LOS ANGELES, CA – In a full page ad in the Los Angeles Times, Consumers Union, the policy and advocacy arm of Consumer Reports, called on Trader Joe’s today to stop selling meat and poultry from animals raised on antibiotics. The ad highlights how the overuse of antibiotics by the meat and poultry industries on healthy animals is promoting the spread of drug resistant superbugs that threaten public health.

At the same time, Consumers Union is spreading the word through aggressive social media promotions and sidewalk leafleting outreach efforts at Trader Joe’s stores in the Los Angeles area as well as Portland, Oregon, and Washington, D.C. The outreach effort will expand to Trader Joe’s stores in other cities in the coming weeks.

“It’s critical that we do everything possible to curb the growing public health crisis of antibiotic resistance,” said Jean Halloran, Director of Food Policy Initiatives for Consumers Union. “Virtually every respected medical and public health organization agrees that we must reduce the use of antibiotics in healthy livestock in order to preserve the effectiveness of these drugs to treat disease.”

Consumers Union has pushed Congress and the FDA to take action to curtail antibiotic use in meat production, but these efforts have been blocked by politically powerful pharmaceutical and livestock industry interests for decades. Last year, Consumers Union launched its Meat Without Drugs campaign to convince grocery stores – starting with Trader Joe’s – to sell only meat raised without antibiotics.

Antibiotic Use in Livestock Poses Public Health Risk

Some 80 percent of all antibiotics sold in the U.S. are used not on humans but on livestock. These antibiotics are fed to healthy animals like cows, pigs, and chickens to make them grow faster and to prevent disease in often crowded and unsanitary conditions on today’s factory farms. While public health campaigns are helping to curb the overuse of antibiotics in humans, the livestock industry has steadily increased its use of antibiotics over the past decade.

When antibiotics are used on the farm, the bugs that are vulnerable to them tend to be killed off, leaving behind bacteria resistant to antibiotics. Antibiotic resistant bacteria can spread from the farm to our communities via meat and poultry, farmworkers, and through the air, soil, and water. As antibiotic resistance increases, the medications we all depend on become less effective.

Trader Joe’s Should Be A Leader

Over 500,000 consumers have signed petitions, postcards and flyers in support of Consumers Union’s campaign. However, Trader Joe’s has so far refused to change their practices or even meet with Consumers Union to discuss the issue. Trader Joe’s offers some chicken, turkey, and beef raised without antibiotics, but no pork. While this is a step in the right direction, it doesn’t go far enough, according to Consumers Union.

“Continuing to sell meat from animals that are routinely fed antibiotics contributes to the development and spread of antibiotic resistance,” said Halloran. “Trader Joe’s has demonstrated its commitment to its customers’ health by saying no to GMOs, artificial colors, and trans fats. It should take the obvious next step and help move the livestock industry in the right direction towards healthy animals raised without drugs.”

Consumer Reports Tests

Earlier this week, Consumer Reports issued the results of its tests of 257 samples of ground turkey, including 27 different brands purchased at a variety of retail stores across the nation. Consumer Reports found that while bacteria were widespread, bacteria from products labeled as “raised without antibiotics” or carrying a similar label were resistant to fewer antibiotics overall than bacteria found on conventional products. Consumer Reports recommends that consumers buy ground turkey that is raised without antibiotics.
“As a company that has taken socially responsible stands on other issues, Trader Joe’s could make an important contribution to improving public health by carrying only meat and poultry raised without antibiotics,” said Halloran.

April 30, 2013

Consumers Union Urges Regulators and Lawmakers to Stop Superbugs and Make Ground Turkey Safer

WASHINGTON, DC – Consumers Union, the policy and advocacy division of Consumer Reports, is urging regulators and lawmakers alike to take action to improve the safety of ground turkey, and to stem the growing problem of antibiotic resistant bacteria in our food supply. Consumers Union today sent a letter to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) calling for regulatory action to stop the growth of these antibiotic resistant “superbugs.” The group also sent a letter to the Department of Agriculture (USDA), urging the agency to make several changes to its food safety regulations in order to better protect consumers.

