeks, but when the paperwork arrived, eight weeks had turned into 13. In mid October, still without his computer, he said he tried to cancel the deal, but a month later Blue Hippo was still sucking $79.98 from his bank account every two weeks.

Meanwhile, the state of Virginia has shut down a Blue Hippo wannabe, Financing Alternatives, Inc., after consumers complained the company took their money allegedly for grossly overpriced computers but provided nothing in return.

I didn`t have the heart to tell my son it was a scam, that the money was just stolen, Carla, of Galesburg, Illinois, told ConsumerAffairs.com. He looked at me and said no Mom, somebody wouldn`t do that. I said well this company did and it wasn`t just us, but many others.

Many, many others. Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell says Financing Alternatives owes computers to 1,765 customers who paid in full - plus hundreds more who've made partial payments. McDonnell says Financing Alternatives and its owner George Christian owes consumers $3.3 million.

Back to the top

6. Well Buy Your Home Scams
With 2007s subprime mortgage mess and escalating foreclosures, theres a lot of desperation out there among some homeowners. Theres also no shortage of shady characters hoping to get rich off this misery from mortgage rescue operations to teaser rate mortgage hustlers.

Also hoping to take advantage of the fear gripping the housing market are scammers who promise to pay cash for your house often without even seeing it. In North Carolina, state officials say one such company making that promise to homeowners was nothing more than a scam.

Attorney General Roy Cooper said the company, Charlotte Home Solutions, promised to buy homes from people who needed to sell quickly but instead left them vulnerable to foreclosure. As alleged in Coopers complaint, the company convinced homeowners to sign title to their homes to a trust controlled by the partners. Because Charlotte Home Solutions didnt assume the mortgage on the property, the original homeowner unknowingly remained responsible for mortgage payments on the house.

This scam hurt both homeowners and people who hoped to become homeowners, Cooper said.

Back to the top

7. IRS Phishing Scams
For the last few years, identity thieves have used spam phishing emails to trick people into revealing social security numbers and other sensitive information. While more people have become savvy to these ubiquitous emails, allegedly from banks and credit card companies, in 2007 scammers found a sure fire way to get their emails noticed. Hardly anyone, they discovered, disregards a notice from the feared Internal Revenue Service.

In May, the IRS warned consumers about an e-mail scam intended to fool people into believing they are under investigation by the agencys Criminal Investigation division. The e-mail purporting to be from IRS Criminal Investigation falsely states that the person is under a criminal probe for submitting a false tax return to the California Franchise Tax Board.

The IRS does not send out unsolicited e-mails or ask for detailed personal and financial information. It dealt with new variations of the same email scam for much of the year.

Everyone should beware of these scam artists, said Kevin M. Brown, Acting IRS Commissioner. Always exercise caution when you receive unsolicited e-mails or e-mails from senders you dont know.

Back to the top

8. Unauthorized Billing Schemes
Judging by our mail, nothing infuriates consumers more than this scam. Even if the monetary loss is only $9.95, the fact that a business would think it could hit your credit card without your informed consent simply drives people up the wall. As well it should.

And all those small charges can add up to some pretty big money. In 2007 Mary Lou Farr and other defendants settled FTC charges that they placed $30 million in bogus collect call charges on millions of consumers phone bills a practice known as cramming. The charges, usually between $5 and $8, typically were buried in the back of consumers monthly phone bills.

In July the FTC shut down Florida based Suntasia Marketing, Inc., one of the largest telemarketers of those supposedly free trial memberships in buyers clubs. The FTC charged the company defrauded U.S. consumers out of tens, and perhaps hundreds, of millions of dollars.

According to the FTC, when Suntasias telemarketers called consumers to offer these free trial memberships, they deceived them into divulging their bank account information and later charged consumers without authorization for a series of negative option programs. With a negative option agreement, a company takes a consumers silence or failure to cancel as acceptance of the offer, and permission to bill them.

The essence of this massive telemarketing scam was simple: trick people into giving out their checking account numbers, send them a brochure on a travel and buyers club, take money out of their bank accounts for as long as possible, and make it very difficult to cancel and get a refund, said C. Steven Baker, Director of the FTCs Midwest Region.

Consumers complained in near-record numbers about Suntasias practices. In total, the FTC collected and reviewed more than 5,000 formal consumer complaints against Suntasia that were submitted to various law enforcement agencies and the Better Business Bureau.

