Current Events in August 2012

It isn't just your heart that benefits from the aspirin-a-day your doctor wants you to take.

A large new observational study finds more evidence of an association between daily aspirin use and modestly lower cancer mortality, but suggests any reduction may be smaller than that observed in a recent analysis.

The study, appearing early online in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute (JNCI), provides additional support for a potential benefit of daily aspirin use for cancer mortality, but the authors say important questions remain about the size of the potential benefit.

A recent analysis pooling results from existing randomized trials of daily aspirin for prevention of vascular problems found an estimated 37 percent reduction in cancer mortality among those using aspirin for five years or more. But uncertainty remains about how much daily aspirin use may lower cancer mortality, as the size of this pooled analysis was limited and two very large randomized trials of aspirin taken every other day found no effect on overall cancer mortality.

For the current study, American Cancer Society researchers led by Eric J. Jacobs, Ph.D., analyzed information from 100,139 predominantly elderly participants in the Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition Cohort who reported aspirin use on questionnaires, did not have cancer at the start of the study, and were followed for up to 11 years.

Lowering the risk

They found daily aspirin use was associated with an estimated 16 percent lower overall risk of cancer mortality, both among people who reported taking aspirin daily for at least five years and among those who reported shorter term daily use. The lower overall cancer mortality was driven by about 40 percent lower mortality from cancers of the gastrointestinal tract (such as esophageal, stomach, and colorectal cancer) and about 12 percent lower mortality from cancers outside the gastrointestinal tract.

The reduction in cancer mortality observed in the current study is considerably smaller than the 37 percent reduction reported in the recent pooled analysis of randomized trials. The authors note that their study was observational, not randomized, and therefore could have underestimated or overestimated potential effects on cancer mortality if participants who took aspirin daily had different underlying risk factors for fatal cancer than those who did not. However, the study's large size is a strength in determining how much daily aspirin use might lower cancer mortality.

"Expert committees that develop clinical guidelines will consider the totality of evidence about aspirin's risks and benefits when guidelines for aspirin use are next updated," said Dr. Jacobs. "Although recent evidence about aspirin use and cancer is encouraging, it is still premature to recommend people start taking aspirin specifically to prevent cancer. Even low-dose aspirin can substantially increase the risk of serious gastrointestinal bleeding. Decisions about aspirin use should be made by balancing the risks against the benefits in the context of each individual's medical history. Any decision about daily aspirin use should be made only in consultation with a health care professional."

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has signed disaster designations for an additional 44 counties in 12 states as primary natural disaster areas due to damage and losses caused by drought and excessive heat.

The latest designees are in the states of Arkansas, Iowa, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma and South Dakota.

During the 2012 crop year, USDA has designated 1,628 unduplicated counties across 33 states as disaster areas -- 1,496 due to drought -- making all qualified farm operators in the areas eligible for low-interest emergency loans. The U.S. Drought Monitor indicates that 66 percent of the nation's hay acreage is in an area experiencing drought, while approximately 73 percent of the nation's cattle acreage is in an area experiencing drought.

During the week ending Aug. 5, USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) reported that U.S. soybeans rated 39 percent very poor to poor, surpassing the lowest conditions observed during the drought of 1988. NASS also reported that 50 percent of the U.S. corn crop was rated very poor to poor. In addition, 59 percent of the nation's pastures and rangeland are rated very poor or poor.

New areas  

The latest primary counties and corresponding states designated as disaster areas include:

Arkansas

• Lincoln
• Iowa
• Lyon
• Plymouth
• Sioux
• Woodbury

Illinois

• Lake
• McHenry

Kansas

• Cherokee
• Clay
• Cloud
• Jewell
• Pottawatomie
• Republic
• Riley
• Washington

Kentucky

• Breckinridge
• Grayson
• Minnesota
• Rock

Mississippi

• Coahoma

Nebraska

• Adams
• Boyd
• Burt
• Butler
• Clay
• Colfax
• Cuming
• Dakota
• Dodge
• Hamilton
• Polk
• Saunders
• Thurston
• Webster
• York

New Mexico

• Sandoval

Ohio

• Williams

Oklahoma

• Cleveland
• Lincoln
• Okfuskee
• Oklahoma
• Ottawa
• Pottawatomie
• Seminole

South Dakota

• Minnehaha

Despite predictions that a massive settlement between the states and five mortgage servicers would unleash a flood of foreclosures this year, the flood is more of a trickle.

The latest data from RealtyTrac, a company tracking U.S. foreclosures, shows default notices, scheduled auctions and bank repossessions were reported on 191,925 U.S. properties in July, a decrease of three percent from the previous month and a decrease of 10 percent from July 2011.

The report also shows one in every 686 U.S. housing units with a foreclosure filing during the month.

Uneven descent

“U.S. foreclosure activity continued its uneven descent in July as the overall numbers declined on an annual basis for the 22nd straight month, but properties starting the foreclosure process increased on an annual basis for the third straight month,” said Daren Blomquist, vice president of RealtyTrac. “Recent foreclosure activity patterns vary significantly from state to state, often hinging on the level of dysfunction that exists in each state’s foreclosure process."

For example, Blomquist says in states like Florida, Illinois and New Jersey, where processing and procedural issues slowed foreclosure activity to a crawl last year, foreclosure numbers continue to rebound off those artificially low levels. But in states like Texas, Arizona and Virginia, where the average time to foreclose is well below the national average of 378 days, foreclosure activity continues on a long-term downward trend.

REOs are down

The decline in overall foreclosure activity was driven primarily by a 21 percent year-over-year decrease in bank repossessions (REO) the data show. But no one is suggesting the foreclosure crisis has suddenly been resolved.

Blomquist notes that recent legislation and court rulings could lengthen the foreclosure process in some of the states with the shorter timelines, resulting in a temporary foreclosure lull and subsequent rebound in those states as well.

