Current Events in December 2016

A California family blames Apple for the death of their young daughter in a traffic accident that a lawsuit says was caused by a driver who was using FaceTime on his iPhone 6.

James and Bethany Modisette were driving with their two daughters on I-35 just north of Dallas two years ago when traffic slowed suddenly and a driver who admitted he was on FaceTime plowed into them. James and his daughter, Moriah, 5, were trapped in the car. Moriah later died of her injuries.

The lawsuit claims Apple is responsible for Moriah's death because of its failure to use an alternative FaceTime design which it had already patented. The alternative design "locks out" drivers in a moving vehicle and could have prevented the accident, the suit argues, according to a Courthouse News Service report. 

“Defendant Apple Inc. has had the technology to prevent these events, and the Modisettes’ injuries, specifically since at least Dec. 12, 2008, when it filed an application with the U.S. Patent Office for a ‘driver handheld computing device lock-out,” the family says in the complaint.

Specifically, the family says Apple possessed the capability to use GPS tracking to gauge the speed of a vehicle in which a user was traveling and shut down FaceTime, but that its failure to include this technology was a significant factor in the crash that injured the Modisette family.

The suit was filed in Santa Clara County Superior Court last Friday. 

The U.S. Justice Department and Takata are nearing agreement on a $1 billion criminal settlement that would include a guilty plea to criminal misconduct, the Wall Street Journal reports.

It's expected that Takata would pay part of the penalty upfront and the rest over a number of years, the report said. Takata has been trying to sell itself and is said to be considering a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing, so how much of the fine would actually be paid could be in doubt.

Takata has had to recall millions of airbags because of faulty inflators that can explode with excessive force in hot and humid conditions. At least 11 deaths and 184 injuries have been attributed to the airbags in the U.S.

The recall process has been painfully slow despite repeated attempts by federal safety regulators to take the brakes off. On Dec. 12, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued what's called the "Amended Coordinated Remedy Order." It sets deadlines for when automakers must have replacement parts available for customers. 

“NHTSA is doing everything possible to make sure that there are no more preventable injuries or deaths because of these dangerous airbag inflators,” said NHTSA Administrator Dr. Mark Rosekind. “All vehicle owners should regularly check their vehicles for recalls at SaferCar.gov and go get them fixed at no cost as soon as replacement parts are available.”

Consumers frustrated

Of course, the problem is that many thousands of consumers have done just that, only to be frustrated when their dealer was unable to make the repairs because of lack of parts. NHTSA has also been frustrated by the delays and has tried to speed things up previously but says that, this time, it aims to get results.

At last count, there were about 46 million recalled Takata airbag inflators in 29 million vehicles in the U.S. Another NHTSA order issued in May 2016 requires automakers to recall an additional batch of inflators over the next three years, ultimately recalling nearly 70 million inflators in 42 million vehicles. 

NHTSA has committed to seeking a 100 percent recall completion rate, but as of Dec. 2, automakers reported they have so far repaired approximately 12.5 million inflators, roughly a quarter of the total number currently on the recall list.

"Ultimately all frontal Takata inflators using non-desiccated phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate (PSAN) will be recalled," NHTSA said.

Whether the settlement agreement would include any kind of compensation for consumers isn't known. The newspaper report said final agreement was not expected until January at the earliest. 

The problem of children strangling on window cords is one that just won't go away. Despite warnings, recalls, and revised industry standards, children continued to become entangled in window covering cords, with often tragic results.

In a recent 29-day period, four children died from window cord strangulation: 

• a 4-year-old boy, in Chicago Ridge, Illinois, on November 12, 2016;
• a 4-year-old girl in Salt Lake City, Utah, on November 29, 2016;
• a 4-year-old girl in League City, Texas, on December 7, 2016; and
• a 3-year-old boy in Cleburne, Texas, on December 10, 2016.

The deaths are the most recent in a long list of 293 deaths and serious injuries caused by window cords between 1996 and 2012.

“These window covering strangulations are so complicated but the most important factor is that it happens to the best of parents. Parents who trusted that either tying up cords, cutting cord short or using breakaway devices would prevent their children from death,” said Linda Kaiser, Founder and President of Parents for Window Blind Safety. 

