Current Events in December 2013

Yauk’s Specialty Meats of Windsor, Colo., is recalling approximately 90,000 pounds of various meat and poultry products that were produced under insanitary conditions.

There are no reports of illness due to consumption of these products.

The following products are subject to recall:

• “Colorado Best Beef” brand various fresh, smoked and shelf-stable meat products.
• “James Ranch” brand jerky and summer sausage.
• “Rocky Plains Meats” brand hams, bacon, raw and smoked sausage, jerky and raw poultry.
• “John Long Farms” brand fresh and smoked pork products.
• “Horned Beef” brand jerky.
• “Mile High Hungarian Sausage” brand fresh and smoked bacon and sausage.

All products being recalled are packaged in retail-ready packaging of various sizes, and bear the establishment numbers “Est. 20309” or “P-20309” inside the USDA Mark of Inspection. The products were produced between April 1, 2013, and Dec. 5, 2013 and can be identified by four-digit Julian dates ranging between 3091 and 3339. The products were sold at the wholesale and retail level in Colorado, Nebraska, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming.

Consumers with questions about the recall should contact Wayne Yauk at 970-686-9080 .

While it is true that some people successfully find good, lasting relationships on online dating sites, it is also true that many end up frustrated and disappointed.

Rochelle, a Match.com user from Irvine, Calif., says she has found a troubling pattern with the men she has met online: they aren't telling the truth, she says.

“I've noticed that a lot of men are lying about their age,” Rochelle writes in a ConsumerAffairs post. “I set my age limit at 45 and about a quarter of the men contacting me are no way even close to 45. Try 55-65! Also, a lot of men use very old pics. Sorry, but any picture older than 2-3 years is irrelevant.”

Disconnect

Researchers at the University of Iowa (UI) think Rochelle might unknowingly be onto something. Not that people are dishonest when they use an online dating site but there's a disconnect -- what they say doesn't really match what they truly want.

Kang Zhao, assistant professor of management sciences in UI's College of Business, and UI doctoral student Xi Wang are part of a team that has developed an algorithm for dating sites that uses a person's contact history to recommend partners with whom they may be more romantically compatible.

Netflix model

It's similar to the model Netflix uses to recommend movies users might like by tracking their viewing history. For example, you might not pick a particular movie to watch but Nexflix, analyzing the movies you've watched in the past, says “hey, you might like this one.” In a way, it's putting the computer in computer dating.

Dating sites are taking notice. Zhao says he's had preliminary discussions with two dating services who have expressed interest in learning more about the model. Since it doesn't rely on profile information, Zhao says it can also be used by other online services that match people, such as a job recruiting or college admissions.

The system was developed with the help of a popular commercial online dating company whose identity is being kept confidential. The research team looked at 475,000 initial contacts involving 47,000 users in two U.S. cities over a 196-day span. Of the users, 28,000 were men and 19,000 were women, and men made 80 percent of the initial contacts.

The data showed that just 25% of those initial contacts were actually reciprocated. To improve that results, Zhao's team developed a model combining two factors to recommend contacts: a client's tastes, determined by the types of people the client has contacted; and attractiveness/unattractiveness, determined by how many of those contacts are returned and how many are not.

Better predictor

Zhao believes those two factors, taste and attractiveness, do a better job of predicting successful connections than relying on information that clients enter into their profile, because what people put in their profile may not always be what they're really interested in. And from Rochelle's observation, they could also be intentionally misleading.

Zhao goes a step further, suggesting the average user of an online dating site might not really know themselves well enough to know their own tastes in the opposite sex. A man who says on his profile that he likes tall women may in fact be approaching mostly short women, even though the dating website will continue to recommend tall women.

"Your actions reflect your taste and attractiveness in a way that could be more accurate than what you include in your profile," Zhao says.

Another way of saying, actions speak louder than words. Zhao says that eventually, the algorithm will notice that while a client says he likes tall women, he keeps asking out short women, and will change its recommendations to start suggesting that he contact short women.

If it works for movies, it should work for dates, Zhao says.  

Cyber security experts have cautioned consumers this holiday season to use extra care in making online credit card purchases. Scam operators have stepped up their efforts to take advantage of consumers in search of great deals.

“Especially around the holiday season we get these email's with great deals that almost look too good to be true,” said Rob Shavell, co-founder of Boston based Abine, a software firm specializing in privacy. “But there are some great deals out there and some are totally legitimate. Sometimes it's hard to tell them apart. You never quite know where your information is going when you buy or sign up for something online.”

Shavell's company provides a tool called Mask Me, which can be added to a web browser to prevent websites you visit from gathering too much personal information, such as email addresses, phone numbers, and credit cards. That stops them from tracking you online. When you use MaskMe, the websites see “masked” information. The user can decide when and if to disclose real information.

Mask your credit card

One feature of MaskMe is the ability to mask your credit card, which Shavell says is a way for consumers to safely make purchases online. It's part of the $5 a month MaskMe package but through the holiday period, Abine is allowing consumers to use the masked card feature at no change. All you have to do, he says, is download the software from the Abine website.

“Once you've done that you don't have to do anything more because our software will give you the choice to make a masked credit card or not,” Shavell said.

