Current Events in June 2017

If you're paying more for antimicrobial or antibacterial soaps than other products, more than 200 scientists and medical professionals say you're wasting your money, doing nothing for your health, and harming the environment.

“People think antimicrobial hand soaps offer better protection against illness. But generally, antimicrobial soaps perform no better than plain soap and water,” said Barbara Sattler, RN, DrPH, FAAN, environmental health professor at the University of San Francisco. 

Last fall, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) determined that 19 different antimicrobial chemicals, including infamous triclosan and triclocarban, were not effective and should not be marketed for use in over-the-counter consumer wash products. Now, 200 scientists say the FDA’s decision does not go far enough to protect consumers and the environment.

While there has been some reduction in the use of triclosan and triclocarban, soap brands are using different additives that may be as bad or even worse. 

No evidence they work

“I was happy that the FDA finally acted to remove these chemicals from soaps. But I was dismayed to discover at my local drugstore that most products now contain substitutes that may be worse,” said Arlene Blum, PhD, Executive Director of Green Science Policy Institute. Antimicrobials are also commonplace in products where you wouldn’t expect them, including paints, exercise mats, flooring, apparel, food storage containers, home textiles, electronics, kitchenware, school supplies, and countertops. 

“Customers may think added antimicrobials are a way to reduce infections, but in most products there is no evidence that they do,” said Ted Schettler, MD, MPH, Science Director of the Science and Environmental Health Network. 

“Added antimicrobials are marketed as beneficial in building products from countertops to doorknobs and light switches” said Bill Walsh, President of Healthy Building Network, which recently produced a white paper on antimicrobial building products. “Antimicrobial preservatives are useful in certain products like paints, but we found claims about health benefits to be largely invalid.” Nevertheless, sales of “antimicrobial” performance products are projected to grow.

Scientists and health professionals agree that non-medical uses of antimicrobials should be reduced. “Environmental and human exposures to triclosan and triclocarban are widespread, affecting pregnant women, developing fetuses, and breast-feeding babies,” said Rolf Halden, PhD, PE, professor of engineering at Arizona State University. “We must develop better alternatives and prevent unneeded exposures to antimicrobial chemicals.”

Data secured within large retail computer networks isn't always so secure. Hardly a month goes by without news that hackers have been able to get into a major network, compromising credit and debit card information.

Arby’s, Intercontinental Hotels Group, Kmart, Brooks Brothers and Chipotle are a few of the companies that have reported data breaches so far this year.

While these companies are doing everything they can to increase the security of their networks, consumers can also take steps to make their individual cards safer. Sometimes, that means leaving them in your wallet.

Gary Warner is director of the Center for Information Assurance and Joint Forensics Research at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. He says consumers who have a card with a chip should never swipe it at a terminal.

Never swipe a chip card

While the new chip protocol has been in place for two years now, not all retail locations have made the expensive transition. You might find, for example, a store might request you swipe a debit card, even if it has a chip.

Warner says you shouldn't use your chip card if you can't insert it into a chip reader. If you swipe it, the terminal takes the information off the old fashioned magnetic strip, which can be intercepted if the network has been infected with malware.

“It is theoretically impossible to copy the computer chips that have been added to credit and debit cards,” Warner said. “However, if you are swiping for purchases with your chip card, criminals don’t have to worry about the chip because they can use the information from the magnetic strip on the back to make a duplicate copy of the card."

Use a signature instead of PIN

If you can't insert your chip card, Warner says you should leave it in your wallet and pay with cash or a check.

If swiping your debit card is the only option, Warner suggests completing the transaction as though it was a credit purchase, not a debit card. That way, you'll be asked to sign your name and not punch in your PIN. Entering your PIN on an infected terminal gives a hacker entry to your bank account.

Finally, be leery of an email that informs you about a data breach. Because consumers worry about their data being compromised, hackers capitalize on data breach publicity by sending phishing emails to millions of people.

The email will direct you to a fake website that may ask you to enter sensitive information, such as a user name and password.

If you think there's a chance the email could be legitimate, don't click on any link it provides. Instead, go to the company's main website, where you will find information about any data breach that has occurred.

People often view a pregnant woman’s belly as an open invitation to dish out unsolicited advice. From birth plans and beyond, no topic appears to be off limits to well-meaning strangers who have been there and done that.

And the barrage of advice doesn’t end when a woman gives birth. Upon trading that one-way ticket to motherhood for an actual baby, women are bombarded with opinions on child-rearing from strangers and relatives alike.

