Consumer News: More young people are turning to AI chatbots for mental health advice, study finds

IIHS study finds these vehicles had 68% fewer police-reportable crashes per mile traveled

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Waymos driverless vehicles had a crash rate 68% lower than human-driven vehicles, according to new research.

• The vehicles were involved in 81% fewer injury crashes and 85% fewer single-vehicle crashes per mile traveled.

• Researchers said federal reporting requirements must improve as driverless technology expands.

Waymos driverless vehicles are involved in substantially fewer crashes than vehicles operated by human drivers, according to a new study from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

The IIHS study found that Waymo vehicles operating without a human driver had 68% fewer police-reportable crashes per mile traveled than human-driven vehicles in the same cities.

Researchers examined crashes involving Waymo vehicles in San Francisco, Phoenix, Los Angeles and Austin. The companys vehicles traveled approximately 50 million miles in driverless mode during the study period, compared with about 222 billion miles traveled by human drivers in the same locations and time periods.

The results show that, on a limited scale, these driverless cars are safer than human drivers who can be impaired or drowsy or suffer lapses in attention, IIHS President David Harkey said.

Waymos results varied by city. Compared with human drivers, its crash rate was:

• 76% lower in Phoenix

• 71% lower in Los Angeles

• 35% lower in San Francisco

• 4% higher in Austin

IIHS cautioned that the Austin results were based on a relatively small sample and may not provide a reliable indication of the vehicles long-term performance there.

The study also found that Waymo vehicles were involved in 81% fewer injury crashes and 85% fewer single-vehicle crashes per mile than human drivers.

Comparing crashes is complicated

Researchers had to make significant adjustments to federal crash data before comparing driverless vehicles with human drivers.

Ordinary motorists do not report every collision. IIHS estimates that about half of all crashes and one-third of injury crashes involving human drivers are never reported to police. Drivers may avoid reporting minor crashes because of insurance concerns or because the damage does not meet a states reporting threshold.

Automated-vehicle companies, by contrast, have been required to report many minor incidents to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Until federal rules were revised in 2025, even an incident such as a vehicle scraping its underside while entering a parking lot could be classified as a crash.

IIHS researchers reviewed 736 crashes involving automated driving systems on public roads from 2021 through 2024. They removed duplicate records and incidents in which the automation was not operating, the vehicle was not on a public road or no actual collision occurred.

Researchers then estimated which crashes would probably have been reported to police if a human had been driving. Only 22% of the 736 incidents met that standard.

That left 89 crashes involving Waymo vehicles, 50 involving Cruise, 10 involving Zoox and 10 involving other companies. Because only Waymo voluntarily provided mileage data, researchers could calculate a meaningful crash rate only for that company.

Of Waymos 89 likely police-reportable crashes, 64 occurred while the vehicles were operating without a human driver.

Better monitoring is needed

Waymo began as Googles self-driving car project in 2009 and launched its public driverless taxi service in Phoenix in 2020. It later expanded to San Francisco, Los Angeles and Austin.

Its vehicles are classified as Level 4 automated vehicles, meaning they can perform all driving functions without human supervision, but only within certain locations and operating conditions.

IIHS said the encouraging results should not eliminate the need for stronger oversight.

Companies are required to report crashes, but they generally do not have to disclose how many miles their vehicles travel or whether those miles were driven autonomously.

Without mileage figures, regulators and researchers cannot determine how frequently other driverless vehicles crash or whether safety changes as fleets expand.

More than 12,000 pounds of bacon imported from Canada were uninspected

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• More than 12,000 pounds of imported bacon are being recalled after entering the U.S. without the required federal import reinspection.

• The recall affects Royale Natural and Top Valu bacon products sold through Grocery Outlet stores in Idaho, Oregon and Washington.

• No illnesses have been reported, but consumers are urged not to eat the recalled bacon and should throw it away or return it for a refund.

More than 12,000 pounds of imported smoked bacon are being recalled after federal officials determined the products entered the United States without undergoing a required import reinspection.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced that Maple Leaf Foods Inc., of Lisle, Ill., is recalling approximately 12,036 pounds of not-ready-to-eat (NRTE) refrigerated smoked bacon imported from Canada. According to the agency, the products were distributed to Grocery Outlet distributors and retailers in Idaho, Oregon and Washington.

The recall is not related to contamination or reports of illness. Instead, the products were imported without receiving the required federal import reinspection, a safeguard designed to verify that imported meat products meet U.S. food safety standards before they enter commerce.

Products included in the recall

The recalled bacon was produced on June 9, 10, 12, 13 and 15, 2026, and includes:

• 12-ounce vacuum packages of "Royale Natural Applewood Smoked All Natural Uncured Bacon Product of Canada" with sell-by dates of Sept. 1, 2026 and Sept. 7, 2026.

• 12-ounce vacuum packages of "TOP VALU Uncured Hardwood Smoked Bacon Product of Canada" with sell-by dates of Sept. 1, Sept. 2, Sept. 4, Sept. 5 and Sept. 7, 2026.

