Current Events in November 2011

Believe it or not, not everyone has a cell phone. And when you need to make an international call, sometimes your cell phone just won't get it done.

That's one of the reasons consumers purchase prepaid calling cards, which admittedly were much more common in the days before cell phones became mainstream. But a lot of consumers who buy these cards report problems.

"The calling cards are ripping people off,” Akilah, of Camden, N.J., told ConsumerAffairs.com.

"As soon as your call connects, it disconnects and your balance is zero. When calling the customer service department, they tell you to allow two hours and your time will be put back on your card. That's a lie! I've been robbed for over $52 this month alone. I know other people that this has happened to.”

Fiona, of Livermore, Calif., says she has also experienced calling cards that don't work. She said she had problems with two different companies and neither, she said, was helpful.

“They are not willing to correct the error or refund my money or at least replace it to a better card,” Fiona said. “They both said to me that there's is nothing they can do or help me. This is very wrong, they took my money and gave me bad products.”

Illinois complaints

In Illinois, state Attorney General Lisa Madigan has heard similar complaints from her constituents. She has filed lawsuits against Chicago- and California-based companies for marketing prepaid calling cards to consumers, particularly to immigrant communities, that offer up to 50 percent fewer minutes than advertised and are riddled with hidden usage fees.

"Consumers need to read the fine print on prepaid calling cards," Attorney General Madigan said. "Their advertising is extremely misleading about the actual number of minutes offered, and they're loaded with hidden fees that make their value questionable at best."

The suits were filed against Nobel Tel LLC and NTI Inc., a Chicago company. Madigan said the companies targeted marketing at immigrant consumers seeking to make international calls.

In the suit against NTI, Madigan alleges the company's prepaid cards provided an average of 50 percent fewer actual minutes of talk time than the total time advertised. The company sells cards at neighborhood convenience and telecommunication stores in the Chicago area.

She also says the cards, marketed through Illinois retailers, are riddled with hidden fees – from hang-up fees to daily usage charges. Madigan's investigation revealed that some cards misrepresented the actual amount of call time available.

Units, rather than minutes

The cards' packaging referred to "units" of time as opposed to actual minutes, where one "unit" represented only a portion of a minute of international talk time.

Madigan is asking the court to prohibit the companies from selling, manufacturing, distributing or marketing prepaid calling cards in Illinois, obtain restitution for affected consumers and impose civil penalties on the defendants for the allegations laid out in each of the complaints.

There's a move afoot in Congress to amend the Communications Act  to allow businesses to make robo-calls to your cell phone for “informational purposes.”

Supporters of the bill, introduced in the House of Representatives in September, say it's not as sinister as it sounds. Businesses simply want to be able to call customers on their cell phones to remind them of a doctor's appointment or to pick up their order.

Why robo-calls? Because, they say, it's much more efficient to have machines place the calls. It's standard practice now for landlines and the legislation would simply allow them to expand the practice to cell phones, which a growing number of consumers now use exclusively.

Indiana against it

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller thinks it's a bad idea, since the legislation specifically states that the federal law would supersede any state law against the practice.

When the House Subcommittee on Communications and Technology convened hearings on the bill, Zoeller showed up to testify against it.

"Indiana has spent more than 20 years protecting telephone privacy from the 1988 Auto Dialer law to the addition of cell phones to the Do Not Call law in 2011," Zoeller said. "The success of our statutes have made our citizens appreciate their privacy and made them sensitive to harassing phone calls. Consumer protection is traditionally an issue of state authority and we should take this opportunity strengthen the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and not weaken it."

Would overturn Indiana's Do Not Call Law

Zoeller says he's concerned the proposed legislation would strike down Indiana's Do Not Call law. If passed, states could not enforce their more strict laws against junk faxes, prerecorded calls or text messages.

The legislation is sponsored by Rep. Lee Terry (R-NE), who told Zoeller he is also concerned about this proposal overriding or preempting state laws. Terry asked Zoeller to help draft language that would protect states' powers.

While Zoeller agreed to do so, he said he remains cautious because assurances were also made during the drafting of the 1991 Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) that federal law would not override or preempt state law - but a federal court recently struck down an Indiana statute on preemption grounds.

State laws at risk

"While preemption of such state laws has not been a problem up to this point, Indiana's recent litigation experience with Patriotic Veterans Inc., demonstrates that states and their residents cannot take their residential privacy protections for granted any longer," Zoeller said.

Patriotic Veterans Inc. challenged Indiana's Automatic Dialing Machine Statute in September. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana ruled the state's ban on robo-calls playing political messages cannot be enforced if the calls originate outside Indiana, because federal law allows for these types of calls. Zoeller is appealing the decision.