But the godfather of all unauthorized charge schemes has to be a middleman company called ILD Teleservices. Taking advantage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 provision that allows third party providers to place charges on consumers phone bills, ILDs clients stick thousands maybe millions of consumers for all types of bogus services that were never requested and never provided. In the last 12 months ConsumerAffairs.com has received more than 877 consumer complaints about ILD. Most are like this one, from Tami, of Opp, Alabama:

They have been charging me $14.95 a month since January 29, 2007 on my phone bill. My phone company can't tell me what the charge is for. The company won't answer the phone in order for me to file a complaint or contest the charges. So far they have gotten $164.45 plus taxes from me.

For its part, ILD proclaims its innocence. The company acts as a billing agent for many other, smaller companies some legitimate, some obviously not. Telephone providers, such as Verizon and AT&T, are powerless to prevent these charges from being added to their telephone bills, thanks to Congress bumbled efforts at telecom reform. Consumers should keep in mind, however, that they can refuse to pay unauthorized third party charges on their phone bill without it affecting their local telephone service.

Back to the top

9. Military Spouse Scam
This one makes our list, not because its all that widespread, but because its particularly despicable. The scammer who sounds young and American calls a military spouse and identifies herself as a representative from the Red Cross. The caller says that the spouse's mate, who is not identified by name, was hurt while on duty in Iraq and was med-evacuated to a hospital in Germany.

The caller says treatment cant get started until paperwork is completed, and in order to start the paperwork they needed the spouse to verify her husband's social security number and date of birth. With that information, the scammer can steal the service members identity.

The Red Cross says its representatives typically do not contact military members dependents directly and almost always go through a commander or first sergeant channels.

Back to the top

10. E-Card Greeting Scam
You open your email and theres one of those clever E-Card Greetings. The greeting looks real enough. It is an exact replica of a Hallmark E-Card, or one from MyPostcards.com or a number of other sites that provide animated email greetings.

The recipient is instructed to click on a link to view the greeting card. But doing so leads to big trouble. The link goes to a hackers Web site and tries to open a file called postcard.exe, which then downloads a Trojan, damaging your computer and giving a hacker access to your hard drive.

These fake greetings started popping up around July 4th. It might be wise to expect to see them again around the holidays. Security experts advise that people who receive a an unexpected E-Card from a person they do not know, or have not heard from for a long time, should delete it without opening it, as they would any other email from an unknown, or suspect, source.

There were other annoying scams that didnt make our list this year, but which deserve honorable mention. Like the companies that produce those pop-ups in your Web browser that look like security alerts. It warns youve been infected with spyware, and when you click on the option to remove it, the pop-up offers to sell you software to remove the non-existent spyware. In October, Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna has reached a settlement with one of three California-based Internet affiliate advertisers accused of violating the states consumer protection and spyware laws.

Senior citizens also remained prime targets for scammers in 2007. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott filed suit against three North Texas companies for bombarding seniors in Texas and across the country with deceptive, unsolicited mailers designed to dupe them into sending the companies their personal information. The lawsuits alleged the companies then used the information to develop sales leads for insurance, financial and other companies.

Back to the top

Just one more ...
Perhaps the most poignant scam story of 2007 involved a poor soul from St. Louis, who last July fell for a classified newspaper ad looking for movie extras for Into The Blue 2, a movie purportedly being shot in Vancouver, British Columbia. The catch? Extras had to pay their own airfare.

Instead of being allowed to book his own flight, the victim had to send the money to the scammer, paying twice the value of the ticket. Arriving at the Vancouver airport, where he expected to join other movie extras, he found himself alone and the victim of a cruel hoax.

Adding financial pain to his humiliation, the airline refused to cut him any slack on his return ticket, good for a flight two weeks later. In order to return home in a timely manner, the victim had to pay a full price, late reservation fare, plus change order fees.

When word of his plight got out, people who worked in the airport gift shop clerks, rental car agents, and airline employees, took up a collection to help him pay the extra charges for the return ticket. Someone called a local TV news crew, which came out to the airport and interviewed him about his plight, making him something of a star, at least for a day.

While the world is full of evil, rotten people who cant wait to scam you, its good to remember that there are nice people too.

More Scam Alerts ...

December 10, 2007 
With all the emphasis on lead paint in recalled toys, health advocates say another, very real threat is being overlooked.

