Consumer News: McDonald’s brings back the fried apple pie for a limited time

New state certification will give shoppers another way to identify foods that meet Californias non-ultra-processed standard

• California has created a new non-ultra-processed certified label for qualifying food products.

• The state will oversee the certification process and maintain a public list of certified products.

• Large grocery stores that meet certain requirements will have to make certified products easier to spot.

Figuring out how processed a food is can be surprisingly difficult. Even when shoppers carefully read an ingredient list, it may not always be obvious how a product was made or why certain ingredients were added.

Thats the issue Californias new law is designed to address. Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed Assembly Bill 2244, creating a standardized non-ultra-processed certified label for foods that meet the states requirements.

The law is intended to give shoppers a simpler way to identify products that are not classified as ultra-processed under California law. The Environmental Working Group (EWG), which co-sponsored the legislation, says the label could make it easier for consumers to compare products while grocery shopping.

Like the USDA Organic label, this new seal will provide consumers with clear, trustworthy information and make it easier for them to locate healthier foods that are free from harmful additives, Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel (D-Encino) said in a news release. Parents shouldn't need a Ph.D. in chemistry to understand what theyre feeding their kids.

California began this movement three years ago by banning the most dangerous food additives, and with Governor Newsoms continued leadership we are taking another big step forward today.

How the new food label will work

Under the law, foods classified as ultra-processed under Californias standards wont be allowed to carry the new certification. Products also wont qualify if they contain certain substances or additives used to manipulate a foods taste or quality, including dyes, flavor enhancers, non-sugar sweeteners, and processing aids.

The California Department of Public Health will oversee the certification program. Third-party certifiers will evaluate products, and those certifiers will have to be approved by the state. Products will need to be recertified at least every three years.

The law also includes several transparency measures. Certification agents must register with the state, California can audit certification records, and the state will maintain a public online list of certified products. Misusing the label will also be illegal and subject to enforcement.

What this means for shoppers

The new label won't appear overnight. California must first establish the certification system, with the state directed to accredit third-party certifiers by June 1, 2029.

Once the program is operating, some large grocery stores will also have to make certified products easier to find. The requirement applies to stores that sell more than 25 individual non-ultra-processed-certified product types and generate more than $10 million in annual sales.

For consumers, the biggest change will be having another piece of information to consider while shopping. Rather than trying to determine whether a product meets Californias definition of ultra-processed by studying the ingredient list alone, shoppers will eventually be able to look for the state-backed certification.

Until then, consumers can continue checking ingredient lists and use resources such as EWGs Food Scores database, which identifies less-processed products and flags ultra-processed foods and drinks.

New national data project will examine how neighborhood conditions change and affect older adults

• Researchers are expanding a national database that tracks neighborhood conditions across the U.S.

• The project will examine factors including access to healthcare, food, parks, and environmental hazards.

• The new data could help researchers and communities better understand the local factors connected to healthy aging.

When people think about healthy aging, things like diet, exercise, and medical care often come to mind. But researchers at the University of Michigan are taking a closer look at another factor: where people live.

With an $11 million award from the National Institute on Aging, University of Michigan researchers are expanding the National Neighborhood Data Archive, or NaNDA. The goal is to create and share national data showing how neighborhood conditions change over time and how those conditions may affect the health of older adults.

The existing database connects information about things such as access to parks, healthy food stores, healthcare, and other community resources with health outcomes including hospitalization, chronic disease, and disability.

Neighborhoods shape access to services, exposure to environmental hazards, and levels of social support, affecting cognitive function, mobility, and social interaction, Grace Noppert, a social and infectious disease epidemiologist at U-M and NaNDA deputy director, said in a news release.

Policymakers, community organizations, and researchers across fields use our data. Were creating a public resource that serves many people. Now, we can expand it and work toward becoming a one-stop shop for neighborhood data.