“The declining effectiveness of antibiotics has become a national health crisis,” said Ami Gadhia, senior policy counsel for Consumers Union. “Approximately 80 percent of antibiotics sold in the United States are used in livestock production, often times on healthy animals.  The use of antibiotics in livestock needs to be curbed so that consumers aren’t threatened by these superbugs that can’t be treated.” The policy requests were prompted by recent findings of a newConsumer Reports study of bacteria and antibiotic resistance in ground turkey and previous government findings.

Consumers Union is also asking members of Congress to support legislation that would address these issues. Consumers Union has endorsed Representative Louise Slaughter’s (D-NY) Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act (PAMTA) as a solution to end the routine use of antibiotics on healthy animals and curb the growing threat of superbugs. CU also supports the Delivering Antimicrobial Transparency in Animals (DATA) Act introduced by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), which would require better reporting by industry regarding which antibiotics are being given to animals and for what purpose. Senators Feinstein (D-CA) and Gillibrand (D-NY) previously introduced separate bills addressing these issues and hope to reintroduce legislation to combat the overuse of antibiotics in food production and significantly tighten the safety standards for meat and poultry.

Gadhia said, “Consumers Union urges Congress to move swiftly to pass legislation to address this problem.”

Consumer Reports found widespread antibiotic resistance in bacteria in ground turkey. The analysis tested ground turkey for salmonella, staphylococcus aureus, generic e. coli, campylobacter and enterococcus, and found bacteria in 90 percent of the 257 samples tested. More than 90 percent of those bacteria were resistant to at least one class of antibiotic, and more than half were resistant to three or more classes of antibiotics. The complete report and analysis can be found in the June 2013 issue of Consumer Reports and online at www.ConsumerReports.org.

Full copies of the letters sent to FDA and USDA are available athttp://www.consumersunion.org/research-policies/.

###

APRIL 30, 2013

NEARLY 2 MILLION PEOPLE TELL FDA NOT TO APPROVE GE SALMON

Public Comment Period Closes with Strong Pushback from Congress;

Hundreds of Organizations, Businesses, and Fishermen Voice Opposition to Controversial GE Salmon

Washington, D.C. – On Friday April 26, 2013, over 1.8 million people sent comments vehemently opposing the approval of a genetically engineered (GE) salmon by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The effort was driven by a broad coalition organized over three years ago by the Center for Food Safety and consisting of public interest, consumer, environmental and animal protection groups, along with commercial and recreational fisheries associations and food businesses and retailers.

“It is extremely disappointing that the Obama Administration continues to push approval of this dangerous and unnecessary product through a broken regulatory system,” said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director for Center for Food Safety. “The GE salmon has no socially redeeming value; it’s bad for the consumer, bad for the environment, and bad for our native salmon.”

The FDA first announced that it was considering the approval of a GE salmon in August 2010. If approved, it would be the first-ever GE animal permitted for human consumption in the U.S. Friday marked the close of a 120-day comment period on a revised draft environmental assessment for the GE salmon, which has remained a concern for consumers and Congress alike.

“The fact that the consideration of AquaBounty’s genetically engineered salmon has gotten this far is a sign of how broken the U.S. current regulatory structure actually is,” said Dave Murphy, founder and executive director of Food Democracy Now! “If GE salmon is approved, it sets a dangerous precedent and will be a new low for the Obama administration in their failure to properly protect the American public and our food supply.”

In addition, documents disclosed on Friday through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request raise serious questions about the adequacy of the FDA’s review of the AquAdvantage Salmon application. Among other things, while the FDA has refused to look at the environmental impacts of these GE fish beyond the Canadian and Panamanian facilities proposed in the application, it appears that U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has already received requests to import AquAdvantage Salmon eggs into the U.S. for commercial production.

“Like FDA’s food safety analysis, the environmental analysis leaves many questions unanswered, and includes numerous highly questionable and unsubstantiated assumptions,” said Michael Hansen, PhD, senior scientist at Consumers Union. “The decision on this fish is precedent setting; given the inadequacies of this document, a full EIS, including a failure-mode analysis that looks at the possibility of fish escapes, must be performed.”

