By Sally Greenberg, NCL Executive Director 

March 11, 2012 marks the first anniversary of the launch of the Consumer Product Safety Commission database, which can be found at www.SaferProducts.gov.

I recently gave the consumer perspective on the database at the International Consumer Product Health and Safety Organization (ICPHSO) annual meeting in Florida. The creation of the safety database has been a longstanding interest of mine and of other consumer advocates. In 2007, while working at Consumers Union, I testified before the Senate asking that consumers have access to critical information about products that have caused injury or harm.

We said then that consumers need and want safety information when making an important purchase. Whether it be buying a car, lawn mower, or items for a baby, consumers want the benefit of information about a certain product’s safety record. The database was finally authorized by Congress and I believe it is one of the most important consumer tools to emerge from Washington in several years.  A lot of work goes towards ensuring the database is as accurate as possible. When consumers lodge a complaint, the CPSC gives the named manufacturer 10 days to respond before the incident is made public. Consumers also have to provide specific information about the product and the information is then screened by CPSC for accuracy.

How is the database working for consumers? Well, there have been 6,300 incidents posted in less than one year. That tells me that the database has been a great success, despite an effort by some manufacturers and their supporters in Congress to shut it down. For example, Representative Joann Emerson, a Republican of Missouri who sits on the House Appropriations committee, said about the database: “Funding should go for other priorities of the agency before being spent on a poor and inaccurate resource for consumers.”

With all due respect, I beg to differ with the Congresswoman. Let’s look at the data on inaccuracies- of the 1,600 reports now included in the database, only 194 were found to contain inaccurate information, most often because the consumer mistakenly named the wrong manufacturer or model number of the product and CPSC’s Communications Director, Scott Wolfson said that most of these mistakes are “easily corrected.” In fact, there’s been several analyses of the database. An analysis from the House Commerce Committee Democratic staff last June contained these findings:

• Only a few months after it was launched, the database had more than 1,600 incident reports from consumers, health care professionals, and public safety officials, 1/3 of those reports involved deaths or injuries.
• 11 incidents reports were of fatalities – infants dying in cribs and playpens, and teenagers and adults killed riding ATVs.
• The database contained 483 reports of incidents that resulted in injuries, including to children suffering amputations when their fingers got trapped in the hinges of strollers with the stroller make and model provided so other consumers can be aware of the problem.
• Many other reports were of product defects that could cause injury – a baby gate whose hinges broke and fell down the stairs, a hair dryer that sparked when a Mom was drying her daughter’s hair, front loading washing machine that burned the clothes, and electronics that began overheating and smoking with normal use.

Kids and Cars Analysis:

Another analysis from the nonprofit group Kids in Danger that has done so much excellent work on product safety and children also analyzed 2,433 entries on the database from April 1 to August 1, finding that:

• 20% of the reports involved injuries to children.
• 14% of the reports involved recalled products, telling us we need to do a better job of getting them out of the marketplace
• Product failures – like Pogo sticks coming apart or improperly constructed trampolines were very much in evidence.

Then the CPSC itself has its own analysis. As for the accuracy of the information in the database, the CPSC’s analysis shows that 84 percent of 6,300 reports include the model and serial numbers. Eighty-two percent of people who filed reports also allowed their contact information to be passed on to the manufacturing company, allowing the company to address their complaints.

I think these numbers demonstrate the overwhelming success of the website. Why? Because it is doing exactly what Congress intended it to do and doing so with a lot of specificity. And it is giving consumers who encounter dangerous products a place to go to help warn other consumers so they don’t get injured.

Let me add that what goes onto the website is very carefully screened by CPSC: consumers can’t just post any old piece of information. They need to provide a description of the product or substance, the name of the manufacturer, they must describe the death, injury or illness caused by the product, and they must provide a date when the incident occurred.  Then *upon filing, the consumer must say who they are – consumer, a health care professional etc, provide their name and address, and verify that the report is accurate.

