Current Events in February 2015

January was another strong month for new jobs.

The ADP National Employment Report (NER), produced by ADP in collaboration with Moody's Analytics, says private sector employment increased by 213,000 jobs last month.

"January marks another month of solid job gains and is in line with the NER's twelve-month average of over 200,000 jobs added per month," said Carlos Rodriguez, president and chief executive officer of ADP.

Strength in the services sector

Service-providing employment rose by 183,000 jobs in January, down from 207,000 in December, with professional/business services contributing 42,000 jobs. Trade/transportation/utilities grew by 54,000, while 11,000 jobs were added in financial activities.

Employment among goods-producing firms rose by 31,000 jobs. The construction industry added 18,000 jobs, and manufacturing added 14,000 jobs.

Payrolls for businesses with 49 or fewer employees increased by 78,000. Companies with 50-499 employees added 95,000 jobs, while employment at large companies -- those with 500 or more employees – was up 40,000 jobs. Firms that employ 500-999 people added 14,000 jobs, and those with over 1,000 employees created 26,000 jobs.

"Employment posted another solid gain in January, although the pace of growth is slower than in recent months,” noted Moody's Analytics Chief Economist Mark Zandi. “Business in the energy and supplying industries are already scaling back payrolls in reaction to the collapse in oil prices, while industries benefiting from the lower prices have been slower to increase their hiring. All indications are that the job market will continue to improve in 2015."

Mortgage applications were on the rise again last week after slipping the previous week.

According to the Mortgage Bankers Association’s (MBA) Weekly Mortgage Applications Survey, applications rose 1.3% in the week ending January 30.

The Refinance Index jumped 3% from the previous week, although the refinance share of mortgage activity dipped to 71% of total applications from 72% the previous week. The adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) share of activity decreased to 5.3% of total applications.

“Following several weeks of already elevated refinance activity due to falling interest rates, FHA refinance applications increased 76.5% in response to a reduction in annual mortgage insurance premiums which took effect January 26,” said Lynn Fisher, MBA’s Vice President of Research and Economics. “Conventional refinance volume was up only 0.5% for the week while VA refinance volume was down 24.3%. FHA purchase applications were also up 12.4% over the week prior, despite a decrease in purchase applications in the rest of the market.”

The FHA share of total applications was 13.1%, the VA share was 8.5% and the USDA share was 0.6%.

Contract interest rates

• The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages (FRMs) with conforming loan balances ($417,000 or less) fell 4 basis points -- from 3.83% to 3.79%, the lowest level since May 2013 -- with points increasing to 0.29 from 0.26 (including the origination fee) for 80% loan-to-value ratio (LTV) loans. The effective rate decreased from last week.
• The average contract interest rate for 30-year FRMs with jumbo loan balances (greater than $417,000) dropping to 3.82%, the lowest level since May 2013, from 3.87%, with points declining to 0.22 from 0.33 (including the origination fee) for 80% LTV loans. The effective rate decreased from last week.
• The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages backed by the FHA dipped 2 basis points to 3.69%, with points unchanged at 0.07 (including the origination fee) for 80% LTV loans. The effective rate decreased from last week.
• The average contract interest rate for 15-year fixed-rate mortgages inched down to 3.14% from 3.15%, with points increasing to 0.31 from 0.28 (including the origination fee) for 80% LTV loans. The effective rate from last week.
• The average contract interest rate for 5/1 ARMs rose 7 basis points to 3.03%, with points decreasing to 0.39 from 0.42 (including the origination fee) for 80% LTV loans. The effective rate increased from last week.

The survey covers over 75% of all U.S. retail residential mortgage applications.  

Gibbs Sports Amphibians of Auburn Hills, Mich., is recalling about 320 Quadski and Quadski XL amphibious vehicles.

The handlebar can fail while the vehicle is in operation, causing the operator to lose control of the steering and braking system of the vehicle, posing a risk of injury.

No consumer incidents have been reported. Three reports of breakage during testing have been reported; one involved injury to the neck of the test operator.

This recall includes Gibbs’ Quadski which is a one-seater and Quadski XL which is a two-seater. The products are high speed amphibious vehicles that are an ATV on land, and also operate on water.

The recalled vehicles have HIN numbers ranging from US-GSA601J213 though US-GSAJ1048C414 on Quadski and US-GSAJ5001J213 though US-GSAM5203H415 on Quadski XL.

HIN numbers are printed on a plate located on the right rear corner of the vehicle. Brand and model names are printed on the back panel and on the side of the vehicle.

The vehicles, manufactured in the U.S., were sold at Gibbs Sports Amphibians dealers nationwide from January 2012 through October 2014 for about $42,000.

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled vehicles and contact an authorized dealer for a repair at no cost.

Consumers may contact Gibbs’ Sports Amphibians toll-free at (877) 230-0888 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday.

Here's a couple of unpleasant facts about modern American life: one, the government is spying on you. That's not even a secret: the Drug Enforcement Administration (alongside several state-level police forces) openly admits to tracking and recording the license plates of all motorists on American highways, the better to know where you've been and who you've been there with.

Meanwhile, various other branches of government including the National Security Agency monitor (spy upon) American's electronic communications, and the current FBI director actually said it should be illegal for Americans to encrypt their own personal communications, because encryption makes it harder for the government to monitor your communications without your knowledge.

