Burnout is real , and you've probably experienced it before (if you aren't experiencing it now). The Association for Psychological Science notes, however, that there are three main varieties of burnout—each with different symptoms and different solutions.
Science is amazing, but science reporting can be confusing at times and misleading at worst. The folks at Compound Interest put together this reference graphic that will help you pick out good articles from bad ones, and help you qualify the impact of the study you're reading
Breastfeeding isn't as simple as "baby plus nipple." It can create a lot of unexpected biological quirks and emotional reactions, leaving many new parents blindsided. Here are some common breastfeeding experiences you may not have heard about, compiled by new moms and women's health experts.
Amazon has introduced a new service for Amazon Prime members, designed to let them stock their pantry with the essentials...for an added delivery fee.
If you're in the UK, you're in for a treat today: the UK-specific version of Lifehacker is officially live.
Between the life-changing proposal and the tear-jerking "I do's," there's the unique stress known as wedding planning. Even if your big day is a year or more out, many things might will trip you up. As someone who's been there and lived to tell the tale, these are the things I wish I had known in advance before my wedding day.
Yesterday, Amazon finally unveiled its Prime Pantry service, which allows customers to consolidate as many grocery items as they can into one large box for home delivery. But given Prime Pantry’s selection and long delivery times, is this something that people can actually use? The answer is… maybe.
SELECTION:
While Amazon touts that it has “more than 2,000″ items available for putting into one’s Prime Pantry box, that’s really not that many when you consider the sheer variety of products available at your typical large supermarket, let alone the seemingly countless number of non-grocery items Amazon sells. This will likely change as the program develops, but for now it feels a bit anemic.
The product offerings appear to be dominated by popular name brands, which is both a blessing and a curse. On the one hand, it means that most shoppers will at least be familiar with what they are buying, but it also means that many smaller but still popular brands are not available. Customers who are very picky about getting their particular favorite brand of potato chip or shampoo will likely feel frustrated by the hit-or-miss selection.
For example, the variety in the personal care section may be found wanting by shoppers who not only have a certain brand in mind, but also a certain scent or size of package.
Some Pantry sections do have a variety of smaller, apparently independent brands, but there is a definite absence of generic offerings for people who just want “baking soda,” “cola,” or “aluminum foil” and don’t care to pay a premium for a recognizable name on the packaging.
And of course there is the issue of no fresh or frozen food; as those would present a logistical nightmare for storage and shipping in this fashion. So even if you’re fine with the lack of variety in brands on Prime Pantry, you can’t do your week’s grocery shopping there.
So in terms of selection, Prime Pantry is less like going to the supermarket and more like those times when you’re on vacation and you stop by the nearest convenience store to pick up snacks and stuff you forgot to pack.
PRICING:
This is a more complicated issue, as supermarket prices tend to vary greatly from ZIP code to ZIP code, depending on things like population density, area competition, household income, shipping and storage costs, and many other factors. So what might seem like a decent price for one customer may seem like a rip-off to another.
Just for a more apples-to-other-kind-of-apples evaluation, we selected a few random Prime Pantry items and compared their prices to what you’d pay to have them delivered by a popular online grocery delivery service operating in many Mid-Atlantic metro areas.
We compared only items that we could match across both services, but in each instance Prime Pantry cost less — sometimes significantly so.
The 30-oz. jar of mayonnaise was $.30 less expensive on Prime Pantry; a 12-pack of soda goes for $1 less; the price difference was $1.20 on both a 28-oz. bottle of body wash and an 8-oz. bag of chips.
Of course, the delivery service we’re using for comparison also offers a much wider variety of products and brands, including fresh and frozen foods. That service also allows you to schedule two-hour delivery windows on days of your choosing.
Again, your local prices might be better than what we have available for comparison, but this at least shows that while Amazon might currently be offering convenience store selection, it isn’t charging convenience store prices.
WHO WOULD WANT THIS?