He also notes the "conspiracy theories" floating around the real estate industry, that banks are purposefully holding back REO properties from the market. The theory goes that banks don't have to show the loss until the property actually sells. Keeping it on the books at an inflated price makes the bank's balance sheet better than it actually is.

Another theory is that banks are trying to control the flow of foreclosures to the market to keep prices on their current slow, steady rise.

'Malevolent masters'

"This is the stuff conspiracy theorists latch on to, always looking for an opportunity to portray the big banks as malevolent masters of the housing market," Blomquist wrote in a recent op-ed piece. "While many of the conspiracy theories involving the big banks are unfounded, there are some rational reasons why banks would want to intentionally restrict the supply of bank-owned properties available for sale."

Meanwhile, the July foreclosure numbers show foreclosure starts increased on a year-over-year basis in 27 states, led by Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Indiana and Massachusetts, which all happen to be judicial foreclosure states. In these states foreclosures were, in fact, put on hold while the settlement was worked out with the five major lenders. Those cases are now moving forward.

California posted the nation’s highest state foreclosure rate in July despite an 11 percent decrease in foreclosure activity from the previous month and a 25 percent drop from July 2011. One in every 325 California housing units had a foreclosure filing during the month, more than twice the national average.

The state where the foreclosure problem is almost non-existent is North Dakota, where the oil and gas boom has transformed the economy. In July, there were only three foreclosure filings in the entire state, for a rate of one in 105,833 housing units.

Perhaps no state has been hit harder by the foreclosure crisis than Nevada. A huge percentage of the state's homeowners have found themselves in a distressed situation, and the pain continues.

Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto says the pain is just made worse when homeowners fall for mortgage modification scams, which have been around since the foreclosure crisis began five years ago. In a high-profile prosecution, Masto sued a company called Save Your House and secured restitution for a dozen victims.

Rare restitution

“I am pleased to provide these 12 victims with restitution checks, especially since receiving restitution in full is very rare,” said Masto. “My office will continue to investigate and prosecute loan modification scams and similar crimes. Protecting Nevadans remains a top priority for us.”

Masto charged defendants Jesus Baca and Ramon Dy-Ragos, co-managers of “Save Your House” and Luis Baca, an employee of the company, with making false representations that they were capable of saving customers’ homes from foreclosure and collected payments for work that was never performed.

Victims scammed by the now defunct Las Vegas company will split $43,772 in restitution with checks ranging as high as $10,750 to $500. The average check is approximately $3,650.

Since the foreclosure crisis began, it has been the states, not the federal government, that have taken the most action to protect homeowners from fraudulent modification and foreclosures rescue schemes. Besides Nevada, Illinois, Indiana, New Jersey, Florida, Colorado, Ohio and New York have brought multiple prosecutions.

Avoid the rip-off

The best way to avoid falling victim to a shady mortgage modification or foreclosure rescue scheme is to watch for these tell-tale signs:

• The company calls itself a “mortgage consultant,” “foreclosure service,” “loan modification specialist” or something similar
• The company or specialist requests a fee before providing services
• The company or specialist tells homeowners to make their home mortgage payments directly to the individual or company and not to the mortgage lender
• The company or specialist tells the homeowner to transfer his property deed or title to the company
• The company promises “guaranteed loan modifications.” No one can “guarantee” a loan modification or can “guarantee” the ability to stop a foreclosure.

Distressed homeowners are particularly vulnerable to these schemes because they are often desperate and grasping at straws. Keep in mind a mortgage modification is a complex process that can be filled with frustration and hiring one of these companies isn't going to help.

To receive reliable information and assistance, the best place to start is with the government's Making Home Affordable program. 

An employment background screening company that provides consumer reports to companies nationwide will pay $2.6 million to settle Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charges that it violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by failing to use reasonable procedures to assure the maximum possible accuracy of information it provided, failing to give consumers copies of their reports and failing to reinvestigate consumer disputes, as required by law.

The case against HireRight Solutions, Inc. represents the first time the FTC has charged an employment background screening firm with violating the FCRA, and is the second-largest civil penalty that the FTC has obtained under the Act. Only the 2006 $10 million civil penalty against consumer data broker ChoicePoint, Inc. was larger. The Department of Justice filed the complaint and proposed order against HireRight on the FTC's behalf. Under the settlement, the company also is barred from continuing its alleged illegal practices.

Background checker

In its capacity as a consumer reporting agency, HireRight Solutions, provides background reports that contain information about prospective and current employees to help thousands of employers make decisions about hiring and other employment-related issues. Under the FCRA, the company's reports qualify as "consumer reports." They contain public-record information, including the individuals' criminal history.

The FTC alleges that in many cases, when it provided consumer reports to employers, HireRight Solutions failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that the information in the reports was current and reflected updates, such as the expungement of criminal records. Because of this, the FTC charged, employers sometimes received information that incorrectly listed criminal convictions on individuals' records.

In addition, according to the FTC's complaint, HireRight Solutions failed to follow reasonable procedures to prevent the same criminal offense information from being included in a consumer report multiple times, failed to follow reasonable procedures to prevent obviously inaccurate consumer report information from being provided to employers, and in numerous cases even included the records of the wrong person. The FTC alleged that these failures led to consumers being denied employment or other employment-related benefits.

FCRA requirements

Under the FCRA, consumer reporting agencies must allow consumers to access their own information and dispute any inaccuracies. To do this, the consumer reporting agency must clearly and adequately disclose information in their file to a consumer who requests it. Next, within 30 days of being notified that a consumer wants to dispute the information in his or her report, the consumer reporting agency must conduct a reasonable investigation to determine whether the information is inaccurate, record the status of the information, or delete it from the file. Finally, the consumer reporting agency must notify consumers in writing of the results of this reinvestigation of their file within five days of when it's completed.