Also, America's criminal justice system operates under the de facto rule, “If a police officer says one thing and any number of non-police say something else, always assume the cop is telling the truth unless there is recorded evidence proving otherwise.”

Fortunately, cheap and ubiquitous recording technology increases the odds that innocent people will be able to prove their innocence despite police testimony to the contrary.

In 2011, to offer just one example, then-19-year-old Los Angeles resident David Gipson was arrested and charged with illegal gun possession. Arresting officer Deputy Levi Belville testified that he saw Gipson running away from police before tossing a loaded gun onto the roof of a nearby building.

Fortunately for Gipson, it turned out that a non-police witness had taken a cell phone video of the entire encounter, and the video showed that Deputy Belville was, let's say, mistaken: Gipson was standing still and leaning against a wall when officers first saw him, never had a gun and never threw anything onto a rooftop, either.

A jury acquitted Gipson of all charges, and in May 2013 he filed a civil rights suit against Belville and the city.

Getting around the problem

So cell phone videos can definitely help protect the innocent — unless the police know about them, and delete the recording. But a new smartphone app called Hands Up 4 Justice offers a way around that problem.

Hands Up is the invention of Duncan Kirkwood, a native of Montgomery, Alabama, who first came up with the idea after a police officer pulled him over last last year.

“As a black man, I am always fearful that when the police pull me over the encounter could escalate and I could be severely injured and there would be no way to prove I was not at fault,” Kirkwood said to AL.com.

He expanded upon that theme a couple days later, chatting with Fusion.net:

“You know, I’m a black man who grew up in the inner city. I know that when the police pull you over it’s probably gonna be a bad day …. I realized that I should not have to be afraid of the police. If I break a traffic law, I should get a ticket and that’s it. I shouldn’t have to be worried about getting dragged out of the vehicle, being shot, getting tased, and just having the officer’s word against mine.”

But he's American, so he does have to worry about it. And using his smartphone to record the encounter wouldn't necessarily work, because “I saw videos online of police taking people’s phones, and I even saw a video of police smashing someone’s phone.”

Uploaded to the cloud

That's why Kirkwood got the idea of creating an app to record police without their knowledge — and upload video to the Internet before they can delete it.

Here's how it works, according to the Hands Up website: first, open accounts with YouTube and/or Dropbox, for posting those videos as necessary. You should also choose a trusted friend or relative to be your emergency contact; anytime the app is activated your emergency contact will get a text message alert.

If you're pulled over by a police officer, what happens next?

Once pulled over by a police officer, turn on the app, click front facing camera and begin recording. The best position for this is to place the phone on the dashboard between the windshield and middle of dashboard with a slight tilt towards the driver's side window. By using the forward facing camera you can see that the camera is positioned correctly right before the screen goes black. …

After the app is turned on, the screen will go black within 10 seconds, even though the app is still recording and uploading video. The app costs 99 cents, and is currently available for download onto Android phones. An iPhone version of the app is expected to come out soon.

When shopping for wine, most consumers head for the supermarket or wine shop. There, they may find something they like but encounter a wide range of prices for it.

A few years ago a British winemaker decided there had to be a better way to price and sell wine – better for the winemakers and better for consumers. That led to Naked Wines, which a few years ago set up shop in Napa, Calif., introducing the concept of “crowdfunding” wine.

Ryan O'Connell, a winemaker at Naked Wines, says it has totally changed the way wine is sold and it should change the way consumers look at the product.

Angel investors

Here's how it works: Naked Wines signs up “angel” investors in dozens of quality, independent wineries. Each investor opens an account at the Naked Wines website and deposits roughly $40 a month.

O'Connell says there are currently some 75,000 investors, creating a total annual investment of around $36 million a year. That money is then divided among the participating wineries.

“That gives us the ability to go out and talk to really good winemakers and say 'Look, you're having a hard time selling your wine, but we have a big customer base that's just waiting for authentic, good quality wine,'” O'Connell told ConsumerAffairs.

In return for that investment of $40 a month, each investor gets to choose $40 worth of wine from among the participating wineries who are sharing the fund. Only O'Connell says your $40 investment buys much better wine than $40 buys at the supermarket or wine shop.

Cutting out the middleman

Because wine available through Naked Wines is pre-sold, the independent winemakers don't have to spend much money on sales, marketing and distribution. O'Connell says that's what costs the most in a typical fine bottle of wine.

“It's supermarkets and big brands that use their muscle and size to strong-arm users and suppliers, to make them sell the best stuff they have for the smallest price,” he said. “Then they use their leverage and size to get the largest margin possible out of consumers.”

So, just how much money are we talking about here? Just exactly how much of a bottle of wine is the marketing and distribution?

“The fruit and wine making costs that go into a $16 bottle of supermarket wine probably is less than $5,” O'Connell said. “By participating with Naked Wines the winemaker doesn't have to spend a lot of time on the road and selling the wine, the winemaker doesn't have to find a gatekeeper, or butter up critics or experts and, most importantly, doesn't have to go through traditional distribution channels.”

Half price or more

Investors may sign up on the website, deposit their investment, then shop for wine. For example, a nice Argentine Malbec, regularly priced at just over $20 a bottle, is available to investors for $10. There are also hundreds of customer reviews for each bottle.

The wine is so inexpensive that some consumers, who judge a wine's quality by its price, are often confused.

