Consumer News: CVS expands weight-loss program with $29 online visits and new GLP-1 options

Previously, America built its way out of the problem

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• A record 25.2 million Americans under age 35 lived with their parents in 2025 nearly one-third of young adults and more than during the pandemic.

• This isnt simply a jobs problem: About 70% of 25- to 34-year-olds living with their parents are employed, suggesting housing costs, debt and wages are preventing many workers from establishing their own households.

• America faced a strikingly similar housing crunch after World War II. That shortage eventually eased through a massive expansion of housing construction, government-backed mortgages and the rapid development of new suburbs.

For millions of young Americans, getting a job is no longer enough to get them out of their childhood bedroom.

A record 25.2 million adults under age 35 lived with their parents in 2025, according to research from Realtor.com. That's nearly one in three young adults and even exceeds the number recorded during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Perhaps the most revealing part of the data is that many of these adults aren't unemployed.

About 70% of 25- to 34-year-olds living with their parents have jobs. Among 25- to 29-year-olds living at home, 71% are employed, while 68% of 30- to 34-year-olds are working.

That suggests the phenomenon is less about young people failing to find work than about the widening gap between what they earn and what it costs to establish an independent household.

And while the scale of today's problem is remarkable, the United States has been here before.

The cost of moving out keeps rising

Housing is at the center of the problem.

In 2025, the median U.S. home price was $430,000, according to Realtor.com, an increase of 34.4% from 2019. Median asking rent reached $1,673, up 17.9% over the same period.

Realtor.com estimates the country has a housing shortage of roughly 4 million homes. The problem becomes particularly visible among people well past college age.

About 20.4% of Americans ages 25 to 29 lived with their parents in 2025, nearly six percentage points higher than at the beginning of the century. Among 30- to 34-year-olds, 12.7% lived with their parents, compared with 7.1% in 2000.

Debt compounds the problem. Younger borrowers' debts are more concentrated in student loans, auto loans and credit cards, leaving monthly obligations that can consume income that might otherwise go toward rent or a down payment.

The result is an unusual economy in which employment and independence have become increasingly disconnected.

It's not necessarily a free ride

Living with Mom and Dad can provide an enormous financial advantage, particularly when the alternative is paying thousands of dollars each month in rent.

But that doesn't mean 20- and 30-somethings living at home are simply banking their salaries.

Realtor.com cites Pew Research Center data showing 72% of young adults living with their parents contribute financially to their households. About 65% help with groceries, utilities or other expenses, while 46% contribute toward rent or the mortgage.

That can turn multigenerational living into a form of household economic cooperation. Adult children get housing below market cost, while parents receive help paying increasingly expensive taxes, insurance, utilities, repairs and other expenses.

But there are trade-offs.

Parents who expected to downsize after their children left home may postpone the move. Families may need larger homes than they otherwise would. And young adults can find themselves caught in a financial loop: Living at home prevents them from facing unaffordable rent, but contributing to household expenses while paying down debt may make it difficult to save enough to leave.

The implications stretch beyond individual families.

When millions of people delay establishing households, demand for starter homes changes. Marriage and parenthood can also be postponed. Census researchers have found that housing cost burdens are associated with lower odds that young adults reach traditional family-formation milestones.

In other words, a shortage of affordable housing doesn't just affect where people live. It can affect when or whether they marry, have children and begin accumulating housing wealth.

We've seen this movie before

Today's multigenerational housing squeeze has a surprisingly strong historical precedent.

When World War II ended in 1945, millions of service members returned to a country that had built far too little housing during the Great Depression and the war.

The National Park Service estimates that the United States was short approximately 5 million homes in 1945.

The consequences sound remarkably contemporary.

Roughly 6 million Americans squeezed in with relatives or friends, according to an account published by Yale University Press, while others resorted to garages, attics, barns, Quonset huts and other makeshift accommodations.

President Harry Truman described millions of families sharing homes as the nation's housing shortage remained acute, according to a Congressional Research Service history of federal housing policy.

The postwar crisis and today's problem aren't identical. The 1940s shortage was intensified by years of extremely low construction during the Depression and war, followed by millions of servicemen returning within a relatively short period.

But the underlying economic mechanism is familiar: The country had more people ready to form households than it had suitable, affordable homes for them. So young families doubled up.

How America got out of it

The postwar housing crisis didn't disappear because Americans suddenly became wealthier or because returning veterans simply waited long enough. America built its way out.

The federal government helped stimulate construction and homeownership, while the GI Bill provided eligible veterans access to favorable government-backed mortgages. The Federal Housing Administration also helped expand mortgage financing.

Congress followed with the Housing Act of 1949, which declared a national goal of providing a decent home and suitable living environment for American families. Among other measures, the law authorized support for 810,000 public housing units over six years and expanded federal mortgage insurance designed to promote construction and homeownership.

Private builders simultaneously revolutionized the way homes were produced.

Developments such as Levittown on Long Island applied mass-production techniques to housing. Rather than constructing one customized home at a time, builders standardized designs and divided construction into specialized tasks.