The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association warns that many popular toys can negatively affect hearing.

When the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) released a list of unsafe toys last month, the ASHA says hearing damage from noisy toys or electronic devices was missing from the list. Yet electronics are one of the fastest-growing segments of the toy market, and are being marketed to younger and younger children.

It is up to adults to safeguard our children and protect them from dangers that we can easily avoid, including lead, choke hazards and hearing damage from loud toys or playing videogames and music too loud, too long, said Noma Anderson, Ph.D. president of ASHA.

Loud toys and personal listening technologies that arent used safely pose a threat to ears of all ages. Once damaged, ears do not heal. For children, hearing loss can also lead to other problems, including difficulties in academic and social development.

As younger and younger children are asking for and receiving electronic toys and music devices like MP3s and iPods, it is critical that parents learn how to protect their childrens hearing and teach them safe listening habits.

The group offers these simple guidelines:

• If you must raise your voice to be heard, it is loud enough to damage hearing.

• When evaluating toys for small children, bear in mind that their arms are short and they tend to hold toys close to their face, making noises even louder.

• If you can hear music from someone elses earphones three feet away, its too loud.

• Give your ears a break from continuous listening.

• Upgrade headphones so that they isolate music from background noise. Lower volumes can then be used.

• Set volume limiters before allowing children to use electronic items.

• www.listentoyourbuds.org is a fun website created by hearing experts and educators with video games for kids, and information for teachers, parents and reporters to learn about hearing safety. The site is also available in Spanish.

A lawsuit filed last year against Apple claims its iPods are too loud and could damage users' hearing.

Lawyers for John Kiel Patterson charge the mp3 players are "inherently defective" in design and do not provide sufficient warning to consumers that the volume could result in hearing loss. The suit says the iPod can produce sounds at more than 115 decibels, which it says can damage hearing if exposed to as little as a half minute per day.

The colder months always bring on stories about accidental deaths from carbon monoxide poisoning in the home. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CSPC) estimates that about 200 people die each year from carbon monoxide poisoning associated with home fuel-burning heating equipment.

But there is an even more dangerous, though little-noticed, killer lurking in many homes -- and just like carbon monoxide, it is invisible, odorless and tasteless.

It's radon -- a radioactive gas that comes from the breakdown of uranium in soil.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), radon is the second-leading cause of lung cancer in the U.S. and is associated with up to 22,000 lung cancer deaths per year.

Radon is commonly found in the air and water, where it poses little risk. But but radon that creeps into your home from the soil can be a much greater risk.

Radon can enter homes through cracks in the foundation or flooring, so higher levels of radon are normally found in the basement and first floor. It doesn't matter if your home is old or new, high levels of radon have been observed in every type of dwelling, in every part of the country.

Not just hype

While there are critics who claim the radon problem is nothing but hype, every major health organization has found that long-term radon exposure causes cancer.

These include the Environmental Protection Agency, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Lung Association, the American Medical Association, and the National Academy of Sciences.

Researchers first noticed a high incidence of lung cancer in uranium miners, and subsequent studies on rodents confirmed the results.

Critics will point out that miners were exposed to a higher level of radon than most people would have in their home, but health organizations believe that while the level of radon is important, the length of exposure is more significant.

A miner might be exposed to a high level of radon for 8 hours per day. A homemaker might be exposed to a decreased level, but for 18 hours per day or more. Researchers estimate that the same negative effects are likely due to the increased exposure time in the home.

Additionally, because the home is sealed, the colder months can produce higher radon levels. The same applies to a home closed in the summer because of air conditioning.

Home inspectors

Because more consumers have become aware of potential problems from radon, many home inspectors are performing radon testing as part of their routine. This means that radon has had an effect on both home sellers and buyers.

Joseph, of Morristown, New Jersey was one such buyer.

"Everything was done, all the underwriting was complete and then ... the house inspection! With 99% of the loan process complete, the home inspection showed a radon level above the state standard," Joseph told ConsumerAffairs.com.

"This concerned us because of our newborn, so we decided to hold off on the particular house and keep the home search going," Joseph wrote.

Not just homes

It's not just homes that can harbor radon. In Nevada, parents in the Lake Tahoe area are protesting a plan to consolidate two schools, using Zephyr Cove Elementary, which has high radon levels.

According to the Nov. 3 tests done by Fallon Heating and Air Conditioning, five rooms in Zephyr Cove were above the Environmental Protection Agency's recommended action level of 4 picocuries per liter of air.