If you keep files – especially treasured photographs – on your computer hard drive, you're running a risk of losing them. Computer hard drives fail all the time, meaning you can lose important data.

“I purchased a Gateway laptop on sale,” Paula, of East Lansing, Mich., told ConsumerAffairs.com. “About ten days after the warranty expired it died. I paid approximately $300 to have it repaired and also purchased a new replacement power cord. Almost a year to the day after it was resurrected from its previous death it was going fine then a zap and a billow of rancid smoke it died again! I lost my wedding pics all my files and almost my religion!”

Purchasing an inexpensive flash drive that plugs into your computer's USB port is a good way to protect your valuable data. Just be disciplined about always using it, and not storing data on the computer's internal hard drive. And of course, valuable data like wedding photos should also be copied to a CD or DVD for safe keeping.

You can also sign up for a service like Dropbox, which automatically keeps a copy of everything on your computer.  Besides protecting it from loss, this makes your data available wherever you happen to be, as long as you remember your user ID and password.

Punished for using their own money

Perhaps one of the reasons consumers have been so angry at big banks recently – in addition to the fees – is the way they sometimes do business. Anita, of Hillsboro, Ore., said she and her husband recently began withdrawing small amounts from their US Bank savings account and investing it into a retirement account.

“We got a letter in the mail stating that they will be closing our accounts with them with no explanation,” Anita said. “When visiting the branch to confront the situation, they told us it was a 'red flag' to them and they had every right to close us out! I The strange thing about this is the bank manager told us that if we would have drawn out $20,000 then we would have been fine. How does that work?”

It sounds like the bank, and perhaps other large institutions, are following a formula – devised by a consultant, no doubt – that tells them what action to take in reaction to a set of consumer actions. Maybe it's this inflexible, one-size-fits-all approach, that consumers are objecting to as much as the fees, leading to this past weekend's Bank Transfer Day.

Expensive toys

With the holiday season fast approaching, parents will soon be shopping for this season's hot toys. Darcel, of Streamwood, Ill., says he's shocked at the price for the Disney Little Einstein Pat Pat Rocket by Fisher Price.

“What are Disney and Fisher Price doing to the prices they are asking for a toy, are you kidding me,” Darcel asked Consumer Affairs.com. “I've seen it priced between $350.00 and $369.00. It's a rocket that makes sounds with four little plastic characters. Parents, stop buying these toys at such a rip off price and they will go down but if you keep buying them at those ridicules prices they will never stop!”

We've seen the toy advertised at Amazon.com for between $199 and $249. That's not as much as Darcel says, but it's still a lot for a toy.

Lost in the shuffle

Jeannine, of Lake Park, Minnesota, says she moved recently and set up service as a new customer with DIRECTV, paying a $40 installation fee by debit card to have a dish installed.

On the day of installation, the installer cancelled. I rescheduled, and he didn't show up,” Jeannine said. “I called customer service and cancelled everything. I was told that a check for the $40 installation fee would be sent to me immediately. After waiting two weeks for the check I called customer service again and was transferred numerous times to different people and departments. I was finally told that my account was 'lost' or 'not showing up' and I wouldn't be getting my money back.

DIRECTV may consider Jeannine a non-customer, but why did they take $40 from her bank account? Jeannine needs to call her bank immediately and dispute the charge. It would be easier if she had used a credit card, but maybe her bank can get some results.

Food companies issued recalls for nearly six times the units in the third quarter of this year than they did during the preceding three month period, according to the ExpertRECALL Index.

The data also showed that there were more recalls for pharmaceutical and medical devices but fewer recalls for children's and infant's products. Surprisingly, recalls for consumer goods were the lowest in five quarters.

"Based on third-quarter recall activity, product safety remains a hot topic among consumers, manufacturers, retailers and regulators," said Mike Rozembajgier, Vice President of Recalls at Stericycle ExpertRECALL. "Now, as we enter the holiday season, everyone should be reminded of their role in supporting consumer safety to make sure that not only the products we use, but also the gifts we give, are safe for everyone."

Undeclared allergens

When food products were recalled in the last three months, undeclared allergens remained the leading reason. The data shows they accounted for 50 percent of all food recalls during the period.

Listeria-related recalls were the second-leading cause, accounting for 25 percent of all food recalls listed on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's website between July and September. In late October, for example, Landshire of St. Louis, MO expanded its recall of the Nike Sandwich as a precautionary measure to include the addition of the Nike Super Poor Boy Sandwich as well as increased production dates of the Nike All-American Sandwich. The products were suspected of being tainted with Listeria Monocytogenes

Need to pay attention

"Manufacturers and retailers must pay close attention to consumer safety and be more diligent when communicating with consumers, particularly as shoppers increase their purchases during the holiday season," said Rozembajgier. "And while regulators will need to pay close attention to product safety complaints, particularly about the hottest gifts of the season, consumers need to keep their eyes and ears open for recall announcements about not only the products they buy for themselves, but also about the gifts they are giving."