At the point you are asked to type in your credit card number for any online purchase and the software then gives you the option of masking it. If you choose to mask it, the vendor gets credit card information that is similar to that of a gift card or pre-paid debit card. They can only charge the amount the consumer has authorized. The online vendor, however, doesn't know the difference.

“It's a real, working Mastercard that has a limit which you, the consumer, give to the vendor,” Shavell said. “For an online business it's just a regular Mastercard and it goes through their system just like any other credit card would.”

Eliminates unauthorized charges

While it has obvious benefits to keep fraudsters from loading up your credit card with unauthorized purchases, the masked card is also a way to keep businesses from placing charges on your credit card for things you didn't ask for and don't want. In fact, that could be its biggest benefit.

“We've all signed up for something that has some fine print that says there's a recurring charge of $10 every month,” Shavell said. “Just make a masked card for $10. That way you'll never have to pay that company more than $10, unless you really want the service.”

The practice Shavell just described is negative option marketing. That's when a company starts with the assumption that you have made a purchase, usually for some type of subscription service. It's up to you to cancel the service or get charged $10 to $20 a month. Many consumers don't notice these charges until they have paid them for several months and often, cancelling is not that easy. A masked card, it would seem, would prevent that abuse.

“We encourage everyone, if they sign up for a subscription or a free trial to use a masked card to limit the amount they can ever be charged,” Shavell said.

Power shift

Over the last decade a number of tools have emerged that have returned more power to the consumer during commercial transactions. Shavell says it's about time.

“What you're seeing is the market is finally waking up because businesses have generally crossed the line and people are now aware of how their privacy is being impacted, they're aware that when they get something for free, when they sign up for a free offer, that they are the product, and they need tools and services that restore their control,” Shavell said.

If you’re reading this in the continental United States, there’s a very good chance your local road conditions are currently awful, what with the gigantic winter storm that made its way over most of the continent these past few days. So if you’re expecting a UPS package that’s arrived late, you could maybe blame the weather—except that when we checked our consumer-review archives, we found plenty of recent complaints pre-dating even the first hint of inclement weather.

One problem with the potential to plague UPS customers is that many UPS stores are actually independent franchisees, so complaints to national headquarters will often be referred back to the independent franchise-holders.

Daisy of Lake Oswego, Oregon, complained about this to us on Nov. 27: “I was anticipated to receive a package for today. I waited all day to get it. Then when I refreshed the page, it says it was delivered? To who? I never heard the doorbell ring or heard a knock. Says delivered at 10:04 am. When I called customer service, she said she couldn't do a thing about it?!! She advised me to contact my local UPS store, ... they referred me to call customer service.”

Waiting at home for packages that don’t arrive is a common theme among the complaints. Here’s what Philip of Flushing, NY, said on Dec. 4: “UPS emailed me that a package would be delivered the next day. At 9 A.M. the next day their web site said that the package was out for delivery and would be delivered by the end of the day. I stayed home to wait for the package. At 1:30 P.M. I checked the status again and found that it was changed to read that the package was scheduled for delivery the next day. When I called UPS customer service for an explanation, they said that the original info was put up based on the expectation that the package would arrive on time and be sorted to the correct route on time. However the package was delayed and the delivery had to be changed.

“Since someone has to be home to accept a package, it is important that UPS be accurate in stated delivery time. They should not post 'Out for Delivery' until the package is actually on the truck. I lost a day waiting for this package. UPS will not reimburse me for lost time and wages.”

Wasted time

Like its competitors FedEx and the US Postal Service, UPS makes most of its deliveries during normal business hours – which, incidentally, are the hours when most Americans with jobs are not home to receive packages. Michael in Honolulu told us, “I've wasted about 3 hours of my weekend trying to get an option other than leaving it at my doorstep all day while nobody is home.”

“Y” in San Francisco complained that UPS left his package on his doorstep “at night in a lighted doorway,” and although the UPS website confirmed delivery of the package, it wasn’t there when Y got home.

In fairness to UPS, such complaints are hardly unique to them; other package-delivery services ranging from FedEx to the official United States Postal Service generate the same types of complaints at roughly the same frequency.

In any instance, whether you enjoy good service or bad has less to do with which company you patronize, and more to do with whether you’re assigned a good or bad delivery person. As Y from San Francisco noted, “our usual UPS guy is excellent, but as the support guys told me [when I called to complain], they're using holiday staff …. avoid UPS like the plague over the holidays, and if you do risk using them, make sure you insist upon delivery signatures and all of that stuff.”

It also needs to be said that where you live can make a difference. Many neighborhoods are plagued by theft. If your package is left at your door and stolen before you can retrieve it, that's not really the delivery service's fault.

A solution, although an expensive one, is to contract with a UPS or FedEx store to receive and hold your packages. You can then pick them up at your convenience. Many smaller companies, like Postal Annex, also offer this kind of service. 

With air travel bollixed by rotten weather across much of the country, it's a bad day for flying, but it's a good day for creating the world's largest airline. American Airlines Group Inc. was officially born this morning as American completed its merger with US Airways.

The new carrier immediately became the world's largest airline by traffic.