Unless you subsist on packaged foods and shampoo, Prime Pantry will not fulfill all your kitchen needs, but there are some people and situations for whom it might be worth considering:
•Urban Dwellers Who Don’t Cook: I’ve met a surprisingly large number of people who live in major cities but who rarely, if ever, cook at home. They eat out, get take-out, or order every meal. But these people also tend to have things like soda, cereal and snacks in their cupboards… and of course they need the usual suspects like toilet paper and soap.
But many densely populated cities lack proper supermarkets, forcing urban dwellers to pay extortionate corner store prices. Having a service that delivers these pantry staples cheaply and efficiently to their doors may be appealing.
•Senders Of Care Packages: Got a kid living off ramen cooked on a hot plate in her college dorm room? Prime Pantry seems tailor-made for the parent or loved one who wants to treat someone to a box full of stuff to someone who could use cookies, deodorant and toothpaste.
•Rural Shoppers Who Want To Save A Trip To The Store: Some rural areas of the country face a similar problem to densely populated urban centers — a lack of readily available quality supermarkets. And sometimes those stores don’t carry items for shoppers with specific dietary needs, like food allergies. A service like Prime Pantry wouldn’t solve all these issues for everyone, but it could be used to supplement trips to the supermarket.
•Consumers Without Cars: For people who don’t drive or don’t have ready access to a vehicle, supermarket shopping can be a huge pain in the read-end, especially for the non-perishable items. Shopping without a car means you often have to sacrifice value for convenience; for example, buying only a single roll of paper towels instead of the 8-pack. Every non-perishable item you can get delivered to your door is one you don’t have to carry home from the store.
WHO WOULDN’T WANT THIS:
•Extreme Couponers: Prime Pantry does offer coupons on some items, but people who are practiced in the coupon martial arts will probably want to stick with their current shopping habits.
•Food Snobs: While there are a handful of smaller brands available on Prime Pantry, most food snobs will turn their noses up at almost every item. This is not the place to pick up items you can brag to your friends about having in your kitchen.
•Anyone Who Needs Things Quickly: Yes, ordering online is incredibly convenient and may be less expensive than going to the store. But if you’re going to run out of dishwashing detergent tomorrow, Prime Pantry isn’t going to help. The delivery estimates on Pantry orders are upwards of 3-4 business days, so it’s not for people with any urgent needs.
•Warehouse Shoppers: Even though Prime Pantry is all about shipping items in bulk to save time and money, it’s not about actually buying in bulk. So if you’re a fan of going to Costco and buying a stack of toilet paper the size of a dog house, or if you looked at the earlier mention of a 30-oz. jar of mayo and went “Is that all?”… then you’re probably best sticking with your local warehouse store.
A disabled Minneapolis man filed suit against a local McDonald’s owner and the global corporation alleging the restaurant violated the Americans With Disabilities Act when he was refused service twice while accompanied by his service dog. The man is seeking damages and requirements that company employees be trained and educated about the Americans With Disabilities Act, the Minneapolis Star Tribune reports.
The man, who has muscular dystrophy and a chronic back ailment, uses a wheelchair and has limited use of his arms and hands. His 4-year-old service dog helps with many of his daily duties, such as opening and closing doors.
According to the lawsuit, in late August 2012 the man wheeled himself into the McDonald’s with his service dog in tow. An employee behind the counter told him that the dog prevented him from being served. The man then rode his wheelchair into the drive-through and was told “we don’t serve those things in the drive-through.”
Upon returning back inside the restaurant the man was allowed to buy his meal but was told he could not come back.
Several months later in May 2013, the man once again returned to the McDonald’s location. This time he says his order was taken without issues, but while waiting the restaurant’s manager told him he had to leave.
According to the lawsuit, the manager demanded to see documentation that the dog was in fact a service animal, and told the man he could not eat in the dining area with the dog.
When the man said the law allowed him to eat there, the manager replied: “I am the manager here, and I am the law,” to which other customers laughed. Upon receiving his food, the man and his service dog left.