Among consumer products, burn hazards and structural-collapse risks were the main reasons for recalls. For example, in October General Electric General Electric recalled about 470 GE Monogram Pro Rangetops with grills. Burners on rangetops operating on liquefied petroleum ("LP" or propane) may fail to ignite or light if the gas control knob is left in a position between OFF and LITE, posing a risk of delayed ignition or explosion.

As consumers revolted against the idea of paying a fee for the privilege of using a debit card, big banks retreated and, it appears, the nation's credit unions have reaped the benefits.

The Credit Union National Association (CUNA), a trade group, says at least 650,000 consumers have joined credit unions in the past four weeks, since Bank of America announced it would impose a monthly $5 fee on customers who made purchases with their debit cards.

Reaction was so strongly negative that other big banks considering a similar move announced they would not impose the fee. Earlier this week, Bank of America also capitulated, announcing it would not impose the fee after all.

$4.5 billion in new savings accounts

CUNA estimates that credit unions have added $4.5 billion in new savings accounts in the last month. More than four in every five credit unions experiencing growth since Sept. 29 attributed the growth to consumer reaction to new fees imposed by banks, or a combination of consumer reactions to the new bank fees plus the social media-inspired Bank Transfer Day. Bank Transfer Day, which is tomorrow, urges consumers to switch from big banks to smaller credit unions and community banks.

Pete, of Elk Grove Village, Ill., has accounts at both Chase Bank and a credit union. Saying his Chase credit card lowers his credit limit on a regular basis, he says he sees no reason to keep two accounts.

“The Credit Union treats me the best,” Pete told ConsumerAffairs.com. “I recommend that eveyone move to a credit union for great service. I will be dropping Chase when the card is paid off.”

And it's not just the big banks that are drawing consumer anger. Noreese, of Lockport, Ill., says she has been a customer of TCF Bank for 15 years but is fed up with what she says are excessive overdraft fees.

“I will be closing my account and going with my local credit union,” Noreese said.

Savings promised

"The results indicate that consumers are clearly making a smarter choice by moving to credit unions where, on average, they will save about $70 a year in fewer or no fees, lower rates on loans and higher return on savings," said CUNA President/CEO Bill Cheney.

Cheney cited studies he says have shown people living paycheck to paycheck save even more at a credit union than the average financial institution customer, as they use more credit union services.

No stockholders

Why do credit unions have fewer and smaller fees than major banks? A lot has to do with the way they are organized. Banks are corporations that try to maximize profits from shareholders. That often means squeezing customers.

A credit union is a non-profit membership association. That means its “customers” are really “members.” While they have many of the same costs as banks, they don't pay out a profit to shareholders.

As consumer anger built around the debit card fees, credit unions were quick to market their services to the big banks' disaffected customers. According to Cheney, they have increased advertising, sent “switch kits” to existing members to share with family members or other prospective members, beefed up websites, extended hours and staffing for Bank Transfer Day, performed e-mail blasts to members, and maximized social media campaigns.

From jobs that require hours of computer time to relaxing in front of the television set, we are spending a lot more time sitting down than we used to.

While the link between a sedentary lifestyle and obesity is well established, a group of Canadian researchers now says a lack of physical activity can lead to cancer. Presenting at the American Institute for Cancer Research annual conference, the researchers says as many as 49,000 cases of breast cancer and 43,000 cases of colon cancer occurring in the U.S. every year are linked to a lack of physical activity.

Daily exercise may not help

Specifically, the researchers honed in on sitting for prolonged periods, finding that sitting for long periods of time can increase some of those same indicators of cancer risk, even among people who exercise daily.

"Taken together, this research suggests that every day, we're each given numerous opportunities to be active and protect ourselves from cancer, not one," said AICR spokesperson Alice Bender, MS RD. "We need to start thinking in terms of make time and break time."

According to the study, led by Christine Friedenreich, PhD, of Alberta Health Services-Cancer Care, getting a vigorous workout every day – while part of a healthy lifestyle – won't lessen what she sees as the cancer risk from prolonged sitting.

Advice

Her advice? Make time for physical activity and break every hour of sitting with one to two minutes of activity. These breaks can be as simple as walking to a colleague's office instead of sending an email or going to the kitchen to get a glass of water.

"Making time to get at least half an hour of moderate to vigorous activity every day is great, and more Americans need to do it, but those 30 minutes represent only a sliver of our day," Bender said. "This new research on break time suggests there are small things we can do in the other 15 hours and 30 minutes we spend awake that also make a big difference."