"Our people, our customers and the communities we serve around the world have been anticipating the arrival of the new American," said Doug Parker, CEO of American Airlines, in a prepared statement.  "We are taking the best of both US Airways and American Airlines to create a formidable competitor, better positioned to deliver for all of our stakeholders.  We look forward to integrating our companies quickly and efficiently so the significant benefits of the merger can be realized."

The new American has a global network with nearly 6,700 daily flights to more than 330 destinations in more than 50 countries and more than 100,000 employees worldwide. 

It has 600 new jetliners on order, to freshen up its aged fleet and improve the company's fuel economy. 

Parker, who was previously CEO of US Airways, said the combined airline has the scale, breadth and capabilities to compete more effectively and profitably in the global marketplace and said customers will soon enjoy access to more benefits and increased service across the combined company's larger worldwide network and through an enhanced oneworld Alliance. US Airways will exit Star Alliance on March 30, 2014 and will immediately enter oneworld on March 31, 2014.

The hoopla and hype is in marked contrast to the gloom and doom that surrounded American for the last few years, as it watched from bankruptcy as other airlines bulked up. The American-US Airways merger notion began to take hold in September 2012. It encountered resistance from federal and state regulators but a series of concessions finally cleared the way and the merger got its final clearance last week as courts declined to intervene further.

Business as usual

In the meantime, American said, customers should continue to do business with the airline from which travel was purchased just as they did before the merger.  In short, it is "business as usual."  The airlines' separate websites, aa.com and usairways.com, as well as the two airlines' reservations systems and loyalty programs, will continue to operate separately until further in the integration process.

The number of foreclosures posted a sharp year-over-year decline during October.

According to CoreLogic, a  provider of residential property information, analytics and services, there were 48,000 completed foreclosures -- a drop of 30% from 68,000 at the same time in 2012.

On a month-over-month basis, completed foreclosures were down 25.6% from the 64,000 reported in September.

Completed foreclosures are an indication of the total number of homes actually lost to foreclosure. Since the financial meltdown began in September 2008, there have been approximately 4.6 million completed foreclosures. As a basis of comparison, prior to the 2007 decline in the housing market, completed foreclosures averaged 21,000 per month nationwide between 2000 and 2006.

As of October 2013, approximately 879,000 U.S. homes were in some stage of foreclosure, known as the foreclosure inventory, compared with 1.3 million in October 2012 -- a year-over-year decrease of 31%. The foreclosure inventory as of October 2013 represented 2.2% of all homes with a mortgage, versus 3.1% a year earlier. The inventory was down 2.9% on a month-over-month basis.

‘Good news’ for the housing market

"Year over year, the foreclosure inventory, as a percentage of all homes with a mortgage, has declined almost a full percentage point to 2.2 percent," said Mark Fleming, chief economist for CoreLogic. "This is good news for the housing and mortgage finance markets, but the rate remains elevated relative to the pre-crisis level of about 0.6 percent. There are almost 900,000 properties still in foreclosure, but a normal level would be only a quarter of the current stock."

The scourge of an elevated foreclosure inventory is easing. In October, every state posted a year-over-year decline in completed foreclosures. "Additionally, the rate of serious delinquencies, which fell more than 25 percent year over year, is at the lowest level in nearly five years,” said Anand Nallathambi, president and CEO of CoreLogic, adding that this is “great news as we head into a new year."

Report highlights

• The five states with the highest number of completed foreclosures for the 12 months ending in October 2013 were: Florida (115,000), Michigan (50,000), California (46,000), Texas (43,000) and Georgia (39,000). These five states account for almost half of all completed foreclosures nationally.

• The five states with the lowest number of completed foreclosures for the same 12 months were: District of Columbia (57), North Dakota (411), Hawaii (491), West Virginia(514) and Wyoming (694).

• The five states with the highest foreclosure inventory as a percentage of all mortgaged homes were Florida (7.1%), New Jersey (6.7%), New York (4.9%), Maine (3.8%) and Connecticut (3.7%).

• The five states with the lowest foreclosure inventory as a percentage of all mortgaged homes were:Wyoming (0.4%), Alaska (0.6%), Nebraska (0.6%), North Dakota (0.7%) and Colorado (0.7%).

Given the fawning publicity accorded each new iPhone, Google gadget or weird Amazonian package delivery dream, you would think that an eager public waited breathlessly for every new tweak dreamed up by the software minions who have taken over the functions once performed by the automotive designers who hammered out new fins for 1960s vintage cars.

But those of adequate age will recall that consumers eventually got tired of ridiculous fins and change-for-change's sake in automotive design. People got tired of having to buy a new car every few years just to keep up. And a new study suggests something similar is happening in the technology sector, where many may feel the pressure to buy each new iPhone model is getting a little too intense.

A new study by JETIntelligence predicts that a top trend for 2014 will be what it calls "rage against the machine," as consumers rebel against “what’s been lost in our embrace of unprecedented change.”

The research company says consumers -- tired of bots and automated greetings -- will be putting a higher value on “all things human.” 

"For many, technology serves as a gateway to opportunity and an enabler of hyper-efficient lifestyles, but those who are most immersed are starting to question its effect on their lives and their privacy. One result is that more people are trying to find a balance and lead more mindful, in-the-moment lives," the report said.

