Over the years, we have featured some cool make-ahead mixes you can keep ready for a quick-fix snack, such as a single-serving cake or this super simple hot cocoa mix. Jessica Fisher has a neat tip for such mixes: use dedicated jars and write the recipe on them.
    
|
We've always said you shouldn't check email too often and that even a three-second distraction can be hazardous for productivity. Leo Widrich, cofounder of Buffer, disagrees and has found it useful to heed Zen Habits' author Leo Babauta's mantra for interruptions: "Deal with it only once."
|
|
Ever feel like your brain is out to get you? Like it's convincing you to do things that aren't actually in your best interest? Our brain is a funny thing, and sometimes the only way to fight it is to trick it right back. Here are 10 ways you can overcome your brain's tricks and get it to do what you want.
|
|
To get your spendings under control, you can't be micromanaging every decision. Instead, get together with the other people in your household and split up budgets for different things.
|
|
The latest sleep research has revealed a good night's rest is more important than we ever thought. Sleep doesn't just reinforce memories and make you feel alert the next day—it flushes dangerous proteins from your brain, maintaining your mental health into old age. So how to fall asleep fast and get the best rest possible? The experts at Stack Exchange chime in.
|
|
Your kids' stuffed animals get dragged through all manner of lovely adventures, some a little dirtier and smellier than others. You can machine wash some stuffed animals but for others, you need a more creative solution.
|
|
Got any plans this weekend? Good! The key to a happier weekend is planning it, according to Laura Vanderkam, author of the book What the Most Successful People Do on the Weekend.
|
|
Dear Lifehacker,
I've always been told to look at nutrition labels, but I totally don't understand what I'm looking at. Is there something in particular I should look out for?
|
|
Much of your financial future hinges, unfortunately, on your credit score. One important factor that goes into your credit score is the type of credit you're utilizing. The Wall Street Journal's MarketWatch says that if you have credit card debt, you'll be better off converting it into a personal loan. Not only can it boost your score by 100 points or more, you'll likely pay lower interest rates.
|
|
Maybe you're a ninja in the kitchen. Maybe you're just starting your cooking adventure. Either way, these tips and tricks from chefs and food pros can help you spend less time slaving over a stove and more time enjoying the foods of your labor.
|
|
Terrorists have detonated a low-yield nuclear warhead in your city. How long should you hide, and where, to avoid the worst effects of radioactive fallout? We talked to Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory atmospheric scientist Michael Dillon to find out.
|
|
If portion control is part of your diet struggle, the best tool you have to judge whether there's too much food on your plate is one you already have with you: Your hand. This graphic shows you how to judge servings of meat, pasta, even butter with your hand and fingers.
|
|
If you asked most folks if formaldeyde sounds like a great ingredient for baby shampoo, they’d say “no.” And possibly also, “ew, gross.” Baby-goods behemoth Johnson & Johnson agrees that formaldehyde is not so much a thing your baby needs, and has rinsed it right out of their iconic yellow shampoo.
As the New York Times reports, Johnson & Johnson announced this week that they have finished reformulating their baby shampoo, and the new version will start appearing on store shelves worldwide soon. The new! improved! version removes two potentially harmful chemicals–formaldehyde and 1,4-dioxane–from the big bottle of yellow suds.
In response to pressure from consumers and activist groups, Johnson & Johnson promised back in 2011 to phase out the chemicals in question by the end of 2013. The company has not only come up with a new formula for their famous baby shampoo, but also for roughly 100 other baby-care products in their lineup.
Both formaldehyde and 1,4-dioxane have been coming under fire in recent years for their links to cancer. Neither existed in its pure form as an ingredient in Johnson & Johnson products. Common preservatives that were used on Johnson & Johnson products, however, have been known to release formaldehyde over time. And a process used to make other ingredients mild (no more tears!) can create 1,4-dioxane.
The company also plans to remove the chemicals from their other product lines, like Neutrogena, by 2015.
Johnson & Johnson cites evolving customer preferences for the switch, and insists that all their products have always been rigorously safety tested and have met all relevant regulations in both the US and EU.
A representative for the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, the organization that petitioned Johnson & Johnson to make the change, told the NYT that erring on the side of excess safety is better than erring in the other direction: “Will a kid get cancer because there’s formaldehyde in their shampoo? We don’t know the answer to that. But why is there a carcinogen in their shampoo? When in doubt, take it out.”
