Current Events in April 2017

High blood pressure, or hypertension, affects approximately 75 million people in the U.S., according to reports from the CDC. Globally, the condition affects over one billion people and is responsible for over half of deaths due to stroke and slightly less than half of deaths due to heart disease.

While treating the condition can be done with medication, Dr. Alicia McDonough of the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California (USC) says that making some simple dietary changes can also do the trick. She contends that eating more potassium-rich foods – such as sweet potatoes, avocados, spinach, beans, and bananas – can go a long way towards combatting hypertension.

"Decreasing sodium intake is a well-established way to lower blood pressure, but evidence suggests that increasing dietary potassium may have an equally important effect on hypertension," she said.

Balancing act

In a recent study, McDonough investigated the relationship between high blood pressure, sodium, and potassium. She found that having higher amounts of potassium in one’s diet was generally associated with lower blood pressure, regardless of sodium intake.

In mice models, she found that the body tends to use sodium to regulate the amount of potassium in the blood. When there is an excess amount of potassium, she said, more sodium is used. The result of this balancing act is lower blood pressure and proper regulation of heart, nerve, and muscle function.

"When dietary potassium is high, kidneys excrete more salt and water, which increases potassium excretion. Eating a high potassium diet is like taking a diuretic," she explains.

Changing your diet

While it may seem simple enough to add more potassium to your diet, McDonough says it might be a challenge. She says that most U.S. consumers would need to make a conscious effort to include high-potassium foods that are not typically a part of their everyday diet.

"If you eat a typical Western diet," McDonough says, "your sodium intake is high and your potassium intake is low. This significantly increases your chances of developing high blood pressure,” she said.

However, for those looking to try out her recommendations, McDonough points to a 2004 report which recommends that adults eat at least 4.7 grams of potassium per day to lower blood pressure. She points out that eating three-quarters of a cup of black beans will get you halfway there, but certain plant-based sources are also viable and may be more nutritious.

The full study has been published in the American Journal of Physiology – Endocrinology and Metabolism.

Stress can wreak havoc on our health, potentially leading to such issues as insomnia, high blood pressure, and even physical pain. While few are impervious to the occasional bout of stress, a new study suggests your stress level may be higher depending on where you live.

Researchers from WalletHub recently set out to discover which states were the most and least stressed in the country by looking at four dimensions of stress: work-related, money-related, family-related, and health and safety-related.

Following a comparison of key stress “indicators” across 50 states and Washington D.C., analysts from the personal finance website concluded that the most stressed states were Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi, respectively.

Most stressed states

The researchers assigned different weights to various stress indicators, including average hours worked per week, income, divorce rates, and number of adults diagnosed with depression. Each state was graded on a 100-point scale, with 100 being the most stressed.

Consumers looking to keep it zen may be wise to avoid moving to Alabama any time soon. With a score of 56.91 out of 100, Alabama was the most stressed state.

Results from the analysis suggest tensions related to work and personal life are high in the southern state. Alabama had the fourth highest percentage of adults in fair/poor health, the fourth fewest average hours of sleep per night, the second fewest psychologists per capita, and the second lowest credit scores.

Other southern states also ranked among the most stressed. Louisiana, Mississippi, West Virginia, and Kentucky rounded out the top five.

Least stressed

Minnesota -- with its high credit scores, low divorce rates, and generally healthy residents -- was the least stressed state, with a score of 31.07. Residents of North Dakota, Iowa, and South Dakota also seem to have a handle on their stress levels.

The following states were the least stressed, according to the study:

• Minnesota
• North Dakota
• Iowa
• South Dakota
• Utah
• Nebraska
• New Hampshire
• Vermont
• Colorado
• Wisconsin

Savvy travelers know they can save money by booking air travel at just the right time. Ticket prices fluctuate significantly between the time the flight is posted and when it takes off.

The editors at TripAdvisor say the same is true when it comes to booking a hotel room for summer vacation travel, and the timing may be different from other seasonal travel periods.

Their research shows the best times to book will depend on the region or city where you are going during the usually busy the summer vacation season. The price changes may not be as dramatic as for airfare, but there are savings to be had.

Here's an example: the least expensive time to book a hotel room in the U.S. is within three months of a summer trip. If you time it right, you can pocket up to 9% in savings.

Big savings in Paris

Traveling to Europe? Book your Paris hotel room two months in advance and you might save 23% off peak summer rates.

"Bargain hunters know that timing is crucial when it comes to booking the lowest hotel prices," said Brooke Ferencsik, senior director of communications for TripAdvisor. "TripAdvisor data shows that travelers can often find the best prices on summer hotels months in advance, with a booking sweet spot typically within three months of their trip.”

