1. At the Meat Counter
Good: Lean beef
Why: It's high in protein but lower in calories and saturated fat than other cuts of beef--and still brimming with B vitamins, which help your body turn food into energy. Cuts that have the words loin or round in their names (like tenderloin or top round steak) are lower-fat choices. When buying ground beef, look for one that's at least 92% lean. (Beef labeled 80% lean doesn't mean it has only 20% calories from fat. It's 20% fat by weight and has closer to 70% calories from fat--about 20 g per 3 1/2-ounce serving!)
Better: Organic beef
Why: The cattle were raised without hormones or antibiotics, substances that some people worry may contribute to consumers' reproductive disorders and antibiotic resistance. Organic beef also makes a more environmentally friendly burger, since it comes from cows fed only organic feed (which was grown without chemical pesticides). Just be sure the label says the word organic, because natural beef isn't the same.
Best: Grass-fed beef
Why: It's pricier than regular beef, but the health perks make it worth the splurge. Compared with grain-fed beef, grass-fed packs twice the concentration of vitamin E, an antioxidant that protects cells from damage that can lead to chronic diseases. It's also high in the compound CLA, fatty acids that researchers link with weight loss. Plus, it's rich in heart-healthy omega-3 fatty acids, rivaling some fish. According to researchers from the University of California Cooperative Extension Service, feeding grass to cattle boosts the omega-3 content of beef by 60%. Because this type of beef tends to be lower in overall fat, it can be tough--so marinate it, and use a meat thermometer to avoid overcooking.
2. In the Egg Section
Good: Packaged egg whites
Why: They're a low-calorie protein powerhouse, with no cholesterol or fat. In recipes, substitute the equivalent of two egg whites for each whole egg. Added bonus: Any egg-based dish makes an affordable alternative to pricier meat-based ones.
Better: Whole eggs
Why: The yolk is home to tons of nutrients, including choline, which is linked to lower rates of breast cancer. (One yolk has more than 25% of your daily needs.) It's also rich in antioxidants that may help prevent macular degeneration and cataracts. Worried about the fat and cholesterol? Though people with heart disease should limit egg yolks to two a week, a recent study didn't find a connection between eating up to six eggs per week and increased rates of heart attack or stroke in healthy people.
Best: Omega-3-fortified eggs
Why: They have all the nutrients of regular eggs, plus up to 300 mg or so of the heart-protective fatty acids in each one. Many experts recommend 1,000 mg of DHA and EPA a day; however, because most people don't eat enough fish to meet this goal, these eggs offer another way to add omega-3s to your diet.
3. In the Dairy Case
Good: Fat-free milk
Why: It contains only traces of fat, while even 2% milk packs 3 g of the artery-plugging saturated kind in every 8-ounce glass. Each cup of fat-free also supplies 76 mg more calcium than the same amount of whole milk does.
Better: Skim Plus
Why: It's as good for you as fat-free milk, with a richer taste. Skim Plus (also called skim deluxe or supreme) is fortified with extra milk protein, making it thicker, creamier tasting, and easier to transition to from whole or 2%.
Best: Organic fat-free milk
Why: A recent study from the United Kingdom found that organically raised cows produce milk with higher levels of antioxidants and fatty acids such as CLAs and omega-3s--thanks to all the grass and clover they consume. You'll pay more for organic milk, but because it's often ultrapasteurized (heated at higher temps and labeled UHT), it may last longer in your fridge.
4. On the Butter Shelf
Good: Trans-free margarine
Why: It's a wiser pick than butter because it doesn't contain any cholesterol and has much less saturated fat. It also doesn't pack the dangerous trans fats that many margarines do--the kind of fats that boost bad cholesterol and lower the good kind. Some are even fortified with bone-building calcium or heart-healthy omega-3 fatty acids.
Better: Light trans-free margarine
Why: Your toast and baked potatoes will still get a buttery kick. But even if you use a whole tablespoon, you'll take in as few as 45 calories and 5 g of fat.
Best: Margarines with added plant stanols/sterols
Why: You'll pay more for this margarine, but it's a powerful cholesterol fighter, thanks to plant stanols/sterols, which naturally reduce the amount of LDL cholesterol the body can absorb. In a study in the American Journal of Cardiology, eating 25 g of margarine a day enriched with plant stanols/sterols lowered LDL cholesterol by 8% in 4 weeks.
5. In the Yogurt Section
Good: Low-fat flavored yogurt
Why: Cup for cup, yogurt has about 70 mg more calcium than milk, plus enough protein to make it a satisfying snack. It's rich in beneficial bacteria that can ward off tummy troubles and yeast infections. Look for Lactobacillus (L. acidophilus) and/or Bifidobacterium (B. bifidum) in the ingredients.
Better: Low-fat plain yogurt
Why: Despite the health benefits, some flavored varieties have a ton of added sweetener, such as sugar or high fructose corn syrup. For a healthier treat, pick plain and swirl in a spoonful of all-fruit spread. (You can also drizzle in honey for a bonus shot of antioxidants.)
Best: Greek yogurt
Why: "I love recommending Greek yogurt to clients," says Lara E. Metz, RD, a New York City nutritionist. "It has just as much calcium as regular yogurt and twice the protein--but it's richer and creamier." Be sure to choose the 0% fat variety to minimize calories.
6. At the Fish Counter
Good: Tilapia
Why: It's an affordable pick and a dieter's dream. Each 3-ounce serving contains only 110 calories and 2.5 g of fat--but a whopping 22 g of fill-you-up protein. According to the FDA, tilapia has the lowest mercury level of all fish. Although other fish have more heart-smart omega-3 fatty acids, tilapia is still a healthy choice at dinnertime.
Better: Halibut
Why: It boasts more heart-healthy omega-3s per serving than tilapia. In fact, a 5-ounce fillet packs your entire day's needs of EPA and DHA, fatty acids that can increase "good" HDL cholesterol and may also help prevent cognitive decline related to aging.
Best: Salmon
Why: Salmon's one of the best sources of omega-3s you can find. Research has found that a healthy diet including fatty fish like salmon is linked to lower risk of heart disease, stroke, and diabetes. Wild has a slight edge over farm-raised because it may be lower in contaminants such as PCBs and dioxins--but both versions are equally nutritious. "Just remove the skin after cooking, because that's where most of the contaminants are found," says Grotto.
7. In the Produce Section
Good: Romaine
Why: Rich in vitamins A and K, crunchy romaine makes a respectable base for any salad. Romaine also boasts more than 8 times the vitamin C of iceberg lettuce.
Better: Watercress
Why: This peppery leaf not only adds a kick to salads but also adds a small dose of calcium. A study from the University of Ulster in the United Kingdom found that eating watercress daily is linked with reduced cellular DNA damage that may lead to cancer. If you find the flavor too strong, toss it with milder lettuces (say, bib or red leaf) or layer it with tomato on your turkey sandwich.
Best: Spinach
Why: Spinach is rich in iron, which helps deliver oxygen to your cells to keep you alert and energized. And research from the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary links eating antioxidant-rich spinach with a lower risk of age-related macular degeneration.
8. In the Snack Aisle
Good: Popcorn
Why: It's a stealth whole grain, packing 3 g of fiber and an entire serving of whole grains in each 3-cup, 90-calorie, air-popped bowl. That's why people who snack on it get two more servings of whole grains and 22% more fiber every day than people who don't, according to a recent study in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association.
Better: Peanuts
Why: With as much protein as 1/2 cup of black beans, a handful of peanuts also contains 7 g of heart-healthy monounsaturated fat. Women who ate peanuts and peanut butter at least 5 times a week had up to 27% less risk of developing type 2 diabetes, possibly because the healthy fats increase insulin sensitivity, according to a study from the Harvard School of Public Health. Because they're easy to overeat, measure out your 1-ounce, 160-calorie portion (a small handful--about 40 nuts).
Best: Almonds
Why: "They're one of the most nutritious nuts around," says David Katz, MD, director of the Yale Prevention Research Center. Almonds are also the go-to snack when you're trying to drop weight. In one study, women who ate almonds had higher levels of cholecystokinin, a hunger-suppressing hormone, circulating in their systems. Another study found that a heart-healthy diet including almonds lowered LDL cholesterol as much as a statin drug did.
9. In the Dried Fruit Bins
Good: Raisins
Why: They're an affordable and portable pick-me-up, ideal for stashing in your bag or desk drawer. Each little box contains a serving of fruit and nearly as much potassium as a small banana--but at 130 calories, they're a lighter pick than most energy bars. Researchers at the University of Illinois at Chicago College of Dentistry even debunked the myth that raisins stick to the teeth and cause cavities: They actually contain a natural compound that fights bacterial growth in the mouth.
Better: Dried apricots
Why: One-half cup contains all the virus-fighting vitamin A you need for the day, along with a big shot of potassium, plus the same amount of fiber as two slices of whole wheat bread. Sulfur dioxide is often added to lock in color, but if it doesn't agree with your gut, look for an unsulfured kind (it's browner but just as healthy) or freeze-dried apricots, which are additive free.
Best: Dried figs
Why: With about one-third of your day's supply of fiber per 1/2-cup serving, they pack more than any other dried fruit. Fiber helps you stay full, so figs are a powerful hunger suppressant. Each 1/2 cup has as much calcium as 1/2 ounce of cheese and contains phenols that may guard against heart disease and cancer, says Grotto.
10. In the Condiments Aisle
Good: Low-fat creamy salad dressing
Why: If you prefer creamy dressings (such as ranch or blue cheese), these are a perfect way to add flavor to your favorite greens without drowning them in extra calories or fat.
Better: Full-fat oil-based dressing
Why: The fats in oils like canola and olive are healthier for you. They're a good source of vitamin E and help your body soak up all the vitamins in veggies. In one study, people absorbed more carotenoids from a salad with full-fat dressing than with reduced-fat dressing. (Those eating fat-free dressing absorbed just traces.) The calories add up fast, so measure out a 2-tablespoon portion.
Best: Olive oil and flavored vinegar
Why: With a do-it-yourself dressing, you don't have to worry about the quality of the ingredients. Mix 2 teaspoons of olive oil (or canola or flaxseed--they all contain higher amounts of heart-healthy monounsaturated fat) with flavored vinegar such as raspberry, then toss in any herbs you like.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
The 7 foods experts won't eat
How healthy (or not) certain foods are—for us, for the environment—is a hotly debated topic among experts and consumers alike, and there are no easy answers. But when Prevention talked to the people at the forefront of food safety and asked them one simple question—“What foods do you avoid?”—we got some pretty interesting answers. Although these foods don’t necessarily make up a "banned” list, as you head into the holidays—and all the grocery shopping that comes with it—their answers are, well, food for thought:
1. Canned Tomatoes
The expert: Fredrick vom Saal, PhD, an endocrinologist at the University of Missouri who studies bisphenol-A
The problem: The resin linings of tin cans contain bisphenol-A, a synthetic estrogen that has been linked to ailments ranging from reproductive problems to heart disease, diabetes, and obesity. Unfortunately, acidity (a prominent characteristic of tomatoes) causes BPA to leach into your food. Studies show that the BPA in most people's body exceeds the amount that suppresses sperm production or causes chromosomal damage to the eggs of animals. "You can get 50 mcg of BPA per liter out of a tomato can, and that's a level that is going to impact people, particularly the young," says vom Saal. "I won't go near canned tomatoes."
The solution: Choose tomatoes in glass bottles (which do not need resin linings), such as the brands Bionaturae and Coluccio. You can also get several types in Tetra Pak boxes, like Trader Joe's and Pomi.
2. Corn-Fed Beef
The expert: Joel Salatin, co-owner of Polyface Farms and author of half a dozen books on sustainable farming
The problem: Cattle evolved to eat grass, not grains. But farmers today feed their animals corn and soybeans, which fatten up the animals faster for slaughter. More money for cattle farmers (and lower prices at the grocery store) means a lot less nutrition for us. A recent comprehensive study conducted by the USDA and researchers from Clemson University found that compared with corn-fed beef, grass-fed beef is higher in beta-carotene, vitamin E, omega-3s, conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), calcium, magnesium, and potassium; lower in inflammatory omega-6s; and lower in saturated fats that have been linked to heart disease. "We need to respect the fact that cows are herbivores, and that does not mean feeding them corn and chicken manure," says Salatin.
The solution: Buy grass-fed beef, which can be found at specialty grocers, farmers' markets, and nationally at Whole Foods. It's usually labeled because it demands a premium, but if you don't see it, ask your butcher.
3. Microwave Popcorn
The expert: Olga Naidenko, PhD, a senior scientist for the Environmental Working Group,
The problem: Chemicals, including perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), in the lining of the bag, are part of a class of compounds that may be linked to infertility in humans, according to a recent study from UCLA. In animal testing, the chemicals cause liver, testicular, and pancreatic cancer. Studies show that microwaving causes the chemicals to vaporize—and migrate into your popcorn. "They stay in your body for years and accumulate there," says Naidenko, which is why researchers worry that levels in humans could approach the amounts causing cancers in laboratory animals. DuPont and other manufacturers have promised to phase out PFOA by 2015 under a voluntary EPA plan, but millions of bags of popcorn will be sold between now and then.
The solution: Pop natural kernels the old-fashioned way: in a skillet. For flavorings, you can add real butter or dried seasonings, such as dillweed, vegetable flakes, or soup mix.
4. Nonorganic Potatoes
The expert: Jeffrey Moyer, chair of the National Organic Standards Board
The problem: Root vegetables absorb herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides that wind up in soil. In the case of potatoes—the nation's most popular vegetable—they're treated with fungicides during the growing season, then sprayed with herbicides to kill off the fibrous vines before harvesting. After they're dug up, the potatoes are treated yet again to prevent them from sprouting. "Try this experiment: Buy a conventional potato in a store, and try to get it to sprout. It won't," says Moyer, who is also farm director of the Rodale Institute (also owned by Rodale Inc., the publisher of Prevention). "I've talked with potato growers who say point-blank they would never eat the potatoes they sell. They have separate plots where they grow potatoes for themselves without all the chemicals."
The solution: Buy organic potatoes. Washing isn't good enough if you're trying to remove chemicals that have been absorbed into the flesh.
5. Farmed Salmon
The expert: David Carpenter, MD, director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany and publisher of a major study in the journal Science on contamination in fish.
The problem: Nature didn't intend for salmon to be crammed into pens and fed soy, poultry litter, and hydrolyzed chicken feathers. As a result, farmed salmon is lower in vitamin D and higher in contaminants, including carcinogens, PCBs, brominated flame retardants, and pesticides such as dioxin and DDT. According to Carpenter, the most contaminated fish come from Northern Europe, which can be found on American menus. "You can only safely eat one of these salmon dinners every 5 months without increasing your risk of cancer," says Carpenter, whose 2004 fish contamination study got broad media attention. "It's that bad." Preliminary science has also linked DDT to diabetes and obesity, but some nutritionists believe the benefits of omega-3s outweigh the risks. There is also concern about the high level of antibiotics and pesticides used to treat these fish. When you eat farmed salmon, you get dosed with the same drugs and chemicals.
The solution: Switch to wild-caught Alaska salmon. If the package says fresh Atlantic, it's farmed. There are no commercial fisheries left for wild Atlantic salmon.
6. Milk Produced with Artificial Hormones
The expert: Rick North, project director of the Campaign for Safe Food at the Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility and former CEO of the Oregon division of the American Cancer Society
The problem: Milk producers treat their dairy cattle with recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH or rBST, as it is also known) to boost milk production. But rBGH also increases udder infections and even pus in the milk. It also leads to higher levels of a hormone called insulin-like growth factor in milk. In people, high levels of IGF-1 may contribute to breast, prostate, and colon cancers. "When the government approved rBGH, it was thought that IGF-1 from milk would be broken down in the human digestive tract," says North. As it turns out, the casein in milk protects most of it, according to several independent studies. "There's not 100% proof that this is increasing cancer in humans," admits North. "However, it's banned in most industrialized countries."
The solution: Check labels for rBGH-free, rBST-free, produced without artificial hormones, or organic milk. These phrases indicate rBGH-free products.
7. Conventional Apples
The expert: Mark Kastel, former executive for agribusiness and codirector of the Cornucopia Institute, a farm-policy research group that supports organic foods
The problem: If fall fruits held a "most doused in pesticides contest," apples would win. Why? They are individually grafted (descended from a single tree) so that each variety maintains its distinctive flavor. As such, apples don't develop resistance to pests and are sprayed frequently. The industry maintains that these residues are not harmful. But Kastel counters that it's just common sense to minimize exposure by avoiding the most doused produce, like apples. "Farm workers have higher rates of many cancers," he says. And increasing numbers of studies are starting to link a higher body burden of pesticides (from all sources) with Parkinson's disease.
The solution: Buy organic apples. If you can't afford organic, be sure to wash and peel them first.
1. Canned Tomatoes
The expert: Fredrick vom Saal, PhD, an endocrinologist at the University of Missouri who studies bisphenol-A
The problem: The resin linings of tin cans contain bisphenol-A, a synthetic estrogen that has been linked to ailments ranging from reproductive problems to heart disease, diabetes, and obesity. Unfortunately, acidity (a prominent characteristic of tomatoes) causes BPA to leach into your food. Studies show that the BPA in most people's body exceeds the amount that suppresses sperm production or causes chromosomal damage to the eggs of animals. "You can get 50 mcg of BPA per liter out of a tomato can, and that's a level that is going to impact people, particularly the young," says vom Saal. "I won't go near canned tomatoes."
The solution: Choose tomatoes in glass bottles (which do not need resin linings), such as the brands Bionaturae and Coluccio. You can also get several types in Tetra Pak boxes, like Trader Joe's and Pomi.
2. Corn-Fed Beef
The expert: Joel Salatin, co-owner of Polyface Farms and author of half a dozen books on sustainable farming
The problem: Cattle evolved to eat grass, not grains. But farmers today feed their animals corn and soybeans, which fatten up the animals faster for slaughter. More money for cattle farmers (and lower prices at the grocery store) means a lot less nutrition for us. A recent comprehensive study conducted by the USDA and researchers from Clemson University found that compared with corn-fed beef, grass-fed beef is higher in beta-carotene, vitamin E, omega-3s, conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), calcium, magnesium, and potassium; lower in inflammatory omega-6s; and lower in saturated fats that have been linked to heart disease. "We need to respect the fact that cows are herbivores, and that does not mean feeding them corn and chicken manure," says Salatin.
