Consumer News: Fi recalls dog supplements over possible Salmonella contamination

The problem is not under the hood but in the dashboard

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Infotainment systems account for 25% of all problems reported by new-vehicle owners, according to a new J.D. Power study.

• Multimedia was the only major vehicle category in which quality worsened in 2026, as software, connectivity and increasingly complex systems create problems for drivers.

• There is some good news: Navigation systems improved significantly, with customer satisfaction rising 17 points from last year.

Cars are getting better in many ways, but the increasingly sophisticated technology packed into dashboards continues to frustrate drivers.

J.D. Power's 2026 U.S. Multimedia Quality and Satisfaction Study found that infotainment remains the most problematic major category in new vehicles and was the only category to get worse this year.

That's significant because automakers have increasingly moved basic vehicle functions onto touchscreens while adding smartphone integration, navigation, voice controls and connected services.

J.D. Power found 42.4 multimedia problems for every 100 vehicles, essentially unchanged from last year. But because overall vehicle quality improved, multimedia now accounts for 25% of all reported vehicle problems.

Even more striking, the five most frequently reported problems across the industry are all related to infotainment.

Software replaces hardware as the problem

The findings suggest that the nature of vehicle quality problems is changing.

As vehicles become more dependent on computers, software and connectivity, problems are increasingly associated with system complexity and software performance rather than a broken physical component.

The industry continues to make progress improving overall vehicle quality, but multimedia remains a persistent challenge, said Lisa Boor, director of customer success, OEM solutions at J.D. Power.

Boor said automakers that simplify their systems while making them more reliable are likely to achieve better quality and customer-satisfaction results.

For consumers shopping for a new vehicle, that suggests the test drive should include more than checking acceleration, comfort and handling. Buyers may also want to spend several minutes experimenting with the touchscreen and other technology.

Try connecting your phone, changing audio sources, adjusting commonly used vehicle settings and entering a destination into the navigation system. A system that seems unnecessarily complicated during a test drive may not become less frustrating after the vehicle is in your driveway.

Navigation is getting better

There was some encouraging news in the study. Navigation problems declined, particularly complaints involving usability and accuracy. As a result, overall satisfaction with vehicle navigation jumped 17 points to 933 on J.D. Power's 1,000-point scale.

Customer satisfaction also improved in areas involving multimedia and speaker problems.

The improvement suggests automakers can solve some technology complaints even as vehicles become more software-dependent.

A big survey of new-car owners

The results are based on responses from 78,514 people who purchased or leased a new 2026 model-year vehicle. Owners were surveyed after their first 90 days with the vehicle.

The study was conducted from June 2025 through May 2026 and draws on data used in J.D. Power's Initial Quality Study and Automotive Performance, Execution and Layout Study.

The larger message for car buyers is that technology deserves careful consideration when choosing a vehicle. Engines, transmissions and other traditional components may be becoming more reliable, but a growing portion of the ownership experience now takes place through a screen.

And when that screen doesn't work the way drivers expect, it can turn an otherwise well-built new car into a daily source of frustration.

De Todito snack products were distributed in New Jersey and Utah

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• El Eden Import Distributor Corp. is recalling about 264 pounds of snack products containing pork cracklings imported from Colombia.

• USDA says Colombia is not eligible to export meat products to the United States, and the recalled products do not have required import marks.

• No illnesses or injuries have been reported, but consumers should not eat the products and should throw them away or return them to the store.

A New York importer is recalling hundreds of pounds of popular Colombian snack products because they contain pork that was imported from a country that is not currently eligible to ship meat products to the United States.

El Eden Import Distributor Corp., based in Long Island City, N.Y., is recalling approximately 264 pounds of potato chip products containing chicharrn, or pork cracklings, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced Sept. 9.

The products were imported on July 28, 2026, from Colombia. USDA says Colombia is not eligible to export meat or poultry products to the United States.

Products being recalled

The recall covers 45-gram foil bags of two De Todito varieties:

• De Todito NATURAL mixed chips containing "CHICHARRN AMERICANO JACKS," "Margarita" and "NATU CHIPS."

• De Todito BBQ mixed chips containing "CHICHARRN AMERICANO JACKS," "Margarita" and "NatuChips."

Unlike many meat recalls, consumers won't find a USDA establishment or import inspection mark to help identify the affected packages. FSIS says the recalled products do not bear any import marks on their labels.

The products were sent to a distributor in New Jersey and to retail locations in New Jersey and Utah.

Consumer complaint led to discovery

According to FSIS, the problem surfaced after the agency received a consumer complaint involving De Todito snack products containing dried plantains, potato chips and chicharrn imported from Colombia.

The issue isn't that USDA has identified contamination with a pathogen such as Salmonella or Listeria. Rather, the pork entered from a country that is not eligible to export meat products to the U.S., meaning the products did not enter through the required federal import inspection system.

There have been no confirmed reports of illness or injury associated with the recalled products.

