Industry | Consumer News Info

Five Years of Industry Self-Regulation Results in Remarkable Changes in Food Advertising to Kids, Says BBB

December 17, 2011 By admin

Posted on 12/13/2011 by

Arlington, VA – Five years ago, leading food and beverage companies made a major commitment to be a part of the solution to childhood obesity by agreeing to limit what foods they advertise to children under the age of 12. The Council of Better Business Bureaus (CBBB) launched the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative (CFBAI) in November 2006 with ten charter companies.

The CFBAI released its annual report today and provided a five-year retrospective on the changes in children’s food advertising and on the program expansions that have made this self-regulation program even more robust. The report noted there was excellent compliance with the participants’ commitments to advertise to children only products meeting meaningful nutrition criteria or not to engage in child-directed advertising.

“Thanks to CFBAI’s participants, kids now see ads for a wide variety of healthier products, including cereals, crackers, yogurts, soups, snacks and meals, that have less sugar, sodium and fat, and are more nutritious,” said Elaine D. Kolish, CBBB Vice President and Director of CFBAI. “These days, children are regularly seeing ads for products that include, for example, whole grains.”

The CFBAI itself has changed with the times, expanding the scope of the program to cover new and emerging media, such as child-directed ads on smart phones and ads on children’s video games and DVDs. Participation also has grown to 17 companies, which represent the vast majority of food and beverage advertising to children.

“The companies that participate in the CFBAI have made major changes in their business practices since the program was launched,” stated Kolish. “Under self regulation, they’ve significantly improved the products in child-directed ads in both traditional and new media, none are advertising to kids in elementary schools, and none are doing product placement in child-directed entertainment or editorial content.”

Its most significant advance in 2011, its fifth year, was the issuance of new CFBAI category-specific uniform nutrition criteria. “The new criteria build on what CFBAI’s participants already have accomplished ? achieving product improvements without sacrificing taste, which any parent will tell you is more than half the battle,” said Kolish.

The new uniform nutrition criteria establish limits on calories, saturated fat, trans fat, sodium and sugars for ten product categories, and include requirements for nutrition components to encourage, such as vegetables, fruit, low-fat dairy, whole grains, and essential vitamins and minerals. The new criteria require participants to improve many products they currently advertise to children ? products that already meet meaningful nutrition standards ? if they wish to continue advertising them after these criteria go into effect on December 31, 2013.

For a copy of CFBAI’s five-year report, please contact Kelsey Owen at 703-247-9376 or kowen@council.bbb.org

About the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative
The Council of Better Business Bureaus launched the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative in November 2006 to shift the mix of advertising messaging directed at children to encourage healthier dietary choices and healthier lifestyles. The 17 participants of the Initiative are Burger King Corp.; Cadbury Adams USA LLC; Campbell Soup Company; The Coca-Cola Company; ConAgra Foods, Inc.; The Dannon Company; General Mills Inc.; The Hershey Company; Kellogg Company; Kraft Foods Global, Inc.; Mars, Incorporated; McDonald’s USA, LLC; Nestlé USA; PepsiCo, Inc.; Post Foods, LLC; Sara Lee Corporation and Unilever United States. For more information about the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative and to view the current pledges of the participants visit: www.bbb.org/kids_food.

About BBB
As the leader in advancing marketplace trust, Better Business Bureau^® is an unbiased non-profit organization that sets and upholds high standards for fair and honest business behavior. Every year, more than 87 million consumers rely on BBB Business Reviews and BBB Wise Giving Reports^® to help them find trustworthy businesses and charities across North America. Visit www.bbb.org for more information.