“It is paramount that consumers use window coverings with no pull cords in their homes,” Kaiser said. She and her husband Matt formed Parents for Window Blind Safety in 2002, after their daughter, Cheyenne Rose, died as a result of being strangled by a window blind cord.

Top five hazard

The Consumer Product Safety Commission has long recognized window covering cords as a hidden strangulation and asphyxiation hazard to children and continues to identify it on its website as one of the “top five hidden hazards in the home.” The most vulnerable children are infants through eight years of age.

The rate of injuries and deaths has not been significantly reduced since 1983, despite six industry attempts at revising their voluntary standards, the CPSC said. The seventh revision of the voluntary standard is currently underway.

“These terrible tragedies can happen quickly and silently,” said William Wallace, policy analyst for Consumers Union, the policy and mobilization arm of Consumer Reports. “We urge manufacturers and retailers to sell only those products that do not pose a risk of strangulation to children.”

There's a lot of talk about the high cost of health care, but do you know which conditions contribute most to health care spending?

If you said diabetes, you're right -- a new study finds diabetes costs $101 billion annually in diagnosis and treatment and is growing 36 times faster than the cost of heart disease, the leading cause of death and the second most-expensive condition. 

"While it is well known that the US spends more than any other nation on health care, very little is known about what diseases drive that spending." said Dr. Joseph Dieleman, lead author of a paper published in JAMA and Assistant Professor at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington. "IHME is trying to fill the information gap so that decision-makers in the public and private sectors can understand the spending landscape, and plan and allocate health resources more effectively."

In fact, the study found that just 20 conditions make up more than half of all spending on health care in the United States.

While diabetes and heart disease primarily affected consumers 65 and over, lower back and neck pain, the third-most-expensive condition, primarily strikes adults of working age.

These three top spending categories, along with hypertension and injuries from falls, comprise 18% of all personal health spending and totaled $437 billion in 2013.

This study distinguishes between spending on public health programs from personal health spending, including both individual out-of-pocket costs and spending by private and government insurance programs. It covers 155 conditions.

$2.4 trillion

In addition to the $2.1 trillion spent on the 155 conditions examined in the study, Dr. Dieleman estimates that approximately $300 billion in costs, such as those of over-the-counter medications and privately funded home health care, remain unaccounted for, indicating total personal health care costs in the US reached $2.4 trillion in 2013.

Other expensive conditions among the top 20 include musculoskeletal disorders, such as tendinitis, carpal tunnel syndrome, and rheumatoid arthritis; well-care associated with dental visits; and pregnancy and postpartum care.

Other key findings include:

• Women ages 85 and older spent the most per person in 2013, at more than $31,000 per person. More than half of this spending (58%) occurred in nursing facilities, while 40% was expended on cardiovascular diseases, Alzheimer's disease, and falls.
• Men ages 85 and older spent $24,000 per person in 2013, with only 37% on nursing facilities, largely because women live longer and men more often have a spouse at home to provide care.
• Less than 10% of personal health care spending is on nursing care facilities, and less than 5% of spending is on emergency department care. The conditions leading to the most spending in nursing care facilities are Alzheimer's and stroke, while the condition leading to the most spending in emergency departments is falls.
• Public health education and advocacy initiatives, such as anti-tobacco and cancer awareness campaigns, totaled an estimated $77.9 billion in 2013, less than 3% of total health spending.

Top 10 diseases

The top 10 most costly health expenses in 2013 were:

1. Diabetes - $101.4 billion

2. Ischemic heart disease - $88.1 billion

3. Low back and neck pain - $87.6 billion

4. Hypertension - $83.9 billion

5. Injuries from falls - $76.3 billion

6. Depressive disorders - $71.1 billion

7. Oral-related problems - $66.4 billion

8. Vision and hearing problems - $59 billion

9. Skin-related problems, such as cellulitis and acne - $55.7 billion

10. Pregnancy and postpartum care - $55.6 billion

Unexpected acceleration is a problem in some car models, but unexpected decreases in braking effectiveness can also be a serious problem, one that owners of Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan models have been complaining about.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has opened a probe into the matter, after receiving 141 reports of sudden, unexpected increases in stopping distance in 2007 through 2009 model-year Fusions and Milans.

