Consumer News: Why Amazon says your cart could soon cost more

Study shows whole food diet promotes healthy aging

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Cutting back on ultra-processed foods helped older adults lose weight, improve cholesterol and insulin sensitivity, and reduce inflammationregardless of whether their diet emphasized animal or plant protein.

• Researchers wanted to know whether lowering ultra-processed food intake, while still following U.S. Dietary Guidelines, could improve cardiometabolic health in aging adults.

• Both lowultra-processed omnivorous and vegetarian diets produced similar health benefits, suggesting flexibility in how older adults can eat for better health.

As the U.S. population grows older, rates of obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease continue to rise, placing pressure on both individuals and the health care system.

A new study published in Clinical Nutrition suggests that one practical change reducing ultra-processed foods could significantly improve cardiometabolic health in older adults, without requiring strict calorie counting or adherence to a single dietary ideology.

The research builds on concerns that ultra-processed foods (UPFs) industrially manufactured products often high in refined starches, sugars, and additives may worsen age-related metabolic vulnerability. While previous studies have linked UPFs to poor health outcomes, few controlled trials have tested whether cutting them back can deliver measurable benefits in older adults while still aligning with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA).

About the study

To address that gap, researchers analyzed secondary outcomes from the Protein-Distinct Macronutrient-Equivalent Diet 2 (PRODMED2) trial. The study enrolled 36 community-dwelling older adults and compared their habitual diets about half of daily calories coming from ultra-processed foods with two structured, low-UPF eating patterns. One diet featured minimally processed pork as the main protein source, representing an omnivorous approach, while the other used lentils to reflect a lacto-ovo vegetarian pattern.

Each participant followed both low-UPF diets for eight weeks, separated by a two-week washout period. Importantly, the diets were not calorie-restricted; participants were encouraged to eat until satisfied. Researchers measured dietary intake, body composition, blood lipids, insulin-related markers, inflammation, and hormones involved in appetite and energy regulation before and after each diet. Some measures were repeated about a year later to see whether changes lasted.

The results

The results were striking. Simply moving away from a high-UPF baseline dietwithout intentional calorie cuttingled participants to consume 300 to 400 fewer calories per day on average.

That spontaneous reduction translated into meaningful weight loss of about eightto 10 pounds over each eight-week period, along with significant losses in fat mass.

Both dietary patterns delivered comparable metabolic improvements. Measures of insulin resistance, including HOMA-IR, insulin, and C-peptide, improved significantly, as did total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, and markers of inflammation such as C-reactive protein.

The researchers found no significant differences between the animal-based and plant-based diets, suggesting that food processing level mattered more than protein source.

Participants ate less without trying

Hormonal changes provided clues about how these benefits might occur. Levels of leptin, a hormone associated with fat mass and appetite regulation, declined, while fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF21) a hormone involved in nutrient sensing and energy balance increased during both low-UPF diet phases. These shifts may help explain why participants naturally ate less and lost weight without being told to restrict calories.

However, the study also highlighted how difficult it can be to sustain dietary changes. At the roughly one-year follow-up, ultra-processed foods once again made up nearly 44% of daily energy intake. As UPF exposure rose, body weight, fat mass, and cardiometabolic markers drifted back toward baseline levels.

Taken together, the findings suggest that lowultra-processed eating patterns are both feasible and effective for older adults, whether they include animal products or rely on plant-based proteins. By aligning with existing dietary guidelines and focusing on minimally processed foods, such diets may offer a realistic strategy to support healthy aging.

For policymakers and clinicians alike, the message is clear: reducing ultra-processed foods could be a powerful, flexible tool to improve metabolic health and extend health span in an aging population.

Passengers should not assume the airline will automatically refund their fare

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Millions of airline passengers were stranded over the weekend as a powerful winter storm snarled air travel across large swaths of the country.

• Flight cancellations and long delays raised fresh questions about what airlines owe travelers when weather disrupts schedules.

• Consumer advocates say many passengers dont realize they still have important rights, even when storms are to blame.