Friedenreich's research might be another reason to consider switching to a stand-up desk at work. Independent research has suggested there are health benefits to standing rather than sitting – everything from better posture to increased calorie burn.

Stand-up desks and work stations can cost less than $200. The Safco AlphaBetter desk pictured above costs about $189 and has been used by some ConsumerAffairs.com editors for more than two years.  It is adjustable and has a foot rest, which most authorities say is essential; being able to rest one foot at a time relieves back strain. 

More elaborate systems add a slow-moving treadmill, allowing workers to keep moving while at their desks. And if you don't buy the cancer risk research, there is plenty of other research to suggest that sitting is simply not as healthy as standing.

Earlier this year the American College of Cardiologists issued a study suggesting sitting for long periods of time was as harmful to the circulatory system as smoking cigarettes.The research showed that prolonged periods of sitting increases the risk of heart disease, obesity, diabetes, cancer and early death.

The Federal Trade Commission is mailing 188 refund checks to small businesses and non-profits that were defrauded by two telemarketing operations that allegedly tricked them into paying for business directory listings they did not order.

The FTC alleged that Stephane LaChapelle and Integration Media Inc., doing business as GoAm Media; and Karl Garon, Claude Berthiaume, and 6253547 Canada Inc., doing business as The Official Yellow Pages and other entities, violated the FTC Act.

According to the complaints in the two cases, the defendants led the businesses and non-profits to believe they had a pre-existing relationship with the defendants, and falsely claimed that the organizations had agreed to buy, and owed money for, directory listing services.

Nearly $19,000 is being returned to small businesses and non-profits; the amount of payment will vary from $1.55 to $154.99, depending upon how much was paid.

Those who receive the checks from the FTC's redress administrator should cash them within 60 days of the date they were issued. The FTC never requires consumers to pay money or provide information before redress checks can be cashed.

Those with questions should call the redress administrator, Analytics Inc., 1-877-318-7591, or visit www.FTC.gov/refunds.

Hoodia Gordonii is a cactus grown in Africa's Kalahari and eaten by the San Bushmen there. It supposedly curbs your appetite and helps you lose weight. Whether it does is open to question, but it's sort of a moot point because it's illegal to export the plant from Africa.

That might make one wonder how companies like Nutraceuticals International LLC and Stella Labs LLC could market food, drugs and dietary supplements supposedly bursting with the prized cactus juice, denounced by our Dr. Henry J. Fishman as a waste of time way back in 2005.

The Federal Trade Commission got wind of the hoodia situation and has now  settled charges brought against three people and two companies for deceptive advertising.

The FTC said the marketers were part of a scheme that supplied manufacturers of weight-loss supplements with a substance they claimed was a derivative of hoodia.

Under the settlements:

• David J. Romeo, and two companies he controlled, Nutraceuticals International LLC and Stella Labs LLC, are banned from making any weight-loss claims while marketing foods, drugs, and dietary supplements. The settlement imposes a $22.5 million judgment against Romeo and the two companies, which will be suspended when Romeo forfeits his vacation home in Vermont, and assigns to the FTC the right to collect on $635,000 in business loans owed to him. If it is later determined that the financial information Romeo gave the FTC was false, the full amount of the judgment will become due.
• Nutraceuticals International principal Craig Payton is banned from marketing any foods, drugs, or dietary supplements. The order against Payton does not require him to forfeit any assets, as they were already seized in an unrelated federal drug case.
• Nutraceuticals International marketing executive Deborah B. Vickery is required to pay a $4 million judgment, which has been suspended due to her inability to pay. If it is later determined that the financial information she gave the FTC was false, the full amount of the judgment will become due.
• All five defendants are prohibited from making any false or unsupported claims about foods, drugs, or dietary supplements, and from helping others to make these claims. They also are barred from misrepresenting the results of any scientific study.

In its 2009 complaint, the FTC alleged that the defendants made false and deceptive claims about hoodia and its effectiveness as a treatment for obesity, and falsely claimed that their ingredient was hoodia when it was not.

The complaint also alleged that the defendants falsely and deceptively claimed their product would enable consumers to lose weight and suppress appetites; was scientifically proven to suppress appetite, resulting in weight loss; and was clinically proven to reduce caloric intake by 1,000 to 2,000 calories per day.

Since credit is harder to come by, layaway plans have come back into vogue. A consumer makes periodic payments on a piece of merchandise until it is fully paid for. It's a tried and true method, but Teresa, of Chesterfield, Va., thinks something isn't right with her layaway purchase of a dining table at Ashley Furniture.