But if you are traveling to Africa, TripAdvisor recommends booking four months out to save the most. Three months in advance is ideal for Asia and Central America, while four months is recommended for the Caribbean. For the South Pacific, you can wait until two months before check-in.

Coordinating airfare

It's a little different for airfare, which might make travel planning tricky. Last year Cheapair reported the best time book a flight to Central and South America is 70 days from departure. It's about the same if you're flying to Canada or Mexico.

You need to give yourself a lot more time when traveling to Europe or Asia. The best fares to European destinations are available about 120 days in advance. Booking flights to Asia requires even more advance time – 160 days.

As for booking a hotel room in specific U.S. cities, the TripAdvisor editors suggest two months for both New York and Chicago, but give yourself six months when booking in Orlando.

It might not seem to make sense, but consuming a lot of low-calorie, artificial sweetener could cause your body to accumulate more fat.

It might even accelerate fat formation in people who are obese, who are using artificial sweeteners in an effort to lose weight. Researchers who reached that conclusion presented their findings this week at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.

“Many health-conscious individuals like to consume low-calorie sweeteners as an alternative to sugar. However, there is increasing scientific evidence that these sweeteners promote metabolic dysfunction,” said Dr. Sabyasachi Sen, an Associate Professor of Medicine and Endocrinology at George Washington University, and the study’s principal investigator.

Here's how Sen and his colleagues arrived at their conclusions: using sucralose, a widely-avaailable low-calorie sweetener, they introduced it to stem cells that could turn into fat, muscle, cartilage, or bone cells. The amount of sucralose was about equal to about four cans of diet soda per day. Then, they sat back at waited.

They observed an increase in the expression of genes that are markers of fat and inflammation. Sen says there was also an increase in fat droplets in the cells.

Metabolic dysregulation

Artificial sweeteners, of course, are supposed to prevent you from getting fat. But the scientists say they found signs of metabolic dysregulation, a process in which cells actually changed to produce more fat.

Sen said he is most concerned because this was most evident in people who were already obese. They tended to produce more fat with artificial sweeteners than people who were of normal weight.

He's also concerned by the increase in glucose into the cells for consumers who have prediabetes, or who have already developed the disease.

Promoting fat formation

“From our study, we believe that low-calorie sweeteners promote additional fat formation by allowing more glucose to enter the cells, and promotes inflammation, which may be more detrimental in obese individuals,” Sen said.

There have been other studies that suggest artificial sweeteners can have the opposite effect than intended. Last year, researchers at York University reported that obese people who consumed lot of artificial sweeteners had a harder time managing their glucose production.

The research team said it did not find this adverse effect in people consuming saccharin – an early artificial sweetener – or natural sugars.

If you're a fan of Panera Bread, you might not have heard of JAB Holding Company, the German group that is buying the U.S. fast-casual chain for $7.5 billion, including its debt.

JAB Holding is not exactly a household name. It's the investment company controlled by a very wealthy German family, heirs to a company that sells consumer good, Joh.

But while JAB Holdings isn't nearly as familiar to consumers as McDonald's and Starbucks, it has had a growing presence in the U.S. in recent years. It has acquired Einstein Bagels, Peet's Coffee, and Caribou Coffee. Two years ago it scooped up Keurig Green Moountain Coffee and Krispy Kreme donuts.

Panera Bread gives the German firm another foothold in the U.S. food service market. Panera Bread now has more than 2,000 stores with some $5 billion in annual sales.

Attractive addition

Ron Shaich, Founder, Chairman and CEO of Panera, says the company's recent efforts made it an attractive addition to JAB Holdings' portfolio.

“The themes we have bet on - digital, wellness, loyalty, omni-channel, new formats for growth - are shaping the restaurant industry today,” Shaich said. “Indeed, the power of the plan is evident in our business results.”

The transaction is not dependent on a financing condition and is expected to close during the third quarter of this year. It's subject to the approval of Panera shareholders and the usual closing conditions, such as regulatory approvals.  

Millennials may be less likely to be homeowners, but they’re more likely to own pets. That’s a key finding from a new survey from the American Pet Products Association (APPA), which revealed that Millennial pet ownership has officially surpassed Baby Boomer ownership.

Young Americans now account for 35% of all pet owners, according to the survey, which also revealed that pet ownership in general is up. Pets now have a place in a nearly 85 million American households -- up from 79.7 million households in 2015.