A major winter storm that swept across the U.S. this weekend forced airlines to cancel thousands of flights and delay many more, leaving travelers stuck in airports, sleeping in terminals, or scrambling to rebook plans. While airlines often point to severe weather as an unavoidable act of God, passenger advocates say travelers still have clear rights and options when flights are canceled or significantly delayed.

Under U.S. Department of Transportation rules, passengers are entitled to a full refund if their flight is canceled and they choose not to travel, even if the cancellation is caused by weather. That refund must be issued to the original form of payment and cannot be limited to airline vouchers or credits, unless the passenger agrees to accept one.

Its not just weather or lost luggage consumers are worried about; their trust in the travel system is eroding, said Matt Layton, LegalShields senior vice president of consumer analytics. New confusion regarding passenger compensation exposed how fragile the travel ecosystem can be. This shift in confidence is driving real behavior changes.

What usually happens

For travelers who still want to fly, airlines generally rebook passengers on the next available flight at no additional cost. However, rebooking policies vary widely, especially during widespread disruptions when seats are scarce. Some airlines may place passengers on partner carriers, while others restrict rebooking to their own flights.

What airlines typically do not have to provide during weather-related disruptions is compensation for hotel stays, meals, or ground transportation. Unlike the European Union, which mandates cash compensation for many delays, U.S. airlines are not required to pay passengers when weather is the cause. A recent LegalShield survey found thats a source of confusion.

Weve spent our hard-earned money for the airline to get us to our family and friends, and many people believe that if that doesnt happen, the airline will automatically pay us back, said Wayne Hassay, a LegalShield provider lawyer with Maguire Schneider Hassay, LLP in Ohio. That is simply not true.

While federal guidelines address issues such as overbooking, extended tarmac delays, and some controllable events, Hassay said most additional compensation is governed by individual airline policies even if passengers ultimately reach their destination.

Costly confusion

The consequences of that confusion can be costly. LegalShields research found that 63% of travelers lost money due to travel disruptions, and one in four lost more than $500.

More than half said they wasted significant time dealing with delays, customer service problems, appeals, and claims. At the same time, 25% admitted they are unfamiliar with their travel rights, and 55% said they lack confidence in asserting those rights when something goes wrong.

Consumer experts recommend that travelers affected by the storm keep all documentation, including boarding passes, delay notifications, and receipts for unexpected expenses. While airlines may not be obligated to reimburse those costs, some will consider goodwill refunds if passengers submit a complaint.

Credit card travel protections can also play a role. Many premium credit cards include trip delay or cancellation insurance that covers meals, hotels, and other expenses when severe weather disrupts travel.

With winter far from over, advocates say the key takeaway is preparation and persistence. Know your rights, ask questions at the airport, and dont assume the airlines first answer is the final one,experts advise. Even in bad weather, passengers are not powerless.

That quick update request could quietly impact your credit

• Why theyre asking: Lenders use updated income to reassess risk. If you dont respond, they may assume your finances worsened and cut your credit limit.

• Ignoring it can hurt: Skipping the request may lead to lower limits or closed accounts, which can ding your score by raising utilization or shortening credit history.

• Updating can help: If your income is steady or higher, sharing it could mean bigger limits and better offers just verify the request and be honest.

A recently updated article at Clark.com highlights a growing trend of banks and credit card companies increasingly asking customers to update their income information.

While it might feel intrusive and your first instinct might be to ignore it, there are actually some practical reasons lenders are doing this. And more importantly, how you respond can affect your credit limits, your credit score, and even your future borrowing power.

With that said, heres the smartest way to respond to these requests.

Why lenders are asking now

Clark Howard makes the point that with job changes, layoffs, and inflation still affecting household budgets, lenders are trying to reassess how risky of a borrower you are.

Credit card companies, in particular, want to know whether your current income still supports the credit limits theyve extended to you.

In other words, if they dont have updated information, they very well could assume the worst.

Soshould you respond?

First of all, you are not legally required to update your income when asked.

But according to Howard, its important to understand that ignoring it can have consequences.

If your income has stayed the same or increased, updating is usually a smart move. This will reassure the lender that you can still handle your available credit and lowers the chance theyll cut your limit or close your account.

If your income has dropped, its more complicated. Sharing a lower number could trigger a credit line reduction at a time when you might need the flexibility.