Consumers are offering very detailed and very helpful reports of their interactions with products, information that is useful to consumers and manufacturers alike. One mother found her son’s head wedged under a baby bumper – the manufacturer of the bumper refused her a refund since she hadn’t bought it from them directly. Another found a bottom tubular rail of a crib had collapsed. The manufacturer’s website was down so she couldn’t report it to them. One grandmother bought a crib and tried to put it together but it lacked an important part. When she called the manufacturer they said they knew there was a problem and would send her the part.

And I think the staff at the CPSC have done a marvelous job in designing the website – including 10 days to respond a posting, CSPC has provided more than due process to manufacturers and retailers who wish to comment, respond or defend their product.

Once again, consumer advocates believe the database has provided an invaluable tool for consumers and to consumers’ great  credit, they have more than risen to the occasion. There has long been a demand for this kind of place to share information and I’m proud of consumers for their many responses.

To the manufacturers who are seeing defunding of the database, and your supporters in Congress  – we ask you to resist the urge to shoot the messenger.  A far better approach would be to embrace the database, review it daily, and find out where the hazards are. A quick response and a fix of the hazard could prevent lawsuits and most importantly, you’ll be demonstrating that your first priority is to protect the health and safety of the customers that buy your products and keep you in business!

*Links are no longer active as the original sources have removed the content, sometimes due to federal website changes or restructurings.

By Michell K. McIntyre, Director of NCL’s Special Project on Wage Theft

Since when is it controversial to inform people of their rights and protections afforded under the law? Why is it seen as a ‘job killer,’ a ‘punishment,’ or ‘regulation run amok,’ to simply know your rights in the workplace?

Today’s workers are not taught about their rights when entering the workplace and few high schools teach students about their rights to a minimum wage and rules governing safety in the workplace, let alone their rights to collectively bargain and form a union.  How are Americans expected to learn about those rights? The Department of Labor already requires the placing of posters that inform workers of their rights under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Family Medical Leave Act, job safety and others – so why are business groups fighting a new poster?

Business groups such as the National Federation of Independent Businesses Small Business Legal Center, National Chamber Litigation Center, the Manhattan Institute and others have fought the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB’s) ruling to require most private businesses to put up a poster that explains employees’ rights and protections under the National Labor Relations Act, from 1935, to collectively bargain and form a union. They have argued that the poster – which simply informs workers of their rights and protections – will damage the economy, kill jobs and destroy the employer-employee relationship.

On March 2^nd, a U.S. District judge upheld the right of the NLRB to require most private businesses to put up posters informing workers they have a legal right to form a union. Judge Amy Berman Jackson said, “The notice-posting rule is a reasonable means of promoting awareness.” The US Chamber of Commerce, National Federation of Independent Businesses and the National Association of Manufacturers challenged the NLRB’s ruling and questioned the right of the NLRB to require the posters.

The backlash is enough to make one wonder, what legitimate reasons could an honest employer have for keeping their workers in the dark about their rights at work? After all, it’s only a poster…

[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DzlOHrtw_4]

Here at NCL we are always looking for new ways to celebrate Heart Month and talk to consumers about their health and well-being. On Tuesday, February 28^th, we held a very special event through our national Script Your Future (SYF) campaign that brought together our friends at the Center for Disease Control’s (CDC) Million Hearts initiative and the U.S. Surgeon General herself, Dr. Regina Benjamin, for an interactive #HeartRx twitter chat that tackled all things heart health and medication adherence!

The fact is that three out of four Americans don’t take their medication as directed and more than one in three medicine-related hospitalizations happen because the patient didn’t follow their medication regimen. Not taking your medicine as directed can do more than just send you to the hospital – almost 125,000 people die every year because they did not take their medicine as directed. To combat this growing trend, NCL launched the SYF campaign to encourage patients and health care practitioners to engage in open, two-way conversations about improving medication adherence and addressing obstacles that may stand in the way.

To bring this critical conversation to the Twitterverse, we created a #HeartRx task force by teaming up with the Surgeon General Dr. Regina Benjamin and Dr. Janet Wright from Million Hearts. For a full hour, we took questions from engaged doctors, pharmacists, nurse practitioners and consumers, and provided tools, tips, and strategies for improving adherence and keeping hearts healthy! Heart disease is the leading cause of death and disability for Americans and the Surgeon General tweeted about techniques she has used in her own practice—from asking patients questions and listening to answers, to walking patients through dosage instructions, and teaching patients to take their own blood pressure—that she has seen work.