Parents who just bought a giant new bottle of baby shampoo six days ago (sigh) don’t need to throw it away just yet. It will take “several months” for the new baby products to make their way onto store shelves and replace old inventory.
Johnson & Johnson Takes First Step in Removal of Questionable Chemicals From Products [New York Times]
Should a time traveler visiting from 1991 show up here in 2014 at Radio Shack clutching this ad showcasing calculators, devices to play music and other electronic gizmos and gadgets, we’re sure they’d be pretty pleased to find they could get all that technology for the price of one smartphone.
Sure, it was simpler time in 1991, muses Steve Cichon on TrendingBuffalo.com. But technology was a lot more complicated: Back then you’d have to shell out $3,054.82 for the 15 items on this ad from the Feb. 16, 1991 edition of The Buffalo News.
But today’s phones aren’t just phones. They’re alarm clocks, radios, calculators, gaming devices, word processors, cameras and oh yes, they can still make phone calls. As Cichon points out, out of the 15 items for sale, here’s the sum total of what his iPhone has rendered obsolete:
All weather personal stereo, $11.88. I now use my iPhone with an Otter Box.
AM/FM clock radio, $13.88. iPhone.
In-Ear Stereo Phones, $7.88. Came with iPhone.
Microthin calculator, $4.88. Swipe up on iPhone.
Tandy 1000 TL/3, $1599. I actually owned a Tandy 1000, and I used it for games and word processing. I now do most of both of those things on my phone.
VHS Camcorder, $799. iPhone.
Mobile Cellular Telephone, $199. Obvs.
Mobile CB, $49.95. Ad says “You’ll never drive ‘alone’ again!” iPhone.
20-Memory Speed-Dial phone, $29.95.
Deluxe Portable CD Player, $159.95. 80 minutes of music, or 80 hours of music? iPhone.
10-Channel Desktop Scanner, $99.55. I still have a scanner, but I have a scanner app, too. iPhone.
Easiest-to-Use Phone Answerer, $49.95. iPhone voicemail.
Handheld Cassette Tape Recorder, $29.95. I use the Voice Memo app almost daily.
BONUS REPLACEMENT: It’s not an item for sale, but at the bottom of the ad, you’re instructed to ‘check your phone book for the Radio Shack Store nearest you.’ Do you even know how to use a phone book?
That time traveler still might want to buy a radar detector or a three-way speaker with a 15″ Woofer, the only two items on the ad that phones don’t have out of the box. Or just use a crowdsourced traffic app like Waze and plug your phone into some nice speakers.
But that’s not to mention all the other things you can do with your phone that Radio Shack couldn’t sell you — my phone can find me a date, a discount, a dinner and connect me to my family halfway around the world in an instant.
Yes, times were simpler back then. But they were also cluttered with devices that probably ended up collecting dust in your closet anyway.
Everything from 1991 Radio Shack ad I now do with my phone [Trending Buffalo]
The first of the two cases is Riley v. California, initially a state-level case involving whether or not evidence gathered from an arrestee’s phone without a warrant could be used against him in trial.
Police arrested Riley in 2009 for attempted murder and assault with a deadly weapon after he shot at an occupied vehicle. He was later arrested and police searched the phone in his possession at the time, turning up evidence that identified him as a gang member out to kill members of a rival gang.
The phone also contained a photo of him with a car that had been spotted at the scene of the shooting. This, along with other evidence gathered from the phone was used against Riley in his trial, where he was convicted and sentence to 15 years behind bars. His lawyers contend that the warrantless search of his phone violated his Constitutional rights and this evidence should not have been used in trial.
The second case, United States v. Wurie, involves the 2007 arrest of a South Boston man for allegedly dealing drugs out of his car. After he was taken into custody, officers found two phones on his person. While police observed, one phone received several calls from Wurie, who they believed to be this dealer’s drug connection. The police reviewed the call log of his phone and tracked Wurie to his home. Wurie was ultimately convicted on drug distribution charges and sentenced to 262 months (21 years, 10 months) in jail. He appealed his conviction on the grounds that the phone search violated the Constitution, but the First Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the conviction.
While the Wurie case involves the search of a simple flip phone, the Riley case involves the search of a smartphone. Numerous lower courts have held that a warrantless police search of an unprotected, unlocked flip phone is no different that skimming through a handwritten address book found on an arrestee. Smartphones present a more complicated issue to the courts, as they are effectively small computers that contain significantly more sensitive information than a traditional wireless phone.
