The details of this story were published by the New York Times. Here are the opening paragraphs:

To head off medical conflicts of interest, the Obama administration is poised to require drug companies to disclose the payments they make to doctors for research, consulting, speaking, travel and entertainment.

Many researchers have found evidence that such payments can influence doctors’ treatment decisions and contribute to higher costs by encouraging the use of more expensive drugs and medical devices.

Consumer advocates and members of Congress say patients may benefit from the new standards, being issued by the government under the new health care law. Officials said the disclosures increased the likelihood that doctors would make decisions in the best interests of patients, without regard to the doctors’ financial interests.

Large numbers of doctors receive payments from drug and device companies every year — sometimes into the hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars — in exchange for providing advice and giving lectures. Analyses by The New York Times and others have found that about a quarter of doctors take cash payments from drug or device makers and that nearly two-thirds accept routine gifts of food, including lunch for staff members and dinner for themselves.

The Times has found that doctors who take money from drug makers often practice medicine differently from those who do not and that they are more willing to prescribe drugs in risky and unapproved ways, such as prescribing powerful antipsychotic medicines for children.

Under the new standards, if a company has just one product covered by Medicare or Medicaid, it will have to disclose all its payments to doctors other than its own employees. The federal government will post the payment data on a Web site where it will be available to the public.

]]> http://www.pissd.com/2012/01/u-s-to-force-drug-firms-to-report-money-paid-to-doctors/feed/ 0 http://www.pissd.com/2012/01/window-blind-manufacturers-urged-to-improve-safety-of-products/ http://www.pissd.com/2012/01/window-blind-manufacturers-urged-to-improve-safety-of-products/#comments Wed, 11 Jan 2012 09:30:42 +0000 Bob Kraft http://www.pissd.com/?p=8600 I’ve written many times about the hazards to children of window blinds, and specifically the cords on the blinds. Consumer groups are losing patience with the manufacturers repeated promises to make their products safer, and the inevitable delays in implementing those promises. A story in the Seattle Times goes into detail about the dangers, and the delays. Here are excerpts:

A fight to make window blinds safer for children is growing more contentious after manufacturers of the common household product have ignored demands from federal regulators to eliminate exposed cords on window blinds and shades. The manufacturers, who set standards for their own products, are adopting less-stringent rules that safety advocates say won’t reduce injuries or deaths.

“The industry is clinging to the status quo and is refusing to address this very dire safety issue,” said Rachel Weintraub, director of product safety with the nonprofit Consumer Federation of America and a member of a task force drafting the new standards. “As frustrating as it has been, it is even more tragic.”

About one child each month strangles to death on cords of a window blind or shade, according to U.S. regulators. Children can get caught in the cords that hold the blinds together or the cords that are used to pull blinds up and down.

Last summer, safety regulators in the U.S., Canada and Europe told the window covering industry to enact product standards that would eliminate strangulation hazards. Inez Tenenbaum, chairman of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, gave an October deadline, but the task force, which is heavily influenced by the industry, did not meet it.

Many manufacturers say it isn’t feasible to rid window blinds of accessible cords and think it is impractical to eliminate all risk for any kind of product.

In a statement, Tenenbaum said the proposed standard from the task force “poses too much risk to the safety of children.” If the standard isn’t strengthened, she said the agency could be forced to pass mandatory standards. But doing so could take years.

Safety advocates and regulators want to rid blinds of cords that children can wrap around their necks, including long operational cords used to pull blinds up and down.

More than 200 children in the U.S. have died in the last two decades from being strangled in window cord-related accidents with blinds and shades, according to the federal safety agency. The annual rate has remained steady, the commission said.

The disagreement over blinds safety standards centers on tweaks suggested by the industry that advocates and regulators say don’t eliminate the strangulation hazard.

One example is what is known as tie-down or tension devices. The pieces, which are sometimes made of plastic, fasten to the end of a looped cord that pulls blinds or shades up and down. The device is supposed to be screwed into the wall or windowsill to hold the cord taut. The blinds can then be moved up and down on a sort of pulley system.

In theory, the taut cord reduces the risk that a child can wrap it around his or her neck. But safety advocates and regulators do not think those devices are safe because they break easily and often aren’t installed correctly.

Some companies do make blinds with inaccessible cords. The blinds move when someone grasps the middle and pushes or pulls up or down. Springs and a pulley system within the product help it work. Other blinds are made so inner cords are shrouded in fabric so they can’t be pulled out by a child.