The solution: Buy grass-fed beef, which can be found at specialty grocers, farmers' markets, and nationally at Whole Foods. It's usually labeled because it demands a premium, but if you don't see it, ask your butcher.
3. Microwave Popcorn
The expert: Olga Naidenko, PhD, a senior scientist for the Environmental Working Group,
The problem: Chemicals, including perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), in the lining of the bag, are part of a class of compounds that may be linked to infertility in humans, according to a recent study from UCLA. In animal testing, the chemicals cause liver, testicular, and pancreatic cancer. Studies show that microwaving causes the chemicals to vaporize—and migrate into your popcorn. "They stay in your body for years and accumulate there," says Naidenko, which is why researchers worry that levels in humans could approach the amounts causing cancers in laboratory animals. DuPont and other manufacturers have promised to phase out PFOA by 2015 under a voluntary EPA plan, but millions of bags of popcorn will be sold between now and then.
The solution: Pop natural kernels the old-fashioned way: in a skillet. For flavorings, you can add real butter or dried seasonings, such as dillweed, vegetable flakes, or soup mix.
4. Nonorganic Potatoes
The expert: Jeffrey Moyer, chair of the National Organic Standards Board
The problem: Root vegetables absorb herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides that wind up in soil. In the case of potatoes—the nation's most popular vegetable—they're treated with fungicides during the growing season, then sprayed with herbicides to kill off the fibrous vines before harvesting. After they're dug up, the potatoes are treated yet again to prevent them from sprouting. "Try this experiment: Buy a conventional potato in a store, and try to get it to sprout. It won't," says Moyer, who is also farm director of the Rodale Institute (also owned by Rodale Inc., the publisher of Prevention). "I've talked with potato growers who say point-blank they would never eat the potatoes they sell. They have separate plots where they grow potatoes for themselves without all the chemicals."
The solution: Buy organic potatoes. Washing isn't good enough if you're trying to remove chemicals that have been absorbed into the flesh.
5. Farmed Salmon
The expert: David Carpenter, MD, director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany and publisher of a major study in the journal Science on contamination in fish.
The problem: Nature didn't intend for salmon to be crammed into pens and fed soy, poultry litter, and hydrolyzed chicken feathers. As a result, farmed salmon is lower in vitamin D and higher in contaminants, including carcinogens, PCBs, brominated flame retardants, and pesticides such as dioxin and DDT. According to Carpenter, the most contaminated fish come from Northern Europe, which can be found on American menus. "You can only safely eat one of these salmon dinners every 5 months without increasing your risk of cancer," says Carpenter, whose 2004 fish contamination study got broad media attention. "It's that bad." Preliminary science has also linked DDT to diabetes and obesity, but some nutritionists believe the benefits of omega-3s outweigh the risks. There is also concern about the high level of antibiotics and pesticides used to treat these fish. When you eat farmed salmon, you get dosed with the same drugs and chemicals.
The solution: Switch to wild-caught Alaska salmon. If the package says fresh Atlantic, it's farmed. There are no commercial fisheries left for wild Atlantic salmon.
6. Milk Produced with Artificial Hormones
The expert: Rick North, project director of the Campaign for Safe Food at the Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility and former CEO of the Oregon division of the American Cancer Society
The problem: Milk producers treat their dairy cattle with recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH or rBST, as it is also known) to boost milk production. But rBGH also increases udder infections and even pus in the milk. It also leads to higher levels of a hormone called insulin-like growth factor in milk. In people, high levels of IGF-1 may contribute to breast, prostate, and colon cancers. "When the government approved rBGH, it was thought that IGF-1 from milk would be broken down in the human digestive tract," says North. As it turns out, the casein in milk protects most of it, according to several independent studies. "There's not 100% proof that this is increasing cancer in humans," admits North. "However, it's banned in most industrialized countries."
The solution: Check labels for rBGH-free, rBST-free, produced without artificial hormones, or organic milk. These phrases indicate rBGH-free products.
7. Conventional Apples
The expert: Mark Kastel, former executive for agribusiness and codirector of the Cornucopia Institute, a farm-policy research group that supports organic foods
The problem: If fall fruits held a "most doused in pesticides contest," apples would win. Why? They are individually grafted (descended from a single tree) so that each variety maintains its distinctive flavor. As such, apples don't develop resistance to pests and are sprayed frequently. The industry maintains that these residues are not harmful. But Kastel counters that it's just common sense to minimize exposure by avoiding the most doused produce, like apples. "Farm workers have higher rates of many cancers," he says. And increasing numbers of studies are starting to link a higher body burden of pesticides (from all sources) with Parkinson's disease.
The solution: Buy organic apples. If you can't afford organic, be sure to wash and peel them first.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
FICO Reveals How Common Credit Mistakes Affect Scores
Disclosed for the 1st time, 'damage points' taken off for late payments
Borrowers already knew that late payments hurt their credit scores, but for the first time, they now know the extent of that damage.
Did you max out your credit card? Expect a credit score drop of 10 to 45 points. Declare bankruptcy? Your score will plummet by up to 240 points, and your odds of getting credit will nosedive with it.
The "damage points" data, unveiled recently by FICO, are part of the most revealing glimpse into the firm's once-secret -- and still mysterious -- credit scoring model. The new information discloses how many points borrowers' scores will drop when they make the most-common mistakes.
'Help People Understand' Scores
"I hope this information will help people to better understand FICO scores and the value for them of avoiding credit missteps. It illustrates key points such as the higher your score, the farther it can fall if you stumble," says FICO spokesman Craig Watts. "Getting and maintaining a good score isn't complicated. We all just need to pay our bills on time, keep credit card balances low and take on new debt sparingly. "
The greater transparency about FICO scores is important because American consumers' ability to get credit rises and falls with the number. FICO, the company that pioneered credit scoring, assigns consumers a three-digit number from 300 to 850, depending on how well they handle credit. Other companies also offer scores, but FICO's version is the most widely used by lenders in determining whether a consumer can borrow, and at what rate.
FICO's credit score has been around for decades, but only within the past decade have consumers gradually gained access to theirs. Though the raw numbers can be purchased, how they're figured remains a FICO secret, as closely guarded as the formula for Coca-Cola. Until Thursday, FICO revealed only broad categories of factors influencing the score, but not the number of points at stake for consumers who fail to pay as agreed. The "damage points" information, revealed in a report by personal finance writer Liz Pulliam Weston, will be made available through its myFICO.com Web site starting this weekend.
FICO's information shows that bankruptcy does the most serious damage to a credit score (up to 240 points), followed by foreclosure (up to 160 points) while maxing out a credit card has the least numerical impact (as few as 10 points).
Those with good or excellent credit -- so-called prime borrowers -- put more points at risk with each mistake. For example, someone with an average credit score of 680 who pays a bill 30 days late will see a drop of 60 to 80 points. But for someone with an excellent credit score -- 780 -- that same delinquency can send a FICO score tumbling by 90 to 100 points.
The Cost in Dollars
In order to show just how badly a drop in your FICO score can hurt your wallet, we spoke with members of the home mortgage, auto and credit card lending industries. We presented hypothetical scenarios of a consumer who decided to apply for a $200,000, 30-year mortgage; a $20,000, five-year auto loan and a credit card. While all the industry insiders stressed that a FICO score isn't the only factor in determining who gets credit and at what cost (other factors they cited include the borrower's debt-to-income ratio and whether they have already established a relationship with the lender), they were able to provide an idea of what a borrower who had the following credit scores could expect.
For a Consumer Who Started With a FICO Score of 780:
Following a 30-day late payment, the consumer's car loan rate would jump nearly 3 percent, costing the borrower $26 more each month.
Following a debt settlement, the consumer would pay as much as $109 more each month on a home mortgage.
For a Consumer Who Started With a FICO Score of 680:
Following a 30-day late payment, the consumer would pay $41 more each month for a car loan.
Following a 30-day late payment, the consumer would pay as much as $95 more each month on a home mortgage.
Following a debt settlement, the consumer would no longer qualify for a credit card.
Some Surprised By the Details
Consumer advocates say it's important for borrowers to know what can damage their FICO scores. "If they know it in advance, they won't go out and step in a pile of doo-doo. They won't go out and do some of these things," says Linda Sherry, director of national priorities with advocacy group Consumer Action. Even experts found some surprises in today's news. "FICO imposes bigger hits than I would have thought for being maxed out or 30-days late just once, reinforcing my view that it is a cruder, blunter instrument than they like to claim. Nevertheless, it is a powerful, widely used crude blunt instrument," says Ed Mierzwinski, consumer program director for the U.S. PIRG consumer advocacy group.
Of course, knowing the impact on a FICO score and actually avoiding these mistakes are two separate things: Amid rising unemployment and other daily financial struggles, paying bills and staying on-track financially becomes a much bigger challenge for many borrowers.
"Some of these things are out of their control," Sherry says of consumers.
Additionally, as Weston points out, consumers with identical FICO scores can have different credit histories. That means the same slip-up -- such as maxing out a credit card -- could have different impacts on consumers who have the same FICO score. In the examples they provided, FICO assumed each borrower had several active major credit cards, a mortgage, car loan and student loans.
Sherry acknowledges the benefit of putting a number to a financial blunder. "I don't think we necessarily knew the numbers that a bankruptcy could apply to a credit score," Sherry says.
Helping You Make Better Decisions
While knowing the numbers may not keep you filing for bankruptcy if given no other choice, the information may help you make the best decision when faced with a bad situation.
FICO scores -- and the access to credit they provide -- are a valuable asset to consumers and supply a safety net when incomes are stretched. It's an asset that needs to be protected, Sherry says, even if job loss or catastrophic illness makes bill paying problematic.
"In that period of time, paying down debt is the last thing on your mind. Paying the minimum payment may also be the last thing on your mind, but you'll be doing yourself a big favor if you do," Sherry says.
Borrowers already knew that late payments hurt their credit scores, but for the first time, they now know the extent of that damage.
Did you max out your credit card? Expect a credit score drop of 10 to 45 points. Declare bankruptcy? Your score will plummet by up to 240 points, and your odds of getting credit will nosedive with it.
The "damage points" data, unveiled recently by FICO, are part of the most revealing glimpse into the firm's once-secret -- and still mysterious -- credit scoring model. The new information discloses how many points borrowers' scores will drop when they make the most-common mistakes.
'Help People Understand' Scores
"I hope this information will help people to better understand FICO scores and the value for them of avoiding credit missteps. It illustrates key points such as the higher your score, the farther it can fall if you stumble," says FICO spokesman Craig Watts. "Getting and maintaining a good score isn't complicated. We all just need to pay our bills on time, keep credit card balances low and take on new debt sparingly. "
The greater transparency about FICO scores is important because American consumers' ability to get credit rises and falls with the number. FICO, the company that pioneered credit scoring, assigns consumers a three-digit number from 300 to 850, depending on how well they handle credit. Other companies also offer scores, but FICO's version is the most widely used by lenders in determining whether a consumer can borrow, and at what rate.
FICO's credit score has been around for decades, but only within the past decade have consumers gradually gained access to theirs. Though the raw numbers can be purchased, how they're figured remains a FICO secret, as closely guarded as the formula for Coca-Cola. Until Thursday, FICO revealed only broad categories of factors influencing the score, but not the number of points at stake for consumers who fail to pay as agreed. The "damage points" information, revealed in a report by personal finance writer Liz Pulliam Weston, will be made available through its myFICO.com Web site starting this weekend.
FICO's information shows that bankruptcy does the most serious damage to a credit score (up to 240 points), followed by foreclosure (up to 160 points) while maxing out a credit card has the least numerical impact (as few as 10 points).
Those with good or excellent credit -- so-called prime borrowers -- put more points at risk with each mistake. For example, someone with an average credit score of 680 who pays a bill 30 days late will see a drop of 60 to 80 points. But for someone with an excellent credit score -- 780 -- that same delinquency can send a FICO score tumbling by 90 to 100 points.
The Cost in Dollars
In order to show just how badly a drop in your FICO score can hurt your wallet, we spoke with members of the home mortgage, auto and credit card lending industries. We presented hypothetical scenarios of a consumer who decided to apply for a $200,000, 30-year mortgage; a $20,000, five-year auto loan and a credit card. While all the industry insiders stressed that a FICO score isn't the only factor in determining who gets credit and at what cost (other factors they cited include the borrower's debt-to-income ratio and whether they have already established a relationship with the lender), they were able to provide an idea of what a borrower who had the following credit scores could expect.
For a Consumer Who Started With a FICO Score of 780:
Following a 30-day late payment, the consumer's car loan rate would jump nearly 3 percent, costing the borrower $26 more each month.
Following a debt settlement, the consumer would pay as much as $109 more each month on a home mortgage.
For a Consumer Who Started With a FICO Score of 680:
Following a 30-day late payment, the consumer would pay $41 more each month for a car loan.
Following a 30-day late payment, the consumer would pay as much as $95 more each month on a home mortgage.
Following a debt settlement, the consumer would no longer qualify for a credit card.
Some Surprised By the Details
Consumer advocates say it's important for borrowers to know what can damage their FICO scores. "If they know it in advance, they won't go out and step in a pile of doo-doo. They won't go out and do some of these things," says Linda Sherry, director of national priorities with advocacy group Consumer Action. Even experts found some surprises in today's news. "FICO imposes bigger hits than I would have thought for being maxed out or 30-days late just once, reinforcing my view that it is a cruder, blunter instrument than they like to claim. Nevertheless, it is a powerful, widely used crude blunt instrument," says Ed Mierzwinski, consumer program director for the U.S. PIRG consumer advocacy group.
Of course, knowing the impact on a FICO score and actually avoiding these mistakes are two separate things: Amid rising unemployment and other daily financial struggles, paying bills and staying on-track financially becomes a much bigger challenge for many borrowers.
"Some of these things are out of their control," Sherry says of consumers.
Additionally, as Weston points out, consumers with identical FICO scores can have different credit histories. That means the same slip-up -- such as maxing out a credit card -- could have different impacts on consumers who have the same FICO score. In the examples they provided, FICO assumed each borrower had several active major credit cards, a mortgage, car loan and student loans.
Sherry acknowledges the benefit of putting a number to a financial blunder. "I don't think we necessarily knew the numbers that a bankruptcy could apply to a credit score," Sherry says.
Helping You Make Better Decisions
While knowing the numbers may not keep you filing for bankruptcy if given no other choice, the information may help you make the best decision when faced with a bad situation.
FICO scores -- and the access to credit they provide -- are a valuable asset to consumers and supply a safety net when incomes are stretched. It's an asset that needs to be protected, Sherry says, even if job loss or catastrophic illness makes bill paying problematic.
"In that period of time, paying down debt is the last thing on your mind. Paying the minimum payment may also be the last thing on your mind, but you'll be doing yourself a big favor if you do," Sherry says.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Most Popular Cars of 2009
The year 2009 will go down in history as a watershed moment for the automotive industry. American icons General Motors and Chrysler filed for bankruptcy protection, seizing as much taxpayer money as possible in their efforts to fend off impending doom. Both survived, but under much different circumstances than anticipated decades earlier.
Going or almost gone from the GM’s portfolio were Hummer, Saturn, Pontiac and Saab along with a myriad of employees. Chrysler, sold to Italian automaker Fiat SpA, was now under the control of Canadian-born chief executive Sergio Marchionne and harboured an immediate need for new product. A summer launch of the Cash for Clunkers program would help both, but for how long?
Ford was in amazingly good shape, declining offers for government aid in an effort to keep its counterparts from going under. Ford realized, without a healthy GM and Chrysler, it too would be out of business, not large enough on its own to keep afloat the supply network necessary to run an entire industry. New products were streaming full speed into the market, with Taurus, Fusion and Flex leading the way.
Not surprisingly, Yahoo! Autos most searched for car brands in 2009 represent the strengths and sometimes failures experienced in the auto industry this past year. Toyota and Honda placed first and second on our list. Both companies shared the spotlight with successes in new products, the 2010 Toyota Prius, and continuing sales of mainstays such as the Honda Civic and Accord. Not all was roses, however, Toyota suffered from unexpected recalls while both companies encountered downward trends and the need to exit racing, specifically Formula 1, to conserve cash and develop new products faster.
Ford ranked third, with Nissan fourth and BMW fifth. Nissan did feel the pinch of a tighter economy, but under the strong leadership of CEO Carlos Ghosn, it seemed well positioned to tread carefully while others succumbed to economic pressures. BMW continued their A-plan of designing new and exciting vehicles such as the 535i Gran Turismo, and for the most part, consumers responded. With additional product set to launch, both Nissan and BMW appear poised for additional success in 2010.
When it came to ranking the most searched for individual models, it turns out that the enduring popularity of the iconic American muscle car, such as the Chevy Camaro and Ford Mustang, is still tough to beat. In fact, five of the top 10 most searched cars are American made. However, smaller, fuel-efficient models are still top of mind with consumers as evidenced by the continued popularity of the Honda Civic, Mini Cooper and Smart ForTwo.
Going or almost gone from the GM’s portfolio were Hummer, Saturn, Pontiac and Saab along with a myriad of employees. Chrysler, sold to Italian automaker Fiat SpA, was now under the control of Canadian-born chief executive Sergio Marchionne and harboured an immediate need for new product. A summer launch of the Cash for Clunkers program would help both, but for how long?
Ford was in amazingly good shape, declining offers for government aid in an effort to keep its counterparts from going under. Ford realized, without a healthy GM and Chrysler, it too would be out of business, not large enough on its own to keep afloat the supply network necessary to run an entire industry. New products were streaming full speed into the market, with Taurus, Fusion and Flex leading the way.