BBB Blog RSS Feed

Filed Under: Consumer Economic News Tagged With: Advertising, Changes, Five, Food, industry, Kids, Remarkable, Results, Says, SelfRegulation, years

Five Years of Industry Self-Regulation Results in Remarkable Changes in Food Advertising to Kids, Says BBB

December 14, 2011 By admin

Posted on 12/13/2011 by

For a copy of CFBAI’s five-year report, please contact Kelsey Owen at 703-247-9376 or kowen@council.bbb.org

BBB Blog RSS Feed

Filed Under: Consumer Economic News Tagged With: Advertising, Changes, Five, Food, industry, Kids, Remarkable, Results, Says, SelfRegulation, years

Study Finds that Pharmaceutical Industry Continued to Make Business Deals that Delayed Consumers Access to Lower-Cost Generic Drugs

October 30, 2011 By admin

The Consumers

Image by ghwpix
The Consumers
» Their MySpace page
» Their official website

Spartanburg, SC
Spring Fling 2009
Saturday, May 2

According to an overview of industry data released by the staff of the Federal Trade Commission, in Fiscal Year 2011, pharmaceutical companies continued a recent anticompetitive trend of paying potential generic rivals to delay the introduction of lower-cost prescription drug alternatives for American consumers.

The FTC staff report found that drug companies entered into 28 potential pay-for-delay deals in FY 2011 (October 1, 2010 through September 30, 2011). The figure nearly matches last year’s record of 31 deals and is higher than any other previous year since the FTC began collecting data in 2003. Overall, the agreements reached in the latest fiscal year involved 25 different brand-name pharmaceutical products with combined annual U.S. sales of more than billion.

“While a lot of companies don’t engage in pay-for-delay settlements, the ones that do increase prescription drug costs for consumers and the government each year,” said FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz. “Fortunately, Congress has the opportunity to fix this problem through the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction — and save the government and American taxpayers billions of dollars.”

Generic drugs are the key to making medicines affordable for millions of American consumers, and they also help hold down costs for taxpayer-funded health programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. Generic drug prices are typically at least 20 to 30 percent less than the name-brand drugs, and in some cases are up to 90 percent cheaper.

In recent years, certain brand-name companies have paid or otherwise compensated generic firms to settle their patent challenges and, in turn, delay the introduction of lower-cost medicines. An FTC staff study has found that patent settlements that include a payment or other compensation delay generic entry on average by 17 months longer than those that do not include a payment. According to the Congressional Budget Office, proposed legislation would reduce the federal deficit by .67 billion over 10 years.

The FTC has challenged a number of these patent settlement agreements in court, contending that they are anticompetitive and violate U.S. antitrust laws. The agency also has supported legislation in Congress that would prohibit pay-for-delay settlements that increase the cost of prescription drugs.

According to the new staff report, companies reached a total of 156 final patent settlements in FY 2011. Twenty-eight settlements contained a payment to a generic manufacturer and also restricted the generic’s ability to market its product. Of those 28 settlements, 18 involved generics that were so-called “first filers,” meaning that they were the first to seek FDA approval to market a generic version of the branded drug, and, at the time of the settlement, were eligible to exclusively market the generic product for period of time. Because of the regulatory framework, when first filers delay entering the market, other generic manufacturers can also be blocked from entering the market, which makes such patent settlement deals particularly harmful to consumers.

Source: FTC

FMD Consumer News

Filed Under: Consumer Economic News Tagged With: access, Business, Consumers, Continued, deals, Delayed, drugs, finds, Generic, industry, LowerCost, Pharmaceutical, Study

The Legal Noose Is Tightening on the Debt Collection Industry for Questionable Legal Actions

July 24, 2011 By admin

The Consumers

Image by ghwpix
The Consumers
» Their MySpace page
» Their official website

Spartanburg, SC
Spring Fling 2009
Saturday, May 2

Even one of the debt collection industry’s trade publications InsideARM is beginning to publish the problems with many credit card debt lawsuits. It appears that more judges are beginning to question the validity of motions for summary judgments and default judgments. In another words, no documentation, no judgment is what judges are beginning to hand to debt collection attorneys.