Although that technology exists for some blinds and shades, others are too large or heavy to be lifted without cords, according to the industry; in other cases, blinds on extremely tall windows can only be raised or lowered with an operational cord. Plus, the industry notes, cordless technology can add to costs.

Over the years, the window coverings industry and regulators have tried to educate parents about safety hazards, and companies have tweaked products in hopes of making them safer. In 1994, some pull cords with continuous loops were cut to eliminate the loop. Tassels were added to each cord. But the tassels can get tangled.

Regulators and the industry also have tried recalls. In 2009, millions of Roman shades were recalled after regulators got reports of five deaths and 16 near strangulations in the products over three years. Kids were getting their necks stuck between the exposed inner cord and the fabric on the back of the blind.

But recalls are not noticed by many consumers and don’t always eliminate the strangulation hazard.

In the coming months, the window covering industry will continue trying to pass the less-stringent safety standards, which are voluntary for the industry. Regulators and safety groups are often part of the process and give suggestions, but the industry usually has the final say and more input.

In rare cases, government regulators step in and require mandatory standards, which the safety commission’s Tenenbaum has said she would consider.

That process can take years, however, because regulators are required to do an extensive cost-benefit analysis of any standard. To issue mandatory safety requirements, regulators have to prove that the voluntary ones won’t cut the risk of injury or that most manufacturers aren’t following them anyway.

A mandatory standard also might not get approval from the full commission, which is down to four commissioners after the retirement of a fifth. The commissioners would be deadlocked if they voted along party lines, which they often do.

Earlier this year Sen. Dick Durbin tried to force the industry to eliminate the strangulation hazard from blinds by adding language to a pending appropriations bill that would allow regulators to establish mandatory standards.

That provision and others affecting policy were recently dropped, however, so the bill focuses only on spending.

Safety advocates who were asked to participate in the standard-setting process are upset with what they say is the industry’s refusal to make changes. Donald Mays, one of the advocates and senior director of product safety planning at Consumers Union, said he plans to ask for an audit of the entire process.

“To me it is a lot of lip service saying they are making blinds safer,” he said.

If you own a ShoulderFlex Massager, get rid of it, said the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The device — which delivers a deep tissue massage to the neck, shoulders, and back while you’re lying down — was recalled last August after it killed one user and resulted in the near-strangulation of another. But the agency is concerned that the now bankrupt company, King International, didn’t do a good enough job recalling the product before it went out of business.

“King International has not followed through with recall procedures,” read the FDA press release. “The 800 number established by the firm for this recall is no longer in service; and many of the companies that sell this device are not aware of the recall or did not properly notify customers who purchased the massager.”

Hair, clothing or jewelry can become entangled in the ShoulderFlex Massager as it kneads on muscles, causing serious injury or even death from strangulation, according to the FDA. (Here are more details on the risks.)

“The ShoulderFlex Massager poses serious risks. Consumers should stop using this device, health care providers should not recommend it to their patients and businesses should stop distributing and selling the device,” said FDA compliance director Steve Silverman in a statement.

Owners of the device should dispose of it by removing the massage fingers so it can’t be used. Anyone who has been injured from the device can file a report with the FDA’s MedWatch program.

Fighting for Justice is your resource for the latest news and information about America’s civil justice system.

As the world’s largest trial bar, the American Association for Justice (formerly known as the Association of Trial Lawyers of America) works to make sure people have a fair chance to receive justice through the legal system when they are injured by the negligence or misconduct of others—even when it means taking on the most powerful corporations. Learn more at www.justice.org.

The toys deemed potentially dangerous included a whirly wheel, a plastic book for babies, a wooden blocks set and a Sesame Street Oscar doll. The whirly wheel toy and the book had high levels of lead; the blocks set had some pieces that were too small for children under 3 and the Oscar doll had a hat that can come off easily and present a choking hazard to little children, the report said.

PIRG also warned about toys that are too loud and could lead to hearing damage as well as balloons, which cause more choking deaths than any other children’s product. About 40 percent of the choking fatalities reported to the government between 1990 and 2010 involved balloons.

Ed Mierzwinski, consumer program director at PIRG, says industrial chemicals and toxins in toys were among the biggest problems the group found this year. Lead can cause irreversible brain damage, and some studies have linked phthalates to reproductive problems.

The toy industry downplayed the report and pointed to government figures showing sharp declines in national toy recalls.