Not surprisingly, Yahoo! Autos most searched for car brands in 2009 represent the strengths and sometimes failures experienced in the auto industry this past year. Toyota and Honda placed first and second on our list. Both companies shared the spotlight with successes in new products, the 2010 Toyota Prius, and continuing sales of mainstays such as the Honda Civic and Accord. Not all was roses, however, Toyota suffered from unexpected recalls while both companies encountered downward trends and the need to exit racing, specifically Formula 1, to conserve cash and develop new products faster.
Ford ranked third, with Nissan fourth and BMW fifth. Nissan did feel the pinch of a tighter economy, but under the strong leadership of CEO Carlos Ghosn, it seemed well positioned to tread carefully while others succumbed to economic pressures. BMW continued their A-plan of designing new and exciting vehicles such as the 535i Gran Turismo, and for the most part, consumers responded. With additional product set to launch, both Nissan and BMW appear poised for additional success in 2010.
When it came to ranking the most searched for individual models, it turns out that the enduring popularity of the iconic American muscle car, such as the Chevy Camaro and Ford Mustang, is still tough to beat. In fact, five of the top 10 most searched cars are American made. However, smaller, fuel-efficient models are still top of mind with consumers as evidenced by the continued popularity of the Honda Civic, Mini Cooper and Smart ForTwo.
Boost Your Social Security Benefits
These strategies will help you make the most of your benefits.
There is no perfect time to apply for Social Security. You can claim early and take a smaller monthly payment for a longer period of time. Or you can claim later, collecting a larger benefit that is based on a shorter life expectancy. Your decision depends on many things beyond your need for the money: whether you're married, your spouse's earnings compared with yours, how much you have saved and your health.
Your goal is to maximize your Social Security benefits, but not all beneficiaries understand how to make the most of this guaranteed source of inflation-adjusted income. Over the years, Kiplinger's Retirement Report has written about little-known strategies to stretch government benefits. Those stories have been among our biggest source of reader inquiries, so we're returning to the topic.
Before we review the strategies, you need to know some Social Security basics. If you were born between 1943 and 1954, you can claim your full benefit, called the primary insurance amount, at age 66. The earliest you can claim Social Security is 62. But your benefit will be permanently reduced by a certain percentage for each month you claim before your 66th birthday. For instance, if you claim at age 62, you'll get 75% of your full benefit. If you claim at 64 and 9 months, you'll receive 90%. For each year you delay claiming benefits between 66 and 70, your benefit will increase by 8%. Hold off all four years, and you earn a 32% bonus, plus all accumulated cost-of-living adjustments.
A lower-earning spouse can claim a benefit based on his or her work record at age 62. Or the spouse can claim a "spousal" benefit, as long as the higher-earning spouse has started collecting benefits. If the lower earner is at full retirement age, he or she can collect a benefit that's 50% of the higher earner's primary insurance amount.
However, if the lower earner collects a spousal benefit before reaching full retirement age, the benefit will be reduced by a set percentage. For instance, if the spouse claims at 64 and 3 months, the spousal benefit will be 42.7% of the higher earner's benefit. And if the lower-earning spouse collects his or own benefit early and then "steps up" to the spousal benefit later, that spousal benefit will also be reduced.
Now let's turn to the strategies. At the risk of inviting accusations of sexism, we will refer to the lower-earning spouse as the wife. That's the way it usually is, and she tends to live longer than the husband, too.
First, if you're single. It usually makes sense to wait until full retirement age to start claiming benefits, unless you expect to die early or need the money sooner. This is especially true for women, who are more likely to reach the "break-even age," when the total value of full benefits equals what you would have received by claiming reduced benefits earlier.
Unless you have significant savings, it generally pays for singles to claim at 66, says Henry Hebeler, creator of the Web site AnalyzeNow.com. Many singles will not have enough savings to support a delay until age 70, Hebeler says. But a single person who collects at 62 is more likely to run out of money at an earlier age than someone with the same amount of savings who waits until 66, he says. "It usually works out that a single person should take benefits at full retirement age," he says.
You can use a free program on Hebeler's site to make your own calculations. Plug in your savings, tax bracket, annual spending and assumptions on investment growth. You can see how long your money will last based on when you start taking your benefits.
Married men should delay. Married couples can maximize total benefits by coordinating their start dates. The top goal is to increase the benefit for the surviving spouse, who gets 100% of the higher-earning spouse's benefit when he dies. If the higher-earning husband delays until 70, his survivor will get an extra 32% plus cost-of-living adjustments.
There are two ways that the surviving spouse would get less than 100% of her husband's primary insurance amount. If he collects Social Security before age 66, his benefit -- and his wife's survivor benefit -- will be lower. Also, the survivor benefit will be reduced if the husband dies and the wife collects the survivor benefit before turning 66. If she waits until her full retirement age, she'll get 100% of the survivor benefit. The size of her survivor benefit, however, will not be affected if she collects her own benefit or a spousal benefit early.
For many couples, a husband should claim at 70 while the lower-earning wife should start collecting at 62, according to a study by Boston College's Center for Retirement Research. Because the husband is likely to die earlier, the study says, he will increase the value of the survivor benefit by delaying. As for the wife, even though her benefit will be reduced by 25%, the authors figured that her reduced benefit is only temporary. After her husband dies, she will step up to the higher survivor benefit. In the meantime, the household is bringing in extra income.
Found money. Let's say you're at full retirement age. You'd like to delay collecting benefits until 70. If your wife is 62 or older, she could collect benefits based on her own work record, but she'd get more money with a spousal benefit. One problem: She can't apply for the spousal benefit until you file for your own benefit.
Here's what you do. You file for your own benefit, and your wife applies for the spousal benefit (which will be less than 50% of your benefit if she applies before her full retirement age). You immediately request a voluntary suspension for your own benefits. Your wife would then get spousal checks, and you can earn a bigger benefit when you reapply later.
James Mahaney, vice-president of Prudential Financial, recalls one couple who didn't realize they could "file and suspend." The husband didn't want to collect until 70. "They were leaving money on the table," he says. Once they learned of this strategy, the wife applied for a monthly spousal benefit of $1,000 -- a nice pot of "found money" over four years. If the husband dies first, she'll collect a higher survivor benefit.
Claim a spousal benefit. Like the man above, you're at full retirement age and you want to delay until 70. But you can still get benefits now -- a spousal benefit. If your lower-earning spouse is at least 62, she could claim her own benefit. You can then apply for a spousal benefit. At 70, you switch to your own higher benefit. This strategy offers you and your spouse several advantages: Your wife's survivor benefit will be higher if you die first, and you'll be bringing extra income into the household until you reach 70. At that point, your wife can switch to a spousal benefit based on what you would have received at 66.
Raymond Lekowski, 67, of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., had planned to wait until 70 to claim benefits. But when he read in Kiplinger's Retirement Report about claiming a spousal benefit, he decided to go for it.
His wife, Carol, a retired nurse, started collecting her own benefit just short of full retirement age. Her monthly benefit is about $1,000. Raymond, a retired executive for a communications company, gets a spousal benefit of about $500. If Raymond had claimed at 66, he would have collected more than $1,925 a month. By waiting until 70, his benefit will be 32% higher, plus inflation adjustments. "By not taking the benefit, it's like investing the money and seeing it grow," Raymond says. And if he dies first, Carol will be left with the bigger survivor benefit.
Note that the higher-earning spouse cannot use this tactic -- known as "restricting an application" to spousal benefits -- if he's younger than full retirement age.
The retirement do-over. If you claimed your benefits early, perhaps at age 62, you may decide that taking a permanent cut was a mistake. Believe it or not, you can repay the benefits, free of interest, and reapply for a bigger benefit later. Your wife must return any accumulated spousal benefits as well. Dan Cowles, a retired systems analyst for IBM and Wachovia, decided a do-over was a smart move. He had claimed his benefits at age 62. But he says: "I had regrets as the years went by. I was in good health, and my mother lived until she was 94."
Last year at age 67, Cowles, who lives with his wife, Sharon, 65, in Cumming, Ga., decided to repay his benefits. After mailing in a Request for Withdrawal of Application (SSA Form 521), the government told him that the tab was about $84,000. He took the cash from a money-market fund paying 3% interest. Because each year of delay boosts a benefit by more than twice that rate (not including the COLA), he figured he was getting a nice return on his investment.
At the time he repaid his benefits, he was receiving $1,580 a month. He reapplied soon after and now receives $2,196 a month -- $616 more. By repaying $84,000 in past benefits, Dan "bought" an additional $616 a month in inflation-adjusted income. That's less than what it would cost to buy an inflation-protected immediate annuity with a 100% survivor benefit from a low-cost annuity provider.
If Dan dies first, Sharon would receive his full benefit. Dan's higher benefit also means that Sharon's spousal benefit will be bigger. And he will be able to recoup the income taxes he paid on the benefits he gave back. Cowles says that he's owed a credit of about $8,200, reducing his repayment cost even further. (Check IRS Publication 915 for instructions.)
One word of caution: Although this do-over strategy works well if you were already collecting benefits, it's riskier to plan to collect reduced benefits now with the intention of repaying them later. You might not live long enough to take advantage of the repayment strategy. In that case, your spouse would be left with a reduced survivor benefit.
Remember, Medicare premiums are deducted from Social Security checks. When you withdraw an application, you must pay back all the benefits, including the benefits that paid your Medicare premiums. But if you don't intend to reapply for Social Security for several years, be clear that you are withdrawing from Social Security but not Medicare. You will pay your Medicare premium separately. You can test out the payback strategy on Hebeler's Web site, AnalyzeNow.com.
There is no perfect time to apply for Social Security. You can claim early and take a smaller monthly payment for a longer period of time. Or you can claim later, collecting a larger benefit that is based on a shorter life expectancy. Your decision depends on many things beyond your need for the money: whether you're married, your spouse's earnings compared with yours, how much you have saved and your health.
Your goal is to maximize your Social Security benefits, but not all beneficiaries understand how to make the most of this guaranteed source of inflation-adjusted income. Over the years, Kiplinger's Retirement Report has written about little-known strategies to stretch government benefits. Those stories have been among our biggest source of reader inquiries, so we're returning to the topic.
Before we review the strategies, you need to know some Social Security basics. If you were born between 1943 and 1954, you can claim your full benefit, called the primary insurance amount, at age 66. The earliest you can claim Social Security is 62. But your benefit will be permanently reduced by a certain percentage for each month you claim before your 66th birthday. For instance, if you claim at age 62, you'll get 75% of your full benefit. If you claim at 64 and 9 months, you'll receive 90%. For each year you delay claiming benefits between 66 and 70, your benefit will increase by 8%. Hold off all four years, and you earn a 32% bonus, plus all accumulated cost-of-living adjustments.
A lower-earning spouse can claim a benefit based on his or her work record at age 62. Or the spouse can claim a "spousal" benefit, as long as the higher-earning spouse has started collecting benefits. If the lower earner is at full retirement age, he or she can collect a benefit that's 50% of the higher earner's primary insurance amount.
However, if the lower earner collects a spousal benefit before reaching full retirement age, the benefit will be reduced by a set percentage. For instance, if the spouse claims at 64 and 3 months, the spousal benefit will be 42.7% of the higher earner's benefit. And if the lower-earning spouse collects his or own benefit early and then "steps up" to the spousal benefit later, that spousal benefit will also be reduced.
Now let's turn to the strategies. At the risk of inviting accusations of sexism, we will refer to the lower-earning spouse as the wife. That's the way it usually is, and she tends to live longer than the husband, too.
First, if you're single. It usually makes sense to wait until full retirement age to start claiming benefits, unless you expect to die early or need the money sooner. This is especially true for women, who are more likely to reach the "break-even age," when the total value of full benefits equals what you would have received by claiming reduced benefits earlier.
Unless you have significant savings, it generally pays for singles to claim at 66, says Henry Hebeler, creator of the Web site AnalyzeNow.com. Many singles will not have enough savings to support a delay until age 70, Hebeler says. But a single person who collects at 62 is more likely to run out of money at an earlier age than someone with the same amount of savings who waits until 66, he says. "It usually works out that a single person should take benefits at full retirement age," he says.
You can use a free program on Hebeler's site to make your own calculations. Plug in your savings, tax bracket, annual spending and assumptions on investment growth. You can see how long your money will last based on when you start taking your benefits.
Married men should delay. Married couples can maximize total benefits by coordinating their start dates. The top goal is to increase the benefit for the surviving spouse, who gets 100% of the higher-earning spouse's benefit when he dies. If the higher-earning husband delays until 70, his survivor will get an extra 32% plus cost-of-living adjustments.
There are two ways that the surviving spouse would get less than 100% of her husband's primary insurance amount. If he collects Social Security before age 66, his benefit -- and his wife's survivor benefit -- will be lower. Also, the survivor benefit will be reduced if the husband dies and the wife collects the survivor benefit before turning 66. If she waits until her full retirement age, she'll get 100% of the survivor benefit. The size of her survivor benefit, however, will not be affected if she collects her own benefit or a spousal benefit early.
For many couples, a husband should claim at 70 while the lower-earning wife should start collecting at 62, according to a study by Boston College's Center for Retirement Research. Because the husband is likely to die earlier, the study says, he will increase the value of the survivor benefit by delaying. As for the wife, even though her benefit will be reduced by 25%, the authors figured that her reduced benefit is only temporary. After her husband dies, she will step up to the higher survivor benefit. In the meantime, the household is bringing in extra income.
Found money. Let's say you're at full retirement age. You'd like to delay collecting benefits until 70. If your wife is 62 or older, she could collect benefits based on her own work record, but she'd get more money with a spousal benefit. One problem: She can't apply for the spousal benefit until you file for your own benefit.
Here's what you do. You file for your own benefit, and your wife applies for the spousal benefit (which will be less than 50% of your benefit if she applies before her full retirement age). You immediately request a voluntary suspension for your own benefits. Your wife would then get spousal checks, and you can earn a bigger benefit when you reapply later.
James Mahaney, vice-president of Prudential Financial, recalls one couple who didn't realize they could "file and suspend." The husband didn't want to collect until 70. "They were leaving money on the table," he says. Once they learned of this strategy, the wife applied for a monthly spousal benefit of $1,000 -- a nice pot of "found money" over four years. If the husband dies first, she'll collect a higher survivor benefit.
Claim a spousal benefit. Like the man above, you're at full retirement age and you want to delay until 70. But you can still get benefits now -- a spousal benefit. If your lower-earning spouse is at least 62, she could claim her own benefit. You can then apply for a spousal benefit. At 70, you switch to your own higher benefit. This strategy offers you and your spouse several advantages: Your wife's survivor benefit will be higher if you die first, and you'll be bringing extra income into the household until you reach 70. At that point, your wife can switch to a spousal benefit based on what you would have received at 66.
Raymond Lekowski, 67, of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., had planned to wait until 70 to claim benefits. But when he read in Kiplinger's Retirement Report about claiming a spousal benefit, he decided to go for it.
His wife, Carol, a retired nurse, started collecting her own benefit just short of full retirement age. Her monthly benefit is about $1,000. Raymond, a retired executive for a communications company, gets a spousal benefit of about $500. If Raymond had claimed at 66, he would have collected more than $1,925 a month. By waiting until 70, his benefit will be 32% higher, plus inflation adjustments. "By not taking the benefit, it's like investing the money and seeing it grow," Raymond says. And if he dies first, Carol will be left with the bigger survivor benefit.
Note that the higher-earning spouse cannot use this tactic -- known as "restricting an application" to spousal benefits -- if he's younger than full retirement age.
The retirement do-over. If you claimed your benefits early, perhaps at age 62, you may decide that taking a permanent cut was a mistake. Believe it or not, you can repay the benefits, free of interest, and reapply for a bigger benefit later. Your wife must return any accumulated spousal benefits as well. Dan Cowles, a retired systems analyst for IBM and Wachovia, decided a do-over was a smart move. He had claimed his benefits at age 62. But he says: "I had regrets as the years went by. I was in good health, and my mother lived until she was 94."
Last year at age 67, Cowles, who lives with his wife, Sharon, 65, in Cumming, Ga., decided to repay his benefits. After mailing in a Request for Withdrawal of Application (SSA Form 521), the government told him that the tab was about $84,000. He took the cash from a money-market fund paying 3% interest. Because each year of delay boosts a benefit by more than twice that rate (not including the COLA), he figured he was getting a nice return on his investment.
At the time he repaid his benefits, he was receiving $1,580 a month. He reapplied soon after and now receives $2,196 a month -- $616 more. By repaying $84,000 in past benefits, Dan "bought" an additional $616 a month in inflation-adjusted income. That's less than what it would cost to buy an inflation-protected immediate annuity with a 100% survivor benefit from a low-cost annuity provider.
If Dan dies first, Sharon would receive his full benefit. Dan's higher benefit also means that Sharon's spousal benefit will be bigger. And he will be able to recoup the income taxes he paid on the benefits he gave back. Cowles says that he's owed a credit of about $8,200, reducing his repayment cost even further. (Check IRS Publication 915 for instructions.)
One word of caution: Although this do-over strategy works well if you were already collecting benefits, it's riskier to plan to collect reduced benefits now with the intention of repaying them later. You might not live long enough to take advantage of the repayment strategy. In that case, your spouse would be left with a reduced survivor benefit.
Remember, Medicare premiums are deducted from Social Security checks. When you withdraw an application, you must pay back all the benefits, including the benefits that paid your Medicare premiums. But if you don't intend to reapply for Social Security for several years, be clear that you are withdrawing from Social Security but not Medicare. You will pay your Medicare premium separately. You can test out the payback strategy on Hebeler's Web site, AnalyzeNow.com.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Top 8 House-Hunting Mistakes
These mistakes will blow your cool -- your budget is likely to follow.
Buying a home is a very emotional process, and allowing those emotions to get the best of you can cause you to make any number of mistakes. Since buying a home has many far-reaching implications, from where you will live to how hard it will be to make ends meet, it's important to keep your emotions in check and make the most rational decision possible.
There are eight common emotional mistakes that people make when buying a home. Avoiding these pitfalls will help you find the best home-sweet-home.