“One of the things we have to overcome with new customers is getting them to just try the wine and realize they're getting the same quality that goes into a $50 bottle of Napa Cab for $15.99,” McConnell says.

Will we see more of this kind of pricing in the future? O'Connell isn't sure how far it will spread within the wine industry, but says we are already seeing it in business models like Netflix. Instead of going to a video store any time you want to rent a movie, you pay a monthly fee and watch as much as you want.

“When they have all these subscribers, and they realize they can create their own content, it's really close to what we're describing,” O'Connell said. “They're just not selling the proposition the same way we are.”

Google is starting to have the kind of problem that comes with phenomenal success: It's getting so big it is running out of competitors, forcing it to compete with itself.

Sound crazy? Consider this: Uber has built a big business using Google's money and Google's map software. Now it's reported that Google may be going into competition with Uber, possibly launching its own virtual taxi service, even though it owns a big chunk of Uber.

Back when Uber was just getting started, Google Ventures -- the company's venture capital arm -- invested $258 million in the brazen start-up, which uses its own software combined with Google Maps to send cars anywhere and everywhere.

Everyone expected that Google would take Uber under its wing and the companies would work closely together, especially as Google developed its self-driving cars that would fit perfectly into Uber's business, leaving Uber's drivers as road kill.

Collision course

But now, according to a Bloomberg report, the companies may instead be on the path towards being ferocious competitors.  A Google executive who sits on Uber's board has reportedly informed Uber that Google is developing its own ride-hailing service. And Uber executives have reportedly seen screenshots of Google's ride-sharing app.

Google would indeed be a formidable competitor. It now only has money, scale and technological prowess, it also has -- through Google Maps -- access to just about everything there is to know about Uber's operations. 

Uber has also made few friends and lots of enemies in its short time on the scene, basically invading cities and operating however it pleases, daring regulators to do something about it.

It has lately been cleaning up its act but its pugnacious behavior leaves a big opening for a competitor offering a more genteel approach.

Neither company is commenting on the report.

Today, the U.S. Department of Education and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) announced $480 million in debt forgiveness, for current and former Corinthian College, Everest College and WyoTech students who took out private, high-cost “Genesis” loans.

As part of this agreement, the ECMC Group, which owns several Corinthian campuses, agreed to forgo operating any private student loan program for seven years, and also agreed to abide by certain consumer protections. Student borrowers affected by the forgiveness plan should see their debt burden decrease by 40%, according to the CFPB.

CFPB's director, Richard Cordray, said the agreement “will provide substantial relief to current and past students who were harmed by Corinthian’s predatory lending scheme …. These consumers were lured into high-cost loans destined to default, and then targeted with aggressive debt collection tactics. We will be vigilant to ensure that consumers receive this important relief and that others are protected in the for-profit college industry.”

Here's how those loans worked, according to the CFPB's Feb. 3 press release:

In September 2014, the CFPB sued Corinthian Colleges, Inc. for luring tens of thousands of students to take out private loans, known as “Genesis loans,” to cover expensive tuition costs by advertising bogus job prospects and career services. The lawsuit also alleges that Corinthian used illegal debt collection tactics to strong-arm students into paying back those loans while still in school. Under the Genesis loan program, nearly all student borrowers were required to make monthly loan payments while attending school. More than 60 percent of Corinthian school students defaulted on these high-cost loans within three years. Even for borrowers who did not default, interest rates were more than twice as expensive compared to interest rates on federal loans. The CFPB’s litigation is ongoing.

Two months later, in November, ECMC bought several Corinthian properties. Under ordinary circumstances, buying a company means you also buy responsibility for any lawsuits or other legal matters against it. However, ECMC made an agreement with the DOE and CFPB to release itself from “potential liability for Corinthian's alleged illegal activity,” as the CFPB put it.

Hence the $480 million debt relief program, which also requires ECMC to agree to: stop offering private student loans for a period of seven years; stop lawsuit threats and improper debt collection practices related to those debts; remove negative information from borrowers' credit reports; and agree to follow various consumer protection rules.

This agreement with ECMC applies only to ECMC; it does not apply to Corinthian Colleges, and does not shield Corinthian from possible legal liability.

What to do

If you are a current or former Corinthian student, how can you determine if this debt forgiveness program applies to you? The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau released a five-page bulletin, available here in .pdf form, answering that question and a few more:

What do I need to do to sign up for this relief? How do I know if I am eligible?

Nothing. Your loan servicer (the company that collects payments from you) will notify you if you benefit from today’s agreement, as well as any remaining balance you may owe.

You should be sure your servicer has your most recent contact information.

This debt forgiveness plan is unlikely to wipe out your debt in its entirety, though page 3 of the bulletin does say this:

How much debt relief will I receive?

The total amount of relief for borrowers with eligible loans is approximately $480 million. These borrowers will immediately see the amount they owe reduced by 40%.

Remember that this forgiveness applies only to private “Genesis” student loans, not to any federal student loans or other private loans which Corinthian, Everest or WyoTech students might owe.

Responsible dog owners pick up after their dogs. Some use the New York Times delivery bag but those who want to be environmentally responsible may even go so far as to buy dog waste bags promoted as "biodegradable" or "compostable."

Trouble is, the claims are often not true, according to Federal Trade Commission staffers who have written to 20 manufacturers and marketers of the bags warning them their environmental claims may be deceptive.