The groups responsible for organizing the over 1.8 million comments included: Avaaz, Center for Food Safety, Friends of the Earth, Food and Water Watch, MoveOn, Organic Consumers Association, Food Democracy Now, Credo, Consumers Union, Just Label It, Farm Sanctuary, Cascadia Wildlands, Earthjustice, American Anti-Vivisection Society, Institute for Responsible Technology, and the Alliance for Natural Health –USA.

“The public has spoken, loud and clear: There is simply no need for GE salmon,” said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch. “It’s time for FDA to put an end to this regulatory mess and admit that the environmental and public health risks are too big to approve this controversial product.”

On Wednesday, 12 Senators led by Senator Mark Begich (D-Alaska) and 21 Representatives led by Congressmen Don Young (R-AK-01), Mike Thompson (D-CA-05) and Jared Huffman (D-CA-02) sent letters to the FDA urging it to halt its approval until their economic, regulatory and environmental concerns are addressed.  The Congressional letters come just months after an amendment offered by Senator Begich to the Senate Budget Resolutionpassed by voice vote in favor of the labeling of GE fish.

In addition to Congressional attention, the FDA received joint letters from major groups and businesses reflecting broad public opposition to GE salmon. A joint letter was submitted by CEOs of major environmental organizations including American Rivers, the Center for Food Safety, Earthjustice, Friends of the Earth, Food & Water Watch, Greenpeace, Natural Resources Defense Council, Ocean Conservancy and Sierra Club.  Led by the American Anti-Vivisection Society (AAVS), 22 animal protection organizations joined a letterto FDA opposing GE salmon, as did a number of religious groups.

“The AquAdvantage salmon studies, by their very design, underreport or fail to detect health problems and abnormalities in the fish. Yet we know that genetic engineering is fraught with failures and unintended consequences, and preliminary findings indicate that GE salmon are prone to deformities and may be more susceptible to disease,” said Nina Mak, research analyst with AAVS. “It is deeply concerning that FDA would ‘release’ this still-experimental technology into the environment.”

A variety of other groups also have voiced their opposition to GE salmon, including several indigenous groups. Citing numerous fisheries and economic concerns, over 250 businesses, individuals, public interest groups and fisheries organizations, representing fishermen and -women across the U.S., joined a letter to FDA, including the Alaska Trollers Association, the Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance, Bristol Bay Regional Seafood Development Association and the Alaska Marine Conservation Council.

“U.S. fishermen take seriously the job of delivering a wholesome, sustainable, high quality product to market,” said Dale Kelly, executive director of the Alaska Trollers Association. “Applying such invasive technology to a food fish has not been adequately studied for its impacts on human health, the environment, or American jobs.”

The market has already started to reject GE salmon. Supermarket chains with more than 2,500 grocery stores across the county have committed not to sell GE seafood should it come to market and 260 chefs across the country have signed on to a letter by Chefs Collaborative objecting to the transgenic fish.

“We don’t believe this engineered salmon is either healthful or sustainable,” said Trudy Bialic of PCC Natural Markets in Seattle. “We won’t sell it.”

“The FDA process is obviously flawed, and already the market is rejecting genetically engineered salmon,” said Eric Hoffman with Friends of the Earth. “The vast majority of consumers say they won’t eat genetically engineered fishand grocery stores are rejecting it. The submission of over 1.8 million comments in opposition to genetically engineered fish is just another sign that there is no future for this fish in the U.S.”

#  #  #

Media Contact for Consumers Union: Naomi Starkman,nstarkman@gmail.com; 917.539.3924-c

April 30, 2013

Consumer Reports Tests: Bacteria On Turkey Raised Without Antibiotics Showed Significantly Less Antibiotic Resistance Than Bacteria On Conventional Turkey

Ninety percent of samples had one or more of the five bacteria for which CR tested         

YONKERS, NY — In its first-ever lab analysis of ground turkey products, Consumer Reports found potential disease-causing organisms in most of the samples it tested, many of which proved resistant to more than three antibiotic drug classes. Consumer Reports tested 257 samples purchased from stores nationwide.