Mistake 1: Falling in love with a house you can't afford
Once you've fallen in love with a particular home, it's hard to go back. You start dreaming about how great your life would be if you had all the wonderful things it offered - the lovely, tree-lined streets, the jetted bathtub, the spacious kitchen with professional-grade appliances. However, if you can't or won't be able to afford that house, you're just hurting yourself. To avoid the temptation to get in over your head financially, or the disappointment of feeling like you're settling for less than you deserve, it's best to only look at homes in your price range.
Further, start your search at the low end of your price range - if what you find there satisfies you, there's no need to go higher. Remember, when you buy another $10,000 worth of house, you're not just paying an extra $10,000 - you're paying an extra $10,000 plus interest, which might come out to double that amount or more over the life of your loan. You may be better off putting that money toward another purpose.
Mistake 2: Thinking that a particular house is the only one that will suit you
Unless you are a high-end buyer looking at custom homes, chances are that for any home you find that you like, there are quite a few others that are nearly identical to it. Most neighborhoods have multiple homes that are the same model. Further, most neighborhoods are full of homes that were all constructed by the same builder, so even if you can't find an identical model for sale, you can probably find a house with many of the same features. If you're considering a condo or townhouse, the odds are also in your favor.
Even when you have a long list of must-haves, there are probably several homes out there that can meet your needs. Another house in the same area might be similar enough to meet your needs but be less expensive. Likewise, you could find a similar model with more of the upgrades you're looking for at a similar price.
Mistake 3: Being so desperate to become a homeowner that you buy a place that doesn't suit you
When you've been looking for a while and you're not seeing anything you like - or worse, you're getting outbid on the houses you do want - it's easy to start thinking that what you really want simply won't happen. If you move into a house you'll end up hating, the transaction costs to get rid of it will be costly. You'll have to pay an agent's commission (up to 5-6% of the sale price) and you'll have to pay closing costs for the mortgage on your new house. You'll also deal with the hassle and expense of moving yet again. If you decide not to move but to try to make the best of what you have, remember that alterations and renovations are expensive, time-consuming and stressful. The best advice is to wait if you have the luxury of time, or to correct your vision for your future to what you actually need, not want.
Mistake 4: Overlooking important flaws in the structure, appearance or location of the house
For any of the three reasons we just discussed, you might be tempted to ignore major problems with the house that will be difficult, expensive or impossible to change. Carefully consider your options before you make a commitment, and consider waiting until something better comes along. New houses come on the market every day.
Mistake 5: Thinking you're a handyman when you're not
Don't buy a fixer-upper that's more than you can handle in terms of time, money or ability. For example, if you think you can do the work yourself then realize you can't once you get started, any repairs or upgrades you were planning to make will probably cost twice as much once you factor in the labor - and that may not be in your budget. Not to mention the costs involved to fix anything you may have started and the fees to replace the materials you wasted. Honestly evaluate your abilities, your budget and how soon you need to move before purchasing a property that isn't move-in ready.
Mistake 6: Putting in an offer before carefully considering all the pros and cons of the property
In a hot market (or even a hot submarket, with dirt-cheap, bank-owned properties during a housing slump) it may be necessary to pull the trigger very quickly if you find a home you like. However, you have to balance the need to make a quick decision with the need to make sure the home will be right for you. Don't neglect important steps like making sure the neighborhood feels safe at night as well as during the day and investigating possible noise issues like a nearby train. Ideally you'll be able to take at least a night to sleep on the decision. How well you sleep that night and how you feel about the home in the morning will tell you a lot about whether the decision you're about to make is the right one. Taking the time to consider the decision also gives you a chance to research how much the property is really worth and offer an appropriate price.
Mistake 7: Being too slow to pull the trigger
It's a tough balancing act to make sure you make a careful decision yet don't take too long to make it. Losing out on a property that you were almost ready to make an offer on because someone beat you to it can be heartbreaking. It can also have economic consequences. Let's say you are self-employed. Perhaps for you more than anyone else, time is money. The more time and energy you have to take out of your normal activities to search for a house, the less time and energy you have available to work. Not dragging out the homebuying process unnecessarily may be the best thing for your business, and the continued success of your business will be essential to paying the mortgage. If you don't pull the trigger quickly, someone else might, and you'll have to keep looking. Don't underestimate how time-consuming and routine-disrupting house shopping can be.
Mistake 8: Offering more than a house is worth
If there's a lot of competition in your market and you find a place you really like, it's all too easy to get sucked into a bidding war - or to try to preempt a bidding war by offering a high price in the first place. There are a couple of potential problems with this. First, if the house doesn't appraise at or above the amount of your offer, the bank won't give you the loan unless the seller reduces the price or you pay cash for the difference. If this happens, the shortfall on your bid as opposed to your mortgage will have to be paid out of pocket. Second, when you go to sell the house, if market conditions are similar to or worse than they were when you purchased, you may find yourself upside down on the mortgage and unable to sell. Make sure the purchase price for the home you buy is reasonable for both the house and the location by examining comparable sales and getting your agent's opinion before making an offer.
Conclusion
Even knowing all of these things, it's still hard to act on them. You may still find yourself making decisions based on emotion during the home-buying process. Slow down, overcome your emotions and, ultimately, make a home-purchase decision that's good for both your feelings and your finances.
Buying a home is a very emotional process, and allowing those emotions to get the best of you can cause you to make any number of mistakes. Since buying a home has many far-reaching implications, from where you will live to how hard it will be to make ends meet, it's important to keep your emotions in check and make the most rational decision possible.
There are eight common emotional mistakes that people make when buying a home. Avoiding these pitfalls will help you find the best home-sweet-home.
Mistake 1: Falling in love with a house you can't afford
Once you've fallen in love with a particular home, it's hard to go back. You start dreaming about how great your life would be if you had all the wonderful things it offered - the lovely, tree-lined streets, the jetted bathtub, the spacious kitchen with professional-grade appliances. However, if you can't or won't be able to afford that house, you're just hurting yourself. To avoid the temptation to get in over your head financially, or the disappointment of feeling like you're settling for less than you deserve, it's best to only look at homes in your price range.
Further, start your search at the low end of your price range - if what you find there satisfies you, there's no need to go higher. Remember, when you buy another $10,000 worth of house, you're not just paying an extra $10,000 - you're paying an extra $10,000 plus interest, which might come out to double that amount or more over the life of your loan. You may be better off putting that money toward another purpose.
Mistake 2: Thinking that a particular house is the only one that will suit you
Unless you are a high-end buyer looking at custom homes, chances are that for any home you find that you like, there are quite a few others that are nearly identical to it. Most neighborhoods have multiple homes that are the same model. Further, most neighborhoods are full of homes that were all constructed by the same builder, so even if you can't find an identical model for sale, you can probably find a house with many of the same features. If you're considering a condo or townhouse, the odds are also in your favor.
Even when you have a long list of must-haves, there are probably several homes out there that can meet your needs. Another house in the same area might be similar enough to meet your needs but be less expensive. Likewise, you could find a similar model with more of the upgrades you're looking for at a similar price.
Mistake 3: Being so desperate to become a homeowner that you buy a place that doesn't suit you
When you've been looking for a while and you're not seeing anything you like - or worse, you're getting outbid on the houses you do want - it's easy to start thinking that what you really want simply won't happen. If you move into a house you'll end up hating, the transaction costs to get rid of it will be costly. You'll have to pay an agent's commission (up to 5-6% of the sale price) and you'll have to pay closing costs for the mortgage on your new house. You'll also deal with the hassle and expense of moving yet again. If you decide not to move but to try to make the best of what you have, remember that alterations and renovations are expensive, time-consuming and stressful. The best advice is to wait if you have the luxury of time, or to correct your vision for your future to what you actually need, not want.
Mistake 4: Overlooking important flaws in the structure, appearance or location of the house
For any of the three reasons we just discussed, you might be tempted to ignore major problems with the house that will be difficult, expensive or impossible to change. Carefully consider your options before you make a commitment, and consider waiting until something better comes along. New houses come on the market every day.
Mistake 5: Thinking you're a handyman when you're not
Don't buy a fixer-upper that's more than you can handle in terms of time, money or ability. For example, if you think you can do the work yourself then realize you can't once you get started, any repairs or upgrades you were planning to make will probably cost twice as much once you factor in the labor - and that may not be in your budget. Not to mention the costs involved to fix anything you may have started and the fees to replace the materials you wasted. Honestly evaluate your abilities, your budget and how soon you need to move before purchasing a property that isn't move-in ready.
Mistake 6: Putting in an offer before carefully considering all the pros and cons of the property
In a hot market (or even a hot submarket, with dirt-cheap, bank-owned properties during a housing slump) it may be necessary to pull the trigger very quickly if you find a home you like. However, you have to balance the need to make a quick decision with the need to make sure the home will be right for you. Don't neglect important steps like making sure the neighborhood feels safe at night as well as during the day and investigating possible noise issues like a nearby train. Ideally you'll be able to take at least a night to sleep on the decision. How well you sleep that night and how you feel about the home in the morning will tell you a lot about whether the decision you're about to make is the right one. Taking the time to consider the decision also gives you a chance to research how much the property is really worth and offer an appropriate price.
Mistake 7: Being too slow to pull the trigger
It's a tough balancing act to make sure you make a careful decision yet don't take too long to make it. Losing out on a property that you were almost ready to make an offer on because someone beat you to it can be heartbreaking. It can also have economic consequences. Let's say you are self-employed. Perhaps for you more than anyone else, time is money. The more time and energy you have to take out of your normal activities to search for a house, the less time and energy you have available to work. Not dragging out the homebuying process unnecessarily may be the best thing for your business, and the continued success of your business will be essential to paying the mortgage. If you don't pull the trigger quickly, someone else might, and you'll have to keep looking. Don't underestimate how time-consuming and routine-disrupting house shopping can be.
Mistake 8: Offering more than a house is worth
If there's a lot of competition in your market and you find a place you really like, it's all too easy to get sucked into a bidding war - or to try to preempt a bidding war by offering a high price in the first place. There are a couple of potential problems with this. First, if the house doesn't appraise at or above the amount of your offer, the bank won't give you the loan unless the seller reduces the price or you pay cash for the difference. If this happens, the shortfall on your bid as opposed to your mortgage will have to be paid out of pocket. Second, when you go to sell the house, if market conditions are similar to or worse than they were when you purchased, you may find yourself upside down on the mortgage and unable to sell. Make sure the purchase price for the home you buy is reasonable for both the house and the location by examining comparable sales and getting your agent's opinion before making an offer.
Conclusion
Even knowing all of these things, it's still hard to act on them. You may still find yourself making decisions based on emotion during the home-buying process. Slow down, overcome your emotions and, ultimately, make a home-purchase decision that's good for both your feelings and your finances.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
8 fat fighting foods
Combat fat! Your allies in battling bulge? Foods that do the work for you. These edibles have proven lipid-melting powers that help you slim. That’s a win.
By Veronica Byrd
Almonds Almond joy! Dieters who ate 3 ounces of these nuts every day reduced their weight and body-mass index by a solid 18 percent compared with an 11 percent drop in the no-nut group, a study in the International Journal of Obesity found. Almonds are high in alpha-linolenic acid, which can speed the metabolism of fats. Stick to 12 per serving.
Berries Vitamin C–loaded fruit such as strawberries and raspberries can help you sizzle up to 30 percent more fat during exercise, suggests research from Arizona State University at Mesa. Blend a vinaigrette of 1 cup berries and ¼ cup balsamic vinegar.
See our tips: 5 stress-fighting superfoods!
Cinnamon This spice could make your waistline nice. Sprinkling ¼ teaspoon on your food may prevent a postmeal insulin spike—this increase normally occurs after you eat and “signals the body that it should store fat rather than burn it,” explains Lauren Slayton, R.D., of New York City. Add a dash to your oatmeal, yogurt or coffee.
Mustard Hello, yellow. The spice that gives mustard its color, turmeric, may slow the growth of fat tissues, a study in the journal Endocrinology notes. Eighty-six mayo in favor of any mustard; sprinkle turmeric on cauliflower and roast for a tangy side.
Oranges Prevent pound creep with this citrus star: It contains fat-torching compounds called flavones. Women who ate the most flavones had a significantly lower increase in body fat over a 14-year period, a study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition finds. Snack on slices or drink freshly squeezed OJ (with pulp!) for the biggest payback.
Related: 30 foods that fight fat!
Soybeans These green gems are rich in choline, a compound that blocks fat absorption and breaks down fatty deposits. Add ½ cup edamame to a salad.
Sweet potatoes Trade up to sweet taters. They’re high in fiber, which means no drastic insulin jumps and thus less fat packed onto your hips. Bake a small sweet potato—think of two bars of soap as a portion size—and top with a dollop of lowfat or nonfat cottage cheese.
Swiss cheese Holy cow: “Calcium-rich foods reduce fat-producing enzymes and increase fat breakdown,” says Michael B. Zemel, Ph.D., director of the Nutrition Institute at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville. Put toe to toe with some of its cheesy counterparts, Swiss is a heavy hitter in the calcium department; layer a slice on a lunchtime sandwich, or stack some on high-fiber crackers.
By Veronica Byrd
Almonds Almond joy! Dieters who ate 3 ounces of these nuts every day reduced their weight and body-mass index by a solid 18 percent compared with an 11 percent drop in the no-nut group, a study in the International Journal of Obesity found. Almonds are high in alpha-linolenic acid, which can speed the metabolism of fats. Stick to 12 per serving.
Berries Vitamin C–loaded fruit such as strawberries and raspberries can help you sizzle up to 30 percent more fat during exercise, suggests research from Arizona State University at Mesa. Blend a vinaigrette of 1 cup berries and ¼ cup balsamic vinegar.
See our tips: 5 stress-fighting superfoods!
Cinnamon This spice could make your waistline nice. Sprinkling ¼ teaspoon on your food may prevent a postmeal insulin spike—this increase normally occurs after you eat and “signals the body that it should store fat rather than burn it,” explains Lauren Slayton, R.D., of New York City. Add a dash to your oatmeal, yogurt or coffee.
Mustard Hello, yellow. The spice that gives mustard its color, turmeric, may slow the growth of fat tissues, a study in the journal Endocrinology notes. Eighty-six mayo in favor of any mustard; sprinkle turmeric on cauliflower and roast for a tangy side.
Oranges Prevent pound creep with this citrus star: It contains fat-torching compounds called flavones. Women who ate the most flavones had a significantly lower increase in body fat over a 14-year period, a study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition finds. Snack on slices or drink freshly squeezed OJ (with pulp!) for the biggest payback.
Related: 30 foods that fight fat!
Soybeans These green gems are rich in choline, a compound that blocks fat absorption and breaks down fatty deposits. Add ½ cup edamame to a salad.
Sweet potatoes Trade up to sweet taters. They’re high in fiber, which means no drastic insulin jumps and thus less fat packed onto your hips. Bake a small sweet potato—think of two bars of soap as a portion size—and top with a dollop of lowfat or nonfat cottage cheese.
Swiss cheese Holy cow: “Calcium-rich foods reduce fat-producing enzymes and increase fat breakdown,” says Michael B. Zemel, Ph.D., director of the Nutrition Institute at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville. Put toe to toe with some of its cheesy counterparts, Swiss is a heavy hitter in the calcium department; layer a slice on a lunchtime sandwich, or stack some on high-fiber crackers.
8 fat fighting foods
Combat fat! Your allies in battling bulge? Foods that do the work for you. These edibles have proven lipid-melting powers that help you slim. That’s a win.
By Veronica Byrd
Almonds Almond joy! Dieters who ate 3 ounces of these nuts every day reduced their weight and body-mass index by a solid 18 percent compared with an 11 percent drop in the no-nut group, a study in the International Journal of Obesity found. Almonds are high in alpha-linolenic acid, which can speed the metabolism of fats. Stick to 12 per serving.
Berries Vitamin C–loaded fruit such as strawberries and raspberries can help you sizzle up to 30 percent more fat during exercise, suggests research from Arizona State University at Mesa. Blend a vinaigrette of 1 cup berries and ¼ cup balsamic vinegar.
See our tips: 5 stress-fighting superfoods!
Cinnamon This spice could make your waistline nice. Sprinkling ¼ teaspoon on your food may prevent a postmeal insulin spike—this increase normally occurs after you eat and “signals the body that it should store fat rather than burn it,” explains Lauren Slayton, R.D., of New York City. Add a dash to your oatmeal, yogurt or coffee.
Mustard Hello, yellow. The spice that gives mustard its color, turmeric, may slow the growth of fat tissues, a study in the journal Endocrinology notes. Eighty-six mayo in favor of any mustard; sprinkle turmeric on cauliflower and roast for a tangy side.
Oranges Prevent pound creep with this citrus star: It contains fat-torching compounds called flavones. Women who ate the most flavones had a significantly lower increase in body fat over a 14-year period, a study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition finds. Snack on slices or drink freshly squeezed OJ (with pulp!) for the biggest payback.
Related: 30 foods that fight fat!
Soybeans These green gems are rich in choline, a compound that blocks fat absorption and breaks down fatty deposits. Add ½ cup edamame to a salad.
Sweet potatoes Trade up to sweet taters. They’re high in fiber, which means no drastic insulin jumps and thus less fat packed onto your hips. Bake a small sweet potato—think of two bars of soap as a portion size—and top with a dollop of lowfat or nonfat cottage cheese.
Swiss cheese Holy cow: “Calcium-rich foods reduce fat-producing enzymes and increase fat breakdown,” says Michael B. Zemel, Ph.D., director of the Nutrition Institute at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville. Put toe to toe with some of its cheesy counterparts, Swiss is a heavy hitter in the calcium department; layer a slice on a lunchtime sandwich, or stack some on high-fiber crackers.
By Veronica Byrd
Almonds Almond joy! Dieters who ate 3 ounces of these nuts every day reduced their weight and body-mass index by a solid 18 percent compared with an 11 percent drop in the no-nut group, a study in the International Journal of Obesity found. Almonds are high in alpha-linolenic acid, which can speed the metabolism of fats. Stick to 12 per serving.