The letters, which the staff sent after examining the companies’ environmental, or “green,” claims on their websites and in other media, provide examples of potentially deceptive statements regarding the bags’ biodegradability or compostability.

“Consumers looking to buy environmentally friendly products should not have to guess whether the claims made are accurate,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “It is therefore critical for the FTC to ensure that these claims are not misleading, to protect both consumers and honest competitors.”

Must break down

The FTC's guidelines require that a product described as "biodegradable" must break down into its natural components within one year after normal disposal. Most waste bags, however, end up in landfills where no plastic biodegrades in anywhere close to one year, if it biodegrades at all.

Consumers generally think that unqualified “compostable claims” mean that a product will safely break down at the same rate as natural products, like leaves and grass clippings, in their home compost pile, the FTC said.

This doesn't mean, by the way, that you should start throwing your dog waste into a compost pile. It's not really safe since the waste may contain parasites and other contaminates that could prove troublesome.  

So which doggy doo bags are biodegradable? The FTC isn't saying. It didn't release the names of the companies who got the warning letters,, so for now consumers have no way of knowing which bags are greener than others.

The letters are intended as a warning bark, giving the companies the opportunity to clean up after themselves.

The CoreLogic Home Price Index (HPI) posted its 34^th consecutive year-over-year gain in December.

According to the provider of property information, analytics and data-enabled services, home prices nationwide -- including distressed sales -- increased 5% in December compared from the same period the year before. Distressed sales include short sales and real estate owned (REO) transactions.

On a month-over-month basis, home prices nationwide fell by 0.1% from November.

"For the full year of 2014, home prices increased 7.4%, down from an 11.1% increase in 2013," said Sam Khater, deputy chief economist at CoreLogic. "Nationally, home price growth moderated and stabilized at 5% the last 4 months of the year.”

The moderation can be clearly seen at the state level, he pointed out, with Colorado, Texas and New York at the high end of appreciation, ending the year with increases of about 8%. This contrasts with previous appreciation rates in the double digits -- for instance, Nevada and California which experienced increases of more than 20 percent earlier in 2014.

Approaching the peaks

Twenty-seven states and the District of Columbia are at or within 10% of their peak. Three states showed year-over-year home price depreciation, including distressed sales, in December; these states were Maryland (-0.7%), Vermont (-0.9%) and Connecticut (-2.2%).

Excluding distressed sales, home prices increased 4.9% in December 2014 compared with December 2013 and increased 0.1% month-over-month versus November 2014.

Report highlights

• Including distressed sales, the 5 states with the highest home price appreciation were: Colorado (+8.4%), Texas (+7.8%), New York (+7.6%), Nevada (+7.3%) and Michigan (+7.2%).
• Excluding distressed sales, the 5 states with the highest home price appreciation were: New York (+8.0%), Colorado (+7.8%), Massachusetts (+7.2%), Texas (+7.1%) and Nevada (+7.1%).
• Including distressed transactions, the peak-to-current change in the national HPI (from April 2006 to December 2014) was -13.4%. Excluding distressed transactions, the peak-to-current change in the HPI for the same period was -9.6%.
• Including distressed sales, the 5-year HPI change (from December 2009 to December 2014) was 18.9%.
• The 5 states with the largest peak-to-current declines, including distressed transactions, were: Nevada (-36%), Florida (-33.5%), Arizona (-29.5%), Rhode Island (-29.1%) and Connecticut (-25.2%).
• Including distressed sales, the U.S. has experienced 34 consecutive months of year-over-year increases; however, the national increase is no longer posting double-digits.
• Eighty-nine of the top 100 Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSAs) measured by population showed year-over-year increases in December 2014. The 11 CBSAs that showed year-over-year declines were: Worcester, MA-CT (-2.5%); Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT (-2.3%); Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD (-1.9%); Memphis, TN-MS-AR (-1.1%); McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX (-1.0%); New Haven-Milford, CT (-0.9%); Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway, AR (-0.8%); Winston-Salem, NC (-0.6%); Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT (-0.4%); Rochester, NY (-0.2%) and Wilmington, DE-MD-NJ (-0.03%).

The forecast

The CoreLogic HPI Forecast indicates home prices -- including distressed sales -- are projected to increase 0.1% month-over-month from December 2014 to January 2015. Full-year 2015 (December to December) increase is projected to be 4.8%.

Excluding distressed sales, home prices are also expected to increase by 0.1% month-over-month from December 2014 to January 2015 and increase by 4.5% year-over-year from December 2014 to December 2015.

"Nationally, home price appreciation took a pause in November and December 2014 and we expect a slow start to 2015," said Anand Nallathambi, president and CEO of CoreLogic. "As the year progresses, we expect upward pressure as low inventories and more first-time buyers drive up home prices."

Morrison Meat Packers of Miami, Fla., is recalling approximately 70,077 pounds of cooked pork products.

The products contain peanuts, an allergen which is not declared on the product label.

There are no reports of adverse reactions due to consumption of these products.

The following products, produced Dec. 22, 2014, through Jan. 27, 2015, are being recalled:

• Various weight packages containing 2 or 4 pieces of “EL TORO COOKED PORK AND WATER PRODUCT.”
• Various weight packages containing 2 pieces of “VIDA LATINA COOKED PORK AND WATER PRODUCT.”