How researchers will map neighborhood health

The project isn't simply creating a map of where people live. Researchers will combine information from multiple sources to build a more detailed picture of neighborhoods across the country.

NaNDA's collection will grow by about 30%, adding information about the physical, economic, demographic and social characteristics of communities. The data will be available at several geographic levels, including census tracts, ZIP code areas, and counties.

Researchers also plan to use a 20% national sample of Medicare and Medicaid claims to identify communities with high rates of hospitalizations and emergency department visits for respiratory illnesses such as flu, RSV, and COVID.

Another part of the project will track exposure to environmental hazards, including wildfire smoke and high temperatures. Researchers will also develop methods for handling the challenges that come with combining different types of neighborhood data and examining changes over time.

What this could mean for consumers

The researchers aren't saying that a particular neighborhood automatically determines someone's health. Instead, the project is designed to give scientists a better way to examine the relationship between local environments and healthy aging.

That could eventually help researchers identify patterns in communities and give public health departments and community organizations more information about where resources may be needed. For example, the planned respiratory illness dashboard could help communities identify areas experiencing higher rates of hospitalizations and emergency care visits.

For consumers, the biggest takeaway is that healthy aging may be studied in a broader context than individual health choices alone. By making neighborhood data publicly available, researchers hope to give scientists and communities a clearer picture of how local conditions may connect with health as people get older.

The lack of a national, publicly available data infrastructure that includes comprehensive, longitudinal measures of the neighborhood environment has limited our ability to measure and track the dynamic nature of local-level environmental exposures and their impact on healthy aging, NaNDA director Philippa Clarke said in a news release.

Most research remains siloed within specific observational or clinical studies, where neighborhood data are not consistently shared, restricting transparency, reproducibility, and comparability of findings. NaNDA was designed to address this gap by creating and sharing data on the physical, economic, demographic, and social environment at multiple spatial scales, including block group, census tract, ZIP code tabulation area, and county.

New research finds wildfire-related particles were linked to higher health risks than similar amounts of pollution from other sources

• Wildfire smoke was linked to higher hospitalization risks for several heart and lung conditions.

• Among older adults with lung cancer, greater wildfire smoke exposure was associated with a higher risk of death.

• Researchers found that wildfire-related pollution appeared to be more harmful, at the same concentration, than non-wildfire pollution.

When wildfire smoke drifts into an area, the hazy skies and smoky smell can be hard to miss. But new research suggests there may be more to the health effects than simply breathing in bad air.

Researchers from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and other institutions conducted two large studies looking at fine particles from wildfire smoke, known as PM2.5. These are extremely small particles that can travel deep into the lungs and enter the bloodstream.

The researchers wanted to know whether wildfire-related PM2.5 was associated with different health risks than PM2.5 from other sources.

Wildfire smoke is no longer a regional environmental issue. It is becoming a nationwide public health challenge, Yaguang Wei, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Environmental Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and senior author of both studies, said in a news release.

Our research shows that wildfire-related PM2.5 appears to be more harmful than equivalent levels of pollution from other sources. As wildfire activity increases, public health and environmental policies must account for both the quantity and the source of air pollution.

How researchers studied wildfire pollution

The first study looked at 414,016 adults ages 65 and older who had been diagnosed with lung cancer. Researchers used data from the SEER-Medicare database covering 2006 through 2019 and estimated wildfire-related and non-wildfire PM2.5 exposure based on participants residential ZIP codes. They then followed participants over time and examined the relationship between long-term pollution exposure and survival.

The second study took a broader look at hospitalizations. Researchers analyzed more than 57 million cardiovascular hospitalizations and nearly 33 million pulmonary disease hospitalizations among residents of 20 states between 2006 and 2019. They compared long-term exposure to wildfire-related and non-wildfire PM2.5 using pollution models.

What the findings mean for consumers

Both studies found a similar pattern: wildfire-related PM2.5 was associated with greater health risks than non-wildfire PM2.5 at equivalent concentrations.