In numerous instances, HireRight Solutions failed to comply with these FCRA requirements, the FTC alleges. This includes failing to conduct investigations of disputed items in a consumer's file after being notified of a dispute, requiring consumers who wanted to dispute information in their file to have a copy of the report before the company would start a reinvestigation and telling consumers who did not have a copy of their report to request one before they would reinvestigate, delaying the dispute process and making it more difficult. In addition, according to the FTC, HireRight Solutions closed complaint investigations without providing written notice of the results to consumers, as required.

Finally, the complaint contend that HireRight Solutions failed to provide consumers with written notification that it had reported public record information about them to employers when it was being reported, as the FCRA requires.

In addition to the $2.6 million civil penalty, the settlement prohibits HireRight Solutions from:

• failing to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure that its consumer report information is as accurate as possible;
• failing to provide consumers with information in their files in a timely manner;
• requiring consumers to obtain a copy of their report before the company will conduct a dispute reinvestigation;
• failing to provide consumers with the results of a dispute reinvestigation; and
• failing to comply with the requirements for consumer reporting agencies that use public record information.

Can it be true? A new report says restaurants we might think of as fast food are steadily improving their offerings and are competing with full-service restaurants in terms of food quality, decor and variety.

The report comes from research firm Technomic, which uses the phrase "limited-service restaurants" (LSR) to describe fast-food and fast-casual restaurants. A decade ago, LSRs had 47% of the food business and full-service eateries (FSR) had 53%.  

The percentages have now flipped -- with limited-service joints edging out the full-service 53%-47%.

Why? Well, it could be that a sluggish economy is driving more people to choose lower-priced fare. But it could also be that the food is getting better at the limited-service hang-outs.

But sales figures aren't everything. We ran a computerized sentiment analysis on about 2 million consumer postings to social media over the last year and found that things not so rosy. Positive net sentiment was at a dismal 11% this month and never got higher than 23% during the last 12 months, as shown in this chart:

So just what are fast-casual restaurants?

They are those eateries that seem to be a couple of notches higher than fast-food places in terms of food quality and variety. Think of places like Panera or Boston Market, as these types of locations are continuing to gain market share. 

Fast & affordable

ConsumerAffairs spoke with Kelly Weikel, author of the Technomic report, to get a better sense of just what fast-food and fast-casual restaurants are doing to give FSRs a run for its money.

"Consumers can get a high-quality meal, fast and for an affordable price at LSRs, primarily at fast casuals, but increasingly to QSRs (Quick Service Restaurants) as well, as they seek to compete," she said.

"Fast-casuals in particular are also doing a really good job appealing to consumers on the experience level...creating an ambiance and format that often provide some service elements, along with an atmosphere that is suitable for a wide variety of occasions; hanging out with friends, grabbing a quick snack, studying or working," Weikel added.

The improvements among fast-casual restaurants lead the way for other companies in the LSR industry to step their game up. For example, because a restaurant like Noodle Company seems to be moving towards a more FSR dining experience in terms of variety and decor, places like Wendy's are trying to do the same.

"LSRs have always been striving to gain greater share, but it was after the advent of the fast-casual segment and its impressive growth that LSRs starting to shift," said Weikel. "Now fast-casuals are leveraging their successful LSR service model and improving upon it while QSRs are trying to steal a page from their playbook and implement that same thing at their restaurants."

Weidel may be onto something but the term "fast food" continues to have a negative connotation for consumers, as we found in our sentiment analysis. The outstanding characteristic assigned by most consumers was "fast."

Shared experience

Weikel says that both fast-casual and fast-food restaurants will continue to borrow ideas from each other to better meet customer need and expectation.

"Each one has and will continue to look at the strengths of the other and try to integrate them into their model, Weikel explains." So for QSRs we see this now through pushing out more premium options, healthy options, upscaling and remodeling units, etc. At fast-casuals it's around creating a strong value proposition and improving convenience. It will evolve as each segment identifies new opportunities."

And which fast-food and fast casual brands are making the best strides according to Technomic?

"The interesting thing here," states Weikel, "Is that the important shifts can even be seen, and in many cases may even start at the major brand level. We've seen this most notable with McDonald's."

"They starting upscaling the menu and decor long time ago and continue to evolve in both areas. Jack in the Box has done a lot of remodels and menu upgrades in recent months in years; rolled out reformulated burger patties, improved buns and new saucing procedures as part of a yearlong effort to upgrade its core menu items and the overall guest experience," she says.

Weikel also mentions that Burger King has taken pages from fast-casual restaurants like Chipotle, by adding fresher ingredients and fulfilling the need for customization and interactive experience through their Whopper Bar.

Convenience stores

Weikel notes that consumers are also choosing convenience stores for their daily meal needs more now than ever.

Although convenience stores don't fall under the LSR category, Weikel says they are making leaps and bounds in terms of providing the necessary balance of quality foods items and fast service.

"They've developed so many concept, menu and service elements that have put them on par with conventional QSRs. Additionally; they pioneered interactive, touchscreen ordering formats in their category."

"In recent years, they've also gone from standard c-store fare to an extensive menu that serves all three dayparts; features beverage selections that mimic restaurant offerings; promotes meal deals; and strongly emphasizes freshly prepared, customizable offerings," she says.

So fortunately, consumers no longer have to break the bank or carve out the necessary time to go to a full-service restaurant, as fast-food and casual-food dining places are amping up efforts to appear more upscale.

Weikel also says there will be a blurring of the lines when it comes to the differences between fast-food establishments and fast-casual establishments.

Maybe so, but the entire category gets lumped into "fast food" in the minds of many consumers and is likely to be something the industry will need to do with as time goes by.  Take a look at these comments we gathered over the last few days and it's obvious fast-food and fast-casual restaurants need to tend to their cooking more carefully than ever.

Not only do you not need cash, soon you won't even need plastic to buy a cup of coffee at Starbucks. The coffee chain has linked up with Square as a means to accept payment from its customers.