“All eyes have been on toy safety for several years now,” says Joan Lawrence, the Toy Industry Association’s vice president for toy safety standards. “I am confident that the toys on store shelves are safe. The toy industry works year-round on this.”

Government figures show a continued decline in toy recalls, with 34 in fiscal year 2011 — down from 46 recalls the previous year; 50 in 2009 and 172 in 2008. Recalls related to lead were down from 19 in 2008 to four recalls this past year.

PIRG credited a 2008 law that set stronger standards for children’s products, including strict limits on lead, for helping to make many of the products on store shelves safer for youngsters. The law was passed in the wake of a wave of recalls of lead-tainted toys.

PIRG reviewed about 200 toys and other children’s products from major retailers and dollar stores for its 26th annual “Trouble in Toyland” report.

People who invest in hybrid cars are significantly less likely to be injured in an accident because their heavy batteries make the vehicles safer than traditional cars, according to an insurance industry report released Thursday.

The average hybrid is 10 percent heavier than a traditional car of the same size, and the extra heft reduces the odds of being hurt in a crash by 25 percent, the report says.

“Saving at the pump no longer means you have to skimp on crash protection,” said Matt Moore, vice president of the Highway Loss Data Institute and author of the report.

The first generations of hybrids generally were smaller, lighter vehicles than those produced more recently. With manufacturers increasingly converting a portion of some traditionally powered car models to hybrids, the hybrid versions are heavier.

For example, a Honda Accord takes on about 480 pounds when transformed into a hybrid version. A Toyota Highlander gains 330 pounds.

Hybrid car sales peaked in 2009 at just shy of 3 percent
of the market, according to
the automotive Web site Edmunds.com. Their share dropped to 2.4 percent last year and continued to decline in the first eight months of this year.

The institute, an affiliate of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, is considered one of the most reliable sources of such data because it draws on detailed insurance claim filings rather than police accident reports.

The institute gathered data on 25 models that are produced both as traditional and hybrid vehicles, all 2003-2011 models, and that had been in at least one accident that resulted in an injury claim. The Toyota Prius and the Honda Insight were excluded from the study because they are sold only as hybrids.

]]> http://www.pissd.com/2011/12/report-says-hybrids-are-safer-for-occupants-than-traditional-cars/feed/ 0 http://www.pissd.com/2011/12/check-out-new-routes-for-saving-on-car-insurance/ http://www.pissd.com/2011/12/check-out-new-routes-for-saving-on-car-insurance/#comments Tue, 13 Dec 2011 10:15:30 +0000 Bob Kraft http://www.pissd.com/?p=8426 The business section of the Dallas Morning News recently featured an article on saving money by making changes in your automobile insurance coverage. I recommend reading the full article, but here are a few excerpts:

The ideal way to save money is to exert effort once and automatically reap savings over and over again, every month. That’s why examining your car insurance makes a lot of sense.

Auto insurance prices vary widely. On average, car insurance cost Americans $789 per vehicle annually in 2008, the most recent year of data provided by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.

But your costs could be far higher or lower because of the state you live in. For example, Florida, New Jersey and New York were among states where the average was more than $1,000 annually. North Dakota’s average expenditure was the lowest at $503. Texas fell in between with an $854 average.

Here are ways to save on car insurance:

Compare

If you think all auto insurance rates within a state are about the same, you’re wrong. Premiums can be different for the exact same policies, depending on what factors an insurer chooses to emphasize in its rate formula.

For the youngest drivers, comparison-shopping could save about $1,100 a year, according to a study by CarInsurance.com. You might think you get better service from higher-priced insurers, but there seems to be no correlation, according to a study by the Consumer Federation of America.

“Many people stick with the same insurance carrier year after year without ever shopping for a better deal,” Consumer Reports says in its guide to car insurance. “Blind loyalty to one insurer can cost you dearly.”

Bundling

Choosing an auto insurer is important, too, because you might want to get your home insurance through the same carrier. Auto rates vary more and probably are more expensive, so let that be the insurance that, well, drives your decision.

Like bundling your pay TV, phone and Internet access with one company, you can get discounts for bundling your insurance with a single insurer, said Jim Fults, associate vice president of auto and personal insurance at Fireman’s Fund Insurance. At Fireman’s, he said, customers can save $400 to $600 a year by bundling auto and home insurance.

Deductibles

A deductible is the part of the bill you pay out-of-pocket before insurance kicks in. The higher the deductible you’re willing to accept, the lower your premiums will be. Changing from a $200 deductible to $1,000 could save you 40 percent, says the Insurance Information Institute.