The products bear the Canadian establishment number "EST. 1" on the package. Master shipping cases also display health certificate 2026-S732971612.

No illnesses reported

FSIS said the issue was discovered during routine inspection activities. As of the recall announcement, there have been no confirmed reports of illness or injury linked to the bacon. Anyone who believes they became ill after consuming the product should contact a healthcare provider.

Because some packages may still be in consumers' refrigerators or freezers, FSIS is urging anyone who purchased the recalled bacon not to consume it. Instead, consumers should discard the product or return it to the place of purchase for a refund.

Although labeled as bacon, the products are classified as not ready-to-eat, meaning they require thorough cooking before consumption. Even so, FSIS recommends that consumers avoid using any product covered by the recall because it did not undergo the required import verification process.

In the current outbreak, nearly 2,000 people in nine states have been stricken

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Cyclospora infections are surging across the U.S. this summer, driven in part by contaminated fresh produce and the parasite's seasonal peak.

• Experts say the illness is difficult to diagnose and cannot be prevented simply by washing produce, making outbreaks especially challenging to control.

• Unlike many stomach bugs, Cyclospora is not spread directly from person to person, but through food or water contaminated with human waste.

The United States is experiencing one of its largest outbreaks of cyclosporiasis in recent years, with thousands of confirmed and suspected cases linked to contaminated produce. As health officials continue investigating the outbreak, infectious disease experts say several factors make the parasite unusually difficult to detect, trace and prevent.

Cyclosporiasis is an intestinal illness caused by the microscopic parasite Cyclospora cayetanensis. People become infected by eating food or drinking water contaminated with human feces carrying the parasite. Fresh produceincluding leafy greens, herbs and berrieshas been implicated in previous outbreaks because these foods are often consumed raw.

This year's outbreak has largely been associated with iceberg lettuce distributed from Mexico, although investigators continue to examine whether other foods also played a role. Although there have been no deaths, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports nearly 2,000 people in nine states have been sickened, with nearly 100 hospitalized.

Epidemiologic evidence continues to point to contaminated iceberg lettuce, even after the FDA determined an earlier positive laboratory test from one sample was a false positive.

A seasonal disease

Cyclospora infections tend to peak between May and August in the United States. According to experts, the seasonal increase occurs because warmer weather helps the parasite mature in the environment while imports of fresh produce from regions where the parasite is more common also increase during the summer months.

Unlike viruses such as norovirus, Cyclospora is not usually passed directly from one infected person to another. The parasite must spend one to two weeks outside the body before it becomes infectious, making contaminated food and water the primary sources of infection.

Symptoms can last for weeks

Symptoms usually begin about a week after exposure but can take as long as two weeks to appear. The hallmark symptom is frequent watery diarrhea, often accompanied by stomach cramps, nausea, bloating, fatigue, loss of appetite and weight loss.

Without treatment, symptoms may persist for several weeks or even recur after temporarily improving. Some infected people, however, experience no symptoms at all.

Doctors typically prescribe the antibiotic trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (Bactrim) to treat the infection. Maintaining hydration is also important, particularly for older adults and people with weakened immune systems, who may face a higher risk of complications from severe diarrhea.

Hard to diagnose and hard to prevent

Scientists say one reason the current outbreak has become so widespread is that Cyclospora is not detected by routine stool tests. Physicians generally must order specialized testing when they suspect the infection.

Prevention is also challenging. Because the parasite can cling tightly to fresh produce, simply rinsing fruits and vegetables may not remove it completely. Cooking foods thoroughly is the most reliable way to kill the parasite, but that's not practical for many fresh fruits and salad ingredients.

Health experts recommend washing hands before handling food, rinsing fresh produce under running water even though it is not foolproof, and paying close attention to food recalls and public health advisories during the summer outbreak season. People who develop prolonged watery diarrhea after eating fresh produce should seek medical care and ask whether testing for Cyclospora is appropriate.

Companies may reduce service but keep prices the same

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Skimpflation is replacing shrinkflation as a growing consumer complaint, with companies reducing product quality or service instead of package size.

• Unlike shrinkflation, which gives consumers less product, skimpflation delivers an inferior product or experience while charging the same price.

• Consumer advocates say the trend can be harder to detect because packaging and prices often remain unchanged, even as ingredients, portions or service levels decline.

Consumers have spent the last several years learning to spot "shrinkflation"the practice of shrinking a product's size while keeping its price the same or even raising it. Now, economists say shoppers should also watch for a newer form of hidden inflation: skimpflation.

Instead of reducing the amount of a product, skimpflation reduces its quality, ingredients or level of service without a corresponding drop in price. The result is similar: consumers receive less value for the money they spend, even if the package looks the same and carries the same price tag.

Heres an example: Before 2008, an airline ticket often included checked bags, a meal, or at least a beverage and a bag of peanuts. Now, passengers pay extra for those things.