Blown to bits

In a November, 2007 episode of the ABC show "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition," a large home was blown into toothpicks. The home wasn't blown to bits because it was the scene of a past mass murder. And it wasn't destroyed because it was condemned.

ABC blew up the house because it showed high levels of radon.

"Blowing up your home is not the answer to a radon problem, unless you're looking for good TV ratings," said Gary Hodgden, president of Midwest Radon, based in Olathe, Kansas.

"If a home does test at a high level of radon, there are proven methods that reduce the measurements to a safer level," Hodgden said. "But the first step is to test. Testing is the only way to know if there is a problem."

Hodgden says there are a few different testing methods. The first and quickest is the short-term test, generally a charcoal-based test that takes only a few days.

These kits can be purchased for around $15.00 to $20.00, but be sure to note whether this includes the lab reading and a prepaid return mailer.

On the flipside, a long-term test will give you more accurate results of the year-round radon levels. Typically called an alpha-track test, it will take at least 90 days, but 6 months to a year is recommended. Expect to pay $20.00 to $40.00 for this kit.

"If a neighbor's home has a low level of radon, it doesn't mean you shouldn't test your own residence," Hodgden said. "Everything we know about radon shows that one home can show a low level, but the home next door can test high."

Radon is measured in "picoCuries per liter of air," or pCi/L. The EPA recommends a level at or below 4 pCi/L. Achieving a zero rating is impossible because even the outside air typically has a level of 0.4 pCi/L.

The EPA says that although no amount of radon is safe, most homes can be reduced to a level of 2 pCi/L or below. Additionally, while various removal methods exist, one reduction method has proven to reduce radon levels by up to 99%.

Known as the soil suction system, a small fan draws air from under the home and sends the radon gas through a pipe to the outside.

The cost?

"Consumers can expect to pay anywhere from $800 to about $3,000," Hodgden said. "The cost depends on many factors, such as the type of home, area of the country, etc. Most fans have a five-year warranty, so the only real maintenance is making sure the fan is running."

As Hodgden said, the only way to know if a problem exists is to test. You can find do-it-yourself test kits online or at local hardware and home supply stores. You can also locate a radon specialist in your state by contacting your state radon office.

Many states have safety organizations that sell kits at discounted prices. The Utah Safety Council sells an EPA-approved, short-term test kit for $10.

The national average value of homes in the U.S. is likely to drop further before rebounding, according to a report by the financial service, Moodys Economy. The report predicts the housing market will not begin to recover until 2010. Another report finds a record number of homes in foreclosure and delinquencies continuing to rise.

At its most dire, the report, co-authored by Mark Zandi, chief economist, and Celia Chen, director of housing economics, suggests housing markets will crash in some of the hardest-hit markets. For example, the authors say prices in Punta Gorda, Florida and Stockton, California could plunge 30 percent from their peaks.

Nationwide, the price of the average home is forecast to fall 13 percent from their 2005 peaks through early 2009. The report says further incentives may be required to sell some property, pushing the average decline to as low as 15 percent.

The report also goes into detail about the reasons for the housing market woes, and not all are tied to the subprime mortgage fiasco, which is only now beginning to be addressed by the U.S. government.

The report says the sudden withdrawal of investors in some areas and over-building by some home builders have also contributed to the glut of homes on the market, which in turn has led to slower sales and more foreclosures, creating a vicious cycle.

Effect on the economy

It remains to be seen how the declining housing market impacts the overall economy.

At the height of the real estate boom, housing was a huge contributor to the economy, accounting for nearly a full point of Gross Domestic Product. The authors predict the current recession in the housing market will remove more than a full point from this years GDP and perhaps a point and a half in 2008.

Moodys areas of greatest predicted price declines closely match regions of the country where foreclosure rates have so far been the greatest. The most significant loss of home value is predicted for California, Florida, Arizona, and Nevada states where speculators were particularly active.

While falling home prices may be painful for homeowners, many economists say the price declines may be the only real cure for the housing market. Even the Moodys report sees the large and increasing inventory of unsold homes as the root cause of the problem. Once prices dip enough to attract new homebuyers, the market will rebound.

The new Highlander is the first vehicle to be hit by the magazines October 16 decision to not automatically award the Recommended designation to Toyota vehicles because of reliability issues with the automaker.