The man says he hopes the lawsuit shines light on the Americans With Disabilities Act, which requires that state and local governments, businesses and nonprofit organizations that serve the public must allow service animals to accompany those with disabilities.
Additionally, the Act puts limitations on inquiries about a service dog’s validity; asking a disabled person to produce the documentation of need is illegal.
“The best thing that could come out of this,” the man tells the Star Tribune, “is that all McDonald’s employees are required to undergo sensitivity training concerning people with disabilities.”
In a statement, the McDonald’s manager says he takes “complaints like this seriously [and] we do our best to provide a great customer experience to every customer.”
Disabled man sues Mpls. McDonald’s, citing conduct over service dog [Minneapolis Star Tribune]
It can be very disappointing to not get what you want, when you want it. But when one man allegedly didn’t get cigarettes and beer after trying to bum them off a stranger at a Brooklyn bodega, police say he fired back with a homemade bomb, throwing a Molotov cocktail into the 24-hour store.
Police have arrested a suspect accused of chucking the fireball at the clerk, which set both him and the store on fire, reports the New York Daily News.
The 35-year-old man allegedly asked the clerk before it went down for some free beer and cigs, but the worker had to turn him down.
“I said I can’t give credit because of my boss,” the clerk told the NYDN. “(I) no talk back. He talk mean, but he left. I thought that was it.”
Police say the man returned a few minutes later, lit the cocktail and hurled it into the store at about 2 a.m.
The worker says his jacket and hair caught fire, but he only suffered minor injuries.
“I just thank God I am okay. I am very lucky I survived,” he said yesterday.
The suspect turned himself in and is charged with attempted murder, assault, arson and criminal possession of a weapon.
Cops arrest man accused of tossing Molotov cocktail into Brooklyn bodega after failing to bum beer and cigarettes [New York Daily News]
“He didn’t ask any questions. He didn’t judge me. He smiled, there was kindness in his eyes.” the mom noted in an interview with TV station WXIA. That kind of behavior shouldn’t be considered “above and beyond.” Treating people with different needs and families who might need an extra hand with human dignity, as if helping an upset teen out of the restaurant is no different from fetching an extra fork, is something to which all people should aspire.
“If people understand then incidents like that won’t be a big deal anymore, it’s just life,” the mother said in her interview. Yet that manager’s behavior isn’t why we’re featuring this story about California Pizza Kitchen. Nope.
As we encourage people to do when they have very bad or very good experiences, she wrote about the visit on her blog. Someone at the restaurant saw it, and they were delighted with her writeup (and the priceless good publicity.) They reached out to the family and offered a $5,000 donation to the charity of their choice.
They decided to give back to other children with autism, and donated a therapy garden to the school he attends.
Restaurant pays forward manager’s act of kindness [WXIA] (WARNING: AUTO-PLAY VIDEO)
Someone’s likely in hot water after a foursome allegedly paid for their meal at a Philadelphia diner with a phony $50 bill and bolted, the Philadelphia Daily News reports.
Once the group’s waitress realized the bill was counterfeit she ran after the diners, only to nearly be mowed down by the car. And that’s where things get interesting; the vehicle’s license plate included a Fraternal Order of Police tag.
“Another manager took down the license plate and gave it to the police. They checked to see who it belonged to, and it ended up being registered to an officer,” the diner’s manager says.
A police spokesman confirmed to the Daily News that an internal affairs probe was started when investigators learned that a cop’s car was involved in the incident.
However, a spokesperson for the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge in the area says the officer in questions was cleared of any wrongdoing when it was revealed she had lent the car to a relative.
“Everybody was in shock,” the manager says. “I just don’t understand why anyone would do something like this.”
Did relative use cop’s car to skip out on diner bill? [Philly.com]
A month after announcing its first-ever price hike to its Amazon Prime subscription service, the online retailer is finally launching Prime Pantry, a new bulk grocery shopping addition to Prime that Amazon hopes will justify that additional cost for some customers.