The term has gained traction in recent months as economists, consumer advocates and researchers point to examples ranging from food manufacturers quietly swapping premium ingredients for cheaper alternatives to restaurants reducing portions of expensive ingredients while maintaining menu prices.

Less product vs. lower quality

The distinction between the two practices is straightforward.

Shrinkflation occurs when manufacturers reduce the quantity of a product without a proportional price reduction. A 16-ounce container of ice cream might become 14 ounces while selling for the same price, effectively increasing the cost per ounce. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) defines shrinkflation as product downsizing that raises the unit price consumers pay.

Skimpflation, on the other hand, keeps the size and price roughly the same but cuts corners elsewhere. That might mean:

• Using cheaper ingredients in packaged foods.

• Replacing real chocolate with chocolate-flavored coating.

• Reducing the amount of meat, cheese or other premium ingredients in restaurant meals.

• Eliminating services or amenities that were once included.

• Increasing automation while reducing customer service.

In each case, consumers receive a product or service that costs the company less to provide but often sells for the same price.

Why companies do it

Both shrinkflation and skimpflation are responses to rising business costs.

Companies often worry that visible price increases will drive customers away. Instead, they may preserve the sticker price while reducing costs in less obvious ways.

During periods of high inflation, manufacturers may shrink package sizes. But when that becomes difficultor when changing package sizes is too noticeablethey may instead alter recipes, substitute lower-cost ingredients or reduce service levels.

For example, a frozen meal may contain the same weight as before but include less chicken and more rice. A hotel may eliminate daily housekeeping while keeping room rates unchanged. A streaming service may introduce advertisements to plans that were previously ad-free without reducing subscription prices.

Consumers notice quality more than quantity

New academic research suggests consumers react even more negatively to skimpflation than shrinkflation.

A series of experiments published this year found that shoppers viewed quality reductions as less fair than either outright price increases or package-size reductions. Researchers concluded that quality cuts feel more deceptive because they change the actual experience of using the product, often without obvious warning.

How to spot skimpflation

Unlike shrinkflation, which can often be detected by comparing package weights, skimpflation requires consumers to pay closer attention.

Tell-tale signs include:

• Ingredient lists that have changed.

• Premium ingredients replaced by less expensive substitutes.

• Smaller portions of meat or other high-cost ingredients.

• Products that taste or perform differently than they used to.

• Services that include fewer features while prices remain unchanged.

Consumer advocates recommend comparing unit prices, reading ingredient labels and paying attention to product reviews if a familiar brand suddenly seems different.

If Amazon made Prime hard to cancel, you could be eligible for a payout

• Don't miss the deadline. Eligible Amazon Prime members have until July 27 to claim up to $51 from the FTC settlement.

• You may still qualify. If you were enrolled in Prime without your clear consent or had trouble canceling between 2019 and 2025, you can still file a claimeven if you never received a notice.

• Watch out for . Filing is free, and the FTC will never ask for payment to receive your refund.

Millions of Amazon Prime members could be eligible for a refund, but time is running out.

The deadline to file a claim in Amazon's $2.5 billion settlement with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is July 27th. The settlement resolves allegations that Amazon used deceptive online tactics, sometimes called "dark patterns," to enroll customers in Prime without their clear consent and made it unnecessarily difficult to cancel.

Amazon denied the allegations but agreed to the settlement and to change its enrollment and cancellation practices.

Eligible consumers can receive a refund of up to $51.

Who qualifies?

You may be eligible if all of the following apply:

• You were an Amazon Prime customer in the U.S.

• You unintentionally enrolled in Prime or tried to cancel online but couldn't between June 23, 2019, and June 23, 2025.

• You didn't already receive an automatic refund in late 2025.

• You used relatively few Prime benefits during your membership. Amazon will review its records to determine eligibility.

Even if you never received an email or postcard about the settlement, you can still submit a claim if you believe you qualify.

How to file a claim

Visit the official settlement website and click "File Claim."

If you received a notice from Amazon, enter your Claim ID and PIN. If you didn't, you can still file by providing your information and explaining why you believe you qualify. Amazon will verify your eligibility using its internal records.

When will you get paid?

Amazon says it will review claims within about 30 days.

Approved payments are expected to be sent later this year by PayPal, Venmo, or paper check, depending on the payment method you choose.

Three tips before you file

• Don't wait until the last minute. The claims deadline is July 27, and late claims won't be accepted. It only takes a few minutes to determine whether you're eligible.

• Watch out for . The FTC warns that it will never call, text, or email asking you to pay a fee or provide payment information to receive your refund. Anyone claiming they can "guarantee" your payment is a scam.

• Review your subscriptions while you're at it. Whether it's Amazon Prime, streaming services, cloud storage, or fitness apps, recurring subscriptions are easy to forget. Spending 10 minutes reviewing your monthly charges once or twice a year could save far more than this settlement payout.

A refund of up to $51 won't make anyone rich, but if you were enrolled in Prime without realizing it, or found yourself trapped in a frustrating cancellation process, it's money worth claiming.