In addition to being the generation most likely to own a furry family member, Millennials also account for “more than half of reptile, small animal and saltwater fish owners.”

Key insights

The APPA says Millennials are a “very passionate, active, and connected group,” and the industry is making shifts to meet the demands of the demographic.

The biennial National Pet Owners Survey also revealed insights into how pet owners feel about their pets.

Findings from the 2017-2018 report showed:

• 85% of owners believe pets are a good source of affection;
• 82% agree that interacting with a pet can help them relax;
• 81% are aware that owning a pet can be beneficial to their own health;
• 81% feel unconditional love for their pet; and
• 61% feel buying a pet product made in the USA is important to them.

Pet spending on the rise

Given the growing number of pet owners and pet owners' positive feelings toward their pets, consumer spending on pets is expected to continue to rise.

In 2015, the APPA said pet spending in the U.S. was $60.28 billion. The following year, pet spending rose to more than $69 billion. 

"And Millennials are looking to spend more on their pets," said Bob Vetere, president and CEO of the APPA.

Vetere added that research showing pets are beneficial to human health may also be driving the increase in pet spending. As more studies show that pets can help to mitigate the effects of health problems including PTSD, high blood pressure and more, pet owners may feel justified in spending more on their furry companions. 

As expected, President Trump has signed away consumers' right to browse the internet without their every move being recorded, stored, analyzed and sold on the open market. The measure Trump signed Monday night repeals an Obama-era set of regulations that had not yet taken effect.

"President Trump had an opportunity to restore Americans' broadband internet privacy rights by vetoing [the bill], but sadly failed to do so," said Susan Grant, Director of Consumer Protection and Privacy at the Consumer Federation of America in an email to ConsumerAffairs.

The action means that broadband providers like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon will be better able to enter the $83 billion digital advertising marketplace now that they can collect the same kind of consumer data as websites like Google and Facebook, although the companies insist they have no intention of doing so.

Privacy advocates draw a distinction between websites tracking their users and broadband carriers doing so. Websites generally rely on advertising revenue to survive and their services are basically provided free or at reduced cost in exchange for visitors watching ads. The carriers, on the other hand, charge whopping sums for their service and can track everything a consumer does online whereas a website can only record actions taken on that site.

"Important major step"

Advertisers were quick to celebrate their victory over consumers. Dan Jaffe of the Association of National Advertisers called it "an important major step to help assure a level playing field for privacy regulation for all businesses, and to see to it that consumers will not be bombarded with incessant opt-in notices."

Instead, consumers will have no opportunity to opt in, out, or any other way unless the Federal Trade Commission changes its policies, which currently take a "harms-based" approach to privacy protection that one leading consumer advocate called "ourageous."

Sophia Cope, staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, called the harms-based approach outrageous and said it is "exactly what companies have been hoping for."

"It removes consumer choice and control over their privacy," Cope said in an email to ConsumerAffairs. 

The "notice-and-choice" approach, generally favored by the Obama Administration, basically gave consumers the choice to "opt out" of sharing certain types of information. The "harms-based" approach, on the other hand, seeks to protect consumers only from privacy breaches that are harmful and generally occurs only after the fact.

This is roughly analogous to calling the police to say that you are afraid your neighbor is going to punch you and being told that you should call back if he actually does so. 

Overwhelmed with choices

Besides their supposed fear that consumers would be overwhelmed with privacy choices, advertisers and the broadband carriers who lobbied for the change dragged out the argument that it would simply be too much trouble to spend so much time and trouble on consumers.

"This rule would have required vast amounts of innocuous information to be treated suddenly as highly sensitive and needing opt-in consent from consumers," Jaffe said.

The types of information -- innocuous or not -- potentially include one's marital status, sexual tastes, financial status, health history, daily travels and so forth. Beyond advertising, such data is valuable to insurance companies, prospective employers and law enforcement agencies.

One critic called it "deeply ironic" that Trump signed the measure while simultaneously complaining about supposedly being wire-tapped by the Obama White House.

“The only people in the United States who want less Internet privacy are CEOs and lobbyists for giant telecom companies, who want to rake in money by spying on all of us and selling the private details of our lives to marketing companies,” said Evan Greer, campaign director for the Internet activism group Fight for the Future, according to the Washington Post.

The CFA's Greer said Trump and Congress have angered voters by siding with business interests over consumers. 

"Poll after poll shows that this (Obama-era privacy protection) is something that the public has long desired. When Congress voted to take these rights away there was a swift and angry reaction across the country and political spectrum. Americans saw, correctly, that those who voted for repeal were siding with the big cable and telephone companies, the main internet service providers, instead of with the people," she said.