But not all parenting advice is offered in a kind, gentle manner. When opinions give way to harsh criticism, it’s called “Mommy-Shaming” -- and it’s a topic most moms are familiar with.

Usually from family

According to a recent poll, nearly two-thirds of mothers with children under 5 have been mommy-shamed at some point or another. Most of the time, a mom’s greatest critics are her own parents.

The study found that 37% of mothers have felt second-guessed by their mom or dad on parenting hot topics such as discipline, breast-versus bottle-feeding, and sleep.

Thirty-six percent of respondents said their spouse or their child’s other parent lobs the most criticism, while 31% of mothers said the most criticism came from their in-laws. Half of the mothers surveyed said they tend to avoid people who are too critical of their parenting.

Leads to more stress

The report revealed that major areas of criticism include discipline (70%); diet and nutrition (52%; sleep (46%); breast-versus bottle-feeding (39%); safety (20%); and child care (16%).

"Our findings tap into the tensions moms face when parenting advice leads to more stress than reassurance and makes them feel more criticized than supported," said the poll’s co-director, Sarah Clark.

“Mothers can get overwhelmed by so many conflicting views on the ‘best’ way to raise a child,” she added. “Unsolicited advice -- especially from the people closest to her child -- can be perceived as meaning she’s not doing a good job as a mother. That can be hurtful.”

Potentially outdated advice

As we’ve reported, many grandparents have outdated health beliefs that may put a child’s health and safety at risk. The parenting game has likely changed quite a bit since most grandparents were parents themselves.

Clark says family members “should respect that mothers of young children may have more updated information about child health and safety, and ‘what we used to do’ may no longer be the best advice.”

"It's unfortunate when a mother feels criticized to the point where she limits the amount of time she and her child will spend with a family member or friend," she said. "To guard against that situation, advice to mothers of young children should be given with empathy and encouragement."

Regulators and health experts have been taking a strong stance on what they call the U.S. opioid epidemic, but a recent Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) bust in Southern California shows just how dangerous some of these drugs can really be.

A federal grand jury indictment unsealed Monday in San Diego charges three local residents with possession of nearly 100 pounds of fentanyl – an opioid drug whose derivatives can be 50-100 times stronger than heroin.

How devastating could that much fentanyl be, you might ask? DEA officials say the amount was enough to kill 1.4 million people. To put that in perspective, that’s enough to kill every person in the state of Illinois, or every person living in New York City, Los Angeles, or Chicago.

“The combined amount – 44.14 kilograms – represents the largest fentanyl seizure sent to a DEA lab nationwide,” the U.S. Attorney’s Office said in a statement.

Extremely dangerous opioid

The indictment alleges that defendants Jonathan Ibarra, Anna Baker, and Hector Fernando Garcia discussed transporting an unnamed drug on November 30, 2016, with Ibarra being instructed to have Baker pick up the drugs in San Diego and haul them to Lemon Grove, California – an eastern suburb of the city.

After receiving the information and a warrant, DEA officials stopped Baker’s car and say they discovered 15 kilos of fentanyl in the vehicle. A further search of her home allegedly yielded 30 more kilograms. The indictment charges Ibarra, Baker, and Garcia with possession with the intent to distribute, which could mean mean life in prison for each of them and up to $10 million in fines, according to Courthouse News.

Regulators say that fentanyl is becoming an increasingly popular opioid drug because of its fast-acting nature and short-term effects. However, it can be extremely dangerous in even the smallest amounts; just 3 milligrams can be lethal to humans, an ounce could kill up to 9,457 people, and a pound could kill 150,000 people.

Back in 2016, Sen. Patricia Bates proposed a measure to the California legislature that would have imposed harsher penalties on trafficking fentanyl, but an Assembly Appropriations committee held back the bill, according to the Los Angeles Times.

“Given fentanyl’s deadly potency, the law should treat fentanyl trafficking the same as heroin and cocaine,” Bates said.

Hotels and commercial transportation companies are covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and have to make accommodation for consumers with physical limitations.

But Rutgers University researchers say it isn't clear whether that law covers sharing economy businesses like Uber, Lyft, and Airbnb. Because of that, they report people with disabilities may find themselves increasingly excluded.

To investigate, the research team made nearly 4,000 Airbnb lodging requests between June and November 2016. For a portion of the requests, they created profiles for potential lodgers who had four types of disabilities -- blindness, cerebral palsy, dwarfism, and spinal cord injury.

Compared to travelers with no disabilities, the study showed hosts were less likely to pre-approve, and more likely to reject, requests from the disabled travelers.