Amazon officially launched the grocery service on Wednesday. Sure, consumers have long been able to purchase items like toilet paper, cleaning supplies and certain other household goods from Amazon, but the new service allows for a wider range of products such as pasta sauce and pop.
Consumerist first reported that Amazon was tossing around the idea of Prime Pantry back in December and the officially launched service appears to operate much like it was first described.
Prime members can shop from more than 2,000 products to fill a four-cubic foot box with up to 45 pounds of goods. As items are ordered a virtual Prime Pantry box is filled to track available space.
The package can then be shipped for $5.99 plus the cost of the items. While delivery time may vary, consumers can expect to receive their packages in 1 to 4 business days, the Wall Street Journal reports.
At first glance the products seem to be in line with those found at grocery stores. A 24-pack of Arrowhead Spring Water cost $3.98, while a can of Chicken of the Sea Tuna is prices at $0.84.
Prime Pantry is just one product Amazon has launched in attempts to make grocery shopping on Amazon a thing.
Earlier this month, the company unveiled Amazon Dash, a device that consumers can talk into or use to scan groceries and other household items to add the products to their grocery list. However, that list is only good for AmazonFresh, which is only being tested in Southern California, San Francisco and Seattle.
Amazon Prime ‘Pantry’ Service Seeks to Slim Down Bulk Ordering [Wall Street Journal]
The bill passed with a 114-30 vote, reports the Burlington Free Press, and also makes it illegal for foods with GMOs to be labeled “all natural” or “natural.”
And while Maine and Connecticut have their own GMO labeling bills, those have clauses that makes them inactive until surrounding states pass similar rules. Vermont’s bill goes into effect July 1, 2016, reports NPR’s The Salt blog.
Proponents are excited and hopeful that the measure will inspire the rest of the country to follow suit.
“Our constituents have spoken. They feel it’s important to know what’s in their food,” said House Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Partridge, D-Windham.
On the other side of the coin, plenty of big names in the food industry are none too pleased, and as such, the state government has included a fund in the bill to deal with probably legal battles.
“I’ll be very surprised if we are not sued if the legislature goes ahead and enacts a mandatory GMO labeling statute,” state Attorney General Sorrell said before the bill passed. “A lot of people might not realize that this is arguably a free speech issue.”
The Grocery Manufacturers Association sounds like it might be just such a party to fight it, responding to the bill in a statement: “It sets the nation on a costly and misguided path toward a 50-state patchwork of GMO labeling policies that will do nothing to advance the safety of consumers.”
From here, it’ll just have to cross the desk of Gov. Peter Shumlin, who sounds like he’s on board to sign the bill.
“I am proud of Vermont for being the first state in the nation to ensure that Vermonters will know what is in their food. The Legislature has spoken loud and clear through its passage of this bill,” he said in a statement. “I wholeheartedly agree with them and look forward to signing this bill into law.”
GMO bill one step from law [Burlington Free Press]
Bracing For A Battle, Vermont Passes GMO Labeling Bill [The Salt]
He filed a federal lawsuit against Petco yesterday, claiming he was bitten twice in March by a rat he bought in February, reports the Portland Press Herald. He then spent 35 days in the hospital battling “multiple spinal abscesses, painful inflammation of his joints, extreme debilitation and pain and suffering,” the lawsuit says
“He could have died,” his attorney said.
The man bought the rat to feed to his son’s pet boa constrictor, something he’s done every two to four weeks. He kept the rat in a tank until he tried to feed it to the snake, which did end up eating its dinner and wasn’t harmed.
So at least the rat didn’t get away with it, eh?
The man says he’s still getting treatments regularly for the disease and that he’s racked up medical bills of more than $170,000. He claims Petco breached its implied warranty and is liable and negligent, and he’s seeking unspecified monetary damages and fees.
Portland man contracted rat-bite fever from Petco rodent, lawsuit says [Portland Press Herald]
Keeping an eye on your baby while they sleep or play quietly in their room should be a painless task. But for some owners of a recently recalled video monitor the everyday task has left them injured, and in some cases with property damage.