“My contract stated that the total price was $599,” Teresa told ConsumerAffairs.com. “I had to put the down payment of $126.51 on the date of purchase, I have since paid the same amount each month which totals $506.04. After making the November payment I asked what was my balance and was told $533. I asked how is this possible and the associate stated that a 'portion' goes to Ashley Furniture for their fees.”

Teresa is correct to be suspicious. This doesn't add up. She should carefully read the terms and conditions of the layaway, which should have been given to her at the time of the sale.  Depending on what she finds, she should take her sales contract/receipt to the store, along with cancelled checks from her payments, and ask the manager of the store to explain the math. 

Layaway plans sound great but they always involve extra charges and there's a chance that the consumer will wind up paying for merchandise that, for one reason or another, they don't ever receive.  It's much better to go to a discount store, or a used or factory outlet store and pay cash for something you can take home the same day.  

Get it in writing

Many consumers are confused about how to cancel a subscription service. Some companies seem to make the process harder than others.

“I just discovered that I have been charged for Sirius Satellite Radio service I tried to cancel and thought I had done so successfully over a year ago,” said Glenn, of Medina, Minn. “In speaking with Sirius personnel, three different individuals over the past 45 minutes they were unwilling to give me anything but a refund for the last quarterly charge. I had signed up for their five month promotion for $20.00 and then after using it for two or three days tried to cancel. They will acknowledge a phone call inquiring about my account status, but say they have no record of me cancelling.”

When ordering something online, or cancelling an order or reservation, the business should give you a confirmation number. That is the way you can track and verify the transaction. If the business does not give you a confirmation number, you probably haven't successfully cancelled your contract.

Pests

Melissa, of Newell, Iowa, says telephone solicitors for Debt Relief Network repeatedly call her despite her request to be put on their Do Not Call list.

“I have blocked their number and they keep calling me with different numbers,” Melissa told ConsumerAffairs.com. “They repeatedly hang up on me and they are very rude when I ask them to quit calling me. I ask for a website to look up their company information and they hang up on me. They call me everyday and I am sick of it.”

Melissa should lodge a complaint with Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller's office about the unwanted calls. And if she isn't already, she should get on the Federal Trade Commission's national Do Not Call List. Here's how. 

Happy ending

In recent years coffee makers, of a variety of makes and models, have been the source of consumer gripes. John, of Wilmette, Ill., had a problem with his Bunn BTX-B coffeemaker, but says the company stood behind its product.

“I called Bunn customer service and a very nice lady asked for the code date on the bottom and then told me that it was covered by warranty,” John said. “They shipped me a new one no charge, asking only that I pay the shipping to send the broken one back, which I thought was reasonable. When a company takes responsibility like that, they earn my confidence.”

Once upon a time, that was simply considered good business.  

A bill slithering through Congress gives companies new power to shut down Internet sites that offend them, all in the name of curtailing "piracy" of copyrighted material.  

But critics like CNET's Larry Downes call it "Hollywood's latest effort to turn back time."

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) would require Internet intermediaries -- meaning your ISP, Facebook and sites like this one -- to censor any posting that supposedly violated intellectual property laws.

Critics like Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) say SOPA “would mean the end of the Internet as we know it."  Canadian pop star Justiin Bieber went even further in a radio interview last week, suggesting that any member of Congress who votes for the bill "needs to be locked up — put away in cuffs."

'Rogue' sites

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) and others, would authorize the Justice Department to seek injunctions against "rogue" websites dedicated to providing access to pirated goods or content. It would also allow the government and rights holders to demand that third parties, including payment processors and online ad networks, cut ties with such sites.

Ironically, Smith, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, claims to be a foe of "unnecessary regulations," and frequently touts his committee's passage of a bill that would supposedly "reform the federal regulatory process and reduce unnecessary burdens on job creators."

Smith and his follow SOPA sponsors say the measure is necessary to stop Americans from sharing music, movies and other copyrighted material with each other. But technology groups say the bill would be a "nightmare" for Web and social media firms.

"[T]his is not a bill that targets 'rogue foreign sites.' Rather, it allows movie studios, foreign luxury goods manufacturers, patents and copyright trolls, and any holder of an intellectual property right to target lawful U.S. websites and technology companies," the Consumer Electronics Association and the Computer and Communications Industry Association said in a letter to members of Congress.

Stifle innovation

The Electronic Freedom Frontier (EFF) says the measure would stifle innovation and creativity and destroy jobs, while making the Internet  duller and drabber while making it easy for just about anyone with a grievance to shut down entire sites. 

"This bill could also have a huge impact on the work of human rights advocates and whistleblowers who depend on online tools to protect their anonymity and speak out against injustice," said EFF's Travor Timm. "Platforms created to provide anonymity software to human rights activists across the world, as well as next generation WikiLeaks-style whistleblower sites, could be major casualties of this bill — all in the name of increasing Hollywood’s bottom line."