The pre-approval rate was 75% for travelers without disabilities, compared to 61% for travelers with dwarfism, 50% for travelers with blindness, 43% for travelers with cerebral palsy, and 25% for travelers with spinal cord injury.

Policy change

While the study was being conducted, Airbnb instituted a new policy, requiring all hosts to agree to a new non-discrimination policy. The researchers said they perceived no difference in how hosts responded to their lodging requests before or after the policy change.

The researchers also say their findings raise questions about the reach of ADA. The law applies to commercial establishments like hotels, and to some Airbnb listings. However, the law does not apply to owner-occupied dwellings with fewer than six units for rent.

The researchers say many individuals are benefiting from the disruptive nature of the internet, allowing them to leverage private assets to produce income.

Unintentional discrimination

"This more decentralized model of mediated exchange has potential benefits for participants, but it may also create opportunities for both intentional and unintentional discrimination," the authors write. "Although the organizations operating the peer-to-peer platforms through which exchanges take place may not be engaging in discrimination, the participants may be doing so, thereby undermining anti-discrimination laws and the principle of equal access to goods and services."

The researchers said they do not think the discrimination they perceive is based on personal prejudice. Rather, their study found that many of the Airbnb units were simply not very accessible to people with physical limitations.

For years, coconut oil has been extolled as a healthier alternative to butter or other types of cooking oils. But a recent report from American Heart Association (AHA) says that’s not true.

In an updated advisory, the organization says that coconut oil actually contains more saturated fat than butter, beef fat, or pork lard. Previous studies have confirmed that saturated fats can increase the level of LDL cholesterol in the blood, which can clog arteries and increase the risk of cardiovascular disease and stroke.

“Because coconut oil increases LDL cholesterol, a cause of CVD, and has no known offsetting favorable effects, we advise against the use of coconut oil,” the AHA report said.

Coconut oil misconceptions

Health experts say that the misconceptions surrounding coconut oil likely originate from general perceptions of dietary fats. Over the years, many consumers have come to think that plant fats are preferable to animal fats because of the amount of saturated fats they tend to contain.

However, recent findings show that isn’t a hard and fast rule for all vegetable fats. While certain vegetable oils, like olive oil or sunflower oil, have more unsaturated fats, AHA says that 82% of the fat in coconut oil is saturated, well above the amount in butter (63%), beef fat (50%), and pork lard (39%).

These findings largely contrast with public sentiment surrounding coconut oil, though. In its advisory, AHA quotes a recent survey which reported that 72% of Americans rated coconut oil as a “healthy food,” while only 37% of nutritionists said the same thing. And despite claims that the mixture of fats in coconut oil are beneficial, AHA says that there is no good-quality evidence to back up those statements.

Reducing saturated fats

The overriding message of the AHA advisory is that consumers should try to minimize the amount of saturated fats they ingest to avoid cardiovascular risks.

“We want to set the record straight on why well-conducted scientific research overwhelmingly supports limiting saturated fat in the diet to prevent diseases of the heart and blood vessels,” said Dr. Frank Sacks, lead author of the AHA advisory, according to a BBC report.

Health experts say that consumers should strive to reduce the overall amount of fat in their diets, but special attention should be paid to reducing saturated fats. Substituting these fats for products with unsaturated fats can often make a huge difference in terms of cardiovascular health, they say.

Most people are aware that smoking cigarettes is bad for your health. Since 1964 it's been linked to lung cancer, and later to heart disease and emphysema.

But the list doesn't stop there.

Dr. John Spangler, professor of family and community medicine at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, says he has found that many people have been told cigarettes are bad, but haven't been told why. The harsh reality, he says, is that cigarettes cause damage throughout the body.

High blood pressure, diabetes

In addition to lung cancer and heart disease, Spangler says smoking can contribute to high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, stroke, gum disease, arthritis, and even erectile dysfunction.

Cigarette smoke is damaging, in part, because it can contain as many as 9,000 different chemicals, many of which are toxic, and as many as 70 that have been linked to cancer.

“When you smoke, these various chemicals get into the bloodstream, are carried to all parts of the body and go right to the most susceptible cells,” Spangler said. “That’s why there’s such a wide array of negative effects from cigarettes.”

Carbon monoxide

Even carbon monoxide, the gas that results from the incomplete burning of any carbon-related material, damages the body. Too much of it interferes with the blood's capacity to transport oxygen throughout the body, including to important areas of the brain and heart. That's often why a heavy smoker suffers from shortness of breath, and even heart failure.