Loss of privacy

The study also finds consumers increasingly concerned that they are giving up their anonymity to Big Data and predicts consumers will begin to push back and even grow paranoid about technological intrusions on privacy.

“In this year's trend report, we see how consumers are both welcoming and resisting technology's growing omnipresence in our lives,” JWT said. “For many, technology serves as a gateway to opportunity and an enabler of hyper-efficient lifestyles, but those who are most immersed are starting to question its effect on their lives and their privacy. One result is that more people are trying to find a balance and lead more mindful, in-the-moment lives.”

The report is the result of quantitative, qualitative and desk research conducted by JWTIntelligence throughout the year. For this report, JWTIntelligence conducted quantitative surveys using SONAR, JWT’s proprietary online tool, from Nov. 5–8, 2013, surveying 1,003 adults aged 18-plus (500 Americans and 503 Britons). 

Zip International Group of Edison, N.J., is recalling herring fillet in oil (FOSFOREL, ATLANTIKA) 400 gram in plastic packaging due to Listeria contamination.

No illnesses have been reported to date in connection with this problem.

The recalled product includes best by dates 18/01/2014 (UPC: 4607095500208), which is located on the round side of the packaging. The herring, a product of Russia, was sold to retail grocery stores in New York State beginning on 11/01/2013, and ending on 11/14/2013.

A similar recall was issued earlier this year.

Consumers who have purchased the recalled product should not consume it, but should return it to the place of purchase.

Consumers with questions may contact the company @ 732-225-3600, 9:00AM-5:00 PM EST from Monday to Friday.

StockPot, Inc., of Everett, Wash., is recalling 1,864 cases (approximately 22,368 pounds) of chicken noodle soup.

The product is formulated with wheat, a known allergen.  However, it was released with a Loaded Baked Potato Style Soup side label, which does not declare this allergen.

The company has received no reports of adverse reactions due to consumption of these products.

The following product is subject to recall:

• 24-oz. plastic tub of Wholesome@Home “Classic Chicken Noodle Soup.” The establishment number “P-18235” is located on the label on the lid.

The product was produced on October 25 and 26, 2013, with a use-by date of February 17 and 18, 2014. It was shipped to distribution centers in Arizona, California, Colorado, Indiana, Oregon, Texas, Utah and Washington., and sold at retail only.

Consumers with questions about the recall may contact Susan Baranowsky at 1-866-270-9303.

Santa Maria Foods of Brampton, Ontario, Canada, is recalling approximately 2,600 pounds of whole boneless ham prosciutto product due to possible contamination with Listeria monocytogenes.

There have beenno reports of illnesses associated with consumption of these products.

The ham product was shipped to California and Michigan for further distribution. Case labels bear the Canadian establishment number “473A” within the Canadian mark of inspection. The following product is subject to recall:

Approximately 50-lb. boxes labeled “PROSCIUTTO x 4 GOLD” with the case codes BR031356 or BR031374, produced on Nov. 14 and Nov. 15, 2013. Each box contains 4 individually packaged hams with the case codes BR031341 or BR031354.

Consumers with questions regarding the recall can contact the company’s consumer hotline at 888-886-4428.

At ConsumerAffairs, we see it on a daily basis. Consumers post reviews complaining – often bitterly – about a product or service.

Often the complaint revolves around customer service issues. The consumer is told something by a customer service rep that turns out not to be true. Or the consumer is unable to get satisfaction. Satellite TV, mobile phone providers, banks and online florists appear to spark the most customer rage.

In response to ConsumerAffairs and other Internet sites where consumers can post reviews about a company's products and service, major corporations have stepped up their efforts – and spending – to improve customer service. Mary Jo Bitner, executive director of the Center for Services Leadership at the W. P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University, says it doesn't appear to be working.

Growing rage

She and a team of researchers have just completed a study showing 56 million American households experienced at least one problem during the past 12 months, and about $76 billion in revenue was at stake for the businesses involved. What's more, the rate of customer rage appears to be rapidly growing. She says many companies are throwing money at the problem without fixing it.

“The moral of the story: Don’t invest in improving your customer service unless you’re going to do it right,” Bitner said. “If a company handles your complaint well, then you typically become a more loyal customer. However, if they don’t, then you become 12 percentage points less brand loyal than if you never complained at all.”

It turns out there is quite a bit of research available about customer dissatisfaction. In 1976 the White House retained Customer Care Measurement and Consulting (CCMC) to work with the Carey School to design and conducted and analyze the first customer rage survey.

Downward spiral

There have been five other surveys since then, all showing a downward spiral in customer satisfaction and a rise in customer rage.

“We found satisfaction is no higher than reported in 1976,” said Scott Broetzmann of CCMC. “People are frustrated that there are too many automated response menus, there aren’t enough customer-care agents, they waste a lot of time dealing with the problem, and they have to contact the company an average of four times to get resolution.”

Indeed, that's a familiar refrain for many of the consumers posting reviews at ConsumerAffairs. Having to spend an inordinate amount of time on the phone and still not resolving the issue sends many a consumer around the bend.

The rise in customer rage is remarkable. The 1976 survey put it at 32%. By 2011 it had grown to 45%. Two years later it had jumped to 50%.

