The move is denounced as "political theater"

July 11, 2025

• FCC removes Net Neutrality rules from its books, even though they were not in effect.
• A federal appeals court, in a suit brought by telecom companies, had held the rules were improper.
• The argument has gone back and forth since the Obama administration.

---

Net Neutrality is not a topic that brings crowds of demonstrators surging into the streets but it has important implications in a world that is driven largely by online communications.

The Obamaadministration's Federal Communications Commission (FCC) constructed a framework of rules and regulations intended to ensure that everyone had equal access to broadband. That made telecommunications companies responsible for providing service on just, reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms to users across the nation.

Those rules were repealed during Donald Trump's first term in office earlier this year and reinstated during President Biden's term. But earlier this year, a U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in a suit brought by major telecom companies that the ruleshad been wrongfully adopted and that broadband providers cannot be treated as utilities.

Telecoms aren't utilities?

The court determined thatbroadband is an "information service" not a "telecommunications service," meaning the FCC lacks the authority to impose net neutrality regulations under the Communications Act.

Today, theFederal Communications Commission issued an order announcing its decision to remove the agencys Net Neutrality rules. The agency neglected to provide advance notice or give the public an opportunity to comment.

The consumer group Free Press called the FCC's action "little more than political grandstanding."


"Its true that the rules in question were first stayed by the 6th Circuit and then struck down by that appellate court in a poorly reasoned opinion. So todays bookkeeping maneuver changes very little in reality," said Matt Wood, the group's vice president of policy and general counsel.

Rules protecting Net Neutrality have broad bipartisan public support; the issue generated record numbers of public comments during prior agency proceedings on these essential open-internet safeguards, Wood said.


"Theres no need to delete currently inoperative rules, much less to announce it in a summer Friday order. The only reason to do that is to score points with broadband monopolies and their lobbyists, whove fought against essential and popular safeguards for the past two decades straight," Wood said. "It also shows subservience to Elon Musks incredibly destructive government-by-chainsaw attitude which seems to have outlived Musk himself in some corners of the Trump administration."

Just 1,000 extra steps per day is linked to a lower risk of depression

July 11, 2025

• Findings from a recent study found that walking moreespecially aiming for around 7,000 steps per daywas linked to fewer depressive symptoms in adults.
  

• Every extra 1,000 steps per day correlated with about a 9% lower risk of depression.
  

• The effect was consistent across ages, sexes, and step-tracking methods, suggesting walking is a universally accessible mentalhealth tool.
  
  

---

Researchers from the University of CastillaLa Mancha (UCLM) teamed up with international colleagues to examine how daily walking relates to depression in adults.

The team pooled data from 33 observational studies involving around 96,000 participants, all tracked using wearable devices such as pedometers and accelerometers.

Their goal? To find out whether walking more each daymeasured objectivelycould be tied to lower rates of depressive symptoms and risk.

The study

The researchers conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis:

1. They searched multiple literature databases up to May 2024 and identified 33 studies (27 cross-sectional, 6 longitudinal) involving over 96,000 diverse adults.
   

2. These studies tracked daily steps using reliable wearables and measured depression using clinical diagnoses or symptom questionnaires.
   

3. Participants were grouped by step ranges (e.g.,
   

4. They adjusted for variables like age and sex and checked the robustness of results.
   
   

The results

Ultimately, the results were promising. The study found that adults walking 5,0007,499 steps/day had significantly fewer depressive symptoms than those walking under 5,000 steps per day.

The more participants walked, the better their mental health. The study showed that walking 7,5009,999, and especially 10,000+ steps/day, showed even stronger links to lower depression-related symptoms.

Notably, hitting around 7,000 steps/day stood out, as it was linked to a marked reduction in future depression risk compared to fewer steps.

Its also important to note that with each additional 1,000 steps/day, depression risk dropped by roughly 9%.

What does it mean for you?

Walking is free, simple, and easy to integrate into daily life. This analysis suggests even light, regular stepsespecially around 7,000+ per daycan add up to real mentalhealth benefits.

It doesnt require gym time or intense workoutsjust consistent movement. Boosting your daily step count, even in shorter bursts, may help protect against depression.

Daily step counting could be an important strategy in the general population to promote physical activity and contribute to the prevention of depression, researcher Bruno Bizzozero Peroni wrote.

Based on the available evidence, we emphasize the need for further longitudinal studies to clarify the protective role of daily steps in preventing depression during adulthood. In the meantime, if you've read this far, stop reading and go for a brisk walk.

Owners of certain models could get payments of up to $500

July 11, 2025

• Owners of certain GM trucks and SUVs in Oklahoma could get $500 checks as part of a nearly $25 million class-action settlement.
• 
  The lawsuit claims some GM vehicles burn excessive oil, risking engine damage.
  
• 
  Eligible owners must act before the July 28 deadline to join the settlement.
  

---

Owners of specific General Motors vehicles in Oklahoma may soon receive hundreds of dollars as part of a class-action lawsuit settlement addressing excessive oil consumption in certain trucks and SUVs. Similar suits are pending in several other states.

The named plaintiff in the case isDurwin Hampton, a Poteau, Oklahoma resident who noticed troubling issues with his truck shortly after purchase.