The result was dramatically faster production of relatively small, comparatively affordable homes. Levittown became one model for an enormous suburban building boom that spread across the country.

The move is aimed at increasing reading skills and language development

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Los Angeles Unified School District is introducing age-based classroom screen-time limits, ranging from no weekly screen time for its youngest students to 10 hours a week for high schoolers.

• A Cedars-Sinai pediatric neurologist says reducing screen exposure could give children more opportunities to develop language, reading, social, and higher-level thinking skills.

• The new limits include screen-based homework, while parents are also being encouraged to establish screen-free periods at home, particularly before bedtime and during meals.

Schools in Los Angeles are cutting the amount of time students spend looking at screens as educators and parents grapple with the role technology plays in children's learning and development.

The Los Angeles Unified School District and several neighboring districts are introducing stricter age-based limits on classroom screen time for the new school year, according to Cedars-Sinai.

Under the guidance, children in early education, kindergarten, and first grade will have no weekly classroom screen time. Students in grades two and three will be limited to one hour and 40 minutes a week, while fourth- and fifth-graders will be limited to two and a half hours.

The limits rise to six hours a week for students in grades six through eight, and 10 hours for high school students. Screen-based homework counts toward the limits.

The changes come amid concerns about how heavy screen use could affect developing brains.

Dr. Jane Tavyev Asher, a pediatric neurologist and director of the Division of Pediatric Neurology at Cedars-Sinai Guerin Children's, said childhood is a particularly important period for developing language, reading, attention, and social skills.

Asher argues that excessive screen exposure can place greater emphasis on visual processing while reducing opportunities for conversation, face-to-face interaction, and other experiences involved in developing language and social abilities. Reducing classroom screen use, she said, could create more opportunities for active learning and conversation.

The issue may be especially significant for younger children. During early childhood, auditory and language centers develop rapidly as children speak and interact with other people. Heavy screen use can potentially displace those interactions, including opportunities to recognize facial expressions, body language, and other social cues, according to Asher.

Screen use raises different concerns as children get older

For middle school students, the concern shifts toward the development of higher-level thinking.

Around age 12, children increasingly begin connecting ideas, asking questions, and pursuing answers independently, Asher said. She cautioned that passive consumption of information through screens including reliance on artificial intelligence may provide fewer opportunities to exercise those skills than more active forms of learning.

Smartphones present another challenge because students can carry them and access them throughout the day.

Asher recommended that families consider delaying smartphones and pointed to the Wait Until 8th movement, in which participating parents pledge to postpone giving children smartphones until at least the end of eighth grade or age 13. For families that need to stay in contact with their children, she suggested a basic phone without internet access as an alternative.

Parents can reinforce limits at home

Schools aren't the only place where screen habits are formed.

Asher recommends that parents encourage alternatives such as reading, creative play, outdoor activities, and spending time together as a family. Parents can also model the behavior they want their children to adopt by paying attention to their own screen habits.

Among her recommendations is establishing a screen-free period for at least two hours before bedtime and keeping devices away during meals. The latter gives families more opportunities for conversation and interaction, while reducing screens before bed can help children avoid bright light immediately before sleep.

The new school policies represent a notable shift after years in which laptops, tablets, and other digital tools became increasingly integrated into education.

For families, however, the broader question extends beyond how much technology schools use. It is how to balance the convenience and educational potential of digital tools with the face-to-face interactions and active learning experiences children need as they develop.

The recalled products are generally used as dietary supplements

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Food To Live is recalling several green powder products sold nationwide because they may be contaminated with Salmonella.

• The recall covers certain lots of wheatgrass, spirulina, algae, and SuperGrass powders sold in multiple sizes, including bulk packages.

• No illnesses have been reported, but consumers with recalled products are being told not to eat them and to throw them away or return them for a refund.

Consumers who use green powders and supplements should check their pantries after Food To Live recalled several products that may be contaminated with Salmonella.

Lexunder Inc., which does business as Food To Live, announced the recall Aug. 7. The affected products were sold nationwide and distributed online to consumers and businesses through FoodToLive.com, FoodInBulk.com, and other online marketplaces, according to a recall notice posted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

The recall includes certain lots of Food To Live Wheatgrass Powder, Organic Spirulina Powder, Organic Algae Powder Mix, Organic SuperGrass Powder, and Organic Wheatgrass Powder.

The recalled products are generally used as dietary supplements. Powders such as wheatgrass, spirulina, and blended super greens are commonly mixed into smoothies, protein shakes, water, or juice and consumed as a drink. Wheatgrass powder can also be incorporated into foods such as salad dressings, dips, and soups.

Products were sold in packages ranging from a few ounces to several pounds, as well as bulk cases weighing as much as 55 pounds.

Affected lots fall within the range SO-72558 through SO-79374, along with certain products carrying the codes VFD/ORG/MORP/B/25, C25051312 and OSP251001. However, not every product or lot within that broad range is necessarily included.