Tars found in cigarette tobacco are harmful because they can build up in the lungs, inflaming the linings of blood vessels and other soft tissues. It can reduce the body's ability to ward off infection, slow the healing process, and release free radicals -- a major element in the development of cancerous tumors.

Falling smoking rates

Fortunately, smoking rates in the U.S. have been steadily declining, in part because more people area aware of health issues, but also because taxes have made smoking a very expensive habit.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 42% of U.S. adults smoked in 1965. By 2014, the percentage had dropped to 16.8%.

Spangler says nicotine is far from the most harmful substances in cigarettes, but it is one of the most dangerous, because it's addictive. It's why people continue to smoke, even when they know the health facts.

To quit, Spangler suggests using nicotine gun or patches while trying to work on the habits -- like having a cigarette after a meal -- that keep many people lighting up and wrecking their health.

With their wagging tails and chipper dispositions, dogs have a way of infusing any space with good energy. And these days, some pet owners don’t have to wait until they get home to bask in the infectious enthusiasm of their favorite companion -- they can do so at work.

Many companies are saying ‘yes’ to pets in the workplace. The move is likely to be seen as a good one by the 41 percent of pet parents who agreed, in a recent survey by Wellness Natural Pet Food, that a pet-friendly workplace is important to them.

Additional findings from the survey revealed that 52% of Millennials, 33% of baby boomers, and 31% of Generation X-ers are in favor of pet-friendly offices.

Pet-friendly companies

This new research makes it clear that many pet owners would prefer not to leave Fido behind when they go to work. And at some companies, they wouldn’t have to.

Here are a few of America’s most pet-friendly companies, according to the survey:

• Kimpton Hotels
• Tradesy
• Life is Good
• HubSpot
• Kurgo
• Clif Bar and Company
• Etsy
• The Nerdery
• Bitly

Benefits of dogs in the workplace

Allowing dogs in the workplace has been linked to a number of potential benefits, including reduced employee stress and increased employee satisfaction.

In a 2012 study, researchers from Virginia Commonwealth University concluded that dogs “make a positive difference in the workplace,” helping to reduce employee stress while boosting office morale and productivity. 

"Pet presence may serve as a low-cost, wellness intervention readily available to many organizations and may enhance organizational satisfaction and perceptions of support," said the study's lead author, professor Randolph T. Barker.

“Of course, it is important to have policies in place to ensure only friendly, clean and well-behaved pets are present in the workplace,” he added.

'Petiquette' tips

Indeed, practicing good "petiquette" is important. Pet parents who choose to bring their dog to work should be sure to plan ahead, according to Dr. Danielle Bernal, a veterinarian with Wellness Natural Pet Food. 

Before walking into work with your pup, Bernal suggests ensuring your workspace is puppy proofed. Pet owners should also make sure their colleagues are comfortable with the idea of a dog in the office. 

To help ensure your dog isn't too wound up while you're trying to work, start your dog's day off with a healthy amount of exercise. Finally, be sure to schedule breaks and have a backup plan in case your dog can't get settled.

A massive data leak has exposed extensive information on nearly 200 million Americans, everything from birthdates and phone numbers to analyses of feelings about such hot-button issues as gun control and abortion.

The data was stored on a publicly accessed Amazon Web Services server by Deep Root Analytics, a contractor to the Republican National Committee. The firm gathers information that is used for political advertising and targeted appeals to potential voters.

Security experts quoted by Gizmodo say that more than a terabyte of data was stored on the cloud server. It was not protected by a password and could have been accessed by anyone who stumbled across the URL. 

The files were gathered from numerous outside data firms and super PACs. All told, the data contained highly personal information on 198 million Americans, about 61 percent of the total population.

Besides individuals, the files contained information on rival political organizations, including the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Planned Parenthood, and the American Civil Liberties Union, Gizmodo said.

“We take full responsibility for this situation,” said Deep Root founder Alex Lundry. “Since this event has come to our attention, we have updated the access settings and put protocols in place to prevent further access.”

He said the data was only unprotected for 12 days and, as far as is known, no one happened onto it.

For years, a supposed charity called the Breast Cancer Survivors Foundation has solicited contributions, claiming it was providing medical services to cancer victims. 

But New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman says the foundation was a fraud.

“There are few things more galling than pretending to help cancer patients, when you’re really just lining your own pockets. But that’s exactly what those behind the Breast Cancer Survivors Foundation did – siphoning millions in profits for themselves and sending less than four cents of every dollar raised to medical clinics,” he said. 