Under SOPA, private companies would be able to force payment processors to shut down payments to websites by merely claiming the site “engages in, enables or facilitates” infringement.  This broad provision could target websites behind important Internet projects such as Tor, the anonymity network that has been vital for protecting activists from government surveillance in Tunisia and Egypt, Timm said.

"Corporations concerned about users illegally downloading music could use SOPA to force Visa and Mastercard to cut off donations to Torproject.org — despite Tor’s aim to facilitate human rights activism, not piracy," he said.

Whistleblower sites could also find themselves in trouble if they post any documents related to corporate corruption or law breaking, if those documents contain trade secrets or are copyrightable.

The smoking-cessation drug varenicline, marketed under the brand name Chantix, already carries a “black box” warning on its label. But researchers at Harvard, Johns Hopkins and other institutions, say it might not be enough.

Writing about their study in the journal PloS One, they say the drug's poor safety profile makes it unsuitable for first-line use among those who want to quit smoking.

According to the researchers, Chantix showed a substantially increased risk of reported depression or suicidal behavior compared to other smoking-cessation treatments.

'Might as well have been heroin'

“This drug might as well have been heroin,” Ken, of Kent, Wash., told ConsumerAffairs.com last year. “I suffer from constant heighten anxiety levels and frequent panic attacks. I was diagnosed with panic disorder by the doctor who prescribed this worse than crack to me.”

Teresa, a nurse from Burton, Ohio, said she took Chantix in 2008 and was able to stop smoking. However, she said she was left with a number of serious side effects that she believes will remain with her the rest of her life.

“I am so angry,” Teresa said. “I wish the drug companies would spend more time testing their product before putting it on the market to prevent, after the fact problems.”

Side effects

The researchers focused on Chantix side effects and said they found that 90 percent of all reported suicides related to smoking- cessation drugs since 1998 implicated varenicline, even though it was on the market only four years in the nearly 13-year study period. They also found that varenicline (Chantix) was eight times more likely to result in a reported case of suicidal behavior or depression than nicotine replacement products.

“Our study contradicts the implications of a recent review by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showing no difference in psychiatric hospitalizations between varenicline and nicotine replacement patches,” said Curt D. Furberg, M.D., Ph.D., professor of Public Health Sciences at Wake Forest Baptist, co-author of the study and a nationally recognized leader in drug safety research. “The FDA hospitalization studies were flawed because they could not capture most of the serious psychiatric side effects, including suicide, depression, aggression and assaults. These can be catastrophic events but do not normally result in hospitalization.

Too risky

Furberg said he and his colleagues concluded that when it comes to Chantix, “the risks simply outweigh the benefits.”

The researchers said they strongly recommend that the FDA revise the black box warning to say what this study and the FDA’s own data show – that varenicline has higher risks for suicidal behavior and depression than other smoking-cessation treatments.

America, it turns out, has a shortage of some prescription drugs. At a Congressional hearing in September, doctors complained they were unable to find what used to be fairly common cancer drugs.

For many consumers, this doesn't come as news. For years, thyroid patients taking a drug called Armour Thyroid have complained about a shortage.

“I was told today that I would no longer be able to get my prescription of Armour Thyroid filled due to a shortage in the product," Catherine, of Farmersville, Texas, told ConsumerAffairs.com in 2009. "How can a company have a shortage of a product that millions of Americans depend on for their very lives? My mother passed away when I was 15 from an untreated thyroid problem. I myself have already had a heart attack due to complications from my thyroid.”

Not enough pig thyroid?

Forest Laboratories, the company that makes Armour Thyroid, reported in 2009 that it was having a hard time finding the active ingredients in the drug. Armour Thyroid is a "natural" hormone replacement therapy because the thyroid glands are collected from pigs. The thyroids are processed, dried, powdered, and compounded to produce Armour Thyroid tablets.

While the drug supply appears to be adequate today, consumers who take it say it has been reformulated and does not achieve the same positive results it once did.

“Original Armour Thyroid was the only thyroid medication I have been able to tolerate,” Linda, of Walnut Creek, Calif., reported last month. “I feel awful on the reformulated version. I can't tolerate any thyroid medications. The best and the only one I could tolerate was the original Armour Thyroid I feel generally awful and cannot find a medication to get enough thyroid support without side effects - different side effects for different medications. Please bring back the original medication!”

Executive order

President Obama, meanwhile, has issued an executive order, instructing the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Justice Department to take action to prevent drug shortages. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) applauded the move, noting that drug shortages have tripled over the last five years.