Yelling and cursing

The survey also found a rise in yelling and cursing when dealing with the worst problems. Yelling is up from 25% in previous studies to 36% this year – cursing has rising from seven to 13%.

What triggers a bout of customer rage? The number one source of rage, according to the survey, are satellite and cable TV companies.

Finally, the cost of a company not resolving a case of customer rage is significant. The survey shows that a satisfied or pacified customer only told an average of 10 to 16 people about the problem. But if customers were left dissatisfied, they told an average of about 28 people.

Many times they told more, using the Internet. The survey found customer complaint-posting has nearly doubled from 19 to 35% since 2011.

Another report, by contact center provider Five9, also turns up a huge increase in angry consumers. According to its survey, 85% of consumers said they would retaliate against a firm with lousy customer service. As you might expect, 18-34 year olds are three times as likely as their older peers to vent their frustrations online.

The surveys don't speculate about the reasons for the increase in customer rage but plenty of business experts have offered opinions. Especially since the Great Recession businesses have cut expenses as much as possible to improve the bottom line. Fewer, and poorly-trained customer service reps might seem like a good idea in the executive suite but these kinds of moves could turn out to be a bad decision in the long run.

Tis the season when gaily wrapped holiday packages are sent through the mail and get lost.  Although tis not the only season this happens; “The U.S. Postal Service lost my mail” is a complaint as perennial as the evergreens used to symbolize Christmas. And as the volume of mail delivery increases with the holiday season, so too does the volume of lost-mail complaints.

Lynda from Illinois wrote us on Dec. 2 to say “I have had a very distressing time with USPS over the past couple of months. I order a fair amount through the catalog and eBay and never had a problem at that point in receiving my packages until October 2013… Because I had never had a problem receiving any packages before, I never purchased insurance before, never had a reason to.”

Lynda says the USPS tracking website listed a package as “delivered” even though she never received it. This is pretty common complaint among USPS customers; Lea in Las Vegas told us on Nov. 17 that “I checked the status of a package I was waiting for. It said delivered to addressee. Well, not sure whose address (apt. number) they delivered it to but it sure wasn't mine. I even went to the office and they didn't receive a package either. If these carriers won't do their job right then go find another job. How hard is it to put a piece of mail or package in the correct mailbox?”

We’ll resist the temptation to offer an extremely sarcastic answer to that question, even though we personally have had the same problem. Last September we told you the tale of the glorious summer when we got our first-ever passport:

The U.S. Department of State sent our passport via Priority Mail, with a tracking number. On July 7 we typed that tracking number into the USPS website and were horrified to discover that the passport had allegedly been delivered on June 29. On July 9, we formally reported the passport as “missing,” and the very next day, the now-invalidated passport (which, you recall, had allegedly been delivered to us two weeks before) finally arrived in our mailbox ….   So, when federal officials working for the Department of State can’t even get their official national-security documents properly delivered, what’s an ordinary civilian to do?

Lynda tried getting help from the USPS customer-service bureaucracy, but “The post office denied my claim solely because I didn't have insurance.”

Insurance not always the answer

Though there’s no guarantee insurance would have helped, either. Jevan in Colorado wrote on Nov. 21 to say “USPS is HORRIBLE. They lost a $450 package of mine. I opened a claim a week ago and was told I'd receive a call back. Well, guess what? Still no call back ... I was on hold for almost 2 hours today and almost 2 hours yesterday trying to get a hold of somebody there! My package is insured and I want my $450 back NOW! I cannot wait for you people to get it together! SOMEONE HAS TO BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS!”

Jevan and Lynda’s complaints come from the perspective of a mail-order customer denied their purchase. But “E” in River Park, Illinois, is arguably in worse shape: he’s one of the mail-order sellers whose packages keep getting lost. As he told us on Nov. 28: “Over the last 2 months my online business has now suffered so much I will be lucky to even stay in business till the end of the year. …. The stress is insane, emails flying everywhere "WHERE IS MY ORDER." Nasty phone calls from customers. Being blasted all over forums and Facebook making me into a thief and a scammer. ALL because the damn USPS is not doing their job properly! I have had about 50 lost orders seems as most of them were in or around area code 352 a few in California and a few on the east coast….”

This is only a tiny sampling of the dozens of complaints we’ve received just since the start of November. As we type this sentence on the afternoon of Dec. 6, the total number of USPS lost-mail complaints in our consumer-review archives is 1,460. If that number is higher by the time you click on the link—we won’t be surprised at all.

In all the history of humanity, we are the first generation of people to take complete 24/7 connectivity for granted, and while there’s undeniably wonderful benefits to constant communication, there’s also concern that maybe, just maybe, 24/7 connectivity might have a downside as well.

Researchers from Kent State University have published a study suggesting just that: “Frequent cell phone use linked to anxiety, lower grades and reduced happiness in students.”  A study of 500 university students showed that “for the population studied, high frequency cell phone users tended to have lower GPA, higher anxiety, and lower satisfaction with life (happiness) relative to their peers who used the cell phone less often. The statistical model illustrating these relationships was highly significant.”

