Consumer News: Starbucks' new fall drinks are here — here's how to try them without spending a fortune

A new analysis breaks down household food costs and reveals how spending habits vary across generations

• The average American household spends more than $10,000 a year on food.

• Food accounts for 12.9% of the average households annual spending, making it the third-largest expense category.

• Younger and older generations have noticeably different habits when it comes to fast food, meat, snacks, and beverages.

Between groceries, takeout, snacks, and the occasional coffee run, food spending can add up quickly.

A new analysis from CashNetUSA offers a closer look at just how much American households are spending on food and how those habits differ between generations.

According to the analysis, the average household spends more than $10,169 on food each year. That represents 12.9% of its overall spending, putting food behind only housing and transportation. Housing, by comparison, accounts for 33.4% of household spending, while transportation makes up 17%.

The analysis also comes as food prices continue to change. The report notes that food prices increased 3.2% between April 2025 and April 2026, although some categories, including beef and fresh fruits and vegetables, saw larger increases.

How the analysis measured food spending

To examine Americans eating and spending habits, CashNetUSA analyzed data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 2024 Consumer Expenditure Survey.

The researchers first calculated average annual household spending and then broke food purchases into different categories. They also converted spending into percentages and compared the results across five generations: Gen Z, millennials, Gen X, baby boomers, and the Silent Generation.

The analysis uses the generation of the households reference person, which the Bureau of Labor Statistics generally defines as the person who owns or rents the home. All of the figures represent total household spending, and the data was current as of May 2026.

Spending habits vary

The results show that food spending looks different depending on a households generation. Gen Z spends the largest share of its food budget on food away from home, at 41.5%. It also directs 23.3% of its food and nonalcoholic beverage spending toward fast-food restaurants, compared with 19.6% for Millennials and 11.4% for the Silent Generation.

Other everyday purchases add up, too. Households spend an average of $1,414 per year on meat, with chicken and ground beef accounting for the largest portions. Dairy spending averages $631 annually, including $201 on cheese.

Snacks are another notable expense, costing the average household $719 per year. Potato chips make up the largest share at $214, followed by candy and chewing gum at $162.

The numbers don't necessarily mean every household spends this way, but they do offer a useful snapshot of where food dollars are going. For consumers trying to trim their budgets, the analysis suggests that keeping track of smaller purchases particularly snacks, takeout, and coffee could help identify spending that adds up over time.

New research suggests shoppers shouldnt assume an AI-generated recommendation has been vetted

• AI models recommended a completely fictional company in up to 100% of test runs, showing that confident recommendations dont necessarily mean a business has been vetted.

• AI recommendations can change significantly from one search to the next, with roughly half of the suggested brands changing when researchers asked the same question twice.

• Experts recommend using AI as a starting point, not the final word, and checking a companys digital footprint, customer reviews and independent sources before making a purchase.

More people are turning to AI tools like ChatGPT and Gemini for help deciding what to buy, where to shop, and which companies to trust. But how much confidence should consumers really place in those recommendations?

A new experiment from digital marketing agency Fractl raises some uncomfortable questions. Researchers created a completely fictional company with no website, customers, or actual business behind it and tested whether AI models would recommend it alongside legitimate competitors. In many cases, they did, and they did so with surprising confidence.

The findings suggest that an AI chatbot sounding certain about a company doesnt necessarily mean that company has been vetted or that the recommendation is based on solid information.

ConsumerAffairs spoke with Nicole Franco, Head of Digital PR, AI Innovation at Fractl, who explained that consumers may want to keep this in mind as AI increasingly becomes part of the way they research products and services.

What the research found

In one study, researchers placed a completely fabricated company alongside five legitimate competitors in simulated search results.

Six of the nine AI models tested recommended the fake company in 94% to 100% of runs, while two others recommended it less often or included caveats. The newest model tested, Claude Fable 5, was the only one that consistently identified the company as unverifiable and explained why it was leaving it out.

A second study looked at 11,573 AI answers across 15 industries and found that AI recommendations often extend beyond the biggest, best-known companies. In fact, 85% of recommendations went to brands outside their industry's top five.

The researchers also found that asking the same buyer question twice could produce noticeably different results: roughly half of the recommended brands changed between responses on several major AI platforms.

What made me surprised is the little effort needed to get a recommendation for a company which doesn't exist at all, Franco said. We created a business which had no website, no customers, no history, and six out of nine models recommended this business 94% to 100% of the times it was part of the information that the model got access to.

This shows quite obvious vulnerability for anyone able to create a credible-looking piece of information online."

The risks to shoppers

With half of recommended brands changing when the same question is asked, Franco shared some of the risks this can pose to shoppers.