“We know that nearly half of these shortages are because of problems at manufacturing facilities which fail to meet FDA safety and quality standards to ensure that Americans have access to safe, effective, and affordable medicines, DeLauro said. “The industry must step up to meet these standards, and we must invest in staff and technology at the FDA so the agency can work with industry to resolve manufacturing problems in a timely manner.”

But DeLauro's colleague, Rep. Joe Pitts (R-PA), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee, says the reasons for the shortage are not clearcut and the president's action was hasty.

“The issue is complex and witnesses, including Health and Human Services (HHS), testified at our hearing that there are multiple causes and as a result, it will require multiple solutions,” Pitts said.

Not long after consumers picked up their new iPhone 4S smartphones last month they began reporting a problem with the battery life. It wasn't as long as they expected – certainly not as long as the previous model, the iPhone 4.

Now, Apple says it has found the problem in the device's iOS5 operating system.

"A small number of customers have reported lower than expected battery life on iOS 5 devices,” Apple said in a statement. “We have found a few bugs that are affecting battery life and we will release a software update to address those in a few weeks."

Apple started getting complaints from customers that the battery life drained from the 4S in less than 24 hours in some cases. Some users found work-arounds, such as turning off the smartphone's location settings.

The announcement from Apple that the battery problem is software-related comes as a relief to new iPhone users, who initially feared the devices new advanced features – such as its voice control system – might be causing the problem.

Apple Insider reports the company has released the first beta iOS5.1 for developers to begin testing. In addition to addressing the battery life issue, the update will reportedly add multitasking gestures for the original iPad, fix bugs with Documents in the Cloud, improve voice recognition for Australian users who are using the dictation feature and add other security enhancements.

Because the battery life issue involves the operating system, consumers should not have to take their iPhones in for any kind of repair, but simply download the update once it becomes available.

Meanwhile, CNET reports Sprint, which began supporting the iPhone with the release of the 4S, is investigating reports of slow iPhone 4S download speeds on its network. Sprint told the tech site that it has not been able to replicate the problem but takes seriously the complaints from its customers.

Since the onset of the Great Recession three years ago, many people have seen their credit scores suffer. That lower credit score means they'll have a harder time getting loans, and when they do get a loan, they'll pay a higher interest rate for it.

But will it also keep them from getting a job? Employers are increasingly looking at credit histories before hiring someone.

According to a 2010 poll by the Society for Human Resource Management, 60 percent of surveyed employers conducted credit checks for some or all candidates as part of the hiring process. Because many people saw their credit scores suffer when they lost jobs, it seems especially ironic that a low credit score might prevent someone from getting a better job.

Bigger impact

Now, losing a career opportunity has a potentially higher impact than nearly ever before, while the nationwide wave of foreclosures simultaneously makes it more likely for an individual to have a black mark on their record. So, the question should be asked, is a credit score a legitimate means to judge someone for employment?

Researchers from LSU, Texas Tech University and Northern Illinois University have tried to address that question. Their recently completed a study showcased the link between credit ratings and an individual's personality, and found no connection between poor credit scores and theft.

First, the authors found a link between credit scores and personality types. But it's not the kind of link that many personnel managers might expect.

"With regards to personality and credit – it makes sense that conscientiousness is related to good credit, but what was really interesting was that agreeableness was negatively related to your credit score," said Jeremy Bernerth, assistant professor in LSU's E. J. Ourso College of Business Rucks Department of Management. "That suggests easy-going individuals actually have worse credit scores than disagreeable and rude individuals. This suggests that agreeable individuals might get themselves in trouble by co-signing loans for friends or family or taking out additional credit cards at the suggestion of store clerks."

No link between low score and poor job performance

However, contrary to what many employers consider common knowledge and practice, the researchers found no correlation between poor credit scores and bad behavior on the job.

"It was telling that poor credit scores were not correlated to theft and other deviant types of work behaviors," said Bernerth. "Most companies attempt to justify the use of credit scores because they think such employees will end up stealing, but our research suggests that might not be the case."

If you have bad credit and think a prospective employer will hold that against you, here are some things you should know: according to the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which is enforced by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and your state Attorney General, an employer must get your permission to look at your credit report.

What to do

If you don’t get a job because of information in your report, the employer must show you the report and tell you how to get a copy from the consumer reporting company. There is no charge for the report if you request it within 60 days of getting notice that you did not get the job.

What if the information in your credit report is wrong? According to the FCRA, both the consumer reporting company and the information provider (that is, the person, company, or organization that provides information about you to a consumer reporting company) are responsible for correcting inaccurate or incomplete information in your report. To protect your rights under the law, contact both the consumer reporting company and the information provider to dispute any information. The FTC has information about disputing credit report errors on its website.

The federal government should be doing more to protect consumers against the phone bill fraud known as cramming, the attorneys general from 17 states say.