In that case, you may choose to skip a voluntary update. But keep in mind that the lender could eventually require you to update your information to keep your account open.

What can happen if you dont update

Lenders will sometimes take action when they feel theyre being left in the dark.

This can include doing the following:

• Lower credit limits This reduces your spending power and can raise your credit utilization ratio, which may hurt your credit score.
• Account closures Losing an older account can shorten your credit history and negatively affect your score.
• Strained lender relationship A closed or restricted account could make it harder to get a loan or new card from that bank later.

The potential upside of updating

But if your income has improved, Howard points out that there can be some great benefits:

• Higher credit limits A larger limit (if you dont overspend) can help your credit score by lowering your utilization percentage.
• Better card offers You may qualify for cards or perks aimed at higher-income customers.

The smart steps to take

If you havent received an income update request recently, its simply a matter of time before you do.

When you do get it, heres how to handle it safely:

• Confirm its legitimate. Log in directly through your banks official website or app instead of clicking email links.
• Be honest. Providing false income information on a credit account can be considered fraud.
• Include all eligible income. That can mean salary, self-employment income, retirement income, Social Security, and investment distributions.
• Keep debt in check. High balances make lenders more nervous. Paying down credit card balances can reduce the odds of a limit cut.
• Monitor your credit reports. If a lender lowers a limit or closes an account, youll want to track how it affects your credit profile and score.

The lawsuit alleges that the mortgage company pressured buyers into higher-cost loans

• Homebuyers file class-action lawsuit against Rocket Mortgage alleging illegal steering practices

• Plaintiffs say Rockets referral network pushed buyers into costly loans and inflated home prices

• Case claims violations of federal consumer protections and could impact borrowers going back to 2019

A new class-action lawsuit has been filed against Rocket Mortgage and related companies.

The suit alleges that the mortgage company engaged in illegal practices that steered homebuyers into loans that werent in their best interests and ultimately cost them more money. This consumer-focused legal challenge, brought by plaintiffs from across the country, takes aim at practices that critics say inflated home prices and limited borrowers options.

Everyday families rely on the laws governing our nations real estate market for fairness and transparency, and we believe Rocket has failed to play by the rules, Steve W. Berman, managing partner and co-founder of the consumer-protection law firm Hagens Berman, said in a news release.

We believe at least hundreds of thousands of consumers have been duped by Rockets tricks, and judging by its year-over-year revenue, its scheme has worked.

Details of the suit

The lawsuit, filed on January 26, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, centers on Rockets referral network. The suit is examining the ways that real estate agents were funneled leads and then allegedly expected to push clients toward Rocket Mortgages financing even when other lenders might offer better terms.

According to the complaint, Rocket Homes operated a widespread referral system (until it acquired Redfin in 2025) that required participating agents to pay a hefty percentage fee to Rocket. In exchange, those agents were encouraged plaintiffs say pressured to steer buyers into Rockets mortgage products instead of shopping around.

The plaintiffs argue this practice violated federal consumer protection laws, including the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), which prohibits kickbacks or other incentives that interfere with a homebuyers ability to make an informed decision. They claim Rockets network effectively limited competition, resulting in borrowers receiving loans with higher rates and fewer cost-saving opportunities.

The lawsuit seeks various forms of relief, from damages to court-ordered changes in how Rocket and its affiliates operate.

Consumer advocates and attorneys say this case is part of a broader trend of scrutiny on real estate and mortgage industry referral networks, following other major lawsuits alleging inflated costs and lack of transparency.

What this means for homebuyers

Heres what consumers should know and consider:

• Understand all your loan options. Dont just go with the first mortgage offer you get compare rates, terms, fees and the total cost of borrowing from different lenders before signing anything.

• Ask hard questions. If an agent or lender is steering you toward a particular product, ask why and whether youd financially benefit from exploring alternatives.

• Know your rights. Federal laws like RESPA exist to protect borrowers from hidden incentives that could steer your decisions and lawsuits like this aim to enforce those protections.

If you bought a home and used Rocket Mortgage or Quicken Loans to finance at any time since Jan. 1, 2019, find out more about your rights here.