Nearly 800,000 Summer Infant Video Monitors are being recalled because of a potential burn hazard, the Consumer Product Safety Commission reports.
The rechargeable battery in the handheld video monitor can overheat and rupture causing the user to be burned. So far, the company has received 22 reports of overheated or ruptured batteries. In some cases consumers reported smoke and minor property damage.
The two charts below provide specific details on this recall. The first chart provides the letter/number combinations at the beginning of the serial numbers for the problem batteries. The serial number is printed on the back of each battery. The second chart provides the full list of recalled monitor models.
Consumers should remove the battery and contact Summer Infant for a replacement battery. In the meantime, the monitor can be used on AC power with the power cord.
The monitors were sold at Babies “R” Us, Walmart, Target, Amazon and other online retailers between February 2010 and 2012.
Summer Infant Expands Recall to Replace Video Monitor Rechargeable Batteries Due to Burn Hazard [Consumer Product Safety Commission]
(C x 2)
A grandmother of a child at the school complained to local media about the practice, where the school served students trail mix and about three tablespoons of Mountain Dew before administering the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test each day, reports Florida Today.
That complaint caught the attention of the school district and has raised concerns among parents, among them, the risk of kids crashing from their sugar highs in the middle of the test. It’s also an interesting practice considering state law prevents schools from selling soda.
“Once that was brought to our attention, we eliminated that practice,” a spokesman for the public schools said, adding that they’ve advised the school to only provide water to drink.
The practice goes back 10 years, when the school principal read about it in an education journal.
“She felt that it was a professional practice and implemented it,” the spokeswoman explained. “Since then, there’s been new information (about what’s best for students).”
The principal still seems to think it was a fine idea, as the amount of Mountain Dew administered wasn’t very much, and was part of an overall program of encouraging kids to get ready for the FCAT withh a good night’s sleep and a healthy breakfast.
“We don’t think we were giving them enough to really get into” negative impacts of sugar highs and lows, she said. “We’ve done it for years. The kids look forward to the treats.”
That being said, if parents or others are worried, she can respect those concerns, she added.
Meanwhile, some enterprising fourth grader is probably setting up a black market trade in Mountain Dew.
*Thanks for the tip, Kelly!
School stops serving Mountain Dew before FCAT after complaints [Florida Today]
Americans have always viewed a college education as an investment in a student’s future, but there’s another sort of investment going on behind-the-scenes, and it’s nearly risk free. With access to a revolving door of prospective students and a continuous supply of federal aid, some colleges are turning hopes and dreams into big returns for Goldman Sachs and other investors.
Today, prospective college students — from recent high-school graduates to those returning to school after years in the workforce — often seek out opportunities that will allow them to continue working while obtaining their degree. Some for-profit colleges market themselves as the answer: work during the day and take classes online or at local campuses when you can.
But at the intersection of convenience, accessibility, and education, there lies a low-risk, high-reward opportunity for the savvy businessperson. The question is: Are for-profit educational institutions looking out for the students, or the investors?
PROFITABLE INVESTMENT
While you may not know it from the amateurish quality of the for-profit college ads that litter daytime and late-night TV, many of these schools are owned by multibillion-dollar conglomerates offering big returns to their high-profile backers .
“For-profit schools are quite profitable, especially the larger schools like Phoenix or Corinthian,” Suzanne Martindale, a staff attorney for Consumers Union*, tells Consumerist. “To make money, all they need to do is enroll students — they get to keep the financial aid, including loans, which students are on the hook for later.”
One successful for-profit education investor is finance giant Goldman Sachs. Following the collapse of the U.S. housing market, the firm saw a new investment opportunity in the form of a 43% stake in Education Management Corporation, the company behind schools like Brown Mackie College, Argosy University and The Art Institutes.
When Goldman Sachs was announced as one of EDMC’s new partners in 2011, the Huffington Post reported that the move allowed Goldman to secure itself a means of tapping into the boom in for-profit higher education.