Square might be best known for its credit card reader for the iPhone, iPad, and Android devices, allowing anyone to accept credit cards anywhere, anytime. Pay with Square is a way for consumers to pay at participating merchants with just their names. The transaction is then recorded on the consumer's stored credit card.

Because of the just-announced deal, Starbucks says its customers will be able to use Pay with Square at 7,000 participating company-operated U.S. Starbucks stores later this fall. They can also find nearby Starbucks locations within the Square Directory.

Square will also begin processing Starbucks' credit and debit card transactions in the U.S. Starbucks said giving that business to Square will help it reduce its payment processing costs.

Growing relationship

The relationship will get even closer as Starbucks invests $25 million in Square and Starbucks chairman, president and CEO Howard Schultz will join Square’s board of directors.

“As the largest retail mobile payment platform in the U.S., we’re excited and proud to accept payments with Square,” Shultz said. “The evolving social and digital media platforms and highly innovative and relevant payment capabilities are causing seismic changes in consumer behavior and creating equally disruptive opportunities for business. Both Starbucks and Square take a similar approach when building products and running our businesses, and together we can bring the best possible payment experience to Starbucks customers.”

How Pay with Square works

To use Pay with Square, consumers download the company's app to their mobile phone. As part of the registration process, you enter a credit card number that you want to use for transaction.

You enter your name and upload your picture. Then when you arrive at the register of a participating merchant, you just say your name. The cashier brings up your account showing your name and photo, confirming it's you. The purchase is then automatically added to your account.

The Pay with Square Directory provides a list of nearby businesses that are part of the Pay with Square system.

It's been 15 years since the Federal Communications Commission set its radiation standards for cell phones, and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) says that was so long ago the standards may not be adequate to protect public health.

Among GAO’s top findings: The Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) radiofrequency (RF) energy exposure limit may not reflect the latest research, and testing requirements may not reflect maximum exposures in all usage conditions. FCC set its RF energy exposure limit for mobile phones in 1996 based on recommendations from federal health and safety agencies and international organizations.

A lot has changed since then. 

This is not a new argument. The Environmental Working Group has been saying since 2009 that the FCC’s cell phone rules are based on old science and outmoded assumptions and are in serious need of an overhaul.

“The FCC has been wearing a blindfold for more than a decade, pretending that while cell phones were revolutionizing how we communicate, the agency didn't have to take a hard look at what this meant for its so-called safety standards,” said Renee Sharp, director of Environmental Working Group’s California office and senior scientist.

Grave oversight

“Finally, the FCC has been taken to task for this grave oversight, and we hope and expect it will use the GAO’s findings to update its safety standards for wireless devices.”

The FCC’s current standards – which have never been updated – allow 20 times more radiation to reach the head than the body as a whole, do not account for the possible risks to children’s developing brains and smaller bodies, and consider only the impact of short-term cell phone use, not frequent calling over decades. 

“In 1996, tweens and teens were not consumers of wireless technology, but today it’s hard to find a group of young people who aren’t armed with the latest mobile device,” said Sharp. “Those populations who are now talking and texting daily were not considered by the FCC when it devised its safety standards fifteen years ago.”

The GAO issued its report following a year-long investigation into the adequacy of the FCC’s rules. The report was requested by Reps. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.), members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee that has oversight authority over the FCC and the telecommunications industry.

The GAO recommended that the FCC:

• Formally reassess its current RF energy exposure limit – taking into account the effects on human health, the associated costs and benefits and the opinions of relevant health and safety agencies – and revise the limit if necessary.

• Reassess whether mobile phone testing requirements correctly measure maximum RF energy exposure as cell phones are actually used, particularly when they are held against the body, and update its testing requirements as needed.

“We’re thankful to Representatives Markey, Waxman and Eshoo for requesting this important report,” said Jason Rano, EWG’s director of government affairs. “They have all been champions of public health and the public’s right to know, and the information provided in this report demonstrates the need for the FCC to review its cell phone safety standards.”

Fact sheet suit

The GAO report comes just days before the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is slated to hear a cell phone case that challenges the right of the city of San Francisco to require cell phone vendors to provide consumers with a one-page fact sheet about potential health risks of cell phone radiation and advice on safer cell phone use.

The Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association, the cell phone industry’s leading trade group, is suing the city to prevent the law, enacted in July 2011, from being enforced. The case is scheduled to be heard on Aug. 9.

In May of last year, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified cell phone radiation as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer associated with wireless phone use.

All the political blather about jobs is fine but a key group of voters -- employed baby boomers -- say they want the candidates to better explain their plans for Social Security and Medicare, which will help them determine their votes.

The particular pressures facing boomer voters – across party lines – are reflected in a new "Anxiety Index," which measures their worries on issues including prices rising faster than incomes (75% worry somewhat or very often about this), health expenses (62%), not having financial security in retirement (73%) and paying too much in taxes (71%).  

By comparison, 32% of these boomer voters regularly worry about being able to find a full-time job with benefits or keep up with their mortgage or rent (30%), issues that are more widely discussed as leading economic issues for voters in the coming election.

“We know the issue of jobs is very important to voters age 50-plus, but any meaningful discussion of the economy and this year’s election has to include the future of Social Security and Medicare,” said Nancy LeaMond, AARP Executive Vice President.  “For these voters, ‘retirement security’ and ‘economic security’ are largely the same thing.”

Work forever

Non-retired boomer voters are pessimistic about retirement.  Almost three-in-four (72%) believe they will have to delay retirement, and almost two-in-three (65%) worry they won't have enough to retire.  Half of these voters (50%) don't think they'll ever be able to retire. They overwhelmingly (59%) believe the recent economic downturn will force them to rely more on Social Security and Medicare.

Anxiety about retirement security is a main driver for all voters 50+.  Nearly seven-in-ten (69%) of retired voters 50+ worry about prices rising faster than their incomes, and almost half (48%) worry about having unaffordable health expenses, despite the relative security provided by Medicare.  