Greer also drew a distinction between websites and broadband carriers.

"There is a fundamental difference between Internet service providers and other companies that collect individuals' personal information. ISPs see everywhere we go and everything we do online that is not encrypted.  We wouldn't want the phone companies to listen in on our calls, or compile a list of who we call to sell to advertisers who would use that information to target us. The same is true for our online communications, but now there is nothing to stop our ISPs from doing so and profiting from our data, without having to ask for our consent."

Consumers are turning to their credit cards once again, and the National Foundation for Credit Counseling (NFCC) warns that isn't a good thing.

The organization cites the 2017 Financial Literacy Survey that found consumers generally have more credit card debt, less in retirement savings, and more concern about their long-term financial stability.

“It is concerning that so many Americans remain in such a fragile financial position after the Great Recession,“ said Susan C. Keating, president and CEO of the NFCC. “Credit card debt is on the rise, and people are not saving for a financially healthy future."

Credit card spending isn't really a problem when the balance is paid in full each month, or carried only for a month or two while it is paid off. But unfortunately, a lot of consumers don't do that.

39% carry a balance

The survey found 39% of adults carry a credit card debt from month to month, up from 36% the year before. Sometimes the balances are small, making them more manageable. But small balances have a way of growing larger. Nearly two in 10 consumers say they carry a monthly balance of $2,500 or more.

Because the Federal Reserve has now begun raising interest rates, the pressure is likely to grow. The average interest rate is already at a record high and will likely go higher as the Fed continues to boost rates for the rest of this year.

Interest rate increases related to the recent Federal Reserve announcement will likely add to the cost of carrying credit card debt, which could increase financial pressures on families who are unable to find extra room in their budget to offset the impact of these changes.

At least consumers are spending less using their credit cards. The survey found 26% of consumers said they were putting less on plastic than the year before. But consumers may be spending less because they're trying to pay down their rising balances.

Other studies

Other studies have raised similar warnings. In February, personal finance site Bankrate.com conducted a survey of consumers and found just 52% had more money in emergency savings than in credit card debt. That's about the same level as last year.

However, 24% of consumers said their total credit card debt is greater than the amount of money they have set aside in savings, up from 22% last year.

At the same time, the monthly S&P/Experian Consumer Credit Default Indices, a report that monitors changes in consumer credit defaults, shows the overall default rate ticked up three basis points from the previous month to 0.92% in January.

Salt-laden snacks and frozen foods are staple in many kitchens across the U.S., and restaurant menus are often replete with salty menu offerings. So it may not come as a surprise, then, that most of us consume too much salt.

But consumers who are watching their salt intake may be surprised to learn which foods are the worst offenders when it comes to sodium content.

Here are the top five most common sources of salt, according to a new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC):

• Bread
• Pizza
• Sandwiches
• Cold cuts and cured meats
• Soup

Prepackaged and restaurant foods

Findings from the new report were based on Americans’ salt intake from 2013-2014. The CDC found that 70% of sodium consumed by people in the U.S. came from 25 main food categories.

"Most Americans are consuming too much salt and it's coming from a lot of commonly consumed foods -- about 25 foods contribute the majority of salt," said lead researcher Zerleen Quader, an analyst from the CDC.

The study found that most of the salt we consume comes from prepackaged and restaurant foods -- not from the salt shaker. Other culprits include burritos and tacos, salted snacks, chicken, cheese, eggs, and omelets.

Although sodium is essential for bodily functions, having too much in your diet can increase the risk for high blood pressure and heart disease. And it seems most of us are no strangers to going overboard on salt.

Cutting back on salt

In 2013-2014, Americans consumed about 3,400 mg of salt daily -- more than double the amount of sodium touted as “ideal” by the American Heart Association.

To help prevent consumers from exceeding the recommended daily amount of 1,500 mg of salt per day, Quader offered a few salt-slashing suggestions.

“When cooking at home, use fresh herbs and other substitutes for salt. When eating out, you can ask for meals with lower salt,” Quader told HealthDay.

Additionally, consumers can opt for canned vegetables labeled “no salt added” and frozen vegetables without salty sauces.

The report was published in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.

Arming children with a solid financial education can set them up for a more financially secure adulthood. However, a new study finds that few parents actually make time to talk to their children about money matters.

Findings from a new survey commissioned by digital financial services provider Ally showed that although 83% of parents believe saving money is one of the most important money skills children should learn, only 13% of parents regularly talk to their kids about financial matters.