In the hospitalization study, a 1-microgram-per-cubic-meter increase in wildfire-related PM2.5 was associated with higher hospitalization risks across all cardiopulmonary diseases studied. The increases ranged from 10% for heart failure to 16% for asthma.

The lung cancer study found that both types of PM2.5 were associated with increased mortality among older adults with lung cancer, but wildfire-related pollution showed greater toxicity per unit of exposure. Researchers estimated that wildfire-related PM2.5 accounted for about 4% of total PM2.5 but about 17% of mortality related to PM2.5 exposure in the study population.

The researchers say the findings highlight the importance of paying attention to wildfire smoke exposure, particularly for people with lung cancer or chronic heart and lung conditions. They also say more research is needed to understand which components of wildfire smoke may make it particularly harmful.

Food costs are now shoppers' biggest holiday money worry

• Groceries beat gifts for holiday stress: 44% of shoppers say food, beverages, and hosting supplies are a source of financial stress this holiday season, compared with 43% who cited gifts.

• Nearly half feel financially insecure: 45% of consumers surveyed described their household finances as insecure heading into the holidays.

• Shoppers are hunting for deals: 40% say looking for promotions is their response to price pressure, ahead of cutting back on gifts or switching to cheaper brands.

Forget finding the perfect Christmas gift. For many Americans, just feeding everyone may be the bigger holiday money worry this year.

A new Ibotta survey of 1,002 U.S. consumers found 44% are stressed about the cost of food, beverages, and hosting supplies this holiday season.

That's slightly higher than the 43% stressed about gifts and other seasonal purchases. Travel ranked further down the list, with 29% concerned about gas and 17% worried about airfare.

The findings are particularly interesting when compared with Ibotta's holiday research from a year ago.

In 2025, fewer than 1% of shoppers surveyed said they planned to cut back on food purchases for the holidays. At the time, Ibotta described food as a "strong, stable category" for holiday spending, with 66% expecting to buy food or beverages.

This year's survey doesn't mean food stress jumped from less than 1% to 44%. The surveys asked different questions, and Ibotta told ConsumerAffairs that the specific question comparing holiday stressors wasn't asked in previous years.

But the contrast shows just how important grocery costs have become as families plan for Christmas and other year-end celebrations.

Nearly half say they're under financial strain

The grocery concern comes against a broader backdrop of financial pressure.

Ibotta found 45% of shoppers describe their household finances as insecure heading into the holidays, while 72% say saving money is important this season.

And shoppers appear reluctant to simply buy less.

When asked how they're responding to price pressure, 40% said they're looking for deals and promotions. That's more than the 30% cutting down on gifts, 28% switching to cheaper brands, and 24% moving to private-label products.

Some shoppers are also starting earlier.

Thirty percent expect to begin holiday shopping earlier than they did last year, and 44% of early shoppers say they're doing so to spread spending over a longer period or find better deals. Another 39% are starting earlier to catch early sales.

That's another interesting contrast with 2025, when 86% of consumers said they expected to do the majority of their holiday shopping in November or December.

Black Friday isn't just for Christmas presents anymore

One of the more surprising findings is what's ending up in shoppers' carts during big holiday sales.

More than half still plan to buy gifts during major deal events, but about a third are also using them to stock their pantries.

Twenty-eight percent plan to buy holiday food, beverages, and entertaining supplies during October Prime Day, rising to 31% during Black Friday and Cyber Week.

Chocolate and candy see the biggest holiday bump, with 50% saying they buy more during the season. Snacks and nonalcoholic beverages follow at 46%, while 39% buy more dairy and 36% stock up on bread and bakery products.

For shoppers, the main takeaway is that your holiday shopping list this year may be worth starting in the grocery aisle.

This is especially true if you know you'll need baking supplies, drinks, candy, snacks, and other shelf-stable foods later in the season. Watch prices early and stock up when the deal is good.