“Our findings strongly suggest that there is a direct relationship between the routine use of antibiotics in animal production and increased antibiotic resistance in bacteria on ground turkey. It’s very concerning that antibiotics fed to turkeys are creating resistance to antibiotics used in human medicine,” said Dr. Urvashi Rangan, Director of the Food Safety and Sustainability Group at Consumer Reports.  “Humans don’t consume antibiotics every day to prevent disease and neither should healthy animals.  Prudent use of antibiotics should be required to stem the public health crisis generated from the reduced effectiveness of antibiotics.”

The complete report and analysis can be found in the June 2013 issue of Consumer Reports and online at www.ConsumerReports.org.

Consumer Reports Findings

Consumer Reports purchased 257 samples of raw ground turkey meat and patties, including products from major retailers and store brands, and tested them for the presence of five bacteria: enterococcus, Escherichia coli (E. coli), staphylococcus aureus, salmonella, and campylobacter.  Below are some key findings. Additional data will be available at www.ConsumerReports.org.

·       Overall, 90 percent of the samples had one or more of the five bacteria for which they were tested.
·       Bacteria on ground turkey products labeled “no antibiotics,” “organic,” or “raised without antibiotics” were resistant to fewer antibiotics overall than bacteria found on conventional products.
·       Bacteria related to fecal contamination were found on the majority of samples. Sixty-nine percent of ground-turkey samples harbored enterococcus, and 60 percent E. coli.
·       Three samples were contaminated with methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).
·       Salmonella, which is one of the top causes of foodborne illness, was found in 12 of the samples tested (5 percent) and two-thirds of them were multidrug resistant; government studies typically find higher rates of salmonella, at around 12 percent. Processing plants are permitted by the government to have product contamination rates as high as 49.9 percent.
·       Consumer Reports also found much more resistance to classes of antibiotics approved for use in healthy turkeys to promote growth and prevent disease than for those not approved for such uses.

What Consumers Can Do

Common slip-ups while handling or cooking can put consumers at risk of illness. Although the bacteria Consumer Reports found are killed by thorough cooking, some can produce toxins that may not be destroyed by heat, so take the following precautions:

Tips for Choosing Meaningful Labels while Shopping for Turkey:

·       Buy turkey labeled “organic” or “no antibiotics,” especially if it also has a “USDA Process Verified” label, which means that the agency has confirmed that the producer is doing what it says.
·       Consider other labels, such as “animal welfare approved” and “certified humane,” which mean that antibiotics were restricted to sick animals.
·       Be aware that “natural” meat is simply minimally processed, with no artificial ingredients or added color.  It can come from an animal that ate antibiotics daily.

Tips for Safer Preparation and Handling:

·       Buy meat just before checking out, and place it in a plastic bag to prevent leaks.
·       If cooking meat within a few days, store it at 40º F or below.  Otherwise, freeze it. (Note that freezing may not kill bacteria.)
·       When cooking ground turkey, use a meat thermometer to ensure it reaches the proper internal temperature of at least 165º F to kill potentially harmful bacteria.
·       Wash hands and all surfaces after handling ground turkey.
·       Don’t return cooked meat to the plate that held it raw.
·       Refrigerate or freeze any leftovers within two hours of cooking.

What Regulators and Congress Should Do

Consumers Union, the policy and advocacy arm of Consumer Reports, has urged the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to restrict the use of antibiotics in food animals since the 1970s. The FDA should prohibit antibiotic use in livestock except for the treatment of veterinarian-diagnosed sick animals.

“The current FDA guidance is not adequate—it simply calls for voluntary changes by industry.  This will not get the job done,” said Jean Halloran, Director of Food Policy Initiatives at Consumers Union, the advocacy arm of Consumer Reports.