There are many reasons people don’t take their medicine as directed, including forgetfulness, side effects, not sure they need medicine and cost. No matter the reason for not taking the medicine, the result is the same – patients lose protection against future illness and face serious health complications. By getting both health care practitioners and consumers engaged in the issue, we can create better health outcomes for all Americans.  Be sure to visit www.scriptyourfuture.org for tools such as medication lists and free text message medication reminders and stay tuned for news of other interactive Twitter chats like this one!

[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KoRLv5WzrA]

By Lisa Hertzberg, LifeSmarts Program Director

It’s a busy time for all things LifeSmarts. Online competitions are still open in a few states through this weekend, state competitions are in full-swing (good luck to all of our teams competing this month and next), and we are counting down to nationals (59 days to Philly!).

I had the opportunity to attend the Wisconsin state LifeSmarts competition a couple of weeks ago. Seeing my first live competition of the year reminded me just why this program is such a winner. Students were attending from all corners of Wisconsin. Competition was strong, but sportsmanship ruled the day (the two final teams shook hands and congratulated one another while awaiting the judges’ scores on their final activity), and the adult coordinators, volunteers, and coaches supported the teams and cheered for everyone as the students demonstrated their consumer smarts.

I was recently explaining the impetus for the LifeSmarts program and I mentioned that LifeSmarts was the “carrot” or fun element to encourage students to learn as much about real-world consumer issues as they could while still in High School. Watching the Wisconsin competitors reminded me that LifeSmarts does exactly that – spices up consumer education and teaches us all something in the process.

How did the Wisconsin state competition turn out? As is often the case, the state championship went down to the wire – the top two teams were tied with only the team activity to go. By knowing more about deficiency diseases, the Oconto team bested Westfield by 10 points to win the state title.

It was a great day, and it got me jazzed up for Nationals! I hope to see you there.

By Teresa Green, Linda Golodner Food Safety & Nutrition Fellow 

Finally! There is some good news about the way that Americans are eating. The CDC announced recently that blood levels of trans-fats decreased by 58% between 2000 and 2008. This reduction means that Americans are consuming far less trans-fats than they were 10 years ago.

Why this dramatic change?  One reason is that FDA began requiring trans-fat labeling on foods in 2003. Because the fat had garnered a nasty reputation for causing heart disease, many food producers reformulated their products so that they now contain less trans-fat.  Additionally, some local governments, *such as New York City, put limits on the use of trans-fats in cooking at restaurants.

What this dramatic reduction proves is that government regulations, in this case food labeling, work. Despite the good news about trans-fats, there are still many areas of the American diet which could use improvement, and salt consumption is chief among them.

As we’ve mentioned before, the government recommends that Americans consume only 2300 mg of sodium per day.  For African Americans, those with chronic health conditions and those who are 51 year older and above, that recommended level is even lower at 1500 mg per day.  The average American consumes around 3300 mg of sodium per day, far outstripping even the most generous recommendations.

One of the reasons that Americans consume so much sodium is that it has become ubiquitous in processed and restaurant foods.  It is often present at much higher levels than the average consumer would assume.  Bread, for example, is the *number one source of sodium in the American diet, according to the CDC.  Many consumers may not be aware that they are consuming large amounts of sodium when they eat a slice of bread.

As the case of trans-fats suggests, government oversight is likely to be the most effective vehicle for reducing sodium intake.  One such type of enforcement would be to regulate the amount of sodium allowed in foods, based on category appropriate guidelines which account for naturally occurring sodium.  By limiting the amount of sodium, the government would protect consumers and encourage companies to reformulate their products so that they contain less sodium.

The reduction of trans-fat in the American diet is a public health victory but we shouldn’t stop there. Going forward, reducing sodium consumption to the recommended levels should be one of public health’s top priorities.

 

*Links are no longer active as the original sources have removed the content, sometimes due to federal website changes or restructurings.