Three crashes have been reported, but there are so far no reports of injuries.

The cause of the problem is believed to be the Antilock Braking System (ABS) Hydraulic Control Unit (HCU). Some of the complainants report that after an ABS type braking event, caused by braking on slippery surface, a rough or uneven surface, a manhole cover, or similar irregularity in the roadway, that the brake pedal goes soft, frequently described as "going to the floor," and the amount of force required by the driver to stop the car increases significantly, NHTSA said.

In some cases the driver is unable to stop within their desired stopping distance. Complainants have also reported going past the expected stopping points for stop signs or red lights, some have reported being out into the flow of traffic before being able to bring the vehicle to a stop.

Investigators say they think the ABS HCU experiences an internal malfunction which causes an inability to maintain required braking pressure. Reports allege that the condition can continue for some time until it corrects itself, but will then recur if another ABS type braking event happens, while other reports indicate that the replacement of the ABS HCU corrects the problem.

The agency has opened a preliminary evaluation to assess the scope, frequency, and potential consequences of the alleged defect. That could eventually lead to a formal investigation, which in turn could result in a recall.

What to do

If this has happened to you, you can report it to NHTSA using the online complaint form at SaferCar.gov

Despite claims that it is dangerous to human health, the plastics industry and the Food and Drug Administration have insisted throughout the years that Bisphenol-A, a chemical used to make hard plastics and the lining of canned foods, is perfectly safe for humans to ingest. 

Industry spokesmen say that BPA is a safe and effective means of packaging food to protect it from contamination. They argue that finding an equally effective alternative would take years of research.

Some 90 percent of Americans are estimated to have BPA in their bloodstream, leading environmental groups to launch an aggressive but so far unsuccessful lobbying campaign to ban the chemical from food packaging.

Sure, the FDA did agree to pass a rule stipulating that BPA cannot be used in infant formula packaging, baby bottles or sippy cups in 2013, but even then the agency asserted it wasn’t doing so for safety reasons. In fact, the FDA only agreed to ban the chemical in baby products at the request of the manufacturers. “FDA’s action is based solely on a determination of abandonment,” meaning the industry said it had stopped using BPA, “and is not related to the safety of BPA,” the agency wrote in 2013.

Still being found

Given the official stamp of approval, it should be no surprise that researchers are continuing to find BPA in products across the board, including products designed for some of our most vulnerable populations.

Researchers at the University of Missouri recently fed 14 dogs canned food, rather than the bagged food that the pets normally ate, for two weeks. They found that even in cases in which the canned food was labeled “BPA-free,” that the presence of BPA in the dogs’ blood samples increased an average of almost threefold after the two-week period.

The increased presence of BPA in pets has implications for both dogs' health and humans. “We also found that increased serum BPA concentrations were correlated with gut microbiome and metabolic changes in the dogs analyzed,” study co-author Cheryl Rosenfeld told Science Daily. "Increased BPA may also reduce one bacterium that has the ability to metabolize BPA and related environmental chemicals."

Researchers have previously warned that products advertised as BPA-free aren’t necessarily any better. Hard plastics and canned food liners, even those not made with BPA, often contain bisphenols or other endocrine-disrupting chemicals.  

Baby teething 

Another study published earlier this month evaluates baby teethers for the presence of BPA. Previous research has suggested that BPA exposure is especially dangerous for small children and babies.

The research team in this case soaked 59 different teethers in purified water to evaluate whether the teethers leached the chemicals. The results, published in the American Chemical Society this month, show that small amounts of bisphenols, benzophenones and parabens leached from the teethers, even from teethers that were labeled as “BPA-free.”

“Almost 90 percent of the teethers we bought were labeled as BPA-free, but we found BPA in almost every product and most were labeled as non-toxic,” Study author Kurunthachalam Kannan, a research scientist at New York State Department of Health, told CBS News. “We were finding more than 15 to 20 toxic chemicals in all of the them.”