Consumers Union believes the FDA – or Congress, if the FDA will not act – should take the following steps:

·       Phase out the use of antibiotics in livestock except for the treatment of sick animals.
·       Require drug companies and feed mills to disclose sales of antibiotics for use in food animals, broken down by drug, animal species and purpose (growth promotion, disease prevention, disease treatment).

Consumers Union further urges the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), which is charged with ensuring the safety of ground turkey, to do the following:
·      Reduce its current allowable level of salmonella contamination in ground turkey tests from 49 percent, to at most 12 percent, a standard most of the industry already meets.Require strains of salmonella that have previously caused human illness, and that are also antibiotic resistant, to be treated as adulterants.

·      Require company HACCP plans – mandated by USDA to limit contamination–to include testing for salmonella strains that may be present and identify antibiotic-resistant organisms as a hazard likely to occur.

Funding for this project was provided by The Pew Charitable Trusts.  Any views expressed are those of Consumer Reports and its advocacy arm, Consumers Union, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Pew Charitable Trusts.

Consumer Reports is the world’s largest independent product-testing organization. Using its more than 50 labs, auto test center, and survey research center, the nonprofit rates thousands of products and services annually. Founded in 1936, Consumer Reports has over 8 million subscribers to its magazine, website and other publications.  Its advocacy division, Consumers Union, works for health reform, food and product safety, financial reform, and other consumer issues in Washington, D.C., the states, and in the marketplace.

— 30 —

April 24, 2013

Consumers Union Highlights Benefits and Savings from Cleaner Emissions at EPA Field Hearing

PHILADELPHIA – At an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) field hearing in Philadelphia on Wednesday, Consumers Union, the advocacy arm of Consumer Reports, will point to vehicle benefits and consumer cost savings in support of proposed standards for cleaner gasoline and lower-pollution vehicles nationwide.

Shannon Baker-Branstetter, policy counsel for Consumers Union, will testify at the hearing on the Tier-3 standards that aim to improve air quality by curbing the sulfur content of gasoline and setting new tailpipe standards to limit smog emissions.

“Not only will these standards lead to tremendous health and environmental benefits, but they help automakers deliver more fuel-efficient vehicles to consumers,” said Baker-Branstetter.

The proposed standards would ultimately benefit both owners of existing cars as well as new cars. Low-sulfur gasoline would help clean up the exhaust of older vehicles and increase the lifespan of their emission systems.  In new cars it would improve reliability and lower the costs of maintaining the emissions systems.

In addition, the standards would enable automakers to develop new, cost-effective technologies that could lead to higher fuel-efficiency. The proposed rules are estimated to only add less than 1 cent per gallon of gas. In comparison, by the time fuel economy rules are fully implemented in 2025 consumers could save an estimated $1.30 per gallon.

Baker-Branstetter said, “It would be ‘pennywise, but tons foolish’ to save a cent on gasoline, only to have to pay more for our health and overall fuel consumption as a result of additional tons of pollution.”

Consumers Union will also join supporters of the standards representing a wide variety of groups at a press conference prior to the field hearing. The groups include the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, the National Association of African Americans for Positive Imagery; Appalachian Mountain Club, Moms Clean Air Force, and the Clean Air Council.

“The proposed emissions standards have garnered support from unlikely allies, including automakers, environmental groups and consumer organizations like Consumers Union for a reason,” said Baker-Branstetter. “This common-sense rule is good for car owners, and it’s good for our health. We urge the EPA to finalize the rule and implement it swiftly.”

Earlier this month, Consumers Union launched a petition in support of the Tier-3 standards.  To read the Consumers Union’s testimony, click here.  To learn more, visit www.OurGreenEnergyFuture.org.

###

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

Consumers Union: New distracted-driving guidelines a good first step to address “epidemic on the road”

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Consumers Union, the policy and advocacy arm of Consumer Reports, said the distracted-driving guidelines unveiled this afternoon by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) will help address the serious hazards posed by complicated in-car controls.

Ellen Bloom, the Senior Director of Federal Policy for Consumers Union, spoke this morning at a panel on distracted driving hosted by DOT.