The Supremes are expected to hear both cases at some point in April.
Court to rule on cellphone privacy [ScotusBlog]
This ghost is unaffiliated with the house in question. Probably. (poopoorama)
Scooby Dooby Doo, where are you? And do you need a new house because there’s one for sale that could be right up your alley. The owners of a Pennsylvania home advertised as “slightly haunted” thought it would be funny to mention that little detail in their for-sale ads, but despite a lot of attention from ghosthunters and thrill-seekers, the house is no closer to selling than before.
It might be even tougher to unload the property now that the word is out, explains the Associated Press. The couple has experienced banging doors, weird noises in the basement and the feeling that somebody is right… behind… them.
But they thought it’d be funny to highlight that fact about the 113-year-old Victorian — something homeowners are required to inform buyers about by law in neighboring New York state — and went ahead with the ad.
“Slightly haunted. Nothing serious, though,” reads the listing, adding fun details like screams at 3:313 a.m. and “the occasional ghastly visage” in the bathroom mirror.
Cue swarms of ghost hunters and curiosity seekers who stopped by during an open house, without a hint of a serious buyer.
And then there was the guy who used to live there, who got in touch and told the couple that he found a human skull in the basement when he was a child. The wife says she barricaded that same basement door shut once because she claimed she heard the clicking of a cigarette lighter down below.
“I tried to word it with a little bit of a sense of humor,” the husband explains, but “I don’t think it has helped with marketing. We’re not really getting very many interested buyers. We’re getting a lot of nonsense people.”
If the home fails to sell in the coming months, the couple says they might think about renting it out at night for those looking to come in contact with the other realm. Again, paging Scooby Doo. Sounds like these homeowners need a proper investigation to reveal the ghost as simply Old Man Jenkins in a creepy mask.
Pennsylvania Couple Advertises House As ‘Slightly Haunted’ [Associated Press]
Does the thought of missing your favorite show make you want to sit firmly planted in front of the television all day every day? What if you didn’t have the option of using a DVR or (gasp!) tape recorder? You almost didn’t, except for an important ruling made 30 years ago.
Today marks the 30th anniversary of the Sony Corp. v. Universal Studios decision, also known as the Betamax case, which paved the way for such innovations as your beloved DVR.
In 1984, the Supreme Court ruled that Sony could continue to sell its Betamax videocassette recorder, overruling the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals judgement that held Sony liable for consumers’ copyright infringement.
The lawsuit, which began in California District Court in 1976, charged that because Sony manufactured a device that could be used for copyright infringement the company was liable for infringement committed by consumers of Betamax.
Justice John Paul Stevens’ majority opinion in the case deemed home videotaping legal in the United States. The ruling also bore an important principle that has been used time and time again in lawsuits – if a product has a substantial, legitimate use it can be sold, even if some consumers use it illegitimately.
Losing the Betamax war wasn’t all bad news for studios like Universal. In fact, the home video business turned into one of the entertainment industry’s biggest money makers.
Sadly, just four years after the ruling, Sony conceded defeat to JVC’s cheaper VHS format. While Betamax continued to have success overseas, it all but died in the United States.
But the Betamax victor lives on and continues to make an impact on how court cases are determined. Last summer, Dish won an impressive battle in the war between their ad-skipping Hopper-DVR and the major network broadcasters. The Hopper allows users to go back several hours later and watch prime-time programming without any of the commercials.
Just last week the Supreme Court agreed to hear a lawsuit filed by broadcast networks against streaming video startup Aereo - a streaming video service that takes freely available over-the-air broadcast signals and provides them to paying customers online.
What the 1984 Betamax ruling did for us all [The Los Angeles Times]
(SA_Steve)
A massive new report [PDF] from Acting Surgeon General Boris Lushniak cautions that the percentage of adult smokers has begun to plateau in recent years, and that the “burden of smoking-attributable mortality is expected to remain at high and unacceptable levels for decades to come unless urgent action is taken.”
In spite of 50 years of anti-smoking campaigns and the dramatic drop in the number of adult smokers, smoking remains the leading preventable cause of disease and premature death in the U.S., with some 480,000 people dying each year from smoking-related illnesses. More than 20 million preventable deaths have been attributed to smoking since the first Surgeon General’s report in 1964.