In an effort to help parents educate their elementary school-aged children about money, Ally Financial has launched a free digital children’s book with a storyline that reinforces basic financial concepts.

Building financial literacy

“Planet Zeee and the Money Tree” is a tale about three children from another planet who come down to Earth and can’t quite seem to grasp the concept of money. Fortunately, the aliens meet children from Earth who teach them how money is earned, used, and why it’s important to save and give back.

The e-book and its accompanying resources for parents are an extension of Ally Financial’s Wallet Wise program, which offers tools to help consumers better manage their money. In creating the new materials for families with kids, Ally hopes to teach kids money skills and concepts that will come in handy in adulthood.

"Ally believes that learning about money and building good habits from an early age can help young people make smarter money choices and feel more empowered over their personal finances and their lives in the future," said Jacqueline Howard, director of corporate citizenship at Alley.

Teaching money skills to kids

Ally’s research revealed that 33% of parents actually felt uncomfortable talking to their kids about money. But financial literacy isn't a topic parents should shy away from; fostering good money habits in childhood will help kids better manage their finances when they're older. 

Here are a few concepts parents should strive to help kids understand, according to the financial experts American Consumer Credit Counseling (ACCC).

• Where money comes from. When kids see their parents pay with plastic, they may not realize that money is being withdrawn from a finite source. Parents can teach kids about the concept of working for money by helping them set up a bank account for saving and allowing them to earn money by doing chores.
• How to spend wisely. To help kids learn to make smart money choices, parents can have their child make a list of items they need and rank them in order of importance.
• Importance of saving. After kids have learned the importance of spending wisely, they can be taught the importance of saving money. Parents can demonstrate this concept by having their child set goals with savings, such as saving for a new toy or game.
• The concept of credit. Parents should also help kids understand that credit cards aren’t a source of free money. The ACCC recommends helping children under 18 learn the basics of credit by having them practice using credit by borrowing money. If they miss a payment, don’t hesitate to charge a small late fee.

Maryland consumers who purchased contact lenses have been paying more than they should, according Brian Frosh, the state's attorney general.

Frosh says that is ending, however, with a settlement between the state and Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc., a major contact lens manufacturer. Frosh sued the company in 2014, alleging it imposed an illegal agreement with retailers to fix prices, in violation of Maryland's anti-trust law. Federal law is much more lenient.

The suit claimed Johnson & Johnson, maker of the Acuvue brand of contact lenses, required retailers to set a minimum price for contact lenses, in violation of state law. Frosh says Johnson & Johnson makes more than 40% of the contact lenses sold in Maryland.

The suit claimed the price fixing scheme was the result of complaints from some eye care professionals who prescribe and sell contact lenses to consumers. They complained that they could not match the prices offered by national discounters, such as Costco, BJ’s Wholesale Club, and Sam’s Club.

Frosh says as a result of the alleged price-fixing deal, the discounters then raised their prices to more closely match those of eye care professions. The results, he says, is Maryland consumers paid more for contact lenses.

Wrote the law

Frosh said he is very familiar with the Maryland law because, as a state legislator in 2009, he sponsored an amendment to the law specifically prohibiting any minimum price agreement between supplier and retailer.

“Prior to 2009, minimum retail price agreements such as the one we alleged in our suit, could be found lawful by courts,” said Attorney General Frosh. “Now there’s no question – an agreement to fix a minimum retail price is illegal under Maryland law."

As part of the settlement, Johnson & Johnson has signed an Assurance of Discontinuance. In that document, the company denies doing anything wrong but assures the state it has "permanently discontinued the agreements alleged in the lawsuit."

The company will also write a check for $50,000 to the state, in the form of a civil penalty.

Perhaps one of the most debilitating of all injuries are those that affect the spinal cord. Depending on the severity, many people permanently lose strength, sensation, and other body function below the injured area. In some cases, that means the loss of functionality in the legs.

But recent work done by researchers with the Mayo Clinic give hope to those who have suffered a spinal cord injury. Working with UCLA researchers and other colleagues, neurosurgeon and principal investigator Dr. Kendall Lee was able to help a 26-year-old man regain control over previously paralyzed movement, such as step-like actions, balance control, and standing

"We're really excited, because our results went beyond our expectations. These are initial findings, but the patient is continuing to make progress," Lee said

Exceptional results

The unexpected outcomes were a result of intense physical therapy combined with epidural stimulation therapy, a process involving an electrode that is implanted in the epidural region below the injured area. The patient had injured his spinal cord three years earlier at the sixth thoracic vertebrae in the middle of his back, leading to loss of feeling or movement below the torso.