Yet the study actually appears to show two different (though closely related) things: students with lower GPAs tended to have more anxiety than those with higher GPAs, and students who frequently used their phones tended to have lower GPAs.

Intriguing, but it’s uncertain exactly where correlation and causation lie: presumably, would heavy cell phone use not cause anxiety if the student still managed an A average? What about heavy phone use during semester breaks, when grades are not an issue? Is the problem simply “time spent on the phone,” or “time spent doing anything other than study or schoolwork?”

Semi-related anecdote: In 1953, science fiction writer Ray Bradbury published a short story called The Murderer, about a man considered insane by his futuristic society because he hates the constant communication devices people are expected to carry with them, to the point where he actually “murders” (destroys) some of these devices, including his “wrist radio.” The man’s science-fictional complaints include children who can call him via wrist radio at any time of day, no matter where he is, to remind him to pay their allowance, and a wife who got “hysterical” because “she had been completely out of  touch with me for half a day.”

Bradbury intended his 1950s audience to be utterly appalled by the thought of a future where you could never, ever be out of reach of anyone desiring your attention. Yet only sixty years later, that’s pretty much the status quo.

With Christmas less than three weeks off, people who haven't decorated their homes yet will likely be scrambling to get the job dome over the next few days.

This probably doesn't need to be said -- but then maybe again it does: Be careful!

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) estimates there were 15,000 injuries involving holiday decorating seen in emergency departments nationwide during November and December 2of last year. This is the fourth consecutive year these estimates have increased. In each year since 2009, there have been an estimated 12,000 or more emergency department visits.

It may be funny to see Chevy Chase fall from a ladder or Joe Pesce step on broken ornaments, but real life is not the movies and mishaps like these result in visits to the emergency room or calls to fire departments for thousands of consumers each year.

“There are about 250 injuries a day during the holiday season. Adding safety to your checklist can keep a holiday tradition from becoming a holiday tragedy,” said CPSC Acting Chairman Robert Adler. “Keep Christmas trees watered well, don’t leave candles unattended, and use caution whenever you are on a ladder.”

Frequent accidents

The most frequently reported holiday decorating incidents seen in emergency departments in 2012 involved falls (34%), lacerations (11%) and back strains (10%). When it comes to fires, from 2009 through 2011, fire departments nationwide responded to an average of 200 fires in which the Christmas tree was the first item ignited.

These incidents resulted in 10 deaths, 20 injuries and $16 million in property loss. In addition, candle-related fires from 2009 through 2011 have resulted in an estimated 70 deaths, 680 injuries and $308 million in property loss.

To prevent fires, toss out any lights sets with evidence of damage such as broken sockets and bare wires, water Christmas trees frequently, and always extinguish candles before leaving a room.

Staying safe

The CPSC offers the following safety tips to help prevent decorating disasters this season:

Ladders

• Heed the warning labels on ladders. Read CPSC’s OnSafety blog, “Ladder Safety 101,” for tips to prevent ladder falls this season.

Trees and decorations

• Buying a live tree? Check for freshness. A fresh tree is green, its needles are hard to pull from branches, and the needles do not break when bent between your fingers. The bottom of a fresh tree is sticky with resin, and when tapped on the ground, the tree should not lose many needles.
• Setting up a tree at home? Place it away from heat sources, such as fireplaces, vents, and radiators. Because heated rooms rapidly dry out live trees, be sure to monitor water levels daily, and keep the tree stand filled with water. Place the tree out of the way of foot traffic, and do not block doorways with the tree.
• Buying an artificial tree? Look for the label: “Fire Resistant.” Although this label does not mean that the tree will not catch fire, the label does indicate that the tree is more resistant to catching fire.
• Decorating a tree in a home with small children? Take special care to avoid sharp, weighted, or breakable decorations. Keep trimmings with small removable parts out of the reach of children, who could swallow or inhale small pieces. Avoid trimmings that resemble candy or food that may tempt a child to reach for and swallow them.

Candles

• Keep burning candles within sight. Extinguish all candles before you go to bed, leave the room, or leave the house.
• Keep candles on a stable, heat-resistant surface. Place candles where kids and pets cannot reach them or knock them over. Lighted candles should be placed away from items that can catch fire, such as trees, other evergreens, decorations, curtains and furniture.

Lights

• Use lights that have been tested. Select lights tested for safety by a nationally recognized testing laboratory, such as Underwriters Laboratories (UL), Intertek (ETL) or the Canadian Standards Association (CSA). Lights for both indoor and outdoor use must meet strict requirements that testing laboratories are able to verify. On decorative lights available in stores, UL’s red holographic label signifies that the product meets safety requirements for indoor and outdoor use. UL’s green holographic label signifies that the product meets requirements for indoor use only.
• Check each set of lights. Examine new and old lights for broken or cracked sockets, frayed or bare wires, or loose connections. Throw out damaged sets, and do not use electric lights on a metallic tree.
• Check each extension cord. Make sure each extension cord is rated for the intended use and is in good condition. Do not use cords with cuts or signs of fraying.
• Check outdoor lights for labels. Look for labels indicating that the lights have been certified for outdoor use, and only plug them into a ground-fault circuit interrupter (GFCI)-protected receptacle or a portable GFCI.