Of particular concern are the number of younger Americans who use multiple tobacco products, including electronic cigarettes. Between 2011 and 2012, the number of middle and high school students using e-cigs more than doubled.
“Each day, more than 3,200 youth (younger than 18 years of age) smoke their first cigarette and another 2,100 youth and young adults who are occasional smokers progress to become daily smokers,” reads the report.
“Although the prevalence of smoking has declined significantly over the past one-half century, the risks for smoking-related disease and mortality have not,” writes Lushniak. “In fact, today’s cigarette smokers—both men and women—have a much higher risk for lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) than smokers in 1964, despite smoking fewer cigarettes.”
Each year, $130 billion is spent on direct medical care of adults who smoke, while over the economy waves goodbye to $150 billion in lost productivity due to premature death, concludes the report.
The Surgeon General writes that for every adult smoker who dies of smoking-related illnesses, there are two youth and young adult smokers who start. With the slowdown in the number of people quitting, Leshniak expresses doubt that the U.S. will meet the goal of only 12% of adults smoking by 2020.
He puts the blame for the slowdown on the tobacco industry.
“The tobacco epidemic was initiated and has been sustained by the aggressive strategies of the tobacco industry, which has deliberately misled the public on the risk of smoking cigarettes,” reads the report.
Leshniak says that it’s time to get tough on tobacco regulation, meaning everything from raising the price on tobacco products to media campaigns about the dangers of smoking to making cessation programs accessible to more Americans.
“Enough is enough,” said the Acting Surgeon General at a press conference about the new report. “It’s astonishing that so many years later we’re still making these findings.”
“It is my sincere hope that 50 years from now we won’t need another Surgeon General’s report on smoking and health,” writes Lushniak, “because tobacco-related disease and death will be a thing of the past.”
The rendering of the first TargetExpress really makes it look like any of the corner Walgreens you’ll find in many cities.
The Minneapolis Star-Tribune reports that the first TargetExpress, set to open near the University of Minnesota campus this summer, will only be 20,000 square feet in area, about 1/8 the size of your standard Target and about 1/4 the size of a CityTarget store.
TargetExpress is aimed at the urban shopper who wants a place to get most of the things they need but without having to go to a mammoth store on the outskirts of the city. The retailer says that the smaller store will still have those items people want the most from Target — health and beauty products, groceries, pharmacy, some home goods and electronics — but is designed for shoppers who are purchasing fewer items.
By it’s description, TargetExpress is starting to sound less like a small Target and more like a larger Walgreens or CVS. It certainly can’t be any worse than the retail hell I experienced shopping at the Brooklyn Target for seven years.
Let’s face it: The past was terrible. Sure, wax on about the “golden era” and pine nostalgically for the “good old days,” but if we can learn anything from advertising in days gone by, it’s that sexism sells. In an effort to show how far we’ve come and take a bit of shine off the past, we present Consumerist’s Badvertising History Lessons. This week, sexism is an equal opportunity -ism.
We’ve gathered some funny people we know to bring their keen eye for social criticism and ability to crack a joke and asked them to weigh in this week on ads for Volkswagen (sexist against women!), Aunt Jemima corn bread mix (sexist against men!) and Borden cheese (fancy cheese better be on the table or your marriage is in trouble!). Warning: ”DO NOT READ THIS IF YOU DO NOT APPRECIATE SARCASM AS A FORM OF HUMOR”
Scroll on down and click on any ad caption to enlarge and read the full text in all its sexist glory — and send your own examples of why the past was terrible to tips@consumerist.com with the subject line TERRIBLE PAST.
Click to enlarge (LIFE magazine)
Mary Jo Pehl, writer/actor:
This ad ran in in 1964 and feminists were so angry about it, they burned their fenders in public.
Jeff Bercovici, Forbes media guru:
Copywriter 1: Hey, about your Volkswagen ad…you do know that women are statistically safer drivers than men, right?
Copywriter 2: Excuse me? I didn’t catch that. I was busy swigging bourbon and feeling up my secretary.
Copywriter 1: Never mind.
Kristyn Pomranz writer and expert one-liner:
Volkswagen: Because lord knows you can’t buy your wife competence.
Laura Lane, comedian, writer and great at wearing fascinators:
Volkswagen: making cheap cars for dumb wives since 1937.
Heidi Fichtner, queen of biting wit:
Good thing women couldn’t read back then, or they would be mighty upset.