Only four-in-ten (42%) African-American voters 50+ are confident that they will have enough money to live comfortably throughout their retirement.  Hispanic voters 50+ overwhelmingly say that the recent economic downturn negatively impacted their personal circumstances (84%) and will force them to rely more on Social Security and Medicare (69%).

Dissatisfied with "leaders"

Economic anxieties among voters 50+ are leading to a general dissatisfaction with political leaders.  Voters 50+ are as likely to say that their personal economic circumstances were negatively affected by political gridlock in Washington (78%) as by the economic downturn (77%).  

Almost half (49%) of these voters disapprove of President Obama’s job performance, and more than eight-in-ten (81%) disapprove of Congress.  As of now, voters 50+ evenly are split in their presidential vote preference (45% for President Obama, 45% for Governor Romney, and 10% not sure).

The concerns of 50+ voters highlight the importance of Social Security and Medicare as election issues.  They think the next president and Congress need to strengthen Social Security (91%) and Medicare (88%).  They also overwhelmingly (91%) think that these issues are too big for either party to fix alone and require Republicans and Democrats to come together.

“The message from voters 50+ is clear,” added LeaMond.  “In a razor-tight election, candidates have a major opportunity to reach key voters by speaking about their plans on Social Security and Medicare – and they are making a huge gamble if they ignore them.”

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has mailed 503 refund checks to consumers who were allegedly tricked into paying a fee to collect a fake multi-million-dollar sweepstakes prize. 

The FTC says the operators of the scam, collectively known as Prize Information Bureau, sent personalized mailers -- some with fictitious government agency names and official-looking seals -- to hundreds of thousands of consumers. 

Consumers are receiving refund checks totaling more than $183,000. The amount varies based upon the amount of each consumer's loss. Those who receive the checks from the FTC's refund 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. Consumers with questions should call the refund administrator, Gilardi & Co., LLC, at 1-888-251-6826, or go here. 

To learn how to avoid these kinds of scams, read the FTC's Prize Offers: You Don't Have to Pay to Play.

We really are a nation on the move. 

Sixty-two percent of adults say they walked for at least once for 10 minutes or more in the previous week in 2010, compared with 56 percent in 2005, according to a new Vital Signs report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 

However, less than half (48 percent) of all adults get enough physical activity to improve their health, according to data from the National Health Interview Survey.  For substantial health benefits, the 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans recommends at least 2 ½ hours per week of moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity, such as brisk walking. This activity should be done for at least 10 minutes at a time. 

“More than 145 million adults are now getting some of their physical activity by walking,” said CDC Director Thomas R. Frieden, M.D., M.P.H. “People who are physically active live longer and are at lower risk for heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, depression and some cancers.  Having more places for people to walk in our communities will help us continue to see increases in walking, the most popular form of physical activity among American adults.” 

Across the board 

The Vital Signs report notes that increases in walking were seen in nearly all groups surveyed. Walkers were defined as those who walked for at least one session of 10 minutes or more for transportation, fun or exercise. 

In the West, roughly 68 percent of people walk -- more than any other region in the country. People living in the South had the largest increase in the percentage of people who walk -- up by nearly eight percentage points from about 49 percent in 2005 to 57 percent in 2010.  The report also found that more adults with arthritis or hypertension are walking; there was no increase in walking among adults with type 2 diabetes. 

“It is encouraging to see these increases in the number of adults who are now walking,” said Joan M. Dorn, Ph.D., branch chief of the Physical Activity and Health Branch in CDC’s Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity and Obesity. “But there is still room for improvement. People need more safe and convenient places to walk. People walk more where they feel protected from traffic and safe from crime.  Communities can be designed or improved to make it easier for people to walk to the places they need and want to go.”  

Increasing access

The report highlights ways to provide better spaces and more places for walking. These include: 

• State and local governments can consider joint use agreements to let community residents use local school tracks or gyms after classes have finished.
• Employers can create walking paths around or near the work place and promote them with signs and route maps.
• Citizens can participate in local planning efforts that identify best sites for walking paths and priorities for new sidewalks.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has updated its international money transfer rule to make the transfer process easier for institutions that handle 100 or fewer remittances a year. 

“We recognize that in regulations, one size does not necessarily fit all,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “The final remittance rule will protect the overwhelming majority of consumers while making the process easier for community banks, credit unions and other small providers that do not send many remittance transfers.” 

The rule, which will take effect Feb. 7, 2013, implements new protections that require remittance transfer providers to disclose fees upfront, as well as the exchange rate and the amount to be received by the recipient. 

Consumer protections 

Disclosures must generally be provided when the consumer first requests a transfer and again when payment is made. The rule also provides consumers with error resolution and cancellation rights. 

The Bureau concluded that those institutions that consistently conduct 100 or fewer remittance transfers per year do not provide transfers in the “normal course of business” and therefore are not subject to the new requirements. 

However, if a company that provided 100 or fewer remittance transfers in the previous year provides more than 100 remittance transfers in the current year, the rule provides a reasonable transition period to come into compliance. 

The final rule also adjusts certain rules regarding remittance transfers that consumers schedule several days in advance of the transfer. The changes are designed to address concerns that remittance transfer providers might stop offering transfers scheduled in advance due to concerns about compliance costs under the new requirements. 

Consumers transfer tens of billions of dollars from the United States to foreign countries each year. Prior to the passage of the Dodd-Frank Act, these international money transfers were generally excluded from existing federal consumer protection regulations. 

To remedy this, the Dodd-Frank Act expanded the scope of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act to provide protections for senders of remittance transfers.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke says smarter, better informed consumers will make the U.S. economy stronger.

In a speech to educators, Bernanke stressed the need to include financial education as part of school curriculum to help students achieve a greater level of financial literacy.