The products bear the establishment number “EST. 17882” inside the USDA mark of inspection, and “Use By” dates ranging from Feb. 27, 2015, to Mar. 29, 2015. They were shipped to a distributor in Florida, and contain lot numbers 356, 363, 002, 008, 015, 022, or 027.

Consumers with questions may contact Gilda Rodriguez, recall coordinator, at (305) 836-4461.  

Clemens Food Group of Hatfield, Pa., is recalling approximately 42 pounds of uncooked pork rib products.

The products may contain peanuts, an allergen not declared on the product label.

There are no reports of adverse reactions due to consumption of these products.

The following products are being recalled:

• Two 20-lb. cases with code #4109 containing 6 individually wrapped and labeled packages with code 354 of “Hatfield Smokey Chipotle Dry Rub Seasoned St. Louis Style Ribs”

The products bear the establishment number “EST. 791” inside the USDA mark of inspection, and were produced December 20, 2014. One case was shipped internally to the Clemens Food Group Employee Store, and the other case was shipped to one of 7 possible individual retail locations in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Consumers with questions may contact Clemens Food Group customer service at (800) 743-1191.  

Hawkins, Inc., of Roseville, Minn., is recalling approximately 529 pounds of pork products

The products were not presented at the U.S. point of entry for inspection. Without the benefit of full inspection, a possibility of adverse health consequences exists.

The following items, produced on June 13, 2014, are being recalled:

• 131.6 lbs. of “SCAN PORK DP-941 NATURAL DEHYDRATED PORK STOCK/NATURAL DEHYDRATED PORK BROTH” and bearing packaging codes “P0010586” on the labels.
• 397.5 lbs. of “SCAN PORK DP-1075 NATURAL DEHYDRATED PORK STOCK/NATURAL DEHYDRATED PORK BROTH” bearing packing code “P0010628” on the label.

The products bear establishment number “Denmark Est. 215” inside the mark of inspection, and were distributed to processing plants in Alabama, Florida, Iowa, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

The products likely did not reach consumers.

Anyone with questions about the recall may contact Richard Erstad at (612) 331-6910.

Over the last decade food safety has become a hot button issue in Washington, resulting in the recently-passed Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), giving the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) more power to regulate food production.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that food-related disease and illness make millions of people sick each year and kill thousands. CDC spends a lot of resources tracking single cases of foodborne illness and investigating outbreaks.

While many outbreaks have been traced to stops along the food production chain, the biggest food safety threat to the average U.S. consumer may be lurking in their own kitchen. Researchers at Kansas State University have documented it.

They videotaped people in a kitchen, preparing a meal containing raw meat and a ready-to-eat fruit salad. The raw meat contained a nonpathogenic organism so researchers could trace contamination in the kitchen.

90% contamination

The result? Researchers found that 90% of the participants had prepared the meal in such a way that the tracer organism in the meat found its way to the salad.

"Almost all of the fruit salads we analyzed contained levels of the tracer organism, which we were representing as being salmonella," said Randy Phebus, professor of food safety at Kansas State University and one of the authors of the study.

The purpose of the study was to test which of the government's food safety messages and campaigns directed at consumers were most effective. It turned out that almost none of them were very effective.

In the past, researchers have relied on consumer surveys to rate food safety. They asked groups of consumers about their methods of food preparation and caution exercised in the kitchen.

What the consumers said and what they did turned out to be very different, making the previous studies, in Phebus' words, unreliable.

Pictures don't lie

"When you actually videotape it and observe it, most consumers are doing a really bad job in terms of preventing food contamination," he said.

In fact, the study found that all the consumers made mistakes in the kitchen that could lead to potential foodborne illnesses. The kitchen was wiped down after each participant prepared a meal, making it pristine for each new cook.

Afterward, the team looked for contamination. It found it on handles of pots and pans, on countertops and faucets. It was especially prevalent on hand towels, suggesting the participants were at least trying to be careful. They just fell short.

"We found that most people tried to wash their hands, but did it very ineffectively — either only using water or not washing for long enough," Phebus said. "By not washing their hands correctly, they spread contamination to the hand towels.”

The hand towels get used over and over, and each time they recontaminate things in the kitchen.

“It ultimately leads to contamination in the food product," Phebus said.

The U.S. government's food safety experts say one way to reduce kitchen contamination is to use paper towels for drying hands, not the dish towel. It offers other safety tips in the short video below.

Millions of low and moderate-income workers may be missing out on a significant tax credit that can be as much as $6,000.

If you earned $52,427 or less last year, you may qualify for the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) for the first time in 2015. About a third of the people eligible for EITC fluctuate each year based on changes to their marital, parental and financial status.

“About 4 out of 5 eligible workers and families get the credit they earned. That leaves millions missing EITC every year,” said Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Commissioner John Koskinen. “It’s an important credit and one of the government’s best tools to fight poverty.”

Last year, almost 28 million eligible workers and families received $66 billion total in EITC, with an average EITC amount of $2,400.

The amount of EITC varies depending on income, family size and filing status. Those who work for someone else or those who run a business or farm and who earned $52,427 or less during 2014 could receive larger refunds if they qualify for the EITC. This could mean up to $496 in EITC for people without children, and a maximum credit of up to $6,143 for those with three or more qualifying children.

The EITC is refundable. That means those eligible may get a refund from the IRS even if they owe no tax or had no taxes withheld from their paycheck.