Until such time that federal laws (and state laws) require proper documentation of a debt before proceeding with collection lawsuits, it will take a while for consumers to get a fair break in civil debt actions. For far too long collection companies, and their attorneys have had a free reign on the court system and violating consumers right to show just cause (proof) for the lawsuits.

Junk debt buyers are typically the ones that file questionable collection lawsuits and many times, they base their lawsuit on documentation that does not exist. These debt buyers generally only receive names, account numbers, and no underlying documentation of the debts they buy. These companies rely on spreadsheets that anyone with a computer could manufacture or they base their claims on false affidavits.

Consumers should always question any debt lawsuits and force the plaintiff and attorney to show real and proper proof. The more consumers that do stand up and question debt buyers will stop using the legal system to collect on questionable debts.

“In LVNV Funding, LLC v. Colvell, the New Jersey Superior Court ruled that, to win on a summary judgment motion, a party suing on a credit card account must provide the same proof that is required for a default judgment.” ~ InsideARM and Ballard Spahr LLP

“The Maine Supreme Court also cited insufficient evidence as the basis for its decision in Cach, LLC v. Kulas vacating the district court’s grant of summary judgment for the buyer of a credit card account.” ~ InsideARM and Ballard Spahr LLP

It is up to consumers to enlighten judges of collectors questionable tactics. The days of fraudulent debt collection via our court system are nearing their end. Consumers can have a severely negative impact on the collection industry as a whole by standing up and fighting back.

ABOUT ALLEN HARKLEROAD

Allen Harkleroad is the author of the book “Stick it to Sue Happy Debt Collectors”. The book has saved countless consumer from the clutches of abusive debt collectors and shady debt collection law firms. Allen Harkleroad is a veteran of beating bad debt collectors, whether it defending himself in court or suing them for violating the law. Allen’s latest book ‘Suing Debt Collectors’, is now available book stores and online.

Allen is an avid and judicious consumer advocate who enjoys helping others. In addition to consumer advocacy he enjoys writing and blogging on various technology and business subjects.

FMD Consumer News

Filed Under: Consumer Economic News Tagged With: Actions, collection, Debt, industry, Legal, Noose, Questionable, Tightening

Judge Issues Huge Smackdown on Debt Collectors and Industry for Harassing Consumers on Facebook and Social Media

April 19, 2011 By admin

Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act

Image by Public Citizen
(Photo by Joe Newman)

For American consumers, this has been the year of living dangerously. A record number of product recalls this year and last — many involving dangerous toys — put American children and families at greater risk than ever before. But with the U.S. Senate passing the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act Thursday night, after the House passed it Wednesday, there may finally be reason to think that things might get better.

Sen. Dick Durbin.

Letters: Industry defeatism on bottle refunds

October 5, 2010 By admin

The Green Dress (painting) Green (poem)
green

Image by faith goble
An old self-portrait. The clothing, jewelry, hair style, and background are all purely products of my imagination. Acrylic on canvas

Green ( in honor of April, national poetry month)

Green watered silk,
The color of the foam
Which rides upon the sea
Whipped high and frothing
Into the fresh-skimming
Air
Sailing to the Orient shore,
Which in its turn sends emissaries
Of the fraught wind
To greet the voyager
With gift of breeze
Redolent of spice and sandalwood–
A silken caress against the ocean’s
Humid skin,
Lifting the spindrift
Skirts
Of waves.

Faith Goble
April 12, 2008

The Campaign to Protect Rural England’s call to reintroduce bottle refund schemes in order to cut litter and increase recycling has received widespread support, including from the Guardian. The prime minister has promised to look sympathetically at the proposal. So it is very disappointing that industry bodies are trying to rubbish our research (Response: A bottle deposit scheme would be costly and counter-productive, 1 October) rather than working with us to consider how such a scheme could work without burdening retailers and producers with excessive costs.