“Financial education supports not only individual well-being, but also the economic health of our nation,” Bernanke said in a speech in Washington. “As the recent financial crisis illustrates, consumers who can make informed decisions about financial products and services not only serve their own best interests, but, collectively, they also help promote broader economic stability.”

Bernanke said a campaign to teach people smart financial planning--such as budgeting, saving for emergencies, and preparing for retirement -- could not only raise living standards but help people weather financial shocks. Bernanke said research by Federal Reserve Board staff members on the effectiveness of financial education for young military personnel found that those who had taken a high school financial education course were more likely to save regularly.

Essential skills

“Effective financial education is not just about teaching students about financial products or performing financial calculations,” Bernanke said. “It also involves teaching them the essential skills and concepts they will need to make major financial choices.”

For example, he said high school students might not recall specific information from a lesson about loans a year later when they go to get their first car loan or student loan. However, if they understand and remember some basic ideas, like the importance of shopping around for a loan to get the lowest interest rate, to review the fees charged, and to know how to contact financial counselors and advisers, they will be more likely to make a good decision.

Improved financial literacy might also keep them out of trouble while they are still students. With student loan debt mounting at an alarming rate, Bernanke suggests students approach the funding of their education much like an economist would.

Avoiding student loan debt traps

“Students with some exposure to economic thinking will be more likely to conceptualize their spending on postsecondary education as an investment in their own human capital and choose their school, course of study, means of paying for their education, and profession with that thought in mind,” he said. “Likewise, the economic tool of cost-benefit analysis should help students make sounder personal and financial decisions.”

Bernanke says the Fed has identified five areas where American consumers need to improve their knowledge and skill: earning and income, spending, saving and investing, borrowing and protecting. He says it's unrealistic to expect different behavior until consumers gain knowledge and understanding of these concepts.

“For example, in the category of earning and income, students are expected to know the difference between gross pay and net pay, and information about benefits and taxes,” Bernanke said. “With this knowledge, they can understand their pay stubs and take full advantage of their workplace benefits.”

Currently, Bernanke said these five core competencies are incorporated in the National Standards for Personal Finance being developed by the Council for Economic Education.

In what it calls an effort to “prevent children from suffering further harm,” U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) staff has filed an administrative complaint today against Zen Magnets LLC, of Denver, alleging that their products contain defects in the design, packaging, warnings and instructions, which pose a substantial risk of injury to the public. 

The complaint seeks -- among other things -- an order that the firm stop selling Zen Magnets Rare Earth Magnet Balls, notify the public of the defect and offer consumers a full refund. 

Eleven manufacturers and importers of sets of small, powerful, individual magnets, all of which are made in China, have voluntarily agreed to the CPSC staff's requests that they stop the manufacture, import, distribution and sale of their magnet products. Zen Magnets and Maxfield & Oberton (importer of Buckyballs and Buckycubes) are the only companies that have refused to comply, to date. 

Zen Magnets are powerful, chrome-plated, rare earth magnet balls about 5 millimeters in diameter that are made in China and sold online in sets of 72, 216, and 1,728. 

Swallowing hazard 

The complaint explains that when two or more magnets are swallowed, they can pinch or trap the intestinal walls or other digestive tissue between them resulting in acute and long-term health consequences. Magnets that attract through the intestines result in progressive tissue injury. 

Such conditions can lead to infection, sepsis and possibly death. Medical professionals may not be aware of the dangers posed by ingestion and the corresponding need for immediate medical intervention in such cases, exacerbating the life-threatening internal injuries. 

According to the complaint, CPSC has received reports of tweens and teenagers using similar products to mimic piercings of the tongue, lip or cheek, which have resulted in incidents where the product is unintentionally inhaled and swallowed. 

Advertising 

The complaint alleges that in 2009 and 2010, the firm advertised and marketed the product as "fun to play with" strong rare earth magnets that "look good on cute people." It further alleges that in October 2011, the staff notified the firm that the product did not comply with the federal mandatory toy standard, ASTM Standard F963-08. The standard requires that such magnets not be marketed for children younger than 14. 

The complaint also alleges that the firm included a small slip of paper in some of the models that read: "Warning: DO NOT SWALLOW MAGNETS. How old do you have to be to play with these? Dunno. 14 years old in the U.S. for a strong magnetic toy, unless it's not a toy, then no age limit, but they're fun magnets spheres (sic), aren't they a toy? Unless it's a "science kit" then the government age recommendation is 8+. But really, it's whatever age at which a person stops swallowing non-foods." 

In 2011, Zen Magnets began to advertise their product as a "magnetic science kit." While the packaging warns that "strong magnets can cause fatal intestinal pinching," and advises to "keep away from kids and pets who don't understand these dangers," it also cautions consumers to "place swallowing magnets on your don't do list along with breathing water, drinking poison, and running into traffic." 

The complaint notes that recently, the firm posted on its Website that "CPSC recommends minimum age of 14." 

Defective warning 

CPSC staff says in its complaint that Zen Magnets warning and labeling are defective because they do not effectively communicate the hazard associated with ingestion of the product. The complaint further alleges that the product's design and packaging are also defective because they fail to prevent children from gaining access to the product, and do not allow parents or caregivers to know readily if a magnet is missing and is potentially within the reach of a young child. 

The complaint contends that once separated from the packaging, the individual magnets themselves display no warning against ingestion or aspiration, and the small size of the individual magnets precludes the addition of such a warning. 

The commission staff proposed the administrative complaint against Zen Magnets after discussions with the company failed to result in a voluntary recall plan that CPSC staff considered adequate. 

The Federal Reserve pretty much threw the book at MetLife for failing to adequately oversee its mortgage loan servicing and foreclosure processing operations.

The $3.2 million fine levied against the company was the maximum allowed for what are deemed unsafe and unsound practices in regard to handling mortgages and foreclosures.