Plastics industry trade group the American Chemistry Council, meanwhile, continues to say there is nothing to worry about. “It should be noted that all the chemicals studied here are shown to be at extremely low exposure levels and well-below government set safe levels,” the group wrote in response to the baby-teether study.

Carmakers have lost out on a last-minute bid to loosen fuel economy standards through the 2025 model year. The Environmental Protection Agency told industry lobbyists earlier this week that it will not extend the deadline for a review of the standards, indicating the agency will push ahead with a plan to make the rules final before the Obama administration leaves office Jan. 20.

Donald Trump's pick for the job of EPA chief, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, has been a critic of President Obama's efforts to regulate greenhouse gas emissions as a way of curbing climate change and the auto industry has been hoping he will agree to loosen the tough fuel economy standards.

The EPA's action won praise from environmentalists and consumer groups. Consumers Union, the policy and mobilization arm of Consumer Reports, called it a victory for consumers who will benefit from lower fuel costs and protection from future spikes in gas prices.

"Save real money"

“This plan will ensure new-car buyers save real money and have more options for clean, fuel-efficient vehicles over the next decade,” said Shannon Baker–Branstetter, energy policy counsel for Consumers Union. “We see a lot of advancements in car technologies and features every year, but fuel efficiency investments are unique in that they pay for themselves and keep more money in the pockets of consumers.”

A recent Consumers Union analysis found that under the 2025 standards, consumers would benefit from net savings of $3,200 per car and $5,700 per truck. The fuel savings are significant enough that, even with continuing low gas prices, the fuel savings would outweigh technology costs starting with the very first car loan payment and continuing after that.

If gas prices rise, the savings will be even greater – up to $5,700 per car and $8,200 per truck, the analysis found. Depending on the car-truck vehicle mix, EPA’s latest analysis found that net consumer benefits would total between $60 billion and $100 billion.

"Sadly predictable"

The Association of Global Automakers, a trade group that had petitioned the agency for a change along with Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, called the EPA’s decision “sadly predictable.”

“EPA's hurried determination, and lack of transparency, only increases suspicions surrounding the agency's decision, undermining confidence in its objectivity and impartiality,” John Bozzella, president and CEO of the group, said, according to an Automotive News report.

Carmakers say the fuel-economy standards will be difficult to meet and will drive up the price of cars. But in comments filed today, Consumers Union notes that EPA’s proposed determination is based on extensive technical analysis that found the standards, first proposed in 2012, to be achievable and cost-effective.

Top attribute

Consumers Union also noted that fuel economy is the number one attribute vehicle owners would like to see improved, according to a  June 2016 survey, conducted by the Consumer Reports National Research Center.

Fuel economy beat out purchase price, connectivity, vehicle comfort, safety, cargo space, reliability, horsepower, vehicle size, off-road capability, style, and handling.  And even consumers who plan to buy a SUV still want their next vehicle to have better fuel economy. 

The survey findings also show that strong majorities of Americans believe increasing fuel efficiency is important (84%) and that the government should continue to set standards for higher fuel economy in cars and trucks (70%) - a belief supported by majorities of both Republicans and Democrats.

“Automakers are already outpacing the current fuel efficiency standards, all while achieving record sales and ever-increasing profits. By finalizing these standards, EPA will provide automakers the certainty they need to continue building the efficient fleet that consumers want and expect,” said Baker-Branstetter.

There may be reason for new optimism among multiple sclerosis (MS) patients and the doctors who treat them.

Clinical trials on a promising new drug have shown good results, according to researchers writing up their findings in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The drug is ocrelizumab, which researchers say is the first drug that appears to work against the primary progressive form of MS.

MS is a degenerative disease that attacks the protective lining of nerve cells in the brain. Over time the patient has difficulty walking. MS is categorized as either “primary progressive,” meaning it steadily gets worse, or “relapsing,” in which the patient is subject to periodic setbacks.

Encouraging results

In the trial, researchers report that the percentage of patients whose condition got worse after 12 weeks after taking ocrelizumab was 32.9%. But the percentage was higher – 39.3% – for patients who didn't get the drug.