Berries Vitamin C–loaded fruit such as strawberries and raspberries can help you sizzle up to 30 percent more fat during exercise, suggests research from Arizona State University at Mesa. Blend a vinaigrette of 1 cup berries and ¼ cup balsamic vinegar.
See our tips: 5 stress-fighting superfoods!
Cinnamon This spice could make your waistline nice. Sprinkling ¼ teaspoon on your food may prevent a postmeal insulin spike—this increase normally occurs after you eat and “signals the body that it should store fat rather than burn it,” explains Lauren Slayton, R.D., of New York City. Add a dash to your oatmeal, yogurt or coffee.
Mustard Hello, yellow. The spice that gives mustard its color, turmeric, may slow the growth of fat tissues, a study in the journal Endocrinology notes. Eighty-six mayo in favor of any mustard; sprinkle turmeric on cauliflower and roast for a tangy side.
Oranges Prevent pound creep with this citrus star: It contains fat-torching compounds called flavones. Women who ate the most flavones had a significantly lower increase in body fat over a 14-year period, a study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition finds. Snack on slices or drink freshly squeezed OJ (with pulp!) for the biggest payback.
Related: 30 foods that fight fat!
Soybeans These green gems are rich in choline, a compound that blocks fat absorption and breaks down fatty deposits. Add ½ cup edamame to a salad.
Sweet potatoes Trade up to sweet taters. They’re high in fiber, which means no drastic insulin jumps and thus less fat packed onto your hips. Bake a small sweet potato—think of two bars of soap as a portion size—and top with a dollop of lowfat or nonfat cottage cheese.
Swiss cheese Holy cow: “Calcium-rich foods reduce fat-producing enzymes and increase fat breakdown,” says Michael B. Zemel, Ph.D., director of the Nutrition Institute at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville. Put toe to toe with some of its cheesy counterparts, Swiss is a heavy hitter in the calcium department; layer a slice on a lunchtime sandwich, or stack some on high-fiber crackers.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Volkswagen Steals Toyota's Crown as World's Largest Automaker
The people want an empire, apparently, with that unassuming little black VW bug at the head of it.
The U.K.’s Guardian explains, "Volkswagen-Porsche has overtaken Toyota to become the world's largest car manufacturer as the German group benefits from state-backed stimulus packages around the globe." VW has "produced 4.4 million vehicles so far this year, outstripping its Japanese rival which has seen four million cars roll off production lines since January."
Ironically, VW reached the milestone in part by taking over Porsche – which it was forced to do after Porsche failed in an attempt to take over VW earlier this year.
"Of course," Autoblog notes, there is "some number play involved" in the Guardian’s numbers. "We're talking about the combined entity VW-Porsche, which has built 4.4 million cars to date, which is roughly 400,000 beyond Toyota's mark. However, Toyota halved its production earlier this year and shut down all its plants in February." VW also "benefited much more than Toyota from the European cash-for-clunkers programs," though Toyota saw more sales than VW spurred by the U.S. version of the car-swap program.
The news doesn’t just push Toyota down a notch. Jalopnik notes that VW has "passed Toyota and GM at the top of the heap." America’s largest automaker – the world’s largest just three years ago – now sits in third globally.
The change may not be permanent. The Guardian notes that Toyota "has the capacity to make 10 million vehicles a year but it expects to make seven million vehicles in 2009" as production picks back up. VW, however, may see its production increase long-term enough to stay ahead, or at least to take the title again even if it loses it later this year.
After all, Autoblog notes, "VW's also got the edge on Toyota" in the huge Chinese market, "where it has spent years introducing models."
The U.K.’s Guardian explains, "Volkswagen-Porsche has overtaken Toyota to become the world's largest car manufacturer as the German group benefits from state-backed stimulus packages around the globe." VW has "produced 4.4 million vehicles so far this year, outstripping its Japanese rival which has seen four million cars roll off production lines since January."
Ironically, VW reached the milestone in part by taking over Porsche – which it was forced to do after Porsche failed in an attempt to take over VW earlier this year.
"Of course," Autoblog notes, there is "some number play involved" in the Guardian’s numbers. "We're talking about the combined entity VW-Porsche, which has built 4.4 million cars to date, which is roughly 400,000 beyond Toyota's mark. However, Toyota halved its production earlier this year and shut down all its plants in February." VW also "benefited much more than Toyota from the European cash-for-clunkers programs," though Toyota saw more sales than VW spurred by the U.S. version of the car-swap program.
The news doesn’t just push Toyota down a notch. Jalopnik notes that VW has "passed Toyota and GM at the top of the heap." America’s largest automaker – the world’s largest just three years ago – now sits in third globally.
The change may not be permanent. The Guardian notes that Toyota "has the capacity to make 10 million vehicles a year but it expects to make seven million vehicles in 2009" as production picks back up. VW, however, may see its production increase long-term enough to stay ahead, or at least to take the title again even if it loses it later this year.
After all, Autoblog notes, "VW's also got the edge on Toyota" in the huge Chinese market, "where it has spent years introducing models."
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Fight stress and depression with five nutrient-buffed snacks
Sorry, ice cream isn't on the list! But the following foods do have nutrients that can help fight stress and depression, says Elizabeth Somer, RD, author of Eat Your Way to Happiness.
Food: Oranges, lemons and other citrus fruits
Mood-Boosting Ingredient: Vitamin C
This vitamin helps you cope better in stressful times by lowering your levels of stress hormones. If you get a lot regularly, you'll feel calmer during tough situations.
Food: Nuts
Mood-Boosting Ingredients: Vitamin E, arginine (an amino acid) and magnesium
A handful of nuts will keep you full and satisfied because they have a low glycemic index-which means they don't jack up your blood sugar levels and cause mood swings. It also makes you feel good to eat something that seems decadent (they're considered a little bit naughty because they're high in fat) but actually has health benefits.
Food: Leafy greens
Mood-Boosting Ingredient: Folic Acid
Research has shown that the folic acid in leafy greens such as kale and spinach can reduce depression and even improve blood flow to the brain. If you're not eating at least one serving per day you're more than likely low in folic acid, so try getting more or consider taking a multivitamin that contains it.
Food: Salmon
Mood-Boosting Ingredient: DHA (an omega-3 fatty acid)
The omega-3s in fatty fish such as salmon, mackerel and sardines have been found to improve your mood while lowering the risk of depression and age-related memory loss. The depression link is so strong that American Psychiatric Association suggests that anyone taking antidepressants and/or going through therapy also boost her intake of omega 3s.
Food: Dried cherries
Mood-Boosting Ingredients: Potassium, magnesium and vitamin C
These nutrients all work to curb your body's stress response. Dried cherries also keep your brain healthy because they're packed with antioxidants (including vitamin C), which prevent damage to your brain cells that can lead to memory problems.
Food: Oranges, lemons and other citrus fruits
Mood-Boosting Ingredient: Vitamin C
This vitamin helps you cope better in stressful times by lowering your levels of stress hormones. If you get a lot regularly, you'll feel calmer during tough situations.
Food: Nuts
Mood-Boosting Ingredients: Vitamin E, arginine (an amino acid) and magnesium
A handful of nuts will keep you full and satisfied because they have a low glycemic index-which means they don't jack up your blood sugar levels and cause mood swings. It also makes you feel good to eat something that seems decadent (they're considered a little bit naughty because they're high in fat) but actually has health benefits.
Food: Leafy greens
Mood-Boosting Ingredient: Folic Acid
Research has shown that the folic acid in leafy greens such as kale and spinach can reduce depression and even improve blood flow to the brain. If you're not eating at least one serving per day you're more than likely low in folic acid, so try getting more or consider taking a multivitamin that contains it.
Food: Salmon
Mood-Boosting Ingredient: DHA (an omega-3 fatty acid)
The omega-3s in fatty fish such as salmon, mackerel and sardines have been found to improve your mood while lowering the risk of depression and age-related memory loss. The depression link is so strong that American Psychiatric Association suggests that anyone taking antidepressants and/or going through therapy also boost her intake of omega 3s.
Food: Dried cherries
Mood-Boosting Ingredients: Potassium, magnesium and vitamin C
These nutrients all work to curb your body's stress response. Dried cherries also keep your brain healthy because they're packed with antioxidants (including vitamin C), which prevent damage to your brain cells that can lead to memory problems.
Friday, November 6, 2009
The Top 6 Reasons Kids Have Tantrums
The best way to prevent tantrums is to know what triggers them. Lots of kids get irritable when they're hungry or tired, but those aren't the only situations that will spark meltdowns. Psychologist Jed Baker, the author of No More Meltdowns, offers a guided tour of the six most-common triggers, with tips on avoiding each tearjerker:
1. Biological issues
Some kids become especially irritable when they're hungry or tired. That's why it’s always a good idea to take favorite snacks along on outings; you can even pull them out when waiting for meals at restaurants. To keep children from becoming too tired, build some rest time into your plans and don’t overschedule their days. Last, consider what kind of stimulation your kids can tolerate — some like loud amusement parks, while others need quieter activities to keep them happy.
2. Lack of structure
Having nothing to do for too long a period of time is a recipe for trouble. Kids will create their own structure if you don’t, and this sometimes means arguing with each other or otherwise acting out. Create a "Things To Do" box with puzzles, games, art projects, books, videos and other calming activities for the downtime between scheduled activities. Take smaller versions along on long car rides or for destinations with long waiting lines.
3. Demands
Many kids find it stressful to be told to do homework or chores, or to try a new activity. So when it's time for them to do their chores or homework, make a game of it, with rewards for completing each part of the task. If kids are afraid to try something new, don’t force them — instead help them gradually overcome reluctance by letting them watch the activity first, then asking them to participate for a very short period of time.
4. Waiting
Some kids melt down when they don't get what they want, or have to stop doing something fun. It is easier for kids to wait for what they want if they know exactly when they'll get it, so keep a timer or clock on hand. If you know you are going someplace where they will want something they cannot have, tell them ahead of time; suggest that if they get through the outing without complaint, they can get something else. When kids resist stopping a fun activity, try to make the transition easier. For example, as a reward for leaving the playground and going home without incident, stop for a small ice-cream treat.
5. Threats to self-esteem
Some kids are perfectionists and cannot stand making a mistake on their homework or losing a board game. Remind such kids before an activity that you are more interested in their efforts or their sportsmanship than whether they do things perfectly. Promise rewards if they don't get upset when they lose a game.
6. Unmet wishes for attention
Some children fall apart when adults ignore them to attend to siblings or other adults. Children can wait for your attention more successfully when they know exactly when they will get it — again, a timer or clock can be helpful. If you are occupied with something important, ask them to stay near you while they wait; often, that closeness is enough to satisfy them for a while. Also, teach kids the correct ways to ask for attention, and to sit patiently rather than getting mad or acting out. If the kids ask nicely to play, then give them the attention they crave. After all, this is the most valuable gift you can offer them
1. Biological issues
Some kids become especially irritable when they're hungry or tired. That's why it’s always a good idea to take favorite snacks along on outings; you can even pull them out when waiting for meals at restaurants. To keep children from becoming too tired, build some rest time into your plans and don’t overschedule their days. Last, consider what kind of stimulation your kids can tolerate — some like loud amusement parks, while others need quieter activities to keep them happy.
2. Lack of structure
Having nothing to do for too long a period of time is a recipe for trouble. Kids will create their own structure if you don’t, and this sometimes means arguing with each other or otherwise acting out. Create a "Things To Do" box with puzzles, games, art projects, books, videos and other calming activities for the downtime between scheduled activities. Take smaller versions along on long car rides or for destinations with long waiting lines.
3. Demands
Many kids find it stressful to be told to do homework or chores, or to try a new activity. So when it's time for them to do their chores or homework, make a game of it, with rewards for completing each part of the task. If kids are afraid to try something new, don’t force them — instead help them gradually overcome reluctance by letting them watch the activity first, then asking them to participate for a very short period of time.
4. Waiting
Some kids melt down when they don't get what they want, or have to stop doing something fun. It is easier for kids to wait for what they want if they know exactly when they'll get it, so keep a timer or clock on hand. If you know you are going someplace where they will want something they cannot have, tell them ahead of time; suggest that if they get through the outing without complaint, they can get something else. When kids resist stopping a fun activity, try to make the transition easier. For example, as a reward for leaving the playground and going home without incident, stop for a small ice-cream treat.
5. Threats to self-esteem
Some kids are perfectionists and cannot stand making a mistake on their homework or losing a board game. Remind such kids before an activity that you are more interested in their efforts or their sportsmanship than whether they do things perfectly. Promise rewards if they don't get upset when they lose a game.
6. Unmet wishes for attention
Some children fall apart when adults ignore them to attend to siblings or other adults. Children can wait for your attention more successfully when they know exactly when they will get it — again, a timer or clock can be helpful. If you are occupied with something important, ask them to stay near you while they wait; often, that closeness is enough to satisfy them for a while. Also, teach kids the correct ways to ask for attention, and to sit patiently rather than getting mad or acting out. If the kids ask nicely to play, then give them the attention they crave. After all, this is the most valuable gift you can offer them
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Despite millions of job seekers, many positions sit open
Despite millions of unemployed job seekers desperate for work, many open positions are languishing unfilled. The reason? Not enough candidates.
With job openings largely concentrated in specialized industries like health care, green technology and energy, some employers say the problem is finding qualified workers, which are in short supply. Meanwhile, they are inundated with eager candidates from other industries who lack the skills and experience that the job requires.
According to a recent survey by Human Capital Institute and TheLadders, more than half of employers said "quality of candidates" or "availability of candidates" are their greatest challenges -- despite the recession.
Mary Willoughby, the director of human resources at the Center for Disability Rights in Rochester, New York, has been trying to hire registered nurses, home health aides and service coordinators for several of the agencies that she oversees.
Many of the positions, which require specific skills and offer salaries in the range of $30,000 to $45,000, have been vacant for six months or longer.
The job postings, which appear on CareerBuilder, Craigslist and some regional sites, garner a lot of attention, she says. "We get tons of résumés from people. We are just not getting highly qualified candidates."
The problem, according to Willoughby, is that they are bombarded by résumés from job seekers without the two years or more of health care experience necessary. "We're seeing a lot of people trying to break into the health care arena," she said.
As a result, human resources spends too much time sifting through résumés for people who aren't remotely qualified, and can't find many that are. "We've gotten close to 300 résumés for a service coordinator position. Out of that we brought in four people," she said.
Those that didn't make the cut included someone with previous experience as an office clerk and a job applicant with a bachelor's in mathematics, currently employed at a café.
Willoughby recently instituted a hiring incentive program to encourage existing employees to refer viable candidates. Those responsible for bringing in new hires are eligible to receive $2,500 to $5,000, depending on the position. She has also added in a signing bonus for the new employees.
Things are even worse on the higher end of the pay scale. At wireless leasing firm, Unison Site, a position for director of lead generation, which pays $90,000-$140,000, has been open for three months, with no candidates in sight.
"With the job market the way it is, we should be able to recruit really good people and it hasn't worked quite as well as we wanted," said Joe Songer, co-founder and chief financial officer. "My problem is when I put an ad out I just get bombarded with people that aren't qualified."
Typically, the jobs that are the hardest to fill are those that require unique or extensive work experience, according to management professor Peter Cappelli of the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business.
For job seekers, applying to those types of positions may be worth the off chance that one responds with a request for an interview. "They think, I've got nothing to lose," Cappelli said.
Recruiters recommend that job seekers create a targeted list of companies with a clear match to their background and tailor their experience to the job they are applying for, rather than blanketing all available job openings with the same résumé.
"Eighty percent of jobs are being obtained on personal referrals so candidates that are spending the bulk of their time sending their resume out blindly are not being the most fruitful," said Carolyn Thompson, president of CMCS, a boutique staffing firm near Washington, D.C.
Thompson advises job seekers to network within those target companies, whether in person or through social networking sites.
Without a contact at the company, résumés should highlight and emphasize any relevant experience specific to the job opening, added Jennifer Becker, market director for Ajilon Professional Staffing. "You really want your résumé to very quickly and easily reflect your relevant skills and the value you can bring to the position."
"If the client has to look for it, you are probably going to get passed over."
With job openings largely concentrated in specialized industries like health care, green technology and energy, some employers say the problem is finding qualified workers, which are in short supply. Meanwhile, they are inundated with eager candidates from other industries who lack the skills and experience that the job requires.
According to a recent survey by Human Capital Institute and TheLadders, more than half of employers said "quality of candidates" or "availability of candidates" are their greatest challenges -- despite the recession.
Mary Willoughby, the director of human resources at the Center for Disability Rights in Rochester, New York, has been trying to hire registered nurses, home health aides and service coordinators for several of the agencies that she oversees.
Many of the positions, which require specific skills and offer salaries in the range of $30,000 to $45,000, have been vacant for six months or longer.
The job postings, which appear on CareerBuilder, Craigslist and some regional sites, garner a lot of attention, she says. "We get tons of résumés from people. We are just not getting highly qualified candidates."
The problem, according to Willoughby, is that they are bombarded by résumés from job seekers without the two years or more of health care experience necessary. "We're seeing a lot of people trying to break into the health care arena," she said.
As a result, human resources spends too much time sifting through résumés for people who aren't remotely qualified, and can't find many that are. "We've gotten close to 300 résumés for a service coordinator position. Out of that we brought in four people," she said.
Those that didn't make the cut included someone with previous experience as an office clerk and a job applicant with a bachelor's in mathematics, currently employed at a café.
Willoughby recently instituted a hiring incentive program to encourage existing employees to refer viable candidates. Those responsible for bringing in new hires are eligible to receive $2,500 to $5,000, depending on the position. She has also added in a signing bonus for the new employees.
Things are even worse on the higher end of the pay scale. At wireless leasing firm, Unison Site, a position for director of lead generation, which pays $90,000-$140,000, has been open for three months, with no candidates in sight.
"With the job market the way it is, we should be able to recruit really good people and it hasn't worked quite as well as we wanted," said Joe Songer, co-founder and chief financial officer. "My problem is when I put an ad out I just get bombarded with people that aren't qualified."
Typically, the jobs that are the hardest to fill are those that require unique or extensive work experience, according to management professor Peter Cappelli of the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business.