At the time, enrollment at for-profit colleges was expanding as consumers sought to alleviate the impact of a declining economy by returning to college. The federal government supplied prospective students with billions of dollars in aid, money that for-profit colleges and their investors were happy to take.
In 2013, EDMC reported enrollment of 125,560 students and revenue of more than $2.5 billion.
Of course, Goldman Sachs isn’t the only well-known backer of for-profit education. Until Oct. 2013, the Washington Post Company – the corporation that owned The Washington Post newspaper at the time – was behind Kaplan University, which runs 10 campuses in four states and also offers online courses.
Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos bought the newspaper portion of the Washington Post Company late last year and the business that remained became Graham Holdings Company.
With 70,000 total students and $2.2 billion in revenue in 2013, Kaplan University is a cash cow for Graham Holdings.
Large corporations don’t hold a monopoly on investing in for-profit education; wealthy individuals often put their money into this industry. One such investor is Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen. The billionaire is just one of many investors in Laureate Education Inc., which owns 75 schools in 30 countries. The corporations’ colleges boast 800,000 students worldwide and revenue of $4 billion in 2013.
Another investor in Laureate is Henry Kravis, the co-founder of successful private equity firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co., which has investments in Playtex, Toys “R” Us, Safeway and other companies. Bloomberg Businessweek reports that Kravis took a $487.5 million stake in Laureate, an investment that has increased in value to $710.8 million after just three years.
WITH EDUCATION LOANS, RISK FLOWS TO THE BORROWER
“Shareholders who invest in these businesses can make money, since the faucet of federal taxpayer money is all but guaranteed to stay open,” Martindale says. “This creates an environment that is good for business in the short-term, but devastating to students and families – not to mention our economy – in the long-term.”
At the forefront of the profitability recipe is the aid the federal government provides students at for-profit institutions. Between 2003 and 2008, the amount of federal aid distributed to these schools tripled from $8 billion to $24 billion according to a Government Accountability Office report (See charts below).
Colleges essentially receive a guarantee of revenue — in the form of federal student loans and grants for tuition — before a student begins taking classes. And because the burden of repaying student loans fall to the student, whether or not they actually graduate with a degree, investors and corporations are left with little or no consequences.
In 2008, the for-profit industry accounted for 23% of all federal student aid distributed, and the average for-profit school received 66% of its funds from federal student aid. An investigation by the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) found that $32 billion in federal student aid goes to for-profit schools, but those institutions only use about 17% of those fund on actual instruction.
The consequences of education gone wrong can be devastating for students. On average, 54% of students who began at a for-profit institution during the 2008-2009 school year withdrew by summer 2010, the HELP investigation found. But the bad news doesn’t end there for students.
Nearly 22.7% of students who attend for-profit colleges will default on their federal and private student loans, and unlike other forms of credit, education loans are notoriously difficult, if not impossible, to discharge through bankruptcy. This means former students are at risk for extreme forms of debt collection, such as garnishment of wages.
(Click image to see full-size charts)
So, while students risk their livelihood by taking out costly loans in order to further their education, investors have been looking at a growth industry with favorable conditions for lenders.
FRIENDS IN HIGH PLACES
The risks for-profit colleges currently face come in the form of high-profile lawsuits, investigations by federal agencies and proposed regulations regarding the employability of their graduates. However, those risk are made tolerable by the industry’s thick pocketbooks.
David Halperin, the author of the book Stealing America’s Future: How For-Profit Colleges Scam Taxpayers and Ruin Students’ Lives, says the industry provides a wealth of donations to the political arena each year.
“They are looking for people who have influence with members of congress both Democrats and Republicans,” Halperin says. “They are leaning on them to not push too hard.”
Proposed legislation, such as the Dept. of Education’s gainful employment rule, which would require for-profit colleges to show they actually prepare students for careers or lose their access to federal aid, could have meaningful impact on the way for-profit colleges conduct their business, and the industry knows it.