Workers potentially eligible to claim the credit should visit IRS.gov/eitc to learn if they qualify, how to claim the credit and more. The EITC Assistant will also determine their filing status, if they have a qualifying child or children and estimate the amount of the EITC they could get. If an individual doesn’t qualify for EITC, the Assistant explains why and a summary of the results can be printed.

How to claim the EITC

To get the EITC, workers must file a tax return, even if they are not legally required to file, and specifically claim the credit. Free tax help is available to those eligible for the EITC:

• Free File on IRS.gov Free brand-name tax software walks people through a question and answer format to help them prepare their returns and claim every credit and deduction for which they are eligible. Free File also provides online versions of IRS paper forms, an option called Free File Fillable Forms which is best suited for taxpayers comfortable preparing their own returns.

• Free tax preparation sites EITC-eligible workers can seek free tax preparation at thousands of Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) and Tax Counseling for the Elderly (TCE) sites. Taxpayers can locate the nearest site using a search tool on IRS.gov or through the IRS2go smartphone application.

Documentation required

It is important for taxpayers to bring along all the required documents and information to make sure they get the EITC they deserve. Also, those who bought coverage through the Health Insurance Marketplace should receive Form 1095-A, Health Insurance Marketplace Statement, from their Marketplace in early February.

It’s important to also bring the Form 1095-A to the volunteer site. Any taxpayer who does not receive it by early February should contact their Marketplace, not the IRS. The IRS will not have access to the information on the form.

Like last year, the IRS expects to issue more than 9 out of 10 refunds within 21 days. The IRS reminds taxpayers that the fastest way to get a refund is to e-file their tax return and choose direct deposit. It takes longer to process paper returns. Because of budget cuts resulting in a smaller staff, it may take an additional week or more to process paper returns, meaning that those refunds are expected to be issued in seven weeks or more. Taxpayers can track the status of their refund with the “Where’s My Refund?" tool. l available on IRS.gov or on IRS2go.

The role of Obamacare

The Affordable Care Act requires that a taxpayer and each member of his or her family have qualifying health insurance coverage for each month of the year, qualify for an exemption from the coverage requirement, or make an individual shared responsibility payment when filing a federal income tax return.

If taxpayers bought coverage through the Health Insurance Marketplace, they should receive Form 1095-A, Health Insurance Marketplace Statement from their Marketplace by early February. They should save this form because it has important information needed to complete their tax returns.

If taxpayers are expecting to receive Form 1095-A and has not received it by early February, they should contact the Marketplace where the coverage was purchased. Due to the fact that the IRS does not have this information, it is recommended that taxpayers contact the appropriate marketplace.

Anyone who benefited from advance payments of the premium tax credit must file a federal income tax return. The taxpayer will need to reconcile those advance payments with the amount of premium tax credit they’re entitled to based on actual income. As a result, some people may see a smaller or larger tax refund or tax liability than they were expecting. When filing their returns, taxpayers will use IRS Form 8962, Premium Tax Credit (PTC), to calculate the premium tax credit and reconcile the credit with any advance payments.

The Affordable Care Act requires that a taxpayer and each member of his or her family either has qualifying health insurance coverage for each month of the year, qualifies for an exemption, or makes an individual shared responsibility payment when filing a federal income tax return.

Reporting requirements. Most taxpayers will simply check a box on their tax return to indicate that each member of their family had qualifying health coverage for the whole year. No further action is required. Qualifying health insurance coverage includes coverage under most, but not all, types of health care coverage plans. Taxpayers can use the chart on IRS.gov/aca to find out if their insurance counts as qualifying coverage.

Exemptions. A taxpayer may be eligible to claim an exemption from the requirement to have coverage. If eligible for an exemption, the taxpayer will need to complete the new IRS Form 8965, Health Coverage Exemptions and attach it to their return. The individual must apply for some exemptions through the Health Insurance Marketplace. However, most of the exemptions are easily obtained from the IRS when filing a tax return.

Individual Shared Responsibility Payment. If an individual does not have qualifying coverage or an exemption for each month of the year, they will need to make an individual shared responsibility payment when filing their return for choosing not to purchase coverage. Examples and information about figuring the payment are available on the IRS Calculating the Payment page. More information about the Affordable Care Act and the 2014 income tax return is available at IRS.gov/aca.

Get It right

Taxpayers are responsible for the accuracy of their tax return even if someone else preparers it for them. The rules for EITC are complicated. The IRS urges taxpayers to seek help if they are unsure of their eligibility, whether from a paid tax professional or at a free tax return preparation site. Deliberate errors can have lasting impact on future eligibility to claim EITC and leave taxpayers with a penalty.

Taxpayers should reply promptly to any letter from the IRS requesting additional information about EITC. If taxpayers need assistance or have questions, they should call the number on the IRS letter.

In 1973 singer and songwriter Paul Simon had a hit song with “Kodachrome,” a tribute to Kodak's popular color film, which included slides. In those days, people took lots of pictures in the form of slides – maybe because it was cheaper than color prints.

As a result, millions of memories were captured, perhaps looked at once, put in a box and promptly forgotten. For years. Decades, even.

Now we live in the digital age and photographs – as many as you care to take – can live on your computer forever. But what about all those slides collecting dust? Is there an easy way to convert them to a digital image?

Commercial digitizing

If you search online you'll find a number of commercial services that will do it for you. The cheapest costs around 22 cents per slide. But to take advantage of these services you have to box up your precious slides, entrust them to the U.S. Postal Service, and hope they get back to you safely, and in a timely manner.