For job seekers, applying to those types of positions may be worth the off chance that one responds with a request for an interview. "They think, I've got nothing to lose," Cappelli said.
Recruiters recommend that job seekers create a targeted list of companies with a clear match to their background and tailor their experience to the job they are applying for, rather than blanketing all available job openings with the same résumé.
"Eighty percent of jobs are being obtained on personal referrals so candidates that are spending the bulk of their time sending their resume out blindly are not being the most fruitful," said Carolyn Thompson, president of CMCS, a boutique staffing firm near Washington, D.C.
Thompson advises job seekers to network within those target companies, whether in person or through social networking sites.
Without a contact at the company, résumés should highlight and emphasize any relevant experience specific to the job opening, added Jennifer Becker, market director for Ajilon Professional Staffing. "You really want your résumé to very quickly and easily reflect your relevant skills and the value you can bring to the position."
"If the client has to look for it, you are probably going to get passed over."
Monday, November 2, 2009
5 Evil Things Credit Card Companies Can (Still) Do
The credit card reform bill tries to help cash-strapped customers, but companies are coming up with new ways to boost profits.
The Bill
Credit card companies are socking it to consumers left and right.
They're hiking interest rates to as much as 36% and doubling minimum monthly payments, frustrating customers who are already cash-strapped and credit-crunched.
In an effort to curb these abusive practices, President Obama signed into law a credit card reform act in May that's rolling out in three parts over 12 months.
At the same time, credit card companies have been hard at work coming up with new ways to boost profits while sidestepping the reforms.
"Card issuers are making sure they can make up the lost money in new ways," said Bill Hardekopf of Lowcards.com, a research company funded by a commercial debt collector.
The first part of the law, which took effect in August, requires banks to give customers more notice ahead of major changes to their accounts, like rate hikes. Starting in February, limits will be imposed on when issuers can raise rates on existing card balances, and on new cards. In August 2010 some credit card penalty fees will be will reined in.
But no legislation can fully shield consumers from the credit card industry's ongoing efforts to boost the bottom line.
The worst part? "All of these hikes are taking place simply because they can," Hardekopf said
1. Rate Hikes
Interest rates are out of this world.
"They've increased steadily over the past 5 years, and in general are higher than they've ever been," said Josh Frank, senior researcher at the Center for Responsible Lending (CRL), who says he's seen annual percentage rates as high as 36%.
No current laws cap credit card interest rates, according to Pamela Banks of Consumers Union, the nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports, so technically the sky's the limit.
But the CARD act will help curb abusive practices. As of February, issuers won't be able to arbitrarily raise rates on existing balances. But cardholders will still be subject to interest hikes for late payments and various other infractions.
And card companies will be able to raise their rates as high as they want, whenever they want, on future purchases even after the reform bill kicks in completely.
The act will bring protections for new customers; issuers will no longer be able to hike rates on new accounts in the first 12 months, unless the borrower is delinquent by more than 60 days or the increase is stated in the contract.
Keven Vallance recently saw the rate on his Sears card increase from 9.99% to 13.99% for no apparent reason. When Vallance called Sears Credit, which is owned by Citibank, a rep told him every cardholder's rate is increasing by 4%.
Citi spokesman Samuel Wang said in an email that the company has "adjusted pricing and card terms for some customers as part of our regular account reviews."
Consumer outrage is boiling over. Last month, a disgruntled Bank of America customer posted a YouTube video complaining her bank "jacked up my interest rate to a whopping 30% APR." Her rant went viral, and BofA dropped her rate back to its original 12.99%.
Courtesy: House.gov
Rep. Barney Frank hopes a new consumer protection agency can curb credit card fees.
2. New Fees
Fees aren't just rising -- they're multiplying. Cardholders are getting slapped with fees they've never seen before.
The hitch: New laws can address only existing fees and business practices; they can't predict what credit card companies will do in the future.
"Theoretically, they could create a fee for names that begin with 'J,'" said Lowcards.com's Hardekopf.
In reality, customers are seeing new annual fees, inactivity charges and more. Not of these charges are unheard of, but many fees that were unusual are becoming commonplace.
Earlier this month, for instance, some Bank of America customers were shocked to learn that their no-fee credit cards would be subject to a new annual fee.
BofA spokeswoman Betty Riess said the fees are part of a company test that affects 0.5% of all consumer accounts, and that the fees range from $29-$99.
The charges will be levied in February, and Riess said customers were chosen "based on risk and profitability" but have the option to reject the fees by canceling their accounts.
Fifth Third Bank recently introduced a $19 inactivity fee for customers who don't charge anything for 12 months, and Citibank is hitting some consumers with a fee if they put less than $2,400 on their card annually.
To address this problem, House Financial Services Committee Barney Frank (D-Mass.) has proposed a new regulatory body, the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, which would approve new credit card fees. While the House Financial Service Committee approved the agency, it remains to be seen whether legislation will pass; lawmakers are battling over this and other reform proposals floating around Washington.
Photo: Jupiterimages
3. Higher Minimum Monthly Payments
Banks are also demanding bigger and bigger minimum payments. Chase has bumped up the minimum payment for some consumers to 5% of the monthly balance from 2%.
For someone who carries a $5,000 balance, that means the monthly payment of $100 skyrockets to $250 -- a whopping 150% increase.
Consumer Union's Pamela Banks says her organization has compiled a wealth of anecdotal evidence that indicates such increases in minimum monthly payments are widespread.
"This is making payments virtually impossible for some people," she said. "It's throwing people off when they were living on a tight budget anyway."
Some good news is on the way, however. After February, card companies won't be able to increase monthly minimum payments by more than 100%. For example, a bank cannot increase a 2% minimum payment to any higher than 4%. And this so-called "doubling" will be allowed only once during the life of the card.
Photo: Photodisc / Jupiterimages
4. Fewer Rewards
Say goodbye to beach vacations and new iPods just for swiping your card.
Rewards programs have been enticing shoppers to charge a purchase rather than paying cash -- but card issuers are cutting back those perks.
"This is happening with a significant amount of cards," Hardekopf said, adding that many consumers are now receiving 1% cash back instead of the 2% or 3% they once enjoyed.
American Express recently cut its Blue Card's cash back policy from 1.5% to 1.25%. And all AmEx customers who make a late payment will no longer accrue points on their purchases -- however, those points can be reinstated with a $29 fee.
5. Slashed Credit Limits and Canceled Accounts
Without so much as a call from the bank, some customers are learning their credit limits have been slashed by as much as 75%, or that their accounts have been closed altogether, according to the Center for Responsible Lending's Josh Frank.
Citibank recently closed what a spokesman called a "limited number" of MasterCard gas cards co-branded with Citgo, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips and Shell.
"People go to make a purchase, and they find out about these huge changes only when they're denied," Frank said. "It's a shock, and it's been happening a lot."
Even cardholders who don't charge anything might find their accounts abruptly closed, Frank said. With credit losses at a record high, companies see inactive cards as a red flag and close the accounts to avoid the worry of future writedowns.
"Usually cardholders have this credit line available for an emergency, for this kind of current economic situation," Frank said. "But now they're turning to it when they need it, and it's gone."
What's a Cardholder to Do?
Consumers must pay close attention to the terms of their contracts, staying alert to any changes.
"It's boring reading, and it can be hard to understand, but that's where everything is spelled out," said Lowcards.com's Hardekopf.
Of course, while there are laws aimed at helping consumers, legislation can't do it all.
"As we close the loopholes on some things, they open up elsewhere," said Consumer Union's Banks. "Reform acts don't cover everything, and cardholders have to watch out for their own accounts."
And if you don't like your credit card's new terms? "Shop around -- you are not married to your card," Hardekopf said. "It's a partnership, not a lifelong contract."
The Bill
Credit card companies are socking it to consumers left and right.
They're hiking interest rates to as much as 36% and doubling minimum monthly payments, frustrating customers who are already cash-strapped and credit-crunched.
In an effort to curb these abusive practices, President Obama signed into law a credit card reform act in May that's rolling out in three parts over 12 months.
At the same time, credit card companies have been hard at work coming up with new ways to boost profits while sidestepping the reforms.
"Card issuers are making sure they can make up the lost money in new ways," said Bill Hardekopf of Lowcards.com, a research company funded by a commercial debt collector.
The first part of the law, which took effect in August, requires banks to give customers more notice ahead of major changes to their accounts, like rate hikes. Starting in February, limits will be imposed on when issuers can raise rates on existing card balances, and on new cards. In August 2010 some credit card penalty fees will be will reined in.
But no legislation can fully shield consumers from the credit card industry's ongoing efforts to boost the bottom line.
The worst part? "All of these hikes are taking place simply because they can," Hardekopf said
1. Rate Hikes
Interest rates are out of this world.
"They've increased steadily over the past 5 years, and in general are higher than they've ever been," said Josh Frank, senior researcher at the Center for Responsible Lending (CRL), who says he's seen annual percentage rates as high as 36%.
No current laws cap credit card interest rates, according to Pamela Banks of Consumers Union, the nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports, so technically the sky's the limit.
But the CARD act will help curb abusive practices. As of February, issuers won't be able to arbitrarily raise rates on existing balances. But cardholders will still be subject to interest hikes for late payments and various other infractions.
And card companies will be able to raise their rates as high as they want, whenever they want, on future purchases even after the reform bill kicks in completely.
The act will bring protections for new customers; issuers will no longer be able to hike rates on new accounts in the first 12 months, unless the borrower is delinquent by more than 60 days or the increase is stated in the contract.
Keven Vallance recently saw the rate on his Sears card increase from 9.99% to 13.99% for no apparent reason. When Vallance called Sears Credit, which is owned by Citibank, a rep told him every cardholder's rate is increasing by 4%.
Citi spokesman Samuel Wang said in an email that the company has "adjusted pricing and card terms for some customers as part of our regular account reviews."
Consumer outrage is boiling over. Last month, a disgruntled Bank of America customer posted a YouTube video complaining her bank "jacked up my interest rate to a whopping 30% APR." Her rant went viral, and BofA dropped her rate back to its original 12.99%.
Courtesy: House.gov
Rep. Barney Frank hopes a new consumer protection agency can curb credit card fees.
2. New Fees
Fees aren't just rising -- they're multiplying. Cardholders are getting slapped with fees they've never seen before.
The hitch: New laws can address only existing fees and business practices; they can't predict what credit card companies will do in the future.
"Theoretically, they could create a fee for names that begin with 'J,'" said Lowcards.com's Hardekopf.
In reality, customers are seeing new annual fees, inactivity charges and more. Not of these charges are unheard of, but many fees that were unusual are becoming commonplace.
Earlier this month, for instance, some Bank of America customers were shocked to learn that their no-fee credit cards would be subject to a new annual fee.
BofA spokeswoman Betty Riess said the fees are part of a company test that affects 0.5% of all consumer accounts, and that the fees range from $29-$99.
The charges will be levied in February, and Riess said customers were chosen "based on risk and profitability" but have the option to reject the fees by canceling their accounts.
Fifth Third Bank recently introduced a $19 inactivity fee for customers who don't charge anything for 12 months, and Citibank is hitting some consumers with a fee if they put less than $2,400 on their card annually.
To address this problem, House Financial Services Committee Barney Frank (D-Mass.) has proposed a new regulatory body, the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, which would approve new credit card fees. While the House Financial Service Committee approved the agency, it remains to be seen whether legislation will pass; lawmakers are battling over this and other reform proposals floating around Washington.
Photo: Jupiterimages
3. Higher Minimum Monthly Payments
Banks are also demanding bigger and bigger minimum payments. Chase has bumped up the minimum payment for some consumers to 5% of the monthly balance from 2%.
For someone who carries a $5,000 balance, that means the monthly payment of $100 skyrockets to $250 -- a whopping 150% increase.
Consumer Union's Pamela Banks says her organization has compiled a wealth of anecdotal evidence that indicates such increases in minimum monthly payments are widespread.
"This is making payments virtually impossible for some people," she said. "It's throwing people off when they were living on a tight budget anyway."
Some good news is on the way, however. After February, card companies won't be able to increase monthly minimum payments by more than 100%. For example, a bank cannot increase a 2% minimum payment to any higher than 4%. And this so-called "doubling" will be allowed only once during the life of the card.
Photo: Photodisc / Jupiterimages
4. Fewer Rewards
Say goodbye to beach vacations and new iPods just for swiping your card.
Rewards programs have been enticing shoppers to charge a purchase rather than paying cash -- but card issuers are cutting back those perks.
"This is happening with a significant amount of cards," Hardekopf said, adding that many consumers are now receiving 1% cash back instead of the 2% or 3% they once enjoyed.
American Express recently cut its Blue Card's cash back policy from 1.5% to 1.25%. And all AmEx customers who make a late payment will no longer accrue points on their purchases -- however, those points can be reinstated with a $29 fee.
5. Slashed Credit Limits and Canceled Accounts
Without so much as a call from the bank, some customers are learning their credit limits have been slashed by as much as 75%, or that their accounts have been closed altogether, according to the Center for Responsible Lending's Josh Frank.
Citibank recently closed what a spokesman called a "limited number" of MasterCard gas cards co-branded with Citgo, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips and Shell.
"People go to make a purchase, and they find out about these huge changes only when they're denied," Frank said. "It's a shock, and it's been happening a lot."
Even cardholders who don't charge anything might find their accounts abruptly closed, Frank said. With credit losses at a record high, companies see inactive cards as a red flag and close the accounts to avoid the worry of future writedowns.
"Usually cardholders have this credit line available for an emergency, for this kind of current economic situation," Frank said. "But now they're turning to it when they need it, and it's gone."
What's a Cardholder to Do?
Consumers must pay close attention to the terms of their contracts, staying alert to any changes.
"It's boring reading, and it can be hard to understand, but that's where everything is spelled out," said Lowcards.com's Hardekopf.
Of course, while there are laws aimed at helping consumers, legislation can't do it all.
"As we close the loopholes on some things, they open up elsewhere," said Consumer Union's Banks. "Reform acts don't cover everything, and cardholders have to watch out for their own accounts."
And if you don't like your credit card's new terms? "Shop around -- you are not married to your card," Hardekopf said. "It's a partnership, not a lifelong contract."
Sunday, November 1, 2009
5 Habits to Break Before It's Too Late
You want to live a long, full life -- to be young and lean forever. But you could be doing yourself more harm than good.
"Someday," you say, "I'm going to get my health back on track, after this next project," or "when I get back from my cruise," or "when the kids get a little older" ... C'mon, you know your list of reasons -- or what I call EXCUSES -- better than I.
Look, if you're waiting for some magical day to appear, you just may be waiting forever. These days do not "show up"; you show up for THEM. I have identified five critical areas, bad habits that many people mindlessly follow. Do you realize that each and every day of your life that you do not reverse these dangerous trends, you get farther and farther from your ultimate goal of living a fulfilling life?
Take a look at each area, determine how you stack up, and then make the fix today:
1) Stealing from sleep: Studies show that a minimum of seven to nine hours of uninterrupted sleep (at night) are essential for health. Sleep is the time when your body repairs and recovers from all of the metabolic processes that your body performs every second. Sleep supports healthy weight management, raises growth hormone, and heals the adrenals. If you are watching TV, working on your PC, or otherwise stimulating yourself so that you are unable to go to sleep by 11 PM, then establish the Power Down Hour and turn to more relaxing activities like baths, light novels, or cuddling with a loved one (or pet!) at least an hour or two before bedtime. Then ... retrain yourself to sleep through the night.
2) Skipping breakfast: How many times do you find yourself dashing out the door to start your day, only to discover that you forgot to eat? Listen, your body has just "fasted" overnight, and in order to fuel yourself for the day (and lower stress hormones), you must eat a balanced meal that includes proteins, fats, and carbohydrates. Otherwise, your body will turn on itself for fuel, and it isn't fat but muscle that it's going to target ... which will cascade into a very nasty sequence of health consequences that will make you fat, old, and tired before your time.
3) Blowing off exercise: If you think you can manage your health and weight through dietary means alone, it won't work. Period. Exercise is crucial for stimulating proper physical and hormonal response necessary for building muscle and bone, burning fat, letting you sleep, keeping you young, giving you energy -- the list is endless. More important is the CORRECT type of exercise, which involves high-intensity interval training, along with resistance workouts. If you can't find 20-30 minutes a day to incorporate these exercises into your life (oh yeah, that is ALL you need, by the way), then you can kiss your health goodbye.
4) Noshing at night: Strapping on the feedbag in the evenings basically signals your body to hold off on burning existing fat stores, raises stress hormones before bedtime, and screws up your body's natural digestive processes at a time when it should be ready to shut down and repair. If you are eating in a hormonally-balanced way during your evening meal, there is absolutely no need to munch afterward.
5) Not counting your beverages: One of the craziest things I encounter in my work is the lack of consideration of high-calorie, high-sugar drinks in the diet. Yes, those healthy "Jumbo Juices," designer coffee slurpees (hey, they may as well be, given all the sugar in them), and those harmless little cocktails every night, especially those fruit-flavored martini and tequila drinks, can really pack on the pounds in a hurry. Make the switch to healthier options like iced green tea -- or, my favorite, Emergen-C -- for some sparkling mineral replacements that not only satisfy, but also fuel and nourish!
JJ Virgin, PhD, CNS is a celebrity health and nutrition expert, author, public speaker and media personality. She is internationally recognized as the creator of the Weight Loss Resistance Revolution™ and trains other health care professionals in her program. JJ is the President of the National Association of Nutrition Professionals,
"Someday," you say, "I'm going to get my health back on track, after this next project," or "when I get back from my cruise," or "when the kids get a little older" ... C'mon, you know your list of reasons -- or what I call EXCUSES -- better than I.
Look, if you're waiting for some magical day to appear, you just may be waiting forever. These days do not "show up"; you show up for THEM. I have identified five critical areas, bad habits that many people mindlessly follow. Do you realize that each and every day of your life that you do not reverse these dangerous trends, you get farther and farther from your ultimate goal of living a fulfilling life?