Fults suggests examining several deductibles to see how they affect premiums.

“I think people would be really surprised, when they looked at changing a deductible of just $500 or $1,000, by what that does to the price [of premiums],” he said. “For some vehicles, it might move it considerably. In other cases, it might not.”

Personal finance experts typically advise choosing the highest deductible you can financially stomach if it will give you big price breaks on premiums.

Discounts

Make sure you’re getting all the discounts you’re entitled to — for driving low miles every year, for example. A teen driver, who can raise rates 50 percent, can get a discount for good grades, typically at least a B average, Toups said.

Taking time annually to review your coverages with your insurer will make sure you’re getting those discounts, Fults said. You’ll not only incorporate your life changes into your auto insurance, but you’ll also learn about the insurer’s new products and pricing, which change often.

Drop collision

It might be worth dropping collision coverage on older cars that aren’t worth much.

Consumer advocate Clark Howard said the time to consider dropping collision is when cars get to be about 8 years old. His rule of thumb: If your annual, not monthly, premium for collision and comprehensive is more than 10 percent of your car’s value, remove collision coverage and just pay the liability premium.

Texans can check companies, compare rates and file complaints with the Texas Department of Insurance: www.tdi.texas.gov.

From the American Association of Justice press release.

Of 83 booster seats evaluated, 41 fell into the “check fit” category, meaning they might not provide adequate seat-belt fit for all children in all vehicles, the study found. Parents with those seats should check that the booster makes the lap belt lie flat across the child’s upper thighs and the shoulder belt fit snugly across the middle of the shoulder, researchers said. If it doesn’t do both, they said, parents should use another booster seat. The analysis covered all U.S. booster seats being manufactured.

Because vehicle seat belts are anchored in different locations, the researchers said, the same booster might properly position the seat belt in a grandparent’s sedan but not in a family’s minivan. The study covered 62 models but 83 seats because 21 models were tested in both full-back and backless positions. Some models ended up in two different categories because their full-back position better guided the shoulder belt to a proper fit, researchers said. The rankings are available at www.iihs.org.

Parents who focus on fabric colors and cup holders when shopping for a booster should hone in first on how it positions the seat belt in every vehicle in which the child will ride, experts say.

“We still have a lot of boosters out there not always doing a good job in every vehicle,” said Anne McCartt, senior vice president for research at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, an Arlington-based nonprofit organization funded by auto insurance companies.

Infant seats and convertible car seats restrain babies and younger children with their own five-point harnesses. Boosters are designed to elevate children typically ages 4 to 8 to help seat belts, which are designed to restrain adults, fit children’s smaller frame correctly. A child can suffer serious injuries to the hips, spine and internal organs in a crash — a problem known as “seat belt syndrome” — when a lap belt rides too high or the shoulder belt doesn’t properly restrain the torso.

The good news: Boosters are getting better. In 2008, the institute’s first year of analyzing booster seat-belt fit, 10 seats made the “best bets” list. That number has grown as manufacturers have made design changes, McCartt said.

The AP reports, “The FDA finalized plans to phase out the products in 2008 and currently only Armstrong Pharmaceutical’s Primatene mist is still available in the US.”

The CNN “Chart” blog reports that “asthma patients can continue using an inhaler that’s not empty by the December 31 deadline as long as the expiration date is still good.” While many asthma inhaler “manufacturers have already replaced their CFC inhalers with a propellant called hydrofluoroalkane or HFA, which is more environment-friendly…there’s currently no HFA version of an epinephrine inhaler available.”

The NPR “Shots” blog reports that “environmental groups have been working since 1987 to phase” CFCs “out under the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. The epinephrine inhalers are one of the last consumer products with CFCs to disappear from the market.”

MedPage Today reports, “Two CFC-propelled products — one combining ipratropium and albuterol (Combivent Inhalation Aerosol) and another containing pirbuterol (Maxair Autohaler) — may stay on the market until Dec. 31, 2013, according to the FDA. However, the transition has been controversial, as CFC-driven inhalers that were available in relatively cheap generic forms have been replaced with branded products at more than double the cost.” The FDA’s Andrea Leonard-Segal, MD, suggested that “companies selling the prescription products have programs to defray some of the out-of-pocket costs for qualified patients,” and that “there may also be assistance available under Medicare and Medicaid.”

From the American Association for Justice news release.