In fact, EDMC’s own annual report shows the company is aware that regulations could pose significant changes to the industry’s profitability:
“Existing and future laws and regulations may impede our growth. These regulations and laws may cover consumer protection, taxation, privacy, data protection, pricing, content, copyrights, distribution, mobile communications, electronic device certification, electronic waste, electronic contracts and other communications and Internet services. Legislation and regulation in the United States as well as international laws and regulations could result in compliance costs which may reduce our revenue and income and/or result in reputational damage, as well as governmental action should our compliance measures not be deemed satisfactory.”
EDMC joined other for-profit colleges to form the Coalition for Educational Success to lobby for changes to the Department of Education’s 2011 gainful employment rule. CES spent a total of $1.8 million in 2011 in a successful attempt to make changes to the proposed legislation, OpenSecrets.org reports.
A newly proposed second attempt at a gainful employment rule will likely face stiff opposition from the for-profit industry, Halperin says.
“There are two approaches the industry can take: let’s work with the government and try to create a business model to help students or let’s go for bork and try to gut the rule and try to fight tooth and nail against lawsuits and we can go back to where we were before,” Halperin tells Consumerist. “And I think that’s the strategy that for-profit colleges have chosen.”
*Consumers Union is the advocacy arm of Consumerist’s parent company, Consumer Reports.
We’ve all been there: you’re out of cash for some reason, and have to raid your change jar for spending money. While it can be difficult to find a place to trade that money in fee-free, we do not recommend the method that a woman in Florida used.
She tried to get a convenience store clerk to trade her coin jar for cash. Well, it doesn’t hurt to ask, does it? Her request wasn’t all that reasonable, and neither was her next move, knocking items over inside the store. As her brawl with the store owner moved outside, the owner claims that the woman spewed ethnic slurs and death threats at him.
Then she threw a punch. Instead of hitting the store owner, the punch handed on a seven-year-old girl who was sitting outside at a picnic table. She has a bruise on her face, and is also experiencing nightmares.
This whole mess could have been avoided if she were willing to use a Coinstar machine and get a fee-free Amazon gift certificate or something. Maybe that could be a new advertising slogan. “Coinstar: preventing children from getting punched in the face by people in a coin-induced rage.” Not very catchy.
Angry customer trashes store, throws punch [News 13]
It only took five years, but the Food and Drug Administration is ready to begin regulating electronic cigarettes. While the new rule covers a lot of ground with the never-before regulated devices, it doesn’t deal with some of critics’ more controversial concerns.
The FDA’s first step in regulating the popular alternative to traditional cigarettes includes banning the sales to minors and requiring manufactures to put health warnings on the devices.
“Tobacco remains the leading cause of death and disease in this country. This is an important moment for consumer protection and a significant proposal that if finalized as written would bring FDA oversight to many new tobacco products,” FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg, says in a news release.
However, the proposed regulations fail to address one of the products most controversial qualities – the use of flavorings. Opponents of the products contend that the flavorings, such as strawberry or chocolate, are used to attract teenagers. Additionally, the regulation does not include restrictions on television advertisements.
Officials with the FDA say the regulations provide a framework for additional rules in the future, which could include restrictions on flavorings pending the results of scientific research.
Mitchell Zeller, director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products says the new restrictions are a “significant step in the agency’s ability to regulate tobacco products.”
“I call the market for e-cigarettes the wild, wild West in the absence of regulations,” he tells the Los Angeles Times.
Warning labels required under the new regulations would warn consumers against the danger of becoming addicted to nicotine.
The new regulations, which also impose restrictions on nicotine gels and pipe tobacco, require manufacturers to register their products with the FDA within two years. In the meantime, companies could continue to sell new and existing devices without FDA approval.
Before the regulations could become legal they must go through a public comment process and prevail over potential legal challenges before coming into effect.