Take a look at each area, determine how you stack up, and then make the fix today:
1) Stealing from sleep: Studies show that a minimum of seven to nine hours of uninterrupted sleep (at night) are essential for health. Sleep is the time when your body repairs and recovers from all of the metabolic processes that your body performs every second. Sleep supports healthy weight management, raises growth hormone, and heals the adrenals. If you are watching TV, working on your PC, or otherwise stimulating yourself so that you are unable to go to sleep by 11 PM, then establish the Power Down Hour and turn to more relaxing activities like baths, light novels, or cuddling with a loved one (or pet!) at least an hour or two before bedtime. Then ... retrain yourself to sleep through the night.
2) Skipping breakfast: How many times do you find yourself dashing out the door to start your day, only to discover that you forgot to eat? Listen, your body has just "fasted" overnight, and in order to fuel yourself for the day (and lower stress hormones), you must eat a balanced meal that includes proteins, fats, and carbohydrates. Otherwise, your body will turn on itself for fuel, and it isn't fat but muscle that it's going to target ... which will cascade into a very nasty sequence of health consequences that will make you fat, old, and tired before your time.
3) Blowing off exercise: If you think you can manage your health and weight through dietary means alone, it won't work. Period. Exercise is crucial for stimulating proper physical and hormonal response necessary for building muscle and bone, burning fat, letting you sleep, keeping you young, giving you energy -- the list is endless. More important is the CORRECT type of exercise, which involves high-intensity interval training, along with resistance workouts. If you can't find 20-30 minutes a day to incorporate these exercises into your life (oh yeah, that is ALL you need, by the way), then you can kiss your health goodbye.
4) Noshing at night: Strapping on the feedbag in the evenings basically signals your body to hold off on burning existing fat stores, raises stress hormones before bedtime, and screws up your body's natural digestive processes at a time when it should be ready to shut down and repair. If you are eating in a hormonally-balanced way during your evening meal, there is absolutely no need to munch afterward.
5) Not counting your beverages: One of the craziest things I encounter in my work is the lack of consideration of high-calorie, high-sugar drinks in the diet. Yes, those healthy "Jumbo Juices," designer coffee slurpees (hey, they may as well be, given all the sugar in them), and those harmless little cocktails every night, especially those fruit-flavored martini and tequila drinks, can really pack on the pounds in a hurry. Make the switch to healthier options like iced green tea -- or, my favorite, Emergen-C -- for some sparkling mineral replacements that not only satisfy, but also fuel and nourish!
JJ Virgin, PhD, CNS is a celebrity health and nutrition expert, author, public speaker and media personality. She is internationally recognized as the creator of the Weight Loss Resistance Revolution™ and trains other health care professionals in her program. JJ is the President of the National Association of Nutrition Professionals,
Thursday, October 29, 2009
What is happening in AMERICA ??? Getting enough sleep? They aren't in West Virginia
ATLANTA – Sleepless in Seattle? Hardly. West Virginia is where people are really staying awake, according to the first government study to monitor state-by-state differences in sleeplessness.
West Virginians' lack of sleep was about double the national rate, perhaps a side effect of health problems such as obesity, experts said.
Nearly 1 in 5 West Virginians said they did not get a single good night's sleep in the previous month. The national average was about 1 in 10, according to a federal health survey conducted last year and released Thursday.
Tennessee, Kentucky and Oklahoma also were notably above average in their reported lack of sleep. In contrast, North Dakota had fewer problems sleeping, with only 1 in 13 reporting that degree of sleeplessness.
Health officials do not know the exact reasons for the differences.
"We didn't ask 'Why didn't you get enough rest or sleep?'" said Lela McKnight-Eily, an epidemiologist for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who led the study.
But experts noted several possible explanations: West Virginia ranks at or near the bottom of the nation in several important measurements of health, including obesity, smoking, heart disease and the proportion of adults with disabilities. Studies have increasingly found sleeping problems in people with certain health problems, including obesity.
"You would expect to see poorer sleep within a chronically diseased population," noted Darrel Drobnich of the National Sleep Foundation, a nonprofit advocacy and research organization.
Some experts believe sleep-deprived people are more inclined to eat fatty foods during the day.
"There's growing evidence sleep deprivation promotes obesity," said Dr. Ronald Chervin, a University of Michigan sleep disorders expert.
Financial stress and odd-hour work shifts can play roles in sleeplessness, too, Chervin added. He suggested those may be contributing factors in West Virginia, an economically depressed state with tens of thousands of people working in coal mining.
Thursday's report was based on results of an annual telephone survey of more than 400,000 Americans, including at least 3,900 in each state. The survey did not include people who use only cell phones.
The results mirrored earlier studies that found women are more likely to have sleeping problems than men, and blacks are more likely than white or Hispanics to get less sleep.
The survey did not ask people how many hours of sleep they got, and different respondents may have had different views of what counted for a good night's sleep. Sleep experts recommend seven to nine hours of sleep each night.
If you're wondering about Seattle — scene of the Tom Hanks-Meg Ryan film "Sleepless in Seattle" — the report did not provide information on cities. But the state of Washington had slightly fewer sleep-deprived people than the average state as reflected by the percent of residents reporting a solid month of sleeplessness.
New York and California — two states with large, stressed-out cities — were also a little better than average.
The survey also asked people the opposite question: Did you get enough sleep every single night for the last month? Hawaii racked up the most zzz's, with nearly 36 percent saying they were fully rested every day. The national average was about 31 percent.
In every state, most people reported a mix of nights when they got enough sleep and nights they did not.
___
West Virginians' lack of sleep was about double the national rate, perhaps a side effect of health problems such as obesity, experts said.
Nearly 1 in 5 West Virginians said they did not get a single good night's sleep in the previous month. The national average was about 1 in 10, according to a federal health survey conducted last year and released Thursday.
Tennessee, Kentucky and Oklahoma also were notably above average in their reported lack of sleep. In contrast, North Dakota had fewer problems sleeping, with only 1 in 13 reporting that degree of sleeplessness.
Health officials do not know the exact reasons for the differences.
"We didn't ask 'Why didn't you get enough rest or sleep?'" said Lela McKnight-Eily, an epidemiologist for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who led the study.
But experts noted several possible explanations: West Virginia ranks at or near the bottom of the nation in several important measurements of health, including obesity, smoking, heart disease and the proportion of adults with disabilities. Studies have increasingly found sleeping problems in people with certain health problems, including obesity.
"You would expect to see poorer sleep within a chronically diseased population," noted Darrel Drobnich of the National Sleep Foundation, a nonprofit advocacy and research organization.
Some experts believe sleep-deprived people are more inclined to eat fatty foods during the day.
"There's growing evidence sleep deprivation promotes obesity," said Dr. Ronald Chervin, a University of Michigan sleep disorders expert.
Financial stress and odd-hour work shifts can play roles in sleeplessness, too, Chervin added. He suggested those may be contributing factors in West Virginia, an economically depressed state with tens of thousands of people working in coal mining.
Thursday's report was based on results of an annual telephone survey of more than 400,000 Americans, including at least 3,900 in each state. The survey did not include people who use only cell phones.
The results mirrored earlier studies that found women are more likely to have sleeping problems than men, and blacks are more likely than white or Hispanics to get less sleep.
The survey did not ask people how many hours of sleep they got, and different respondents may have had different views of what counted for a good night's sleep. Sleep experts recommend seven to nine hours of sleep each night.
If you're wondering about Seattle — scene of the Tom Hanks-Meg Ryan film "Sleepless in Seattle" — the report did not provide information on cities. But the state of Washington had slightly fewer sleep-deprived people than the average state as reflected by the percent of residents reporting a solid month of sleeplessness.
New York and California — two states with large, stressed-out cities — were also a little better than average.
The survey also asked people the opposite question: Did you get enough sleep every single night for the last month? Hawaii racked up the most zzz's, with nearly 36 percent saying they were fully rested every day. The national average was about 31 percent.
In every state, most people reported a mix of nights when they got enough sleep and nights they did not.
___
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Asians Top Auto Reliability; Ford Cars Score Well
DETROIT – Asian automakers are still building the most reliable cars and trucks, with eight of the top 10 brands from Japanese and Korean companies, according to an annual survey by Consumer Reports.
But several models from Ford Motor Co. are now consistently scoring above Honda and Toyota, the perennial leaders.
While Toyota's youth-oriented Scion brand finished first for the second year in a row, several Ford models, including the midsize Ford Fusion and its cousin, the Mercury Milan, consistently have been at or near the top of their classes, a trend that led Consumer Reports editors to declare that Ford is now making some vehicles with world-class reliability.
After Scion, Honda, Toyota, Infiniti and Acura rounded out the top five brands in reliability based on surveys taken in March of subscribers who own or lease 1.4 million vehicles.
"Ford is definitely doing something right," said Rik Paul, the magazine's automotive editor.
Ford's Detroit-area competitors, General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group LLC, didn't fare as well, however.
Chrysler had only one model that Consumer Reports recommended based on reliability and its staff test, and the Chrysler brand finished last out of 33 brands sold in the U.S. One third of Chrysler's models were much worse than average in reliability.
Six models from GM were recommended by the magazine, but it's still inconsistent. Only 21 of 48 models the magazine studied scored average or better in reliability.
The relatively poor performance by GM and Chrysler could hurt efforts to fight back from financial problems that led to stays in bankruptcy court earlier this year. Auto industry officials say the nonprofit Consumer Reports is among the most widely consulted sources when people buy vehicles.
Officials at GM and Chrysler say they are committed to improving quality.
At Ford, though, four-cylinder versions of the Fusion and Milan finished second in the family car category, beaten only by Toyota's Prius gas-electric hybrid. The Fusion and Milan outscored Toyota Motor Corp.'s Camry and Honda Motor Co.'s Accord, the two top-selling cars in the U.S. "which many people view as the paradigms of reliability," Paul said.
Of the 51 Ford, Lincoln or Mercury models in the survey, 46 were ranked average or better in reliability.
Yet while Mercury was the only Detroit brand to finish in the top 10 (10th), the Ford brand finished 16th, while Lincoln finished 20th. That's largely due to higher-end models — many with all-wheel-drive — scoring below average in reliability, said Jake Fisher, Consumer Reports' senior automotive engineer.
"Those types of problems are keeping them from being truly world class," Fisher said.
Bennie Fowler, Ford's vice president of global quality, said the company is applying the same methods that worked with the Fusion and other models to the ones that didn't perform as well. The company constantly listens to customer complaints and tracks warranty claims to improve quality, he said.
"We know that the quality levels today have to be greater tomorrow," he said.
Toyota, despite a recent spate of recalls, and Honda consistently build cars that cause few problems for Consumer Reports readers, Paul said. Ford, he said, is approaching that consistency, and while GM has some bright spots, it still has a ways to go to match the Japanese.
The Dodge Ram pickup, the only Chrysler model recommended by the magazine, did well in road tests and was average in reliability. The recommendation is important, though, because the Ram is Chrysler's top-selling model.
Paul said automakers often can only make quality improvements when new models come out, and those have been few for Chrysler in the last two years.
"Hopefully for them, when they do release new models, they will still have the same level of quality that we saw in the Ram," he said.
Honda's Insight hybrid was the most reliable vehicle in the survey, while the Volkswagen Touareg was the least reliable.
The Consumer Reports survey also found that higher-priced cars aren't necessarily more reliable than less-expensive ones. Inexpensive small cars and midsize family sedans were the most reliable in the survey, which questions subscribers about 17 potential problem areas.
But several models from Ford Motor Co. are now consistently scoring above Honda and Toyota, the perennial leaders.
While Toyota's youth-oriented Scion brand finished first for the second year in a row, several Ford models, including the midsize Ford Fusion and its cousin, the Mercury Milan, consistently have been at or near the top of their classes, a trend that led Consumer Reports editors to declare that Ford is now making some vehicles with world-class reliability.
After Scion, Honda, Toyota, Infiniti and Acura rounded out the top five brands in reliability based on surveys taken in March of subscribers who own or lease 1.4 million vehicles.
"Ford is definitely doing something right," said Rik Paul, the magazine's automotive editor.
Ford's Detroit-area competitors, General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group LLC, didn't fare as well, however.
Chrysler had only one model that Consumer Reports recommended based on reliability and its staff test, and the Chrysler brand finished last out of 33 brands sold in the U.S. One third of Chrysler's models were much worse than average in reliability.
Six models from GM were recommended by the magazine, but it's still inconsistent. Only 21 of 48 models the magazine studied scored average or better in reliability.
The relatively poor performance by GM and Chrysler could hurt efforts to fight back from financial problems that led to stays in bankruptcy court earlier this year. Auto industry officials say the nonprofit Consumer Reports is among the most widely consulted sources when people buy vehicles.
Officials at GM and Chrysler say they are committed to improving quality.
At Ford, though, four-cylinder versions of the Fusion and Milan finished second in the family car category, beaten only by Toyota's Prius gas-electric hybrid. The Fusion and Milan outscored Toyota Motor Corp.'s Camry and Honda Motor Co.'s Accord, the two top-selling cars in the U.S. "which many people view as the paradigms of reliability," Paul said.
Of the 51 Ford, Lincoln or Mercury models in the survey, 46 were ranked average or better in reliability.
Yet while Mercury was the only Detroit brand to finish in the top 10 (10th), the Ford brand finished 16th, while Lincoln finished 20th. That's largely due to higher-end models — many with all-wheel-drive — scoring below average in reliability, said Jake Fisher, Consumer Reports' senior automotive engineer.
"Those types of problems are keeping them from being truly world class," Fisher said.
Bennie Fowler, Ford's vice president of global quality, said the company is applying the same methods that worked with the Fusion and other models to the ones that didn't perform as well. The company constantly listens to customer complaints and tracks warranty claims to improve quality, he said.
"We know that the quality levels today have to be greater tomorrow," he said.
Toyota, despite a recent spate of recalls, and Honda consistently build cars that cause few problems for Consumer Reports readers, Paul said. Ford, he said, is approaching that consistency, and while GM has some bright spots, it still has a ways to go to match the Japanese.
The Dodge Ram pickup, the only Chrysler model recommended by the magazine, did well in road tests and was average in reliability. The recommendation is important, though, because the Ram is Chrysler's top-selling model.
Paul said automakers often can only make quality improvements when new models come out, and those have been few for Chrysler in the last two years.
"Hopefully for them, when they do release new models, they will still have the same level of quality that we saw in the Ram," he said.
Honda's Insight hybrid was the most reliable vehicle in the survey, while the Volkswagen Touareg was the least reliable.
The Consumer Reports survey also found that higher-priced cars aren't necessarily more reliable than less-expensive ones. Inexpensive small cars and midsize family sedans were the most reliable in the survey, which questions subscribers about 17 potential problem areas.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Cold/Flu Products: What Works, What Doesn't
From Airborne to vitamin D, the truth behind preventative measures and treatments.
In 2004, People magazine interviewed Dr. Peter Katona, an associate clinical professor of infectious diseases at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, about a money-making dietary supplement called Airborne.
The small tablets, then being marketed as a handy cold prevention and treatment remedy, are chock-full of vitamins, herbs and minerals and fizz once placed in water.
Katona gave a frank opinion, calling the over-the-counter supplement a "waste of money." The actor Kevin Costner, on the other hand, gave a brief but glowing review and confessed to stashing them on his private plane.
"Who do you think readers listened to?" says Katona, with a laugh.
In Depth: Cold/Flu Products To Try, And Toss
Katona's assessment was reinforced last December when Airborne agreed to pay up to $30 million to settle a class-action lawsuit. The Federal Trade Commission, which announced the settlement, said Airborne lacked "competent and reliable scientific evidence to support the claims."
Airborne is still on the shelves--with a slightly different marketing claim that it supports the immune system--but that doesn't make the product any more effective.
Though Americans spent $4.6 billion on cough, cold and sore throat remedies in 2008, in fact there are only a handful of scientifically proven preventions and treatments for viruses that cause the cold and flu, and none of them involve excess doses of vitamins. Instead, public health officials and physicians have a more common-sense approach, including avoiding sick people, getting vaccinated for the seasonal and H1N1 flues, managing symptoms with reliable medications like an anti-inflammatory or decongestant, and seeking treatment for the flu within the first 48 hours of flu symptom onset.
Prevention and Treatment Myths
Still, this doesn't stop sufferers from relying on a host of ineffective treatments. Like Dr. Katona, emergency physician Dr. Frank McGeorge often deals with patients who rely on remedies that lack scientific proof until their symptoms worsen and they have to see a health care professional.
McGeorge, a Detroit-Mich.-based spokesman for the American College of Emergency Physicians, says a lot of patients often take vitamins like echinacea, zinc and vitamin C once they get sick. While research on the use of the herb echinacea to treat colds and flues is still ongoing, many studies--including two funded by the government--have found no benefit.
Similarly, there's not enough scientific evidence to demonstrate that zinc and vitamin C are powerful weapons against the cold and flu. On the contrary, both can be harmful in excessive doses. Earlier this year, the Food and Drug Administration warned consumers that the homeopathic cold-treatment nasal spray Zicam, which contains the mineral zinc, had been linked to a loss of smell in more than 100 people since 1999. McGeorge also advises against regularly taking more than 500 milligrams of vitamin C per day. Doing so over a long period of time may be harmful; excess vitamin C can cause severe diarrhea.
"There are very intelligent, well-grounded people who swear by this stuff," says McGeorge, referring to vitamin supplements and homeopathic remedies. "My problem is that people taking these [products] sometimes ignore things that will really help them and instead choose voodoo medicine."
Getting Smart About the Cold and Flu
Instead, McGeorge would prefer patients to practice cold and flu prevention by washing their hands, avoiding sick people, staying healthy and, for the flu, getting vaccinated. This year that means obtaining both the seasonal flu vaccine and the H1N1 vaccine. The second vaccine is particularly important for high-risk patients like pregnant women and young children.
Controlling uncomfortable symptoms of either the cold or flu can be done with over-the-counter medications like ibuprofen, an anti-inflammatory that reduces fever and pain; a decongestant, which relieves swollen tissue in the nose; or an antihistamine, which minimizes sneezing, runny nose and coughing. And staying hydrated, which helps keep mucus moist and easy to clear from the nose, will do more to help the body heal than any alternative or homeopathic remedy.