Nevertheless, the 2008 Highlander scored better than 13 competing mid-size, three-row SUVs to take the segments top spot in the magazines January ratings.

The Highlander was not officially recommended because we recommend only models with sufficient data to predict average or better reliability, according to David Champion, senior director of Consumer Reports Auto Test Center.

If Toyota vehicles return to levels of sustained reliability Consumer Reports considers to be excellent, the magazine will resume automatic recommendations, according to a press release.

Other vehicles tested in the January issue were the Buick Enclave, Ford Taurus X and Subaru Tribeca, whose ratings along with the Highlander were added to the magazines existing rankings of 10 other midsize, three-row SUVs.

The Tribeca and Taurus X received a Recommended designation from Consumer Reports.

Toyota toppled

In October, Toyota Motor Co. was dropped from the top spot in Consumer Reports vehicle reliability survey.

Honda Motor Co. beat out Toyota for first place but the maker of the top selling Prius hybrid managed a third place finish behind Honda and Suburu.

Ford Motor Co. made great strides forward, according to the consumer advocacy group with 41 of Ford's 44 models scoring average or better in predicted reliability.

Three Toyota vehicles lost the magazine's "buy" recommendation. For the first time in the survey's history, the V6 Toyota Camry is not recommended by the publication. The Lexus GS sedan and the full-sized Tundra pickup also dropped off the recommended list.

Japanese-made vehicles dominate CR's most-reliable list but U.S. automakers are making some progress, according to David Champion, senior director of Consumer Reports' Auto Test Center.

"Just because a vehicle is made in Japan, doesn't mean it has bullet-proof quality," Champion said.

Both General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC achieved high ratings in launches of new vehicles but were unable to maintain the ratings.

Consumer Reports said The Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan sedans rank among the most reliable family cars in its survey, along with the Toyota Prius and Honda Accord. Those Ford sedans and the two-wheel drive Ford F-150 V-6 comprise three of the four domestic models on the survey's most reliable list.

Buick was the top U.S. nameplate at number 10 while Mercury followed in the number 11 spot, Ford was 13 and Lincoln 14.

President Bush and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson offered a plan today that would supposedly enable as many as 1.2 million homeowners with risky mortgages to stay in their homes.

Bush and Paulson stopped shy of calling the plan a "bailout," saying that no federal money would be involved, but that federal guidelines would be needed to help the financial industry handle the potentially massive number of loan defaults that may occur as adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) begin to "reset" in 2008.

"[T]he current system for working out those problem loans would not be sufficient to handle the anticipated 1.8 million owner-occupied subprime mortgage resets that will occur in 2008 and 2009," Paulson said. " Instead, the industry needed a streamlined approach to address this increased volume."

Under the plan, homeowners with adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) originated between Jan. 1, 2005, and July 31, 2007, not scheduled to reset between Jan. 1, 2008, and July 31, 2010, may be able to qualify for a five-year rate freeze at their present, lower payment rate.

Only homeowners who live in their homes can qualify for the plan, leaving speculators and those who bought homes to "flip" for a quick profit out in the cold.

But the plan also penalizes homeowners who are already struggling, as only borrowers who have been making payments regularly would qualify for the rescue. Those who have already fallen too far behind or are in default would not qualify for the plan.

Also, homeowners who are deemed able to pay their mortgages after the ARM resets would also not qualify.

Early leaked details about the plan drew lukewarm responses from both the financial sector and consumer advocates, not to mention other politicians.

New York Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, who has offered a mortgage rescue plan of her own, said the Bush/Paulson plan was "going to give struggling homeowners far less than they need."

"[I]t appears that the president is pushing a freeze for a very narrow group of borrowers," Clinton said. "That is unfortunate because this crisis demands a more comprehensive approach that is adequate for the scale of the problem."

Clinton supports a five-year rate freeze on ARMs, as well as a 90-day moratorium on foreclosures of owner-occupied homes with subprime adjustable-rate mortgages, and regular reports from the mortgage industry on the number of loans they are modifying.

Bad Business

Meanwhile, The Wall Street Journal editorial page excoriated the plan as violating the contracts of investors in mortgage-backed securities, who may lose money as a result of the rate freezes.