AI-generated shortlists shouldn't automatically be assumed to represent the top options, she said. When we asked the exact same prompt twice, roughly half of the suggested brands shifted. While this volatility isn't particularly concerning for minor purchases like running shoes, it warrants substantial caution for high-stakes decisions, such as selecting a mortgage lender or financial product.

In those critical scenarios, users should reasonably expect transparency regarding why a specific company was recommended.

Check for a digital footprint

If youre struggling to figure out whether a company that pops up in an AI search is legitimate, Franco recommends doing some research.

"If I searched for a company independently and turned up almost nothing in the search results, that would immediately raise flags for me, she said. A legitimate business should leave a footprint beyond a single favorable article.

I recommend examining the sources cited by the AI and performing your own background check to see if authentic customer feedback and reputable sources corroborate its existence. If every piece of information leads back to a single source, I would not feel secure making a purchase there."

To avoid any risky purchases, Franco encourages consumers to use AI as a starting point, and conduct their own research outside of the AI chatbot.

Even if I haven't heard of a company before, I'm still going to do additional research on it and will most likely cite the sources, she said. When it comes to big purchases, I would ask the same question again or ask other models too. I've seen enough variations in our research to not make an expensive choice based on just one answer from AI."

A new survey finds that many workers are still checking in while theyre away and some worry AI could make taking PTO feel even riskier

• More than half of workers arent fully unplugging: 62% said they checked or responded to work emails, calls, or messages during their most recent vacation, while 55% felt pressure to remain reachable.

• AI is adding to PTO anxiety: 26% of workers worry taking vacation could make them appear more replaceable because AI can keep work moving while theyre away. Younger workers are especially concerned.

• Many workers return from vacation still feeling burned out: 76% said theyve felt like they needed another vacation immediately after returning, suggesting that time off doesnt always mean truly disconnecting from work.

Vacation is supposed to be a chance to step away from work, recharge, and enjoy some time without thinking about your inbox. But for many Americans, actually unplugging can be easier said than done.

Between checking emails, answering messages and staying available for work emergencies, plenty of workers find themselves bringing their jobs along for the trip.

And now, there may be a new source of PTO anxiety: artificial intelligence.

A new survey from NumberBarn found that more than one in four employed Americans worry taking vacation could make them seem more replaceable because AI can keep work moving while theyre away.

ConsumerAffairs spoke with Collin Czarnecki, research lead at NumberBarn, to explore whether AI could make it even harder for employees to feel comfortable stepping away from work.

Methodology

NumberBarn surveyed 1,134 employed Americans in June 2026 about their vacation and PTO habits, workplace expectations, and attitudes toward disconnecting from work.

The survey included full-time and part-time employees, as well as self-employed workers, freelancers and independent contractors. Respondents answered questions about communicating with work while on vacation, employer expectations, PTO use, social media, and how artificial intelligence is affecting their views of taking time off.

Key Findings

Heres a look at what the survey found:

• Nearly two-thirds (62%) of respondents said they checked or responded to work emails, calls, or messages during their most recent vacation.

• 55% said they felt pressure from an employer, manager, or client to remain reachable.

• Nearly one-third (32%) said they had secretly worked while on vacation.

• 39% said they had interrupted or changed vacation plans because of a work issue.

• 26% of workers said they worry taking vacation could make them appear more replaceable because AI can continue performing work while they're away.

• 33% of those ages 18 to 29 said AI has made them less comfortable taking vacation, compared with 19% of workers ages 30 to 44 and 15.1% of those 60 and older.

• Overall, 76% said they've felt like they needed another vacation immediately after returning from one.

AI is creating more stress

These findings highlight the stress that AI is causing many employees who want to take vacations.

Taking a vacation is supposed to reduce stress, but AI is giving some workers a new reason to worry about stepping away from work, Czarnecki said. Most of the anxiety comes down to job security and the pressure employees already feel to prove their value at work. Among workers who said AI has made them less comfortable taking vacation, more than half (55%) worry they'll appear more replaceable, while half feel a greater need to prove their value.

When it comes to PTO and taking time off, AI adds a new layer to an anxiety that was already there. Employees have always worried about falling behind or how taking time off might be perceived, but now there's an added question of, If AI can keep doing parts of my job while I'm gone, what does that say about how necessary I am?

The pressure to keep up

Before AI, many employees felt the pressure to keep up with their email inboxes or messages from coworkers while on vacation. However, the introduction of Ai has only intensified that.

Czarnecki explained that one-third of those who are less comfortable taking vacation because of AI say the technology has raised productivity expectations at work which is part of a bigger workplace culture issue especially when employees already feel a sense of guilt for taking PTO.

As AI allows work to move faster, there's a risk that employees start feeling like they have to keep up with that pace, even when they're supposed to be taking time off, he said.