I've read a number of reviews about these services and the complaints seem to be about the length of time it took to get it done and cropping issues. Some of the reviewers appear to be pretty hard-core photographers, so I took their concerns with a bit of a grain of salt.

But one reviewer pointed out that many of these services use an Epson V-Series flatbed scanner to convert the slides to digital prints so, why not just buy a scanner and do it yourself?

I had about 700 or more slides that I wanted to convert and, while it seemed like a lot of work, the economics seemed to make sense. So I checked out Epson scanners on Amazon.com.

Compromise

You can pay a little or a lot for one of these flatbed scanners, which comes with a slide-scanning attachment. I compromised by selecting the Epson Perfection V600 photo scanner, marked down to $200.

It comes with scanning software and PhotoShop Elements 11, for color correcting. The slide adapter snaps easily into place and holds 4 slides. The software scans 4 slides at a time and saves each one as an individual file. At the default setting of 300 dpi, it takes about 4 minutes – or 1 minute per slide.

Pleasant surprise

I have to say the Epson V600 was a pleasant surprise. My only other experience was projecting a slide on the wall and photographing it with a digital camera, a method that allows you to see what is on the slide, but little else.

The scanner is limited by the quality of the slide it is scanning but assuming your shot is in focus and adequately lit, the results are impressive – stunning in some cases. Some of it may be due to the scanner – some to the quality of the film, which might have gone unnoticed before.

Seeing the quality for the first time

I'm giving the film a lot of credit. Remember that when we viewed these photographs before, it was always on a screen, or even a wall. We never got the full clarity of Kodachrome film unless we had a print made – and even then a lot depended on the developer. Seeing these slides converted to high-quality digital images is almost like seeing them for the first time.

In fact, it reminded me of the scene from an early episode of Mad Men, when Don Draper put together a masterful pitch to Kodak for what became its Carousel slide projector. He described the Carousel as a time machine, allowing the viewer to revisit the past.

This time it's the Epson V600 delivering the emotional wallop of reliving the past through clear, high resolution photographs -- a Carousel updated for the 21st century.

If you have a lot of slides to scan, need a flatbed scanner and have the time to do it yourself, the Epson V600 delivers.

Asia has a problem. Research published in December last year found that 7.1% of the population in Asia is addicted to the internet. But unlike other countries with similar problems, Asian countries are trying to do something about it.

Taiwan has decided to do something about it and has enacted some strict bans. It has banned children under the age of two from using electronic devices such as iPads, televisions and smartphones. If you decide to let your little one play with the devices you face a fine of $1,000.

The new law also states that parents must ensure that under-18s only use electronic products for a "reasonable" length of time. The problem with that is a reasonable length of time seems to have no definition. Although the law proposed by Taiwanese MP Lu Shiow-yen said his intention was to protect young people by stopping them from using electronic devices for more than 30 minutes at a time

China has its issues as well. Online addiction affecting young people has become a problem with an estimated 24 million children considered "web junkies." China has more than 250 military style boot camps that have been set up across the country to tackle under-18 internet addiction.

Instant feedback

“Technology itself is extremely addicting because it provides immediate feedback,” says Hilarie Cash, PhD, founder of reSTART, which claims to be the first inpatient Internet addiction treatment center in the U.S. “Children are growing up with so much Internet exposure that they are becoming dangerously uncomfortable without it.”

When the University of Leeds carried out a study into internet overuse, it found that those who were addicted were more likely to suffer depression as a result.

The American Academy of Pediatrics says two hours tops of screen time should be the limit for letting your kids play online.

There are sources for help if you feel you or a family member are starting to suffer from an online addiction Look into: NetAddiction.com, MentalHelp.net and the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Who are these people who don't believe in vaccinations? That's the question that's been asked -- often in heated tones -- following an outbreak of measles that started at Disneyland.

Would you believe they're more likely to be Republicans and independents than Democrats? That's the conclusion of a new study by researchers at Ohio State University. 

The study re-analyzed national survey data from 2009 that examined Americans' views on a then-new vaccine for the H1N1 virus -- commonly known as swine flu.

Results showed that Republicans and independents were significantly less likely than Democrats to say they would get the vaccine. But it wasn't their political affiliation itself that was driving Republican and independent views, said Kent Schwirian, professor of sociology at OSU.

"It's not that Republicans reject vaccination because of their conservative views or exposure to certain media," Schwirian said. "It was their lack of confidence in the government to deal with the swine flu crisis that was driving their anti-vaccination views."

The study found that people trusting the government's ability to deal with the epidemic were almost three times more likely to take the vaccine than were others.

Lack of confidence

The results may apply to the current measles outbreak that started in southern California last year, Schwirian said. Some research has blamed the outbreak on clusters of people in Marin County, California, and other politically liberal areas who didn't vaccinate their children.

But Schwirian doesn't necessarily see any conflict between these results that find Republicans were less likely to accept vaccines and current work that finds Democrats who are against vaccine use.

"I believe it is a lack of confidence in government -- not political affiliation -- that may unite the anti-vaccination people in our study with those from today," Schwirian said. "Even in our study, about a third of Democrats said they were not likely to get swine flu vaccine and many of those had low confidence in government."