After 24 weeks, there were also fewer ocrelizumab recipients with worsening symptoms than placebo recipients. After 120 weeks, the difference was more pronounced.

On a timed 25-foot walk, 38.9% of ocrelizumab patients performed worse than before, while more than 55% of placebo patients saw their progress go down.

FDA extends review period

Earlier this week, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) extended the review period of ocrelizumab for treatment of both forms of MS. According to the Multiple Sclerosis Association of America, the extension was necessary to give more time for the FDA to review data on the manufacturing process of this potential therapy.

Ocrelizumab's function is to neutralize part of the immune system - called B cells. It is these B cells that attack and destroy the protecting coating around nerve cells, called myelin sheath.

This is just the latest encouraging report from MS researchers, who have been making progress in recent years. In January, we reported on a small clinical trial at the Sheffield Royal Hallamshire Hospital in the UK. There, researchers used an existing cancer treatment to reverse MS symptoms in several patients.

The therapy is called autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). It uses chemotherapy to break down the weak immune system, then rebuilds it using stem cells that come from the patients blood.

The key, researchers say, is the fact that the cells are so young they have not developed the flaws that appear in MS.

This is the time of year many people make out checks to their favorite charities, which depend on that generosity to provide their services.

But not all organizations calling themselves a charity are all that charitable, according to several attorneys general around the country who have launched crackdowns.

Just this week Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette served notice on professional fundraiser Golden Recyclers, Inc., accusing it of more than 2,000 violations of the state's Charitable Organizations and Solicitations Act.

“Michigan citizens are generous, especially around the holidays,” said Schuette. “I won’t tolerate companies that exploit that generosity for private gain. Not only does it harm donors, it also harms those charities that play by the rules by diverting donations from their charitable programs—donations they especially need during the holidays.”

Schuette charges the fundraiser with illegally operating clothing donation bins and misrepresenting what happens to the donated items.

New York sues fundraiser

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has sued a professional fundraiser from Brooklyn, charging that Menacola Marketing, doing business as Neighborhood Outreach, has not complied with an ongoing fraud investigation.

Schneiderman says over a five year period, the organization reported more than $5 million in donations but retained, on average, 85% of that amount for its services. Scheiderman is seeking to have Menacola Marketing turn over its books and records.

At the same time, Schneiderman's office has released a report on professional fundraisers, claiming that one-third of what people donate goes to the fundraiser, not the charity. Schneiderman says the report goes beyond its focus on telemarketers to include a broader range of solicitation methods, such as direct mail, email, and internet fundraising campaigns.

“Unfortunately, many fundraisers are only looking out for themselves, retaining the majority of the donations to fund their own operations,” Schneiderman said.

Check The Charity

Colorado Attorney General Cynthia Coffman says consumers should always check out a charity before they donate. Online tools include www.checkthecharity.com, where consumers can check out a charity's detailed filing and review other information about the group, including any professional fundraisers they employ.

The best advice, however, may be to stay proactive in your giving. Select a cause or group with which you are familiar and give generously.

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing is recalling 12 model year 2016 Avalon, and 2017 Camry vehicles manufactured August 3, 2016, to September 12, 2016.

The front passenger knee air bag module may have been attached to the lower instrument panel with incorrect fasteners.

If the air bag was installed with incorrect fasteners, the fasteners may become loose over time, affecting the air bag deployment and increasing the risk of injury.

What to do

Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the fasteners, and if necessary, replace the instrument panel brace and body bracket and reattach the air bag assembly, free of charge. The recall is expected to begin in December 2016.

Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-800-331-4331. Toyota's number for this recall is G05.

H-E-B, in cooperation with Dawn Food Products, is recalling certain bakery products that may be contaminated with Salmonella.

There have been no reports of illness to date in connection with these items.

The following products, sold in H-E-B and Mi Tienda in-store bakeries in Texas and Mexico, are being recalled:

What to do

Customers who purchased the recalled products should return them to the store for a full refund.

Consumers with questions or concerns may contact H-E-B customer service at 1-855-432-4438, Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. (CST).

Chrysler (FCA US LLC) is recalling 43,071 model year 2016 Dodge Journey, Jeep Compass, and Jeep Patriot vehicles manufactured May 9, 2016, to July 15, 2016.