Bloom said, “Distracted driving has become an epidemic on the road.  The problem isn’t limited to drivers who text on their smartphones.  There’s a serious concern about in-dash controls that may be very distracting when you’re behind the wheel.  These guidelines are aimed at getting automakers to focus on safer tools in the dash that take less of your attention away from the road.”

The upcoming June 2013 edition of Consumer Reports has a national survey on distracted driving.  The magazine asked consumers about sophisticated control systems in vehicles, such as touch screens and multifunction controllers, which may incorporate audio, climate, communications, and other functions. The survey said 17 percent of respondents owned a car with a multifunction controller, and 9 percent had a touch screen. About half of each of those groups said they found performing common tasks, such as adjusting the radio and cabin temperature, somewhat or very distracting.

The new guidelines announced today by DOT and NHTSA include recommendations to limit the time a driver must take his eyes off the road to perform any task to 2 seconds at a time and 12 seconds total. The guidelines encourage automakers to disable any device that allows drivers to enter text for text messaging or internet browsing. The new guidelines also recommend against in-car devices that display web pages, texts and related content, as well as video phones and similar tools.

Consumer Reports has a web page devoted to distracted driving here.

Consumers Union Urges FDA To Require Safety Testing of Metal on Metal Hips and Other High Risk Implants

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Consumers Union urged the U.S. Food and Drug Administration today to adopt a proposed rule requiring metal hip implants to be reviewed through the agency’s premarket approval (PMA) process to prove that the devices are safe and effective.

In a comment letter to the FDA signed by more than 11,000 consumers, Consumers Union called on the agency to re-classify all high risk implantable medical devices under the PMA process so clinical evidence will be required to show their effectiveness and safety before the devices can be sold.

“Thousands of patients have been seriously injured by faulty metal on metal hip implants and other medical devices that were never properly tested before being cleared for sale,” said Lisa McGiffert, Director of Consumers Union’s Safe Patient Project (www.safePatientProject.org).  “It’s time to stop experimenting on patients and require more rigorous safety testing of all high risk implants to prevent flawed medical devices from reaching the market.”

Contact:  Michael McCauley, mmccauley@consumer.org or 415-431-6747, ext 126 or 415-902-9537 (cell)

A copy of Consumers Union’s letter to the FDA follows:

April 18, 2013

Food and Drug Administration
Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0661

To Whom It May Concern:

Consumers Union and the more than 11,000 people signing this letter due to their concern about high-risk implants are in full support of the FDA proposal (Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0661) to require all metal on metal (MoM) hips to be reviewed through the agency’s premarket approval (PMA) process. It is too late for thousands of people who have been harmed by these implants that were cleared for market through a loophole in the law that allowed them to be sold without thorough review by the FDA to assure safety, even though they were classified as “high risk.”

We also strongly support the proposal’s requirement for makers of hip implants in this category that are already on the market to provide critical safety information to the agency within 90 days. However, it is troublesome that MoM hips can continue to be commercially distributed up to 90 days after the FDA order.

This order will finally require manufacturers to demonstrate clinical testing for safety and effectiveness before approval of new metal on metal hips. But at this time we are skeptical that any metal on metal hip implant could be safe for patients. Because of that, we urge the FDA to push all manufacturers of metal-on-metal hips to remove their products from the market, because of the high failure rates and high numbers of adverse events, especially experienced by women.

While the FDA has issued an alert about possible adverse events to the public, this does not guarantee that all affected patients have been given advice on monitoring their metal hips for problems. As was done in the UK, all patients with these implants should be notified about their risks and advised to get yearly tests for cobalt poisoning. Unless the FDA confirms that each manufacturer has done due diligence to notify every patient with these MoM hips, the problem has not been properly addressed.

The New York Times recently reported that a MoM hip sold by Johnson and Johnson had a 40% failure rate but the company continued to sell the remainder of their inventory, despite the knowledge of the failure rate. This kind of irresponsible behavior must stop. Requiring a more thorough review up front, as the current order proposes, will help to keep flawed devices from the market.