The patient went through 22 weeks of physical therapy to prepare his muscles for the planned tasks during spinal cord stimulation. During that time, the researchers characterized his injury as “discomplete,” indicating that there was a possibility of some connections across the injured areas of his spine.

After the 22-week period, the patient had the electrode surgically implanted; the placement of the device allowed the researchers to control it via a computer-controlled device underneath the skin of his abdomen. With the two pieces of equipment, the researchers were able to send electrical current to the spinal cord to enable physical movement.

After three weeks of recovery, the patient resumed physical therapy with the stimulation settings adjusted to enable movements. The researchers found that the combination allowed the patient to move his legs while lying on his side, make step-like motions while lying on his side and while standing with partial support, and stand independently using his arms on support bars. All of these outcomes showed that the patient’s brain was sending signals to his spine to allow him to move his legs.

Setting the tone

The researchers say the patient’s progress is groundbreaking and makes the case for further potential use of epidural stimulation therapy.

"This has really set the tone for our post-surgical rehabilitation -- trying to use that function the patient recovered to drive even more return of abilities," said co-principal investigator Dr. Kristin Zhao.

"While these are early results, it speaks to how Mayo Clinic researchers relentlessly pursue discoveries and innovative solutions that address the unmet needs of patients. These teams highlight Mayo Clinic's unique culture of collaboration, which brings together scientists and physician experts who work side by side to accelerate scientific discoveries into critical advances for patient care," added Dr. Gregory Gores, executive dean of research at the Mayo Clinic.

The full study has been published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings.

Retirement can be an intimidating prospect, especially if you aren't sure whether you're ready. There are emotional considerations as well as financial.

But the financial ones are really big, says Eileen Ambrose, senior editor and writer for the Money Team at AARP, who covered the issue recently in AARP Bulletin. Ambrose says the four mistakes many people make as they approach retirement are:

• Being upside down on a mortgage
• Not having enough money
• Not having savings adequately invested
• Still supporting adult children

Mortgages

Housing expenses can be a challenge in retirement, which is why many retired consumers try to have their homes paid for by then. But thanks to the housing crisis of 2008, Ambrose says some people approaching retirement still owe more than their homes are worth. The good news? You do have some options.

"As a result of the housing crisis, there is a federal Home Affordable Refinance Program, so if you have an underwater mortgage, you can apply for this program, which will help you negotiate better terms on your loan so you can pay it off," Ambrose told ConsumerAffairs.

She says you can also stick it out, staying in your home and making payments until the value recovers. If you are a few years away from retirement and have significant equity in your home, the last thing you want to do is refinance and take the equity out.

Savings

Recent studies have shown more people, especially younger people, are saving more for retirement and starting earlier. But still too many people approaching retirement haven't saved enough.

"A lot of people don't take the time to do an assessment of how much money they'll need to retire," Ambrose said. "It's important to know that because it can prompt you to increase your savings rate."

If you're at retirement age and you don't have enough money, Ambrose says there are really only two things you can do: cut your expenses and increase your income. Increasing income may mean taking on a part-time job in retirement.

Investments

If you have put some money away for retirement, it might not be growing as fast as it should. Ambrose says retirement money should be wisely invested.

"If your fund is temporarily losing money, you shouldn't panic, because the markets go up and down," she said. "If you have a diversified portfolio, some of your assets will do well while others may do really poorly, and that's just cyclical."

But if you have assets that have lost value and it's clear they aren't coming back, Ambrose says its smarter to sell them and reinvest in assets that will provide a return. This is where a trusted and objective financial advisor is helpful.

Adult children

Adult children are a tricky subject. Since the financial crisis, many have had a hard time launching, depending on aging parents for support.

"Merrill Lynch did a study and found six out of 10 people age 50 and older were still supporting an adult child," Ambrose said. "This is difficult because you want to help out a loved one, but as you near retirement or you are in retirement, you might not have the means."

Ambrose says many financial planners have told her this has become a major issue for their clients. In some cases, she says, the financial planners volunteer to talk to the adult children about it, to explain the hardship it is placing on their parents.

"In many cases, the kids simply don't know, and their parents don't bring it up," Ambrose said.

Volkswagen Group of America is recalling 11,618 model year 2017 Audi A3 and S3 sedans.

In a lower-speed crash situation, the airbag control unit software may deploy the passenger front airbag improperly if the front seat passenger is sitting on the edge of the seat or is lying in the seat with the seat reclined.