Schneiderman announced a settlement with the foundation and its president and founder, Dr. Yulius Poplyansky, under which the organization will close down its operations and pay nearly $350,000, which will be directed to legitimate breast cancer organizations.

92 cents of every dollar

Schneiderman said that the foundation was a "shell charity created and run by its primary outside fundraiser, Mark Gelvan, in order to line the pockets of Gelvan, his companies, and his business associates – who pocketed 92 cents of every dollar donated to BCSF."

BCSF was founded in 2010 and began soliciting in New York shortly thereafter. By 2014, BCSF was raising on average $3 million a year nationwide from its telemarketing and direct mail campaigns. 

The Attorney General’s investigation found that Dr. Poplyansky started BCSF at the encouragement of Mark Gelvan, a professional fundraiser and longtime family friend whose relationship with Poplyansky’s family dated back to the 1970s. 

Dr. Poplyansky had no training or experience in managing or leading any type of charitable enterprise. He and the other board members of BCSF allowed Mark Gelvan to run BCSF and turn it into a cash cow for Gelvan and his businesses, Schneiderman said. Mark Gelvan has been barred from the professional fundraising industry in New York since 2004, following litigation brought by the Attorney General. 

More state universities are beginning to respond to rising tuition burdens on families by offering more financial aid -- and in some cases, free -- tuition.

The University of Michigan (U-M) is the latest state university to roll out a free tuition plan, called the "Go Blue Guarantee." Launching next January, it will guarantee students from a family with income below $65,000 a year free tuition for up to four years.

"Today, our long-standing commitment to ensuring that qualified students from Michigan can afford a U-M education becomes a guarantee," said U-M President Mark Schlissel.

Eliminates some of the complexities

Schlissel says the guarantee eliminates a lot of the complexities found in financial aid. If a family of an accepted student qualifies, the student pays no tuition

"I have always believed that talent is ubiquitous in our society, but opportunity most certainly is not," Schlissel said. "The 'Go Blue Guarantee' helps us ensure wider opportunity."

U-M says the new aid package is a way it can help meet the financial needs of in-state students who have the grades to attend the university but not the money. The school says the program is not taking any money away from existing financial aid packages.

The "Go Blue Guarantee" will be available to students whose families fall within the income limits, and also are below a certain net worth threshold. Qualifying students also may be eligible for additional aid to cover non-tuition costs.

New York's free tuition program

In April, New York announced its own free tuition plan. The state legislature approved funding to provide free tuition to students attending CUNY and SUNY, as long as their families earn less than $100,000 a year.

Qualifying students must attend school full-time and average 30 credits each year, including summer and winter classes. They will also be required to maintain a passing grade point average to be eligible for free tuition.

There is an additional condition as well. Upon ending their education, they will be required to live and work in the state for the same number of years they received the financial aid.

The financial aid program called the “Excelsior Scholarship” will be available to students starting school this fall, as long as their families make under $100,000 per year. The income threshold will increase to $110,000 in 2018 and $125,000 in 2019.

According to the College Board, the average cost of tuition and fees for the 2016–2017 school year was $9,650 for in-state students across the U.S.

The midsize 2017 Mazda CX-9 SUV has captured the top award offered by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS)

Across-the-board good crashworthiness ratings, a superior-rated front crash prevention system and acceptable-rated headlights made the difference from tests performed on the 2015 model.

A vehicle must have good ratings in the small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraint tests in order to earn the 2017 "Top Safety Pick+" award.

Available advanced or superior front crash prevention and headlights that earn an acceptable or good rating are required as well.

A new design turns the tables

The CX-9 was redesigned for the 2016 model year. Beginning with 2017 models built after November 2016, Mazda modified the deployment pattern of the side curtain airbags to improve protection in front and side crashes.

The 2015 model of the CX-9 rated poor for protection in small overlap front crashes, as the structure was seriously compromised and the side airbag didn't deploy.

It also came up short for roof strength, which is important for protecting occupants in a rollover crash, and for head restraints, which help prevent neck injuries in a rear crash. The SUV earned only marginal ratings in those tests.

The 2017 CX-9 also offers optional front crash prevention that earns a superior rating. In IIHS track tests at 12 and 25 mph, it avoided collisions.

The system also includes Forward Collision Warning that meets National Highway Traffic Safety Administration criteria.

The superior-rated front crash prevention comes on the CX-9's Grand Touring and Signature trims, which also are equipped with the CX-9's best available headlights, which are rated acceptable. Other trim levels come with marginal headlights.