We know that deposit refund schemes work and that they can increase recycling of drinks containers to 90% (currently, only 38% are recycled). We have now demonstrated that a scheme would be cost-effective, bringing benefits worth £1.2bn a year.

It is an inescapable fact that, despite the admirable increase in kerbside collections, the majority of drinks containers still end up in landfill or polluting the environment in other ways. CPRE wants a deposit refund scheme because we believe it is the best way to increase recycling rates to 90% and to cut litter. But we would be delighted to hear from the packaging industry about any other scheme that can achieve similar results. Jane Bickerstaffe’s depressingly defeatist article certainly didn’t provide any ideas.

Shaun Spiers

Chief executive, Campaign to Protect Rural England

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Environment: Ethical and green living | guardian.co.uk

Filed Under: Consumer Economic News Tagged With: bottle, defeatism, industry, Letters, refunds

Protect Yourself From Consumer Fraud In the Hair Loss Treatment Industry

August 5, 2010 By admin

by Aranami

Protect Yourself From Consumer Fraud In the Hair Loss Treatment Industry

The Definitive Hair Loss Treatment

That title got you, didn’t it? If you wish you could just wave a magic wand and get your hair back, read on to protect yourself from consumer fraud in the hair loss treatment industry.

When your hair loss becomes apparent to you, it can suddenly become the focus of your life. You can feel desperate for any kind of cure or promise that will grow your hair back. But that’s not a realistic expectation, is it? When Roy Baxter, a 37-year-old businessman, began to notice the bald spot on the back of his head, it was almost too late. His scalp was showing through, and his hair had apparently been thinning for several years before he was aware of it. After going to the doctor, he learned that his male pattern baldness was permanent and progressive and that once the follicles were dead, they couldn’t be brought back to life. And that’s the truth Roy had to face.

While browsing around online, Roy found lots of “cures” and solutions to his hair loss, but he didn’t know which ones were proven treatments and which ones were not. So, how do you tell the difference? And how does the “un-approved” hair loss treatment industry make its billions of dollars each year? Well, millions of Americans experiencing hair loss are absolutely desperate for a cure, despite the facts. And many hair-loss-”cure” Web sites and products seem plausible — so, like Roy, you might be tempted to click the order button. But there are many ways to tell the real products from the fakes if you know where to look.

• Get the facts: The Bureau of Consumer Protection of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) advises that education is power against fraud and can help you make well-informed decisions before you make a purchase. Get a medical diagnosis from a doctor for your hair loss; then read up on how your specific type of hair loss can be treated. Visit a hair loss treatment professional and talk to others who have your type of hair loss to see what works. Remember the old adage, “If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.”

• The truth about before-and-after photos on hair loss Web sites: It’s extremely difficult just by looking at a picture to know the circumstances of any particular client’s case or whether you would experience the same results, explains Dr. Robert M. Bernstein, M.D., F.A.A.D., clinical professor of dermatology at Columbia University and hair transplant surgeon and director of Bernstein Medical Hair Restoration in New York City. A better way to gauge results of a specific hair loss treatment studio or doctor who has before-and-after pictures on a Web site is to go in person for a consultation and ask for the phone numbers of current or past patients in order to speak with them. Many companies that use identical products or procedures may use that supplier’s before-and-after photos, and that’s why they are the same on different Web sites. Ask where the photos come from and who did the work.

• FDA approval: Approval by the Food and Drug Administration is a helpful benchmark because clinical studies that prove results must be completed before a company may make a treatment claim. Confusion arises because with the FDA approval of the generic drugs Minoxidil and Finasteride as being effective in halting the hair loss process, some companies will claim that any inclusion of these ingredients — in any form or amount — enables them to make the same effectiveness claims. Any other products (aside from the brand names Rogaine and Propecia) that do not have this exact FDA approval may not work and have not been tested or proven to produce the hair-restoration results they are claiming.