In addition, we strongly encourage the FDA to review and re-classify to PMA status all Class III implantable medical devices. Other high risk implanted medical devices like surgical mesh should also be put into the PMA approval track, requiring more clinical information. Patients suffering from harm due to surgical mesh implants have reported debilitating side effects from punctured organs to autoimmune disorders. Many have undergone multiple surgeries to remove the mesh, which has broken apart and traveled to other parts of the body.

Please move quickly to bring metal on metal hips and all other high risk implants under the PMA process so clinical evidence will be required to show their effectiveness and safety.

Sincerely,

Lisa McGiffert
Consumers Union Safe Patient Project
506 West 14th Street Suite A
Austin TX 78701
lmcgiffert@consumer.org

FCC reports all participating cellphone companies have fulfilled “bill shock” agreement

Consumers Union says report is good news for consumers after years of complaints about surprise charges on wireless bills

WASHINGTON – The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) today formally announced that cellphone companies have fulfilled their agreement to start providing free alerts to customers before they go over their plan’s usage limits.

Consumers Union, the policy and advocacy division of Consumer Reports, said the announcement is welcome news for millions of wireless customers who have experienced cellphone “bill shock.”  For years, the nonprofit organization has pushed for better tools to help consumers keep track of their cellphone usage, so that they can avoid the shock of huge, surprise charges on their bills for going over their plan limits.

A national survey by Consumers Union in 2011 found that 1 in 5 respondents had received an unexpected charge on a wireless bill during the past 12 months.

In October 2011 the FCC and wireless carriers announced a voluntary agreement, under which companies promised to send free alerts to customers clearly informing them that they are approaching their limits on data, calls, and texts, as well as international roaming charges.

Yesterday – April 17th – was the deadline for participating companies to provide all four types of alerts.  The participating companies represent more than 97 percent of the wireless customers in the U.S., and include the nation’s four largest carriers: Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, and T-Mobile.  At this morning’s FCC meeting, Chairman Julius Genachowski said all participating carriers were in full compliance with the agreement.

Delara Derakhshani, policy counsel for Consumers Union, said, “We’re pleased that companies are reporting that they’re living up to this agreement, and we’re going to keep monitoring how they are performing and asking consumers what they think as well. For years, we heard horror stories from people hit with hundreds, even thousands, of dollars in surprise charges on a single bill.  Today we’re glad that more people are getting better tools to avoid bill shock. We will remain vigilant in ensuring this agreement works as promised for all consumers and that those who could be most vulnerable to bill shock and cramming, such as consumers in lower income communities and communities of color, are benefiting from the alerts.”

###

Consumers Union Urges FCC, Lawmakers to Dial Back Rules against Unlocked Phones

WASHINGTON, DC – Consumers Union, the policy arm of Consumer Reports, added its support to the call to restore the legal protection that had permitted consumers to unlock their mobile devices for use on other wireless communications networks. In letters to the FCC and leaders of the House and Senate Commerce and Judiciary Committees, the consumer group urged regulators and lawmakers to take action, whether through legislation or through Commission rulemaking.

“Your announcement, in conjunction with the White House’s announced support for restoring this protection, and bipartisan calls in Congress to restore it, presents an important opportunity to empower consumers with greater choice in how they obtain mobile devices and wireless service,” the group writes.

The letters also call more broadly for policies to promote increased competition and greater consumer-friendly purchasing options. While consumers should have the ability to unlock their phone as they wish, the group notes that carriers requiring consumers to purchase a new mobile device as part of purchasing service on its wireless network can be just as stifling to competition and consumer choice.

The group writes, “In our view, tying these two purchases together provides no benefit to consumers.  Instead, it steers consumers into long-term service contracts that then make it difficult to switch service providers…If consumers were able to shop for the best deal on each of these purchases separately, they would benefit significantly from the lower prices, improved quality, and greater innovation and variety that healthy competition would encourage among both mobile device manufacturers and wireless service providers.”

The legal protection for unlocking had earlier been granted as a clarifying exception to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act as implemented by the Copyright Office, but the Copyright Office removed the exception last October, effective in January.

For full copies of the letters, contact David Butler or Kara Kelber at Consumers Union.

###