Angela Spera, all-around funny person:
Somewhere, Tiger Woods is solemnly nodding his head in agreement…
Alex Leo, avid Internetter:
“Women are soft and gentle but they hit things” is my favorite sentence ever.
Abby Aronofsky, Social Media Strategist:
Sooner or later, your wife will realize she can do better and drive the Volkswagen to a new life with Robert, the milkman
Lauren D., awesome friend:
His secret: Volkswagen
Her secret: He’s not the only one having the two martini lunch
Mark M., “the funniest guy he knows,” has a lot to say on the matter:
Sure, this ad is offensive, but the original version was much worse. Thankfully, the ad men had the decency to cut out the caption saying that the accident pictured occurred when the wife was rear-ended by another woman.
In all seriousness, the ad is wrong on so many levels. It portrays women as hairbrained creatures who just can’t help but smash into things once they get behind the wheel. They’re basically a bunch of beehived Lindsay Lohans. But my real issue is, why does wifey keep getting into accidents? Is she drinking because she’s in an unhappy marriage? Is she having seizures or some other medical issue that she’s afraid to mention to her family or doctor because she fears it’s serious? Something’s definitely not right, and yet hubby doesn’t seem concerned. “You hit another child today, Martha? Don’t worry, we can replace the fender for $25! Now run back out and pick up my suit at the dry cleaner.”
I’m shocked that such an ad ran in the 1960s, the very decade that introduced the feminist movement and “The Flintstones,” a show featuring documented proof that even early women were competent drivers. Think about it: Wilma never got into an accident and — brakes be damned! — could stop a car with her bare feet. I don’t think any man driving a VW can make those same claims.
Click to enlarge (LIFE magazine)
Angela:
“….He may win a trip for 2 to the Rose Bowl Game… and even an Edsel car! If they actually allow that god damned moron behind the wheel! Boy, what an idiot!”
Also, real talk, the first time I ever tried to cook on my own was making corn bread in the 5th grade and I almost burned my house down, so maybe this batter satchel isn’t such a crazy idea.
Kristyn:
Is your husband physically capable of squeezing? NO? How ’bout if you offered him free tickets to the Rose Bowl? BET THAT IDIOT CAN SQUEEZE NOW!
Abby:
Is it weird that this sounds like a cool contest? I think a Men’s Corn Bread Derby still has legs.
Mark:
There’s something sexual about the way that woman’s hands are gripping and squeezing that bag. Look at her, gently cradling the base while using loong, slooow strokes to release the contents … Is it hot in here or is someone baking cornbread? Yeah, no, this ad is stupid and makes men look even stupider. How is the husband supposed to feel when his wife tells him she entered him into a competition for dumbasses? And how does he tell his friends that said competition questions whether he can wrap his head around the concept of pouring an egg and milk in a bag? I can’t imagine how humiliating that would be. But I tell you, for a chance to win an Edsel and a trip to the Rose Bowl and Disneyland, I’d be willing to find out!
Click to enlarge (LIFE magazine)
Angela:
“We need a spokesperson all women will identify with…how about this bossy, naggy, know-it-all COW!” said the well adjusted ad exec in the happy marriage.
Jeff:
This one had me at “Say ‘Close your eyes and open your mouth to your pretty wife.’”
Kristyn:
Borden’s: Because it’s either fine cheeses or your husband leaving you for another woman.
Abby:
To be fair, any sentient being who doesn’t appreciate a fine cheese deserves to be reconsidered.
Mark:
At first I thought, This is terrible — this man’s marriage is in trouble because his wife is serving him government cheese. But then I realized it’s not about cheese at all — It’s really about a man who is bored in the bedroom at home. And then he meets Elsie Borden. Sassy, worldly, flirty Elsie Borden. There she sits, nude, seductively tossing around French phrases like “Camembert,” lustily telling him to “Close your eyes and open your mouth,” and even demanding that he leave his wife. And sure enough, he runs off with that heifer! I think the takeaway from this ad is that, ladies, fancy cheeses won’t make or break your marriage, but for the love of God, keep cows away from your husbands!
In spite of the fact that superstar rock bands and pop artists still travel the world in private jets and tricked-out custom buses while having their every whim catered to before and after performing to thousands of fans who pay huge amounts of money for tickets, the music industry is dead. At least if you believe Gene Simmons of KISS. And who’s to blame for this death that has occurred only in Mr. Simmons’ mind? That would be music fans.