The Fed took action against MetLife in April 2011 and was one of 14 corrective actions issued against large mortgage servicers for the way they handled residential mortgage loans servicing and foreclosure processing. The deficiencies came to light during reviews conducted from November 2010 to January 2011.

Complaints

Complaints to ConsumerAffairs have cataloged homeowner frustrations in trying to modify mortgages.

“Since 2008, I have been told I'm approved for a loan modification and my file has been lost at least 15 or 16 times,” Chris, of Murrells Inlet, SC, reported back in March. “I was told all along by their people not to make payments as they had to 'lock the amount to modify.' Then after four years, they tell me I have to pay the forbearance of almost $100,000 accumulated due to their malfeasance. After 4-plus years I'm losing my home, that I personally built.”

The Board's assessment order against MetLife contains terms similar to those taken in February 2012 against five other mortgage servicing firms. The Fed's assessments against these five organizations were issued in conjunction with a comprehensive settlement agreement between the companies and the state attorneys general and the U.S. Department of Justice. That historic settlement required the firms to provide payments and designated types of monetary assistance and remediation to residential mortgage borrowers.

More to come?

MetLife was not a party to that settlement in February. However, the Fed's monetary sanctions against MetLife leave the door open for a similar settlement under which MetLife agrees to provide borrower assistance or remediation.

If by June 30, 2013, MetLife settles with the attorneys general and Justice Department, MetLife must pay the Fed an additional amount to be used for borrower assistance or remediation in compliance with the settlement agreement.

If there is no settlement agreement by June 30, 2013, MetLife will be required to pay the Fed the portion of the $3.2 million that it has not expended by August 6, 2014, to pay for counseling for distressed homeowners.

The Fed said it is acting now because MetLife has announced plans to sell its subsidiary bank's deposit-taking operations. Once that sale takes place the Fed will lose its jurisdiction in the case.

The economy continues to muddle along and it doesn’t appear a solid pickup is in the cards. 

In fact, Fannie Mae’s Economic & Strategic Research Group says recent data indicate a slowdown in economic activity for the remainder of 2012, although modest growth is still expected. 

Breaking pace with a strong first quarter, consumer spending has weakened in recent months as the consumer confidence index fell to the lowest level since January. Contributing to the downturn is an uncertain job market.  The June employment report showed significantly fewer hires compared with the first quarter monthly average, and continuing concern regarding the European debt predicament and domestic financial markets may suppress a meaningful increase in private payrolls before the end of the year.  

Lower growth forecast 

In light of these trends, the Group has revised down the 2012 gross domestic product (GDP) growth projection from 2.2 percent to 2.0 percent. 

“The data from the past month collectively point to decelerating economic growth, but growth nonetheless,” said Fannie Mae Chief Economist Doug Duncan. “It’s now clear that our bias toward downside risks noted in the June forecast have materialized, pushing down our already modest growth projections.  However, despite signs of deteriorating momentum for economic activity, housing continues to be a bright spot as news from the housing market has been relatively upbeat, presenting a rare upside boost to the economy.” 

A bright spot 

The housing market continues to show positive signs.  Compared with the same time last year, home sales increased by nine percent and single-family housing starts are approximately 20 percent higher, though the levels are still considered below healthy norms.  Residential investment is expected to increase this year but from a very low base, and is expected to contribute to economic growth for the first time since 2005. 

According to Fannie Mae's June 2012 National Housing Survey, homeowners are showing greater confidence in one-year-ahead home price expectations, and their broad attitudes regarding the housing market continue to improve.  The share of polled consumers who say they would buy a home if they were going to move increased by six percentage points to the highest level seen in the survey’s two-year history.  This is likely due in part to low interest rates and the assumption that home prices have hit bottom.

When children head back to school, they almost always load their books and other school supplies in back packs.

A properly sized backpack with the right weight can be a very good way to carry school necessities. Unfortunately, many kids overload their backpacks and suffer back pain as a result.

Health experts say a child should not carry more than 15 percent of his body weight in a backpack. That means if the child weights 80 pounds, the backpack shouldn't weigh more than 12 pounds.

Backpack injuries

Most kids, however, load all their books into their backpacks and are carrying too much weight on their shoulders. According to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) more than 13,700 kids, ages 5-18 years old, are treated in hospitals and doctors' offices for injuries related to backpacks.

"When used correctly, backpacks can be a good way to carry the necessities of the school day," said Dr. Melanie Kinchen, an orthopaedic surgeon. "Backpack injuries are commonly caused by wearing overloaded backpacks, as well as lifting and carrying them incorrectly.”

Parents and teachers should guide kids to take preventative measures. Start by choosing a backpack that is appropriately sized for your child or have her use a rolling backpack as an alternative to carrying the heavy load on her shoulders."

Safety tips

The American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons recommends the following safety tips to help eliminate pain and discomfort due to backpacks:

• Always use both shoulder straps to keep the weight of the backpack better distributed.
• Tighten the straps and use waist strap if the bag has one.
• Remove or organize items if too heavy and place biggest items closest to the back.
• Lift properly and bend at the knees to pick up a backpack.
• Carry only those items that are required for the day; leave books at home or school, if possible.
• Keep walkways clear of backpacks to avoid tripping over them.

Parents also can help with backpack-related pain:

• Encourage your child or teenager to tell you about pain or discomfort that may be caused by a heavy backpack, like numbness or tingling in the arms or legs.
• Purchase a backpack appropriate for the size of your child and look for any changes in your child's posture when he or she wears the backpack.
• Watch your child put on or take off the backpack to see if it is a struggle. Do not ignore red marks on the shoulders if your child or teenager expresses discomfort.
• Talk to the school about lightening the load. Keep the load under 10-15 percent of the child's body weight.
• Be sure the school allows students to stop at their lockers throughout the day.