Fireplaces

• Use care with “fire salts.” Fire salts produce colored flames when thrown onto wood fires. Fire salts contain heavy metals that can cause intense gastrointestinal irritation and vomiting, if swallowed. Keep fire salts away from children.
• Do not burn wrapping papers in the fireplace. A flash fire may result from burning wrapping papers because wrappings can ignite suddenly and burn intensely.

The essence of a lawsuit is to enable one party to recover the damages caused by the negligent or deceptive actions or omissions of the other party.

In other words -- no damage, no case.

And that's exactly how U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul Grewal viewed the claims of a class action suit taking issue with Google's use of the data it harvests about its users as they search the web, send emails and engage in other online activities, Courthouse News Service reported.

Saying that Google made money from the data and didn't share it with its users isn't much of an argument, Grewal said. 

"A plaintiff must do more than point to the dollars in a defendant's pocket; he must sufficiently allege that in the process he lost dollars of his own," Grewal wrote. "Plaintiffs' allegations certainly plead that Google made money using information about them for which they were provided no compensation beyond free access to Google's services. But an allegation that Google profited is not enough equivalent to an allegation that such profiteering deprived plaintiffs of economic value from that same information."

In other words, it's not as though throngs of competing search engines and marketing companies were waiting in the wings, eager to buy the data that Google obtained by providing free services to its users. 

With that, Grewal dismissed the suit. Game over.

The suit was filed in March 2012 after Google updated its privacy policy to permit the commingling of user data across different Google products, such as Gmail and YouTube. The new privacy policy allowed Google to combine a user's information from one service with the user's information from other services.

The complaint also alleged that the new policy violated the users right to privacy, although there is no explicit right to privacy in the Constitution, popular opinion notwithstanding.

You wouldn't expect your flashlight to spy on you, but the Federal Trade Commission says that's just what one of the most popular Android apps does. 

The "Brightest Flashlight Free" app has been download millions of times by Android users who, presumably, never expected that the app would report their whereabouts to the app developer, Goldenshores Technologies LLC, and its clients. 

The FTC filed a complain against the company and its manager, Erik M. Geidl, charging that the company's privacy policy deceptively fails to disclose that the app will report their geolocation and unique device identifier to third parties, mostly advertising and marketing networks.

In addition, the complaint alleged that the company deceived consumers by presenting them with an option to not share their information, even though it was shared automatically rendering the option meaningless.

The company has settled the complaint by agreeing to stop spying on its users and delete any information it still has about them.

“When consumers are given a real, informed choice, they can decide for themselves whether the benefit of a service is worth the information they must share to use it,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “But this flashlight app left them in the dark about how their information was going to be used.”

A few facts omitted

In its complaint, the FTC alleges that Goldenshores’ privacy policy told consumers that any information collected by the Brightest Flashlight app would be used by the company, and listed some categories of information that it might collect. The policy, however, did not mention that the information would also be sent to third parties, such as advertising networks.

Consumers also were presented with a false choice when they downloaded the app, according to the complaint. Upon first opening the app, they were shown the company’s End User License Agreement, which included information on data collection. At the bottom of the license agreement, consumers could click to “Accept” or “Refuse” the terms of the agreement.

Even before a consumer had a chance to accept those terms, though, the application was already collecting and sending information to third parties – including location and the unique device identifier.

The settlement with the FTC prohibits the defendants from misrepresenting how consumers’ information is collected and shared and how much control consumers have over the way their information is used. The settlement also requires the defendants to provide a just-in-time disclosure that fully informs consumers when, how, and why their geolocation information is being collected, used and shared, and requires defendants to obtain consumers’ affirmative express consent before doing so.

The defendants also will be required to delete any personal information collected from consumers through the Brightest Flashlight app.

Ads for Abbott Labs' SideKicks gave the impression that the sugary drinks would give children more energy and help them perform better in sports.

But New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman said an investigation by his office found that Abbott failed to substantiate the claims that SideKicks were "targeted nutrition" for children's "unique needs" and announced that his office has reached an agreement under which Abbott will stop its false advertising and pay a $25,000 penalty to New York State.

“False and misleading advertising aimed at our children and their parents is exploitative, illegal and may even contribute to the obesity crisis in our communities,” Schneiderman said. “My office will prosecute false claims by companies that seek to hawk their products to New York parents who are trying to provide the best for their kids.”

To introduce and promote its new SideKicks products, starting in 2010, Abbott embarked on a three-year advertising campaign in print media, on the internet and in television commercials. As part of its “You Are What You Eat” campaign, Abbott ran ads on national networks, syndicated television shows, cable television, Nnational Hispanic television programs, Spot TV, Health Guru, and Hulu. Print ads ran in various parents’ and women’s magazines. Ads and coupons were also posted on Abbott’s website.

In the ad, a girl who looks to be 10 to 12 years old drinks SideKicks at home before heading off to aher soccer game. At the game, the girl appears to be more energetic and to perform better than the other children, who seem sluggish and wear costumes depicting them as French fries and a chocolate frosted doughnut.