As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 208, "Occupant Crash Protection."

If the airbag deploys with more force than intended, it can increase the risk of injury.

What to do

Audi will notify owners, and dealers will update the air bag control module software, free of charge. The recall is expected to begin in April 2017.

Owners may contact Audi customer service at 1-800-253-2834. Volkswagen's number for this recall is 69Q3.

Already facing a recall of its EpiPen auto-injectors because of a faulty part, Mylan Pharmaceuticals now has been hit with a class-action lawsuit that accuses the company of engaing in an illegal organized scheme to systematically increase EpiPen prices by 574 percent.

The lawsuit alleges that since Mylan acquired the rights to market and distribute the EpiPen in 2007, it has increased the list price 17 times, from $90.28 to $608.62, causing some patients to resort to carrying expired EpiPens, or to using syringes to manually inject epinephrine, the drug that helps counteract severe allergic reactions.

According to the complaint, this once-affordable drug that has been available for more than 100 years and costs pennies to produce is now out of reach for many patients due to a behind-the-scenes quid pro quo arrangement between Mylan and other players, designed to increase profits and guarantee Mylan’s EpiPen is chosen by insurance companies for use over its competitor’s alternatives.

The lawsuit says that Mylan has failed to disclose that the skyrocketing increases in the list prices for EpiPens were due to this scheme – the payment of rebates to pharmacy benefit manufacturers (PBMs) – until the summer of 2016, and has tried to blame the increases on a “broken system.”

“Mylan has tried every trick in the book to avoid taking accountability to the millions of people who are living without the EpiPen they need to prevent a life-threatening allergic reaction. Despite the fiction that Mylan has tried to sell the public, and sell Congress, the numbers don’t lie – Mylan has been the motivating force behind the jaw-dropping 574 percent EpiPen price hike,” said Steve Berman, managing partner of Hagens Berman, the law firm that represents the patients.

Exploited the system

According to the lawsuit, Mylan has exploited the drug-pricing system in a way that ensures it higher profits while leaving those living with allergies who need EpiPens crippled by high costs.

These acts, says the lawsuit, constitute a RICO enterprise, and violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and various state consumer protection laws.

The lawsuit details Mylan’s actions that have caused the list price to skyrocket: “…as Mylan has admitted, it pays ‘intermediaries’ in the pharmaceutical distribution system known as pharmacy benefit managers (‘PBMs’) and those payments increase the price that many consumers pay.”

These middlemen negotiate prices with drug manufacturers on behalf of health plans.

“Together, the three biggest PBMs—Express Scripts, CVS Health, and OptumRx—bring in more than $200 billion a year in revenue. They also control over 80% of the PBM market, covering 180 million insured people,” the suit states.

The lawsuit explains that as compensation for their role as negotiator, PBMs pocket a percentage of the difference between the reported benchmark price and the undisclosed real price they are able to secure. This difference in prices is known as the “spread.”

The larger the spread, the higher the PBMs’ profits, and the higher likelihood PBMs will choose a certain drug company’s product to receive a favorable formulary position, and be prescribed more often.

Neither the drug companies nor the PBMs disclose the rebates given to PBMs to secure formulary placement, labeling them as trade secrets.

“Mylan is no victim,” Berman said. “Mylan has tried to pass the buck and excuse itself from any responsibility, attempting to wash its hands of the dubious scheme that has plagued allergy sufferers with unbearably high prices. This suit sets the record straight and gives the full picture, revealing Mylan as the ringleader in this tightly organized enterprise to spike EpiPen prices.”

Competitors squeezed

When list prices for EpiPen were increasing most dramatically, some companies tried to introduce auto-injectors to compete with EpiPen, according to the suit, but those competitors never succeeded in displacing EpiPen’s market dominance because they did not pay the rebates Mylan paid the PBMs.

Adrenaclick, one auto-injector, had a list price one-third of EpiPen’s, but was withdrawn from the market because PBMs did not place the drug on formularies. Auvi-Q, another auto-injector, attempted to match Mylan’s list prices but, every time it did, Mylan matched the increase, and, as a result, Auvi-Q fought for months to get the favorable formulary position that EpiPen had before it was withdrawn from the market for other reasons.

“It’s clear that consumers cannot rely on drug companies to put their best interests forward,” Berman said. “It is our hope that this suit will bring meaningful change and put an end to Mylan’s profiteering.”

Back in November, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charged NetSpend Corporation – one of the largest providers of prepaid debit cards in the U.S. – with deceiving its customers. The agency said that the company often delayed or denied activation of consumers’ cards or blocked them from accessing their funds.