And don't assume Black Friday is only about TVs and Christmas presents. If the grocery items you'll need in December are discounted in October or November, buying them early can spread out the cost of the holidays and keep one very expensive grocery trip from hitting your budget at once.

Here are some ways to enjoy restaurants without blowing your budget

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Two-thirds of consumers say theyre spending less at restaurants than they did a year ago, according to a new Popmenu survey.

• Diners are trimming bills by drinking water, picking up takeout instead of using delivery, using rewards, and ordering appetizers instead of entres.

• Planning ahead checking specials, joining loyalty programs, and choosing lunch or happy hour instead of dinner can produce additional savings.

As food costs have risen, so have menu prices. Eating out hasn't disappeared from Americans' budgets, but consumers appear to be getting much more strategic about how they do it.

A new study from restaurant technology company Popmenu found that consumers currently spend an average of $100 a week at restaurants. That's up from $90 in February, but still below the $115 reported in June 2025. Two-thirds of consumers surveyed said they're spending less at restaurants than they did a year ago.

Rather than giving up restaurants altogether, many diners are finding ways to shrink the check. Some of their tips may allow more nights out while staying on a budget.

"Around 30% of monthly food budgets go to restaurants today, down from a high of 40% in 2022," said Brendan Sweeney, CEO and Co-founder of Popmenu. "What that tells us is consumers are spending intentionally, not reluctantly. Restaurants have pushed menu prices about as far as they can go. Consumers are looking for value and incentives to come back. They're also looking for the whole experience to be easy, and that starts with the restaurant's digital storefront."

Ways to save

Popmenu found that 52% drink water rather than buying another beverage, while 50% pick up restaurant orders more often instead of having them delivered. Nearly half 48% use coupons or rewards points, and 47% are choosing less expensive restaurants.

Other strategies are a little more creative. Twenty-nine percent said they sometimes order an appetizer instead of a full meal, 28% are buying less alcohol, and 16% have ordered a children's meal for an adult.

Taken together, the findings suggest consumers don't necessarily have to stop dining out to reduce restaurant spending. Here are some ways to make the dollars go further.

Skip the drink

This may be one of the easiest savings because beverages can quickly increase the check. Ordering tap water instead of a soda, iced tea, cocktail, or glass of wine eliminates an expense without reducing the amount of food on the table.

Alcohol can make an especially large difference when several people are dining together. Popmenu's finding that 28% of consumers are cutting back on alcohol purchases suggests diners are already identifying it as an optional expense.

Pick it up yourself

Delivery can be convenient, but convenience often comes with extra costs. In addition to delivery and service fees, menu prices on third-party platforms may be higher than restaurant prices. A 2026 Federal Register notice cited reports indicating restaurant meal prices on delivery platforms can be more than 20% higher than prices at the restaurant, even before additional fees are considered.

Popmenu found that 94% of consumers would rather order through a restaurant's own website than a third-party service, where fees tend to be higher.

Before placing an order, compare the final delivered price with the cost of ordering directly from the restaurant and picking it up.

Don't automatically order an entre

An appetizer may contain enough food for a light meal and cost considerably less than a full entre. That's apparently becoming a mainstream strategy: nearly three in 10 consumers surveyed by Popmenu said they're doing it.

Another option is splitting a large entre. Some restaurants charge a sharing fee, so check first. If the portions are large enough, taking half of an entre home for another meal can also effectively reduce the cost per serving.

Restaurant apps and loyalty programs increasingly serve as gateways to discounts, free items, and special promotions.

Popmenu found that 48% of consumers are already using coupons or rewards points to keep restaurant costs down. Forty-six percent said they're more likely to choose restaurants offering loyalty programs, while 79% said they'd be willing to download a restaurant's app.

The National Restaurant Association has also found that discounts and value promotions play an important role in restaurant choices, with 70% of full-service restaurant customers saying a discount or value promotion is important when deciding where to eat.