In an interview with MetalHammer Magazine [via TorrentFreak], the one-time arena rock god and godfather of rock merchandising laments the end of an era, all due to pesky kids and their file-sharing.
“The sad part is that the fans are the ones who are killing the thing that they love: great music,” explains Simmons. “For fuck’s sake, you’re not giving the next band a chance.”
And by “next band,” we presume he actually means once-popular arena rock acts like KISS, because his statement ignores all the many, many artists who are not only doing just fine in an era of digital downloads and easy file-sharing, but are thriving because of this ease of delivery. Instead, he goes on to complain about how much money he’s not earned.
“How much have we lost through illegal downloading? It’s certainly millions,” explains Simmons. “I don’t think it’s tens of millions, but it’s certainly millions.”
Simmons has long been an outspoken critic of file-sharing, going back to the days of Napster and other early peer-to-peer networks.
“They should have bitch-slapped them,” he says about the operators of the early p2p platforms. “Gone down with the FBI, seized everything and put everyone in jail. But then they should have done what the Allies did with the Nazis: made them work for us.”
Can you imagine Napster founders Shawn Fanning and Sean Parker sitting in a garment factory, silk-screening KISS t-shirts, faking bandmembers’ autographs on KISS photos and posters, and drilling holes in KISS bowling balls?
That goes on your eye.
Anyone who wears contact lenses knows that if even the tiniest of fibers finds its way into your eye, it feels like a marching band of pain is stomping all over cornea and blasting tuba bits of misery all over your irises. On that note, Google says it’s now testing smart contact lenses with tiny computer chips embedded in them. ON YOUR EYEBALL.
While it sounds like a glimpse into our cyborg future, Google’s official blog post on the lenses says the project came about while thinking about the issue of monitoring glucose levels in people with diabetes.
Google notes that scientists have been researching different body fluids, likes tears, to try to find a way to better track glucose levels. Tears aren’t so easy to collect, however.
“At Google[x], we wondered if miniaturized electronics—think: chips and sensors so small they look like bits of glitter, and an antenna thinner than a human hair—might be a way to crack the mystery of tear glucose and measure it with greater accuracy,” the post explains.
Again — getting a human hair in your eye while wearing a contact lens is akin to the hounds of hell galloping directly into your tender orbs. Just saying.
Google is in the process of testing a smart contact lens “built to measure glucose levels in tears using a tiny wireless chip and miniaturized glucose sensor that are embedded between two layers of soft contact lens material,” the post continues.
And if little microchips that look kind of like glitter in your eye isn’t sci-fi enough, the testers are also putzing around with using tiny LED lights that could alert wearers to low glucose levels.
This won’t be on the market any time soon, adds Google, but researchers have already finished clinical research studies that are helping to guide the prototype.
There’s no word if these contact lenses could also someday be used like Google Glass, taking pictures and showing maps right on your eye. Because that would probably feel really good on the fibrous tunic, which I just learned is the word for the outermost layer of the eye. The more you know!
Introducing our smart contact lens project [Google Blog]
Walmart shoppers in NJ snapped this photo of filth-darkened tanks that still contained dead and living fish. (Photo: Dina Ely/Patch.com)
“It was a nightmare,” one customer tells the Mendham-Chester Patch about the filthy tanks she discovered when she tried to look at the fish with her grandson. “Most (of the fish) were dead, and rotting in the tanks… Many were still swimming — starving, freezing, choking on foul water full of ammonia and algae.”
Customers told Patch that the tanks, which had gone dark with pollutants, had been unplugged for about a week. When the grandmother tried to complain to management, she says she was told the manager was unavailable and that the pet department manager was “out to lunch.” She waited an hour to eventually be helped by a store associate who sold her the least ill of the fish remaining in the tank.
When Patch reached out to Walmart HQ, the initial corporate response was that this store had stopped selling fish months earlier. Patch replied with photos sent in by customers showing dead and dying fish in these dirty tanks.
That got Walmart’s attention.
“This is unacceptable,” said a company rep after seeing the photos. “There are protocols in place that were not followed, and associates (in the pet department) will be retrained immediately.”
Fairfax Station rallies around sick child with mysterious brain disease W*USA 9 FAIRFAX STATION, Va. -- They lined up by the dozens at Silverbrook Elementary School to purchase t-shirts, sweatshirts, socks, bracelets and glitter. Loading… Post to Facebook. Fairfax Station rallies around sick child with mysterious brain disease on ... |