In the last decade, banks have moved aggressively to encourage their customers to embrace mobile banking. Institutions stressed the ease and convenience of banking with your smartphone.

J.D. Power and Associates, however, has found that not all banking apps are created equal.

The company has released a survey that measures the things that sets one mobile banking app from another. For the most part, it's being intuitive and easy to use. Consumers rate that higher than any other quality.

The survey found that consumers who use mobile banking like it better than just about any other way of dealing with a bank. But despite that, Bob Neuhaus, director of financial services at J.D. Power, says adoption is stubbornly low.

Slow to adopt

"The challenge for both retail banks and credit card companies is to establish accessible entry points that ease resistant customers onto the mobile channel where they will, in all likelihood, quickly find that they are very satisfied with the experience," he said.

The survey identified "lack of trust" as a key reason many consumers have not yet adopted mobile banking. It found just 31% of retail bank customers and 17% of credit card customers are using mobile apps. Fewer than half the people in the survey said they believed their financial data was "very secure."

A previous J.D. Power study found that just 32% of bank customers say they trust mobile banking.

The rankings

Consumers rank Capital One's bank app number one overall, with an 870 score on a 1,000 point scale. It's followed by Bank of America with an 865 score and TD Bank with 860.

Credit card apps were judged separately, with Discover placing highest with a score of 895.

“Anytime our company is recognized by J.D. Power it is a tremendous honor," said Julie Loeger, Discover’s executive vice president and chief marketing officer. "To rank highest in a first-time category is a credit to our loyal cardmembers who continue to engage with Discover through our mobile app.”

Capital One placed second in the credit card app category with a score of 888. Barclaycard was third at 886.

The J.D. Power survey found that even though consumers have been slow to adopt mobile banking apps, younger consumers are more likely to use mobile than their older peers. Seventy-six percent of Millennials and Generation Z have used a mobile banking or credit card app in the last 30 days.

They may be at opposite ends of the age spectrum, but teens and 60-year-olds may have something in common -- their activity levels.

A recent study by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health suggested adolescents are coasting through their days at the speed of your average 60-year-old.

“Activity levels at the end of adolescence were alarmingly low, and by age 19, they were comparable to 60-year-olds,” said the study’s lead author, Vadim Zipunnikov, assistant professor in the Bloomberg School’s Department of Biostatistics, in a statement.

Study details

For the study, the researchers monitored the activity of 12,529 participants who wore tracking devices for seven consecutive days.

The only age cohort to demonstrate an increase in activity levels were 20-somethings, who spread their activity throughout the day, with an increase in activity in the early morning. The authors suggested this may be related to starting full-time work or other life transitions.

Younger adolescents were about as physically active as adults 60 and older. Across all age groups, males generally had higher activity levels than females. Among adults 60 years and older, males were more sedentary and had lower light-intensity activity levels than females.

“For school-age children, the primary window for activity was the afternoon between two and six P.M,” said Zipunnikov. “So the big question is how do we modify daily schedules, in schools for example, to be more conducive to increasing physical activity?”

Not meeting recommendations

More than half of teens were not meeting recommendations for physical activity set forth by the World Health Organization (WHO), according to the study's results. 

Per WHO recommendations, children ages five to 17 should get at least 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity a day.

Findings from the study correlate with those of another recent study, which found that the amount of active play among children has taken a dip in recent years, likely as a result of kids’ attachment to their digital devices.

Increasing activity

In light of the growing obesity epidemic, the researchers say there is a “growing consensus for the benefits of reducing sedentary behavior and increasing even low-intensity levels of physical activity.”

“The goal of campaigns aimed at increasing physical activity has focused on increasing higher-intensity exercise,” says Zipunnikov. “Our study suggests that these efforts should consider time of day and also focus on increasing lower-intensity physical activity and reducing inactivity.”

The full study is published in the journal Preventive Medicine.

Chrysler (FCA US LLC) is recalling 1,353 model year 2017 Pacifica Plug-in Hybrid Electric vehicles (PHEV).

The vehicles have diodes in the Power Inverter Module ("PIM") that may fail due to an overvoltage condition. If the diodes fail, the vehicle will not move under its own power.

A vehicle that suddenly cannot be driven, increases the risk of a crash.

What to do

Chrysler has not yet finalized its remedy plans for this recall. The recall is expected to begin on July 24, 2017.

Owners may contact Chrysler customer service at 1-800-853-1403. Chrysler's number for this recall is T34.