"Consumers ... deserve action against the predatory and exploitative charges that drive up phone bills and impose burdensome costs in money, time and energy to correct," New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman said. "My colleagues and I strongly urge the FCC to adopt effective regulations that stop cramming, and provide consumers with relief."

Unauthorized third-party charges on telephone bills cost consumers upwards of $2 billion per year, a recent Senate report found.

‘Cramming’ occurs when third parties – other than the phone service provider – add unauthorized charges to phone bills for non-call related services like email, website hosting, discount buying programs or voicemail services. 

Investigations by the attorneys general, as well as complaints received by their offices, reveal that consumers do not intend to purchase these services and rarely make use of them. In addition, most consumers are unaware that they are exposed to such fraudulent billing practices just by using a wireless or landline service. 

Disclosure not enough

The rules currently under consideration by the FCC would be limited to landlines, and rely only on better phone bill disclosures and options to allow consumers to request blocks on such charges. In comments filed with the federal agency, the attorneys general explained that based on experiences in their states, federal anti-cramming regulations need to be stronger than those proposed. 

Given that landline ‘cramming’ charges are often phony and imposed without consumers’ consent, the AGs urged the FCC to ban all non-telephone, third-party charges on landline telephone bills. If the FCC fails to implement such a ban, then the AGs suggested that landline telephone companies be required to automatically block all third-party charges unless and until the consumer opts to accept such charges for a specific vendor by consenting through a phone call to their telephone company.

Consumers would still be free to purchase these third-party services through more traditional means, such as by credit card.

The attorneys general also called on the FCC to extend its regulations to protect wireless telephone users, as more and more consumers rely exclusively on wireless telephone service. The coalition advised the FCC to require wireless telephone service providers to obtain consumer consent for each third-party charge, verified by either call or text, before being billed.  The Attorneys General also recommended that all wireless consumers be provided the option of blocking all third-party charges from their account, at no cost.

You don't want Spike getting salmonella from his dog food -- and you most certainly don't want to get it yourself.  Yet the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says it's increasingly concerned about humans getting sick from exposure to contaminated pet food.

The agency says it is increasing its inspections of dry pet food and pet treats from distributors, wholesalers and retailers.  There've been numerous recalls of pet food tainted by salmonella and other contaminants in recent years.

While humans usually get salmonella poisoning by eating contaminated food, it's also possible to pick up the disease by handling contaminated pet food.  In January 2006, at least 70 people were sickened by selmonella-tainted pet food from a Pennsylvania plant.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says pet owners should be sure to wash their hands after feeding their pets.  

What to do

Here are some more pointers from the CDC:

Purchase Tip

• Purchase products (canned or bagged) with no visible signs of damage to the packaging, such as dents, tears, or discolorations.

Preparation Tips

• Washing hands is the most important step to prevent illness. Wash your hands for 20 seconds with water and soap right after handling pet food and treats, and especially before preparing, serving or eating food, drinks or preparing baby bottles
• Preferably, people should feed their pet in areas other than the kitchen.
• Wash pet food bowls, dishes and scooping utensils with soap and hot water regularly. Avoid washing these items in the kitchen sink or bathtubs to prevent cross-contamination. In households where there is no alternative, the sink area should be adequately sanitized after these items have been cleaned and removed.
• Infants should not be bathed in kitchen sinks because of the risk of cross-contamination.
• Do not use the pet’s feeding bowl as a scooping utensil – use a clean, dedicated scoop, spoon, or cup.

Storage Tips

• Pet food should not be handled or stored in areas where food for humans is prepared.
• If possible, store dry pet food in its original bag inside a clean, dedicated plastic container with a lid, keeping the top of the bag folded or closed.
• Promptly refrigerate or discard unused, leftover wet pet food and containers (e.g., cans, pouches). Refrigerating foods quickly prevents the growth of most harmful bacteria. Refrigerators should be set at 40 degrees F. The accuracy of the setting should be checked occasionally with a refrigerator thermometer.
• Dry pet food and pet treats should be stored in a cool, dry place under 80 degrees F.

Follow these simple guidelines to prevent getting a Salmonella infection from your pet:

• After contact with animals, their food, or their environments, wash your hands well with soap and running water.
• Clean up after your pet. If you have a cat, scoop the litter box daily and dispose of the stool in a tightly sealed plastic bag. If you have a dog, clean up the stool while on walks or from the yard daily and dispose of the stool in a tightly sealed plastic bag.
• Children younger than 5 years of age should not be allowed to touch or eat pet food, treats, or supplements and should be kept away from pet feeding areas. Young children are especially at risk for illness because their immune systems are still developing and because they are more likely than others to put their fingers or other items into their mouths.