• Promises, statements and claims: The FTC advises that you steer clear of any products making all-encompassing “cure” claims, especially if they are not FDA-approved. Ultra scientific jargon or terminology is specifically designed to make you think the product will “cure” your hair loss. Ditto for testimonials and undocumented case histories. Watch out for these marketing tactics.

• Shady payment requirements: “Limited-time offer,” “Hurry,” Advance payment required” and “No-risk, money-back guarantee” are all attempts to make you quickly click the payment button, cautions the FTC. Resist the pressure to purchase on the spot and take your time to consult a trusted medical professional or pharmacist.

As Roy learned, most procedures and products work best when they prevent hair loss, when you still have your hair. There is no magic cure. You have to be realistic in your expectations and cognizant of the fact that once hair follicles are dead, hair loss is permanent. By trying any unproven treatments, you are simply delaying appropriate treatment that could be saving hair follicles, at the stage at which many of the current proven treatments can improve hair counts. Once hair loss is permanent, non-surgical hair replacement and surgical hair transplant are your only options for replacing hair that was lost.

Naomi Mannino is a freelance writer who writes about health, beauty, and fashion, with a specialty in writing about hair extensions and hair loss prevention. She is a contributing writer for HairLoss.Com who writes about hair loss condition and hair loss solutions. For more information please visit:http://www.hairloss.com/

SunTrust Bank consumer fraud & disrespect of Federal Reserve, when Sun Trust customer files inquiry & complaint with the Federal Reserve, SunTrust cancels customer’s account w/out forewarning, maliciously inflicting harm, intentional pain, suffering & embarrassment on its former customer. SunTrust unethical & cruel business practices harm and defraud bank customer, closing his bank account but not sending the positive balance with the letter of cancellation. SunTrust Bank keeps the customer’s money & cancels account. www.PaulFDavis.com – consumer advocate, author & worldwide speaker / Write your complaint to Paul (info@PaulFDavis.com) to join the class action lawsuit against SunTrust Bank.
Video Rating: 0 / 5

What is the maximum consumer surplus in a monopolistic industry under perfect price discrimination?

July 31, 2010 By admin

by Public Citizen

Question by pnx8038: What is the maximum consumer surplus in a monopolistic industry under perfect price discrimination?
Consider the case of perfect price discrimination in an industry with pure monopoly, where every consumer is charged the maximum price s/he is willing to pay. What is the maximum possible value of consumer surplus? I am not really getting the concept of consumer surplus, would anyone please explain that in relevance to the answer to this question?

Best answer:

Answer by Gift
Consumer surplus is the difference between the price a consumer is willing (and able) to pay for a good or service and the price which s/he actually paid, i.e. the market price. Consumer surplus depends on the elasticity of demand of the product concerned. For instance if a football fan is ready to pay for a ticket to watch a soccer match, but the ticket was sold to him/her for , then the consumer surplus is – = .

In the case of a perfect price discrimination where every consumer is charged the maximum price s/he is willing to pay, consumer surplus is zero because everyone is charged the maximum price s/he is willing to pay.

Give your answer to this question below!

Filed Under: Consumer Economic News Tagged With: consumer, discrimination, industry, maximum, monopolistic, perfect, price, surplus, under

Five Years of Industry Self-Regulation Results in Remarkable Changes in Food Advertising to Kids, Says BBB

Five Years of Industry Self-Regulation Results in Remarkable Changes in Food Advertising to Kids, Says BBB

Study Finds that Pharmaceutical Industry Continued to Make Business Deals that Delayed Consumers Access to Lower-Cost Generic Drugs

The Legal Noose Is Tightening on the Debt Collection Industry for Questionable Legal Actions

Letters: Industry defeatism on bottle refunds

Protect Yourself From Consumer Fraud In the Hair Loss Treatment Industry

What is the maximum consumer surplus in a monopolistic industry under perfect price discrimination?

Search

Categories

Recent Posts

Search

Categories

Recent Posts

Tags