The crankshaft or camshaft sensor may only work intermittently, causing the engine to stall. If the engine stalls, there is an increased the risk of a crash.

What to do

Chrysler will notify owners, and dealers will replace the crankshaft or camshaft sensor, free of charge. The recall is expected to begin January 27, 2017.

Owners may contact Chrysler customer service at 1-800-853-1403. Chrysler's number for this recall is S89.

In 1997, ExxonMobil’s then-chairman Lee Raymond told the World Petroleum Congress that fossil fuels are not causing the earth’s temperature to rise. Fifteen years later, ExxonMobil’s CEO (and soon-to-be Secretary of State) Rex Tillerson began acknowledging that man-made climate change is real, but he argued that mankind still shouldn’t cut back on fossil fuels, describing global warming as a problem that can be solved with adaptation and engineering.

“You'd save millions upon millions of lives by making fossil fuels available to parts of the world that don't have it," he told the Council on Foreign Relations in 2012.

It’s assertions like those that have attracted scrutiny from state government officials who are currently investigating ExxonMobil over its decades-long public relations campaign casting doubt on global warming. Earlier this year, a group of Democratic state Attorneys General formed the group AGs United for Clean Power. Several have also launched civil investigations into ExxonMobil, demanding a long list of documents and records pertaining to public statements that company executives like Tillerson have made about climate change.

Exxon Sues AGs investigating it

ExxonMobil has responded by going on the offensive. Most recently, ExxonMobil filed a motion in court arguing that clean power-loving Attorney Generals are discriminating against the world’s largest publicly traded oil company. “ExxonMobil asserts a First Amendment interest to be free from viewpoint discrimination,” ExxonMobil and its team of attorneys wrote in December 19 court filings.

Who is behind the supposed discrimination? Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey and New York AG Eric Schneiderman. Both are evaluating whether ExxonMobil violated their states' consumer protection statutes. “Specifically, the investigation seeks information regarding whether Exxon may have misled consumers and/or investors with respect to the impact of fossil fuels on climate change, and climate change-driven risks to Exxon's business,” Healey’s office writes online.

ExxonMobil countered the civil investigations by filing a lawsuit earlier this year against Healey and Schneiderman, demanding its own stack of records and depositions from the AGs and the environmental groups that they have possibly allied with.

"Content-based discrimination"

In its December 19 filing, ExxonMobil argues that it should not have to turn over its communications or records, especially records relating to think tanks that have minimized the risks of global warming. “The CID [civil investigation demand] requests ExxonMobil’s documents and communications with 12 named organizations, all of which have been identified by advocacy organizations as, at times, opposing the views and policies favored by those advocacy organizations with respect to climate change science or policy,” the corporation writes in its December 19 motion.

“A state official’s targeting of speakers based on their views is improper content-based discrimination,” Exxon adds. The filing neglects to mention that ExxonMobil has a well-documented history of funneling millions of dollars into think tanks that subsequently cast doubt on global warming.

Exxon subpoenas green think tanks

As part of its lawsuit against the AGs, ExxonMobil has previously filed subpoenas demanding records from several environmental advocacy organizations, including the Union of Concerned Scientists and 350.org.

“They’ve hired a team of expensive lawyers to try and intimidate us into handing over all of our internal emails, documents, and communications,” 350.org Executive Director May Boeve wrote to website subscribers earlier this month, in a mass email asking for $15 donations. “Not long after we got the Exxon subpoena, we learned that the company's CEO Rex Tillerson was being considered for the position of Secretary of State. “

Attorneys for the Union of Concerned Scientists fired back to ExxonMobil’s subpoena in November with a letter pointing out that, according to the Union’s own research, “ExxonMobil and other companies had learned of the serious risk of climate change by 1988 at the latest...the fossil fuel companies then publicly denied or minimized the risks and secretly funded purportedly independent, contrarian climate research.”

"You need to contact our government and public affairs hotline," a person who answered the telephone at the office of ExxonMobil's in-house attorneys said when we called.

Exxon Recent Motion by Amy Cranks on Scribd