The Academy also says teachers can help by remaining aware of how much weight children are carrying in their backpack and planning lessons to avoid a heavy load of books. Also, teachers should allow enough time for kids to stop by their lockers to drop off books.

Aahhhh, remember riding your bike as a kid -- the sheer excitement you used to get when you would hop on, pick a destination, then peddle somewhere out of adult view.

Well, bicycles have come a long way since most of our childhoods.

The banana-seat bike, evolved into the 10-speed, which in turned morphed into the mountain bike and improvments continued on from there.

Today, bicycles can be as expensive as a used car, and with the number of riding enthusiasts increasing by the day, it doesn't look like the evolution of bicycles is stopping anytime soon.

Take the "Gravity Bike" for example. It has no chain or pedals, and its tiny seat hugs the back of the wheel. And guess what? The thing has been known to reach speeds of up to 60 mph.

The idea behind the futuristic bike, built by cycle enthusiast Jeff Tiedeken, is for it to maximize any hill or downward angle whether big or small. Theoretically, since the bike is free of peddles, chains and other body parts, it's much lighter and can pick up speed on a hills much better than a traditional bike.

While the bicycle is obviously not for riding on hilly trails, it's good for city bicycling or just going for a joy-ride.  And since it’s lighter than most bikes, it won't be too hard to push it up a hill if you need to.

However its design is a bit dull, and although The Gravity Bike is considered one of the more futuristic bikes being built, it actually resembles something out of the early nineteenth century. It’s not yet in U.S. retail stores.

The Turbo

Next up on our bikes-of-the-future list is the Turbo, made by popular bike builders Specialized.

According to the company, the "Specialized Turbo" is supposed to be the best and fastest electronic bicycle ever built, with speeds being able to reach up to 28 mph, but what company wouldn't say their product is the best?

It includes a 250-watt motor, a compact but powerful rechargeable battery and a handlebar that allows you to manipulate the LED lights in both the front and the rear of the bike.

Reports say the bicycle uses front brakes, but riders can also activate the back brake by pressing a button on the handlebars. Also, because the bike has a smaller battery than other electronic bicycles, it's said to be much lighter and easier to handle on the roads.

It's rumored the Specialized Turbo will be released in Europe first, then make its way to the United States in the future, although no official word or prices have been released just yet. Be on the lookout.

Di-Cycle

Then of course there is the Di-Cycle. When one thinks of what a bicycle in the future would look like, this is probably it. With its spaceship-like circular frame, and airplane-like hand controls, the bike resembles something that would be heavily coveted by Elroy Jetson himself.

The coolest part of this strange-looking bike is that it travels on both land and water. If that's not futuristic I don't know what is.

The half-bike-half-sea-cycle was initially created for residents in the Helmond section of the Netherlands who have to travel their city by both land and water.

There is no doubt that anyone riding the Di-Cycle will get loads of attention because it truly doesn't look anything like a bicycle. Also because of its sheer size, it's not a bike one can just hop on and start riding, as there will have to be some sort of bike training to control its great height and width.

According to reports, the Di-Cycle is still in the design phases but should be released to the buying public in the near future.

Cardboard

But if the Di-Cycle is the best in bicycle ingenuity, then Izhar Gafni's cardboard bike is the best in simplicity.

That's right, the bike is actually made of cardboard and is somehow still able to be waterproof. And get this folks --  the bike costs only $9, which it should since it’s made out of the same stuff your last moving box was made of.

Since the bike is made from recycled cardboard, consumers can peddle the day away while simultaneously being green and helping the environment.

The creator of the bicycle expressed how he came up with the idea in a recent statement.

"I really love bicycles, and when I worked in the United States I inquired in California to see if anyone has already thought of the concept of a cardboard bicycle," said Gafni in an interview with the press.

"To my delight, I only discovered similar concepts based on bamboo. But when I started asking engineers about the possibility of producing a cardboard bicycle, I was sent away and told that the realization of my idea is impossible.

"One day I was watching a documentary about the production of the first jumbo jet, and an engineer on the team had said that when everyone tells him that what he is doing is impossible, it makes it even clearer to him that he is progressing in the right direction," he said.

Some reports indicate the bike will cost consumers $9 to purchase, while others suggest it will cost more, but either way the idea is a good one, and once released it could catch on among people who want to travel with their bicycles.

It's also ideal for those that don't want to pay a lot of money for an expensive bike they'll barely use.

The cardboard bike can fold up and be carried with ease says Gafni, and will be available for retail purchase in the coming future.

So keep your eyes peeled for these new bike releases, as each one should make your riding experience even more pleasurable.

Sometimes couples stay together after the magic wears off.  That's not happening to Google and Apple, though. The Silicon Valley giants are splitting the blanket and this time it's YouTube that's being left at the curb.

Apple is stripping YouTube from iOS 6, which means users of iPhones and other devices won't have the default ability to watch YouTube videos.

Nobody is saying exactly what happened, although Apple is portraying it as a simple case of its license to use YouTube expiring. 

"Our license to include the YouTube app in iOS has ended, customers can use YouTube in the Safari browser and Google is working on a new YouTube app to be on the App Store," Apple said in a statement. 

YouTube issued a similarly vague statement: "We are working with Apple to ensure we have the best possible YouTube experience for iOS users."

Odd couple

It all seems a bit odd.  Building a new app to run YouTube is not a big deal and there will undoubtedly be any number of them out there momentarily. 

It's not as though YouTube was something new. It has been included by default since the very first iPhone and, in fact, Google had to rewrite the YouTube platform when Apple banished Flash, which formerly powered YouTube and lots of other video content.

It's just the latest sign that things aren't all peaches and cream in the Google-Apple family. Not long ago, Apple declared it would rip Google Maps out of its systems and replace it with an in-house version. 

All of this is fine, of course. No one really cares what goes on behind closed doors but it does mean that consumers are likely to be at least mildly inconvenienced as two big powerful companies embark on their latest power trip.