During the winter of 2009-2010, the swine flu was a big deal, Schwirian said. The World Health Organization declared the outbreak the first worldwide pandemic in more than 40 years. In the United States, the virus killed 12,500, hospitalized 275,000 and sickened 61 million.

A vaccine was developed, but during the winter of 2010 the vaccination program became a heated public issue and the number of people who said they would get the vaccine plummeted.

Only 50.4%

Overall, only 50.4% of those who participated in the Pew survey indicated that they would take the vaccine.

A larger percentage of Democrats (63.7%) were willing to take the vaccine than Republicans and independents (both about 43%).

Nearly 60% of those with confidence in government were willing to take the vaccine, compared to 32% of those with less confidence. Those who watched more news were also more likely to want the vaccine.

When the researchers used a statistical model to analyze the data, they learned that confidence in government was the driving force in vaccination views.

Those distrusting the government's ability were more likely to be older, middle income, politically conservative and less likely to follow media reports about the outbreak.

"Republicans were the most likely to have less confidence in government, so that's why we saw this strong relationship between Republican affiliation and skepticism about the swine flu vaccine," Schwirian said.

This survey didn't ask about participants' trust in science and medicine, which may also be related to views on vaccines, he noted.

"But this finding is certainly consistent with studies that have shown that the confidence of political conservatives in science has decreased in recent years."

Schwirian conducted the study with Gustavo Mesch, a Ph.D. graduate of Ohio State who is now a professor of sociology and Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Haifa in Israel. Their results appear online in the journal Health Promotion International and will be published in a future print edition.

For this newly published study, the researchers did a secondary analysis of the Pew Research for the People and Press survey from October 2009. The Pew institute conducts regular surveys of public opinion, and this survey asked about the willingness of Americans to take the swine flu vaccine. A total of 1,000 people were surveyed.

Mrs. Thomas took her prescription for her heart medication to the pharmacy to have it filled. “I don’t want one of those generic drugs either,” she stated. “I want the real thing.” So, are brand name drugs really better than generic version?

According to recent information published in Consumer Reports, the answer is an emphatic no. To win approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the manufacturer of the generic medication must show that the drug has the same active ingredient and that it is identical in strength, dosage form, route of administration and labeling as the brand name drug.

The company must also demonstrate that individuals absorb and excrete the medication at the same rate. Says a pharmaceutical scientist who worked for decades at the FDA, “People may think that brand name products are better because they’re more expensive, but the body doesn’t know whether the drug came from a brand name or a generic company.”

When a medication goes off patient, other pharmaceutical manufacturers are free to create generic versions of that drug. The consumer can save considerable money by switching to the generic form of that drug. But the price of the drug does not go down immediately after the generic is released to the market.

Let’s take a mythical medication, Fat-no-more, used for weight loss, as an example. The brand’s retail price for a month’s worth of Fat-no-more is $220. Then it goes generic. After one year, the generic price is about half: $110. After 2 years on the market, it goes to $48. After 3 years, the price is $12.

Why does it take so long for the price to go down? When a drug is about to go off patent, manufacturers file lawsuits to challenge the patent. The company that wins obtains a 6-month period to sell that generic exclusively. When that period is over, other generic houses can produce that drug, forcing the prices even lower. Today, 8 out of 10 prescriptions filled in the US are for generic drugs, says the FDA. Cost is a big factor because generics can be as much as 85% cheaper than their brand counterparts.

Costs soaring

The cost of generic drugs is soaring, however.

Relatively cheap as they are compared with brand name products, the price gap between brand name drugs and generics is beginning to narrow – and it is not because proprietary drugs are getting cheaper. A 2014 article in the New England Journal of Medicine revealed that certain older drugs, many of which are generic and not protected by patents or market exclusivity, are now also extremely expensive.

Examples:

• Captopril, used for hypertension and heart failure, increased in price by more than 2,800% between November 2012 and November 2013, from 1.4 cents to 39.9 cents per tablet.
• Doxycycline, a broad-spectrum antibiotic that has been in existence since 1967, zoomed in price from 6.3 cents to $3.36 per pill.
• Clomipramine, a long-established antidepressant, has jumped in price from 22 cents to $8.32 per pill.
• Digoxin, used for atrial fibrillation (irregular heartbeat) and heart failure by millions of Americans, saw a price increase of 637% between 2002 and 2013.
• Some generic versions of codeine formulations for migraine, thyroid medicines, as well as the generic steroid prednisolone, have all more than doubled in price since last year, according to industry analyst EvaluatePharma. 

Yet, low-cost generics have saved the health care industry $209 billion in 2012, $239 billion in 2013 and almost $1.5 trillion over the past decade, according to the most recent data.

Sadly, prices have spiked for certain medications because of shortages of raw materials, supply disruptions or other factors that have led some manufacturers to stop producing those medications, resulting in a near monopoly. The number of manufacturers of digoxin, for example, has fallen from 8 to 3.

As Aaron Kesselheim, MD, assistant professor of pharmaceutical economics at Harvard Medical School, stated, “Studies show it is not until you have 4 or 5 companies manufacturing the same generic will the prices really drop.” Therefore, ask your doctor to switch your medications to another drug in that class if you are spending more money than you would like.

Mrs. Thomas’ pharmacist explained the generic process to her and she agreed that perhaps the generic form of her pricy heart medication was as good as the “real thing” and she agreed to switch to the generic. She was pleased at the money she saved, as well as the confidence she gained from her pharmacist’s counseling.