At about 35,000 miles, I noticed that it was burning more oil than usual, Hampton said. It just kept getting worse as it got more miles on it.

The lawsuit alleged that GM marketed and sold the affected vehicles as safe and reliable without disclosing that they could consume an abnormally high amount of oil. Such issues, plaintiffs argue, result in low oil levels, poor engine lubrication, and potential engine damage.

Nearly $25 million settlement fund

As part of the settlement, General Motors has agreed to contribute nearly $25 million to a fund. Clay Barnett, one of the attorneys representing vehicle owners, said eligible individuals who join the lawsuit could each receive about $500.

Vehicles included in the settlement

Vehicles covered under the settlement include:

• 
  2011-2014 Chevrolet Avalanche, Silverado, Suburban, and Tahoe
  
• 
  2011-2014 GMC Sierra, Yukon, Yukon XL SUVs, and trucks equipped with Generation IV Vortec 5300 LC9 engines manufactured on or after February 10, 2011
  

Barnett estimates around 30,000 vehicles in Oklahoma could qualify. Half of these owners bought their vehicles from authorized GM dealers and should have received notice by mail. However, Barnett notes that approximately 15,000 owners who purchased their vehicles elsewhere may need to submit additional information to join the lawsuit.

How to check eligibility

Oklahoma residents who bought affected vehicles can visit oklahomagmenginelitigation.com to check eligibility and file claims. The deadline to join the settlement is July 28.

Despite agreeing to the settlement, General Motors denies any wrongdoing or liability related to the allegations. The company has not publicly commented on the lawsuits outcome.

A defect in the pump can cause the engine to stall

July 11, 2025
Ford Motor Co. is recalling 850,318 vehicles across the United States to fix a potentially defective fuel pump that could cause engines to stall unexpectedly, raising the risk of a crash, federal regulators announced Thursday.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the problem involves low-pressure fuel pumps that may fail and reduce fuel flow from the tank to the engine, potentially leading to sudden loss of engine power while driving.

This recall is for certain 2021-2023 model year Ford Explorer, Lincoln Aviator, Ford F-150, Ford Mustang, Ford Bronco, Ford F-Series Super Duty, Lincoln Navigator and Ford Expedition, said Mike Levine, a spokesperson for Ford.

The defect may affect roughly 10% of the recalled vehicles, NHTSA estimates.

Before complete failure occurs, drivers might notice warning signs including:

• 
  Engine misfiring
  
• 
  Rough idling or running
  
• 
  Reduced engine power
  
• 
  Illumination of the check engine light
  

NHTSA disclosed that it has received six consumer complaints alleging power loss due to fuel pump failures in affected Ford vehicles.

Ford has not reported any crashes or injuries tied to the issue as of the recall announcement.

Owners of vehicles included in the recall are expected to receive notification letters from Ford with instructions for scheduling repairs. The automaker will replace the faulty fuel pumps free of charge.

For additional information, vehicle owners can visit the NHTSA recalls website or contact their local Ford or Lincoln dealership.

Congress is considering a measure that would increase truck weights to 91,000 pounds

July 11, 2025

• Truckers and shippers are pushing for heavier weight limits for trucks on federal highways.
• Congress is considering a measure that would allow trucks up to 91,000 pounds.
• The National Consumers League opposes the measure, saying it would be a "significant threat" to public safety and infrastructure.

---

Congress is considering a measure that would allow heavier trucks on federal highways something the National Consumers League (NCL) thinks is a bad idea.

The organization says the move would be "a significant threat to public safety, infrastructure, and taxpayers."

The proposal under considerationis H.R. 3372, introduced by Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-SD), which seeks to establish a 10-year pilot program allowing six-axle trucks to operate at weights up to 91,000 pounds an increase from the current federal limit of 80,000 pounds. Participationwould be voluntary for states.

In anopinion piecepublished today inThe Hill, NCLs Senior Director of Consumer Protection&Product Safety, Daniel Greene, joinedDavid Williams, the President ofthe Taxpayers Protection Alliance,to warn lawmakers and the public about the dangers of weakening truck size and weight limits.

Increasing size and weight limits would exacerbate the nations traffic safety crisis,writeGreeneand Williams.The heavier the truck, the greater the crash forces, increasing the lethality accidents.

400% more likely to crash

Data cited in the article show that trucks weighing 91,000 pounds or more are up to400 percent more likelyto be involved in major crashes and cause significantly more damage to roads and bridges. Replacing weakened infrastructure to accommodate these trucks could cost taxpayers$80 billion, according to a 2023 analysis.

Politicians and advocacy groups across the political spectrum may not always agree on the best way to fix Americas roads, but they should agree that introducing larger and heavier vehicles is a recipe for disaster,Greeneand Williamscontinued.Lawmakers should swerve away from these policy potholes and commit to real bipartisan protections.

Supporters say the heavier weight limits would enhance supply chain efficiency, address the truck driver shortage by maximizing freight per trip and lower fuel consumption per unit of freight.

Proponents, including the Shippers Coalition and the American Farm Bureau Federation, contend that the additional axle required for these heavier trucks would maintain or even improve safety by distributing weight more effectively and reducing stopping distances.

But NCL is calling on Congress to uphold current truck size and weight limits and reject efforts to allowheaviertrucks or longer multi-trailer rigs on U.S. highways.