Dr. Norman Edelman, chief medical officer at the American Lung Association, says an effective cold and flu prevention strategy should also include a healthy diet, exercise and plenty of sleep. Following these guidelines will help support the immune system, though Edelman stresses that minor slip-ups, like missing an hour or two of exercise during the week, won't severely compromise one's natural defenses.
And if you've been unfortunate enough to catch a cold or flu, Edelman has a final recommendation: be considerate of others.
"Cancel that trip to grandma's or don't go to work," he says. "If you're sick and spread it to someone else, that's an impolite thing to do."
Cold/Flu Products To Try, And Toss
Echinacea
Some who use this herb to shorten the duration of a cold or treat its symptoms say that it's effective, and at least one study of 95 people made a similar observation. Yet many studies, including two funded by the government, have found no benefit. The National Center for Complimentary and Alternative Health, a division of the National Institutes of Health, is continuing to study the use of Echinacea in treating upper respiratory infections and in supporting the immune system.
Vitamin C
There is no conclusive evidence to support vitamin C as a cold prevention or treatment remedy, according to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Several controlled studies have been conducted, but the data on whether or not vitamin C reduces the severity or duration of symptoms is unclear. In fact, taking more than 500 milligrams of vitamin C daily over a long period of time may be harmful; excess vitamin C can cause severe diarrhea.
Consider Vitamin D
If there is a supplement you might consider taking this winter, says Dr. Edelman, it is vitamin D. Recent research has demonstrated an association between vitamin D deficiency and cardiovascular disease and increased risk of the common cold. It's easy to get sufficient levels of vitamin D--which the body processes when it's exposed to the sun's UV-B rays--during the summer months but more difficult throughout winter. Research on the use of vitamin D to protect against the cold is still ongoing; discuss the appropriate dose with your physician.
Tamiflu and Relenza
Practicing prevention doesn't guarantee immunity; for those who do come down with the flu, McGeorge recommends seeing a health care professional within the first 48 hours. That's a critical window of time during which a doctor can prescribe the antiviral medications Tamiflu or Relenza, both of which have been shown to shorten the course of the flu.
In 2004, People magazine interviewed Dr. Peter Katona, an associate clinical professor of infectious diseases at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, about a money-making dietary supplement called Airborne.
The small tablets, then being marketed as a handy cold prevention and treatment remedy, are chock-full of vitamins, herbs and minerals and fizz once placed in water.
Katona gave a frank opinion, calling the over-the-counter supplement a "waste of money." The actor Kevin Costner, on the other hand, gave a brief but glowing review and confessed to stashing them on his private plane.
"Who do you think readers listened to?" says Katona, with a laugh.
In Depth: Cold/Flu Products To Try, And Toss
Katona's assessment was reinforced last December when Airborne agreed to pay up to $30 million to settle a class-action lawsuit. The Federal Trade Commission, which announced the settlement, said Airborne lacked "competent and reliable scientific evidence to support the claims."
Airborne is still on the shelves--with a slightly different marketing claim that it supports the immune system--but that doesn't make the product any more effective.
Though Americans spent $4.6 billion on cough, cold and sore throat remedies in 2008, in fact there are only a handful of scientifically proven preventions and treatments for viruses that cause the cold and flu, and none of them involve excess doses of vitamins. Instead, public health officials and physicians have a more common-sense approach, including avoiding sick people, getting vaccinated for the seasonal and H1N1 flues, managing symptoms with reliable medications like an anti-inflammatory or decongestant, and seeking treatment for the flu within the first 48 hours of flu symptom onset.
Prevention and Treatment Myths
Still, this doesn't stop sufferers from relying on a host of ineffective treatments. Like Dr. Katona, emergency physician Dr. Frank McGeorge often deals with patients who rely on remedies that lack scientific proof until their symptoms worsen and they have to see a health care professional.
McGeorge, a Detroit-Mich.-based spokesman for the American College of Emergency Physicians, says a lot of patients often take vitamins like echinacea, zinc and vitamin C once they get sick. While research on the use of the herb echinacea to treat colds and flues is still ongoing, many studies--including two funded by the government--have found no benefit.
Similarly, there's not enough scientific evidence to demonstrate that zinc and vitamin C are powerful weapons against the cold and flu. On the contrary, both can be harmful in excessive doses. Earlier this year, the Food and Drug Administration warned consumers that the homeopathic cold-treatment nasal spray Zicam, which contains the mineral zinc, had been linked to a loss of smell in more than 100 people since 1999. McGeorge also advises against regularly taking more than 500 milligrams of vitamin C per day. Doing so over a long period of time may be harmful; excess vitamin C can cause severe diarrhea.
"There are very intelligent, well-grounded people who swear by this stuff," says McGeorge, referring to vitamin supplements and homeopathic remedies. "My problem is that people taking these [products] sometimes ignore things that will really help them and instead choose voodoo medicine."
Getting Smart About the Cold and Flu
Instead, McGeorge would prefer patients to practice cold and flu prevention by washing their hands, avoiding sick people, staying healthy and, for the flu, getting vaccinated. This year that means obtaining both the seasonal flu vaccine and the H1N1 vaccine. The second vaccine is particularly important for high-risk patients like pregnant women and young children.
Controlling uncomfortable symptoms of either the cold or flu can be done with over-the-counter medications like ibuprofen, an anti-inflammatory that reduces fever and pain; a decongestant, which relieves swollen tissue in the nose; or an antihistamine, which minimizes sneezing, runny nose and coughing. And staying hydrated, which helps keep mucus moist and easy to clear from the nose, will do more to help the body heal than any alternative or homeopathic remedy.
Dr. Norman Edelman, chief medical officer at the American Lung Association, says an effective cold and flu prevention strategy should also include a healthy diet, exercise and plenty of sleep. Following these guidelines will help support the immune system, though Edelman stresses that minor slip-ups, like missing an hour or two of exercise during the week, won't severely compromise one's natural defenses.
And if you've been unfortunate enough to catch a cold or flu, Edelman has a final recommendation: be considerate of others.
"Cancel that trip to grandma's or don't go to work," he says. "If you're sick and spread it to someone else, that's an impolite thing to do."
Cold/Flu Products To Try, And Toss
Echinacea
Some who use this herb to shorten the duration of a cold or treat its symptoms say that it's effective, and at least one study of 95 people made a similar observation. Yet many studies, including two funded by the government, have found no benefit. The National Center for Complimentary and Alternative Health, a division of the National Institutes of Health, is continuing to study the use of Echinacea in treating upper respiratory infections and in supporting the immune system.
Vitamin C
There is no conclusive evidence to support vitamin C as a cold prevention or treatment remedy, according to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Several controlled studies have been conducted, but the data on whether or not vitamin C reduces the severity or duration of symptoms is unclear. In fact, taking more than 500 milligrams of vitamin C daily over a long period of time may be harmful; excess vitamin C can cause severe diarrhea.
Consider Vitamin D
If there is a supplement you might consider taking this winter, says Dr. Edelman, it is vitamin D. Recent research has demonstrated an association between vitamin D deficiency and cardiovascular disease and increased risk of the common cold. It's easy to get sufficient levels of vitamin D--which the body processes when it's exposed to the sun's UV-B rays--during the summer months but more difficult throughout winter. Research on the use of vitamin D to protect against the cold is still ongoing; discuss the appropriate dose with your physician.
Tamiflu and Relenza
Practicing prevention doesn't guarantee immunity; for those who do come down with the flu, McGeorge recommends seeing a health care professional within the first 48 hours. That's a critical window of time during which a doctor can prescribe the antiviral medications Tamiflu or Relenza, both of which have been shown to shorten the course of the flu.
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Windows 7 !!!
Yes, Windows 7 didn't even hit the market until Thursday. But that hasn't stopped a fog of myths from enveloping the newest version of the much loved--and much hated--PC operating system from Microsoft.
[Slide Show: The Best of What's New in Windows 7.]
The software giant hoped that wide exposure to Windows 7 would help smooth its entry. Microsoft let millions of consumers and professionals download test versions of the operating system. And by a wide margin, testers have found the new system to be the best yet from Microsoft. Version 7 is leaner, more useful, and prettier than past editions--a worthy effort to update the Windows world.
Still, the fictions are legion. Much of it is innocent confusion that accompanies any major software release. Some of it arises from Microsoft apologists trying to bury the botched release of Windows Vista, sniping Apple fans who want the Mac to continue gaining market share, or diehard techies who revere free Linux software.
[Why some analysts argue that Linux is better than Windows or the Mac.]
With so much misinformation swirling, we've sorted through seven points that are confusing consumers:
1. It's only a minor update to Vista. Overstated, but there is some truth. With Win7, Microsoft had the luxury of going back to basics. Vista was a massive effort to update the core of Windows. The edition following Vista didn't have to be as ambitious. Programmers could focus on the edges of Vista, reducing its hardware-hog tendencies and annoying security nags. But Microsoft went further, adding consumer-friendly functions to paint Windows 7 as an upgrade. HomeGroups greatly simplify home networking, libraries organize jumbled collections of files, and multifinger power makes touch screens more powerful. Aero Peek allows users to roll over 10 or 20 open windows in a flash, proving that Apple isn't the only company that can make computing easier and more fun.
[Even the name suggests that Windows 7 is a return to basics.]
2. Vista users need to upgrade. The Vista launch was painful. The system nagged consumers with unnecessary security concerns, didn't support enough of the hardware that plugs into PCs, and was too bloated to run decently on some hardware advertised as "Vista ready." But most Vista users are past those problems. If they have a system that's working well, Windows 7 offers nothing that's compelling enough to make the switch. Upgrading an operating system costs users in dollars, time, and frustration. Vista is a good operating system--one that's secure and stable. Windows 7 offers nifty new features and runs more quickly. Gamers and power users would appreciate the bump in speed. But most users wouldn't notice a big difference as they surf the Web, write E-mail, and maybe edit a photo or two.
[Microsoft hopefully learned its lessons in the dismal mistakes of Vista's launch.]
3. Windows XP is still better. WinXP ran faster than Vista on many, if not all, computers. It also was more compatible with existing equipment, particularly scanners, printers, and other peripherals. But Microsoft spent years working to make Vista's core more stable and secure, and the company succeeded. Buggy software that runs on a Vista PC is much less likely to cause problems with the rest of the system, resulting in many fewer "Blue Screens of Death." Windows 7 has all those benefits of Vista while also running as fast as, if not faster than, Windows XP. Another consideration is that some companies that make PC hardware and software have already stopped making versions for XP. That trend will accelerate if Win7 proves to be the hit that is promises to be.
4. Windows XP users can't upgrade. It's true that Microsoft has not made it easy to move from WinXP to Win7. If installed over Vista, Win7 will transfer software, settings, and data. Not so with Windows XP. All is not lost, however. XP users can find third-party software that eases the transition. "PCMover Upgrade Assistant" ($30) from LapLink preserves most software, settings, and data when users upgrade their XP machine to Win7, what's called an "in-place upgrade." No need to copy files to an external drive or to reinstall programs. There can be hiccups. Installed programs might need to be reactivated with a call to the manufacturer. But it's relatively painless. And WinXP users qualify for the upgrade prices that Microsoft offers for Win7, rather than having to buy a "full" version.
5. It's too expensive. The price of Windows 7 may seem unreasonable, considering it is a derivative of Vista and Microsoft is charging nearly as much for Win7 as it does for Vista. The Home Premium version, which is what most consumers will want, costs $119 for upgrading to Win7, versus $129 for Vista. The discount seems particularly thin when viewing Win7 as a fix to Vista's problems. But happy Vista users don't have much reason to upgrade (see No. 2). For Windows XP users, the upgrade cost is fair. Plus, for homes with multiple PCs, which seem to be a majority these days, Microsoft is offering a Family Pack that will upgrade three PCs for $150. That's a good deal for homes that can use it.
6. The initial release will be a mess. It's always safer to wait for new software to get tested in the market, and for Microsoft to release the inevitable fixes. But the pedigree of Windows 7 suggests that the problems will be fewer this time. Many bugs and hardware issues were worked out with Vista. For example, Microsoft worked to make sure that hardware drivers for Vista will also work for Win7. Problems will undoubtedly crop up, but they're unlikely to affect the core of the operating system, which also remains largely true to the battle-tested Vista. Win7 at the start seems to be one of the least risky system upgrades to make.
7. Mac users should abandon Apple. The Mac is still the standard for a computer that "just works." Apple has more control over the end product because it also assembles and sells the hardware. The Mac system is also more secure, if for no other reason than that a smaller market share makes a smaller target for criminals. Windows has to run on any batch of hardware that a maker or user throws together. That's one reason Windows requires more tinkering. But Windows also comes from a culture that is more influenced by techies who like tinkering and think everyone else does. Macs cost more. But they also benefit from the aura of success that surrounds the iPhone and iPod. Windows 7 may cut into the momentum behind the Mac, but it alone is unlikely to reverse Apple's gains.
[Slide Show: The Best of What's New in Windows 7.]
The software giant hoped that wide exposure to Windows 7 would help smooth its entry. Microsoft let millions of consumers and professionals download test versions of the operating system. And by a wide margin, testers have found the new system to be the best yet from Microsoft. Version 7 is leaner, more useful, and prettier than past editions--a worthy effort to update the Windows world.
Still, the fictions are legion. Much of it is innocent confusion that accompanies any major software release. Some of it arises from Microsoft apologists trying to bury the botched release of Windows Vista, sniping Apple fans who want the Mac to continue gaining market share, or diehard techies who revere free Linux software.
[Why some analysts argue that Linux is better than Windows or the Mac.]
With so much misinformation swirling, we've sorted through seven points that are confusing consumers:
1. It's only a minor update to Vista. Overstated, but there is some truth. With Win7, Microsoft had the luxury of going back to basics. Vista was a massive effort to update the core of Windows. The edition following Vista didn't have to be as ambitious. Programmers could focus on the edges of Vista, reducing its hardware-hog tendencies and annoying security nags. But Microsoft went further, adding consumer-friendly functions to paint Windows 7 as an upgrade. HomeGroups greatly simplify home networking, libraries organize jumbled collections of files, and multifinger power makes touch screens more powerful. Aero Peek allows users to roll over 10 or 20 open windows in a flash, proving that Apple isn't the only company that can make computing easier and more fun.
[Even the name suggests that Windows 7 is a return to basics.]
2. Vista users need to upgrade. The Vista launch was painful. The system nagged consumers with unnecessary security concerns, didn't support enough of the hardware that plugs into PCs, and was too bloated to run decently on some hardware advertised as "Vista ready." But most Vista users are past those problems. If they have a system that's working well, Windows 7 offers nothing that's compelling enough to make the switch. Upgrading an operating system costs users in dollars, time, and frustration. Vista is a good operating system--one that's secure and stable. Windows 7 offers nifty new features and runs more quickly. Gamers and power users would appreciate the bump in speed. But most users wouldn't notice a big difference as they surf the Web, write E-mail, and maybe edit a photo or two.
[Microsoft hopefully learned its lessons in the dismal mistakes of Vista's launch.]
3. Windows XP is still better. WinXP ran faster than Vista on many, if not all, computers. It also was more compatible with existing equipment, particularly scanners, printers, and other peripherals. But Microsoft spent years working to make Vista's core more stable and secure, and the company succeeded. Buggy software that runs on a Vista PC is much less likely to cause problems with the rest of the system, resulting in many fewer "Blue Screens of Death." Windows 7 has all those benefits of Vista while also running as fast as, if not faster than, Windows XP. Another consideration is that some companies that make PC hardware and software have already stopped making versions for XP. That trend will accelerate if Win7 proves to be the hit that is promises to be.
4. Windows XP users can't upgrade. It's true that Microsoft has not made it easy to move from WinXP to Win7. If installed over Vista, Win7 will transfer software, settings, and data. Not so with Windows XP. All is not lost, however. XP users can find third-party software that eases the transition. "PCMover Upgrade Assistant" ($30) from LapLink preserves most software, settings, and data when users upgrade their XP machine to Win7, what's called an "in-place upgrade." No need to copy files to an external drive or to reinstall programs. There can be hiccups. Installed programs might need to be reactivated with a call to the manufacturer. But it's relatively painless. And WinXP users qualify for the upgrade prices that Microsoft offers for Win7, rather than having to buy a "full" version.
5. It's too expensive. The price of Windows 7 may seem unreasonable, considering it is a derivative of Vista and Microsoft is charging nearly as much for Win7 as it does for Vista. The Home Premium version, which is what most consumers will want, costs $119 for upgrading to Win7, versus $129 for Vista. The discount seems particularly thin when viewing Win7 as a fix to Vista's problems. But happy Vista users don't have much reason to upgrade (see No. 2). For Windows XP users, the upgrade cost is fair. Plus, for homes with multiple PCs, which seem to be a majority these days, Microsoft is offering a Family Pack that will upgrade three PCs for $150. That's a good deal for homes that can use it.
6. The initial release will be a mess. It's always safer to wait for new software to get tested in the market, and for Microsoft to release the inevitable fixes. But the pedigree of Windows 7 suggests that the problems will be fewer this time. Many bugs and hardware issues were worked out with Vista. For example, Microsoft worked to make sure that hardware drivers for Vista will also work for Win7. Problems will undoubtedly crop up, but they're unlikely to affect the core of the operating system, which also remains largely true to the battle-tested Vista. Win7 at the start seems to be one of the least risky system upgrades to make.
7. Mac users should abandon Apple. The Mac is still the standard for a computer that "just works." Apple has more control over the end product because it also assembles and sells the hardware. The Mac system is also more secure, if for no other reason than that a smaller market share makes a smaller target for criminals. Windows has to run on any batch of hardware that a maker or user throws together. That's one reason Windows requires more tinkering. But Windows also comes from a culture that is more influenced by techies who like tinkering and think everyone else does. Macs cost more. But they also benefit from the aura of success that surrounds the iPhone and iPod. Windows 7 may cut into the momentum behind the Mac, but it alone is unlikely to reverse Apple's gains.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