The goalie, dressed as the doughnut, watches passively as the girl who drank SideKicks scores a goal. As the game progresses, the mother of the “French fries” child turns to the mother of the SideKicks child and states, “Does Tyler look a little slow? Maybe we should have skipped the drive-through.” The mother of the girl who drank SideKicks replies, “Well, kids are what they eat.” The advertisement concludes with the line, “New PediaSure Sidekicks...an extra kick of nutrition.”

The Attorney General was alerted to Abbott’s advertising by advocates who complained that the ad misleadingly implied that pediatricians recommend Sidekicks for healthy, thriving children.

While both drinks contain vitamins and minerals, SideKicks is a sweetened chocolate-, vanilla-, or strawberry-flavored shake-type beverage. SideKicks Clear is a sweetened fruit-flavored drink. SideKicks Clear products have fruit names such as “Tropical Fruit” and “Wild Berry” and depict fruit such as raspberries, blueberries, and blackberries on their packaging but do not, in fact, contain any fruit or fruit juice.

We’re still living in what future historians will call the earliest era of the Internet age, and it’s still too early to predict exactly how that will play out, which aspects of contemporary web life will remain and which will fade away. But evidence is growing that virtual currency Bitcoin (or some future variant of it) might be a permanent part of the virtual landscape, rather than a flash in the pan.

Indeed, analysts with Bank of America Merrill Lynch released a Dec. 5 report suggesting that Bitcoin has the potential to become “a major means of payment for ecommerce” and a “serious competitor to traditional money transfer providers.”

Bank of America certainly isn’t the first to take an optimistic view of Bitcoin’s future; the day before the report, CNNMoney reported that former congressman Ron Paul said Bitcoin might “destroy the [U.S.] dollar,” and predicted a crackdown because “Governments absolutely demand a monopoly on money and credit. They're not going to give it up easily ….They will come down hard."  

Arguably, “they” already have; last May, the US government froze funds at the largest Bitcoin exchange, due to vague and undescribed reasons cited by the Department of Homeland Security. On the other hand, even those wont to distrust government secrecy must admit there are some legitimate, non-tyrannical reasons governments might want to crack down on Bitcoin: namely, anti-fraud measures, On Nov. 6, the New York Times’ Dealbook warned readers about a “pump and dump” penny-stock fraud scheme being played out on Bitcoin.

Cracking down on fraudsters is difficult enough with traditional banking and its extensive paper trails; in the anonymous world of Bitcoin it may be close to impossible.

People with cancer are living longer after being diagnosed with the disease, leading researchers to conclude the world could be cancer-free by the middle of this century.

Statistics collected through the Value of Medical Innovation initiative, led by the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest (CMPI), show U.S. life expectancy for people with cancer has hit another all-time high, rising over 50 million life-years after diagnosis. The estimate is based on the number of additional years of life that each person diagnosed with cancer since 1990 has experienced.

"The benefits of medical innovation to patients and their families can be counted in birthdays, anniversaries, weddings and other life events that would have been missed if it weren't for medical innovation," said Scott Gottlieb, M.D., resident fellow for the American Enterprise Institute.

The numbers tell the story. In 1990, there were about six million cancer survivors in U.S. Today there are about 14 million. In 1990 about 57 percent of cancer patients could expect to live five years or more. Today, that number is nearly 70 percent.

Celebrity cases

Gottlieb said innovative therapies and improvements in healthcare system efficiency has fueled the improvement. Recent cancer cases involving celebrities provide a case in point.

At the start of the 2012 NFL season Indianapolis Colts head coach Chuck Pagano was forced from the sidelines after he was diagnosed with leukemia. After aggressive treatment Pagano's cancer was remarkably declared to be in remission just two months later. By the end of the season he had rejoined the team.

Doctors say that up to 90% of people diagnosed with Pagano's type of leukemia are eventually cured, thanks in part to a new medication that helps neutralize cancer cells.

In September Howard Stern sidekick Robin Quivers revealed that she had been treated for cancer in the pelvic region. After being diagnosed in late May 2012, Quivers underwent 12 hours of surgery in Pittsburgh to remove a grapefruit-sized cancerous tumor. Her doctors told her they would “try to prolong her life as long as possible.”

But Quivers sought a second option from doctors in New York at Memorial Sloan Kettering, where she was placed on an aggressive treatment program. By June 2013, Quivers said she was pronounced cancer-free.

Turning point

"We're at a turning point in battling cancer," said CMPI co-founder Robert Goldberg.

But he adds that recent gains are in danger of being lost if there is any let up in efforts to defeat the disease. He says even greater gains in life-years, along with a decline in the cost of treating cancer, are possible through personalized medicine, which reduces the cost and time of treatment compared with the old one-size-fits-all model.

In addition to novel drugs, researchers have also done some outside-the-box thinking when it comes to treatment. In 2012 researchers at Immunocore designed a therapy using the body's 'T-cells to find cancer cells and destroy them, thus harnessing the body's own defenses to beat cancer.

T-cells are a type of lymphocytes – a type of white blood cell – that plays a key role in regulating the body's immune system. On their own T-cells don't do a very good job of distinguishing between healthy or cancerous cells. The Immunocore system basically arms the body's T-cells with a guidance system that helps them target the cancer cells.

Other cancer research is being done at Stanford Medical Center, again focusing on using the body's own tools to destroy cancer.