The FDA has come under fire from consumer advocates and political figures for their slow progress in regulating the e-cigarette industry. Earlier this month, senators at a Congressional budget hearing told FDA Commissioner Hamburg that the agency’s failure to issue regulations was unacceptable.
In 2009, the FDA sought to impose restrictions on the devices, which it described at the time to be medical devices designed to deliver nicotine, but a federal court struck down that attempt. The following year, the agency declared it had the power to regulate the devices under its authority to regulate tobacco products.
E-cigarettes, and their potential health-risks, have been at the center of heated debate between supports and opponents of the devices.
Companies who manufacture the devices believe they should be exempt from FDA regulations, contending it would stifle innovation, damage small business and hurt consumer trying to quit smoking.
Still, there is no clear data on the health impact associated with the devices. Supporters contend that the devices help consumers stop smoking traditional cigarettes, while opponents argue the devices are attractive to teenagers and secondary risks, such as poisoning and a tendency for the devices to explode, could be more deadly than traditional cigarettes.
Last month, the New York Times explored one of the deadliest attributes e-cigarettes pose: liquid nicotine. When ingested or absorbed even small amounts of the toxin could prove deadly.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a new report [PDF] earlier this month that show the number of calls to poison centers involving e-cigarette liquid containing nicotine rose from one per month in September 2010 to 215 per month in February 2014.
The popularity of e-cigarettes grown immensely in recent years, with sales of the devices reached more than $1.5 billion in 2012, the LA Times reports.
But even as more consumers use the devices, some cities have banned the products from being used in public places, such as parks or on the subway.
FDA proposes to extend its tobacco authority to additional tobacco products, including e-cigarettes [Food and Drug Administration]
FDA to begin regulating e-cigarettes [Los Angeles Times]
As everyone knows, Taco Bell’s deeply authentic Mexican roots go back to the company’s humble beginnings in 1843 as Taco Campana, a family business selling flatbreads to hungry travelers outside of Hermosilo. For more than 150 years, the Bell has been a leader in bringing the finest in Mexican cuisine — from the Meximelt to the Chipotle Ranch Chicken Loaded Griller to the Crunchwrap Supreme — to U.S. diners aching for the exotic flavors one can only find south of the border. So it’s surprising that the company has announced a new initiative to create a chain serving “American-inspired” tacos… and booze.
The O.C. Register reports that Taco Bell is launching a test eatery called, cleverly enough, U.S. Taco this summer in Huntington Beach, CA.
The name is even more literal than it may sound, as the restaurant won’t just be serving American-style tacos, but tacos actually inspired by regional American foods.
So there would be a lobster roll taco to represent New England, a brisket taco repping Texas BBQ, etc.
“Taco Bell is Mexican-inspired, and U.S. Taco is American-inspired,” explained Taco Bell’s Curiously Australian CEO Greg Creed, who told the Register that this new venture won’t be selling things like burritos and tortilla chips.
The new place will also try to distance itself from the Bell and from competitor Chipotle by serving booze. Though the pilot location has hit a speed bump in getting its alcohol permit and probably won’t serve alcohol, the company says that future U.S. Taco locations would serve more than 50 types of draft and bottled craft beer, along with booze-infused shakes.
Restaurant Inspections: Foster's Grille, Parkside Middle, Penn Station Subs ... Patch.com Prince William Health District officials recently inspected food preparation and storage in the area. Full reports can be accessed on the health department's website. A "critical violation" is one that "poses a direct or immediate threat to the safety ... and more » |
WJLA |
Police arrest Manassas man for child porn, search for additional victims WJLA MANASSAS, Va. (WJLA) - Local police and the Northern Virginia-Washington D.C. Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force have arrested a Manassas man for possession of child pornography - and say there may be additional victims out there. Continue ... |
SUV ends up on top of car in Manassas crash Inside NoVA Several people were injured in a Wednesday afternoon wreck on Liberia Avenue in Manassas, fire officials said. An SUV somehow landed atop a car in the crash, which happened about 3:30 p.m.. The Manassas Volunteer Fire Company reported on its ... |