“Innovative financial products can offer many benefits to consumers. However, when companies promise consumers ‘immediate access’ to their funds, they need to honor those promises. . . We’re committed to protecting consumers – particularly those who are financially strapped – from deceptive practices involving their payment choices,” said FTC Director Jessica Rich at the time.

Now, in an announcement made Friday, the agency said that NetSpend will settle the allegations by paying $53 million. The final order was approved by the Commission in a 2-1 vote.

Deceptive practices

In its original complaint, the FTC noted that NetSpend often marketed its products with terms such as “always available,” “immediate access,” and “use it today.” However, the agency found that many consumers who applied for a prepaid card and put money in their account couldn’t access their funds right away.

Sometimes the lack of access lasted for weeks, or in special cases the consumer was never granted access. Those who tried to close their accounts and requested refunds sometimes had to wait weeks for their money to get back to them, and some found that their funds were spent on company fees.

As a result of these actions, the FTC said that many underbanked consumers who relied on these products were left strapped for cash and extremely vulnerable, with many being evicted from their homes, having their vehicles repossessed, or incurring late fees on bills.

“These delays in access to funds are especially harmful to consumers who have made the NetSpend card their primary means of financial management, leaving them without alternative means of accessing funds,” the complaint stated.

In settling the charges, NetSpend has agreed to pay no less than $53 million in relief to affected consumers who purchased a prepaid card between January 1, 2010 and August 31, 2016. The company has also been barred from advertising, marketing, promoting, or selling any prepaid product in which it misrepresents the key details and conditions.

In a statement also released on Friday, NetSpend continued to deny the allegations, saying that it does “a great deal to encourage card activation and comply with federal law.”

Stiff competition in the real estate market may lead many home buyers to go over budget this spring buying season, according to a new study by Owners.com.

More than half (55%) of consumers who responded to a survey by the online real estate brokerage said they were willing to go beyond their budget on a home purchase. Those who were willing to shell out extra for their dream home stated they would go an average of nearly 40,000 over budget.

The survey suggests potential buyers are aware that housing inventory remains low while mortgage rates keep climbing. But while an impressive display of finances may help boost a buyer’s chances of getting their dream home, going over budget on a house could lead to added stress brought on by financial concerns.

Stress-inducing financial concerns

Most buyers appear to be bracing for a tumultuous home buying process. The survey showed that 72% of potential home buyers expect to encounter stress before being handed the keys to their new home.

Financial stressors stemming from overspending were the most concerning aspect of buying a home for many consumers. Top concerns and issues cited when buying a house included:

• Fear of losing earnest money deposit (64%)
• Becoming house poor (61%)
• Bidding wars driving up house price (59%)

Cutting costs

Overspending on a home probably isn't the best idea, says Lou Cannataro, senior partner at Cannataro Park Avenue Financial in Manhattan.

More expensive homes usually come with higher monthly costs that can devastate even the best of incomes. This can lead to "an expensive spending vortex and a financial risk many would be better off avoiding," he told NewsDay.com.

To offset the financial stress brought on by high market competition, some consumers are considering real estate models that offer opportunities to cut costs in the transaction.

A majority (85%) of the 1,200 potential home buyers surveyed by Owners.com said they would be willing to consider handling the process themselves if it meant they would be charged a lower a commission and be given access to the more complicated transaction services, like the appraisal or legal documents.

Pity the poor cable TV giants. Every day, it seems, brings new challenges in keeping subscribers, not to mention signing up new ones.

The problem is an increasing number of consumers are finding they can get by just fine without spending $100 or more a month on television. First, it was an upstart streaming service called Netflix that gave viewers more options for $9 a month.

It was soon joined by other competitors, like Hulu, Amazon Prime, and Sling TV, each with unique offers. Now, there may be one more.

New Verizon TV service?

A report by Bloomberg News, quoting people in the know, says Verizon has been busy nailing down TV rights in preparation for the launch of its own video streaming services, perhaps as early as this summer.

Bloomberg reports Verizon plans to start packaging dozens of channels that will provide live, over-the-internet TV programs, setting it apart from its current go90, with is an on-demand streaming service. It will also be different from the television program it offers over FiOS.

The service will likely compete head to head with Sling TV and AT&T's streaming service, DirecTV Now.

Bloomberg also reports Comcast, one of the nation's largest cable operators, is trying to secure rights to carry cable networks on an online service, outside its cable footprint. If that plays out, it would be a sign within the industry of which way the wind is blowing.