"When securitizers purchase loans, the Pooling and Servicing Agreements normally assign servicers a fiduciary duty to maximize cash-flows for the investors," the editors wrote. "In some cases, servicers can modify loan terms if this is consistent with 'standard industry practice.' This plan establishes a new 'standard industry practice.' We trust everyone is prepared to fight that out in court, maybe for years to come, because the lawsuits are going to test that 'standard' practice claim."

The Bush administration said it was supporting legislation offered by Republican Congressman Mike Castle (R-DE) that would immunize financial institutions that supported the rate freeze from shareholder lawsuits, just as airlines were largely shielded from liability following the 9/11 terror attacks.

Mortgage Maelstrom

No matter the preferred solution, consensus seems to be that something needs to be done to stem the mortgage and housing slump, as the bad news just keeps on coming.

National home values fell 1.3 percent in the third quarter of 2007, the largest drop in 25 years. Excess inventory of unsold homes and uncertainty in the financial markets due to tightening of credit and lending standards contributed to the fall.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors warned that the subprime mortgage meltdown would have massive economic consequences nationwide, contributing to as much as $1.2 trillion in lost home equity value from foreclosed homes, losses of over 500,000 jobs across metro areas and nearly $6.6 billion in lost tax revenue.

December 5, 2007
General Electric is recalling about 92,000 microwave combo wall ovens. The door switch in the microwave oven can overheat and ignite plastic components in the control area, posing a fire hazard. The lower thermal oven does not pose a hazard.

GE is aware of 35 incidents of minor property damage and one incident in which a fire damaged adjacent kitchen cabinets. No injuries have been reported.

The recall includes GE combination microwave and conventional built-in wall ovens sold under the following brand names: GE, GE Profile and Kenmore. The ovens were sold in white, black, bisque and stainless steel. The brand name is printed on the lower left corner on the front of the microwave door. The following model and serial numbers can be found inside the microwave oven on the left interior wall.

The ovens were sold at department and appliance stores from January 2000 to December 2003 for between $1,500 and $2,000. They were made in the United States.

Consumers should stop using the microwave oven immediately. Consumers should contact GE regarding their GE/GE Profile micro-oven combo or Sears for their Kenmore unit.

GE is offering a free repair or rebate on a new product, a $300 rebate toward the purchase of a new GE brand unit, or a $600 rebate toward the purchase of a new GE Profile brand unit. Sears is offering a free repair or $300 rebate toward the purchase of a new Kenmore brand unit. Consumers can continue using the lower thermal oven.

Consumer Contact: For additional information on GE /Profile units, contact General Electric toll-free at (888)-240-2745 from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. ET Monday through Friday, and 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. ET Saturday, or visit GE's Web site at www.geappliances.com. For additional information on Kenmore units, contact Sears toll-free at (888) 679-0282 from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. ET Monday through Saturday, or visit Sears' Web site at www.sears.com

The recall is being conducted in cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).

Unintended acceleration with Jeeps at car washes continues to endanger owners, car wash employees and bystanders.

The most recent report involved Neil in Minneapolis, Minnesota. His 2006 Jeep Grand Cherokee suddenly accelerated out of a Minneapolis car wash damaging four vehicles, totaling one of them and seriously injuring two bystanders.

Three people were struck by the runaway Jeep.

One remains paralyzed 18 months after incident. My letter to NHTSA says probably driver error, Neil reported to ConsumerAffairs.com.

Jumpin' Jeeps have caused near-catastrophes at three Virginia car washes in the last several months as well.

In Fredericksburg, Bruce drove his 1999 Jeep Grand Cherokee through the wash and when the wash was complete he shifted the vehicle to drive and it accelerated on its own to full throttle.

Bruce told ConsumerAffairs.com that he stood on the brakes but could not stop the vehicle. I hit a wall behind the car wash and then bounced into a boat that was being dried.

The boat owner got out of the way and was not hit.

The local Jeep dealer could not explain nor understand why this happened, Bruce said.

Other reports of unintended acceleration with Jeeps at Virginia car washes include an incident with a 2003 Jeep Grand Cherokee slamming into a truck in Newport News.

At a Virginia Beach car wash a 2006 Jeep commander crashed into a brick wall.

A Chrysler spokesman claims, it's not an issue of sudden acceleration but pedal misapplication" or put another way, simply driver error.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has refused to order a safety recall because the agency found no evidence to indicate the influence of a manufacturing defect.

ConsumerAffairs.com has received reports of unintended acceleration in the Grand Cherokee since at least 2000.