Consumers should compare the product name and specific lot number with the FDA's recall list. The lot code and best-before date can be found on the back of the package below the Nutrition Facts panel and next to the barcode.

Why are the green powders being recalled?

The recall began after the FDA notified the company that a retail sample of Food To Live Organic Supergreens Mix tested positive for Salmonella. The sample came from an 8-ounce package carrying lot number SO-77820.

The source of the contamination has not yet been determined. Food To Live has suspended production and distribution of the affected products while the company and FDA investigate. No illnesses associated with the recall had been reported as of the company's announcement.

Salmonella can cause fever, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. Although healthy people generally recover, infections can be particularly dangerous for young children, older adults, and people with weakened immune systems. In rare cases, Salmonella can enter the bloodstream and lead to more serious illnesses.

What should consumers do?

Consumers should not eat recalled Food To Live products, according to the company. Instead, they should throw the products away or return them to the place where they were purchased for a full refund.

Consumers with questions can contact Lexunder Inc. at 718-717-1029 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern time Monday through Friday or email recall@foodtolive.com.

Its the latest flavor of an old scheme

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• The gold bar scam is a fast-growing fraud in which criminals convince victims that their money is at risk and must be converted into gold for safekeeping.

• Scammers often impersonate government officials, banks, or tech-support representatives and may send couriers directly to victims homes to collect gold bars.

• Authorities warn that legitimate government agencies and financial institutions will never tell consumers to buy gold or other precious metals to protect their savings.

Scammers have to convince their victims to put their money in something that can be stolen, but cant be traced or retrieved. The latest vehicle is gold.

The sophisticated scam involving gold bars is costing consumers hundreds of thousands and sometimes millions of dollars after fraudsters convince victims that moving their savings into precious metals is the only way to keep their money safe.

Known as the gold bar scam, the scheme typically begins with an alarming phone call, text message, email, or computer pop-up. The victim is told that a bank account, Social Security number, computer, or other personal information has been compromised.

The warning is fake, but scammers make the threat sound urgent and credible. They may pose as bank employees, technology companies, law enforcement officers or government agents, while telling victims that criminals are attempting to steal their money.

Then comes the supposed solution: Move the money somewhere safe. Its an old trick. The vehicle used to be gift cards.

How the gold bar scam works

The scam can unfold over days or even weeks. After gaining a victims trust, criminals instruct the person to withdraw money from a bank or investment account and use it to purchase gold bars or other precious metals.

Scammers may tell victims that gold is safer than cash because their bank accounts are supposedly under attack or being investigated.

They can also provide detailed instructions about how much money to withdraw, where to purchase the gold, and what to tell bank employees if questioned about the transactions.

That secrecy is an important part of the scheme. Victims may be warned that bank employees cannot be trusted or that discussing the situation could interfere with a government investigation.

Once the victim has purchased the gold, the scammers arrange to take possession of it. In some cases, a courier comes directly to the victims home or meets them at another location. The victim may be given a password or code that the courier repeats to make the exchange appear legitimate.

After the gold changes hands, it is usually extremely difficult to recover.

Why scammers want gold

Gold offers criminals several advantages.

Large amounts of money can be concentrated into relatively small, portable bars. Unlike a bank transfer, which may potentially be stopped or traced, physically handing gold to another person can make recovering the victims assets much more difficult.

The use of gold also gives scammers another opportunity to make an unusual request sound legitimate. A criminal impersonating an investigator might claim, for example, that converting money into gold is part of a government security procedure.

It isn't.

Government agencies, law enforcement organizations and legitimate financial institutions do not require consumers to purchase gold bars, cryptocurrency, or gift cards to protect their money or assist with an investigation.

The scam relies on fear and trust

Although the gold purchase is the most distinctive part of the scheme, the fraud depends heavily on social engineering.

Scammers create a crisis and then present themselves as the person who can solve it.

They may know personal information about the victim, spoof legitimate phone numbers, or send documents that appear official. Multiple scammers can also participate, with one person pretending to be a bank employee and another posing as a government investigator.

Those tactics can make the story appear to have been independently confirmed.

The criminals also create urgency. Victims may be told their life savings could disappear within hours unless they follow instructions immediately.

Red flags

Consumers should be suspicious of anyone who unexpectedly claims their money is in danger and then tells them to move it.

Requests to buy gold, cryptocurrency, or gift cards are particularly serious warning signs. So are instructions to withdraw large amounts of cash, lie to bank employees, keep an investigation secret, or hand valuables to a courier.

Consumers who receive such a call should end the conversation and independently contact their bank or the government agency the caller claims to represent. Rather than calling a number provided by the suspected scammer, consumers should find the organizations official contact information themselves.

Anyone who has already transferred money or purchased gold for a suspected scammer should contact their financial institution and law enforcement as quickly as possible.

The simplest rule may also be the most important: No legitimate government official, bank investigator, or technology company will ask you to protect your savings by buying gold bars and handing them to a stranger.