Take advantage of your vacation time

If youre thinking about taking a vacation, or youre stressed about falling behind at work, Czarnecki recommends that employees take advantage of their vacation time.

For younger workers especially, it's important to set expectations before taking time off, he said. Make sure coworkers know what's covered, what actually constitutes an emergency, and whether you'll be reachable at all. Then, as difficult as it can be, remember to actually disconnect.

Younger workers may naturally feel like they have more to prove, but constantly checking email or Slack from vacation can reinforce the expectation that you're always available, which isn't much of a vacation.

AI should be making things easier

Despite this surveys findings, AI tools should make employees jobs easier not more stressful.

AI adds another layer of anxiety to a workforce that already has a hard time disconnecting, Czarnecki said.

He pointed to several of the study findings that revealed exactly that:

• 62% checked or responded to work during their most recent vacation.

• 60% regularly worked extra before taking time off.

• 40% have started working before their vacation officially ended.

• 76% say they've come back feeling like they need another vacation.

One of the findings that stands out in the study is that 32% of workers have secretly worked on vacation without telling the people they're traveling with, Czarnecki said. That suggests the pressure isn't always coming from an explicit company policy. Some workers have internalized the idea that they need to stay productive even when they're taking time off.

Ideally, AI should be making it easier for people to step away because work can continue while they're gone.

The scope of the breach remains unclear

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• McKesson confirmed that attackers accessed third-party applications and removed data connected to some customers.

• The ShinyHunters extortion group claims it stole about one terabyte of data containing roughly 284 million records, but McKesson has not verified those figures.

• Patients should be alert for convincing involving prescriptions, insurance claims, medical bills, or requests to verify personal information.

McKesson, one of the nations largest pharmaceutical distributors and healthcare-services companies, has confirmed a cybersecurity incident that may have exposed customer and patient information.

The company said it discovered the incident on Aug. 25 and determined that an unauthorized party had accessed certain third-party applications and taken data.

According to McKesson, the affected information was associated with a subset of customers in its Oncology & Multispecialty and Medical-Surgical business units. The company said its investigation, supported by outside cybersecurity experts, remains in its early stages.

McKesson has not disclosed how many customers or patients may be affected or identified the specific types of information taken, according to a report from Malwarebytes.

Hackers make sweeping claims

The ShinyHunters cybercrime group has claimed responsibility for the attack. The group told BleepingComputer that it obtained access after conducting voice-phishing attacks against several McKesson employees.

Voice phishing, also known as vishing, typically involves criminals calling workers while impersonating technical support personnel, company officials, or other trusted parties. The goal is to persuade an employee to disclose login credentials or approve an authentication request.

ShinyHunters claims it used compromised Okta single-sign-on accounts to enter McKessons Salesforce and Snowflake environments. It says it removed approximately one terabyte of data between Aug. 21 and Aug. 25.

The hackers also claim the stolen files contain about 284 million records, including personally identifiable information and protected health information. That does not necessarily mean information belonging to 284 million different people was taken, because one person can have numerous records.

Those claims have not been independently verified, and McKesson has not confirmed that specific categories of patient information were compromised.

Why medical data is valuable

Healthcare information can be especially useful to criminals because it may contain a combination of names, addresses, dates of birth, insurance information, and details about medical treatment.

Even when stolen records do not contain payment card or bank account numbers, criminals can use personal details to construct highly convincing phishing messages.

Potential victims could receive calls, texts, or emails that appear to come from a pharmacy, doctor, insurer, medical supplier, or patient-assistance program. A scammer might claim there is a problem with a prescription, an unpaid bill, a canceled appointment or an insurance account that must be verified immediately.

The inclusion of accurate personal or medical details does not prove that a message is legitimate. Consumers should independently contact the organization using a phone number from its official website, an insurance card, or a recent statement.

What consumers should do

Because McKesson has not yet said who is affected, consumers may have to wait for additional information or an official notification. In the meantime, Malwarebytes recommends taking several precautions:

• Be suspicious of unexpected messages about prescriptions, medical bills, insurance claims, or deliveries.

• Do not provide passwords, authentication codes, Social Security numbers, or financial information to an unsolicited caller.

• Change any reused passwords and give each important account a unique password.

• Enable multifactor authentication wherever possible.

• Review insurance explanations of benefits and medical statements for unfamiliar services.

• Monitor bank and credit card accounts for unauthorized transactions.

• Consider placing a free credit freeze with Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion if sensitive identity information is confirmed to have been exposed.

Consumers who discover evidence of identity theft can create a personalized recovery plan through the Federal Trade Commissions (FTC's) IdentityTheft.gov website.

McKesson is expected to release more information as its investigation determines what data was taken and which customers or individuals were affected. Until then, the hackers claims about the volume and contents of the stolen records should be treated as unconfirmed.