What to do

FSIS is concerned that some of the snacks may still be sitting in consumers' pantries. Anyone who has one of the recalled products should not eat it. USDA recommends throwing it away or returning it to the place of purchase.

Consumers who are concerned about an illness or injury after eating the product should contact a healthcare provider.

Questions about meat and poultry recalls can also be directed to the USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline at 1-888-674-6854.

Five other high-quality vehicles miss the cut

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• The 2027 Kia Telluride and 2026-27 Tesla Model Y have earned the Insurance Institute for Highway Safetys highest safety designation, Top Safety Pick+.

• Both vehicles received good ratings in the major crash tests as well as pedestrian and vehicle-to-vehicle crash prevention evaluations.

• Five other recently tested vehicles, including models from BMW, GMC, Lexus and Toyota, fell short of qualifying for either IIHS safety award.

Consumers shopping for a new SUV have two more models to consider if crash protection is high on their priority list.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has awarded its highest safety honor, Top Safety Pick+, to the redesigned 2027 Kia Telluride and 2026-27 Tesla Model Y. Both vehicles turned in strong performances under the organization's increasingly demanding testing standards.

To earn an IIHS safety award for 2026, vehicles must receive good ratings in the small overlap front, moderate overlap front and side crash tests. Headlights offered on every trim level must be rated either acceptable or good.

The requirements are even tougher for Top Safety Pick+. Vehicles must receive a good rating for pedestrian front crash prevention and at least an acceptable rating in IIHS's updated vehicle-to-vehicle front crash prevention test. The qualifying crash-avoidance technology also must be standard equipment.

Telluride improvements make a difference

Kia redesigned the Telluride for the 2027 model year, and IIHS said vehicles manufactured after June 2026 qualify for the award.

The production date matters. Tellurides built after June are equipped with headlights that earned a good rating. Earlier versions had headlights rated only marginal, preventing those vehicles from qualifying.

The newer Telluride earned good ratings in all three major crash tests, its headlights and both of the front crash prevention evaluations. Its seat belt reminder system also received a good rating.

Model Y scores well across the board

Tesla's Model Y, redesigned for the 2026 model year, also earned good ratings across all the tests that determine eligibility for the Top Safety Pick+ designation.

One potential consideration for buyers is the Model Y's seat belt reminder system, which IIHS rated marginal. However, seat belt reminder ratings are not currently part of the criteria used to determine Top Safety Pick awards.

Five vehicles fall short

IIHS also released results for five other recently tested 2026 vehicles, but none qualified for either Top Safety Pick designation.

The BMW 3 Series earned good ratings in the small overlap and side tests but was rated acceptable in the moderate overlap test and marginal for vehicle-to-vehicle crash prevention. The BMW i4 had a poor rating for its standard vehicle-to-vehicle crash prevention system, while its available headlights ranged from marginal to poor.

The GMC Canyon crew cab received a marginal rating in the moderate overlap test and a poor rating for vehicle-to-vehicle crash prevention. The Lexus IS received a marginal moderate-overlap rating and an acceptable side-crash rating.

The Toyota Crown Signia came close in several areas, earning good ratings for its side crash protection, headlights and both crash-prevention systems. But its marginal rating in the moderate overlap front test kept it from earning an award.

For car shoppers, the results illustrate why it can pay to look beyond a vehicle's overall reputation for safety. IIHS ratings can vary by model year and, in some cases such as the Telluride, even by when a vehicle was manufactured.

A new study suggests taking a simple at-home screening test could make a meaningful difference in colorectal cancer survival

• People who participated in colorectal cancer screening had a 43% lower risk of dying from the disease.

• Researchers followed more than 376,000 people in Sweden for up to 14 years.

• The findings highlight the potential lifesaving benefits of actually completing a screening test when one is offered.

Colorectal cancer screening may be more powerful than some people realize. New research from researchers at Karolinska Institutet and Ume University in Sweden suggests that people who participate in screening could have a substantially lower risk of dying from colorectal cancer.

The study looked at Swedens StockholmGotland screening program, where adults ages 60 to 74 are offered screening every two years. The process is relatively simple: People receive a kit at home, collect a stool sample, and send it in to be checked for small amounts of blood that aren't visible to the naked eye. If blood is detected, additional testing, usually a colonoscopy, is offered.

A previous evaluation of the programme showed that those who received an invitation to screening had a 14 per cent lower risk of dying from the disease, researcher Johannes Blom said in a news release. We have now been able to show that the mortality is significantly lower than that among those who actually take part in the screening.

How researchers studied screening

Researchers examined people who were invited to participate in the StockholmGotland screening program between 2008 and 2012. They compared this group with a control group made up of people who were either invited to screening later or weren't invited during the study period.

Because not everyone who receives an invitation actually completes the test, the researchers used statistical methods to account for factors that could affect the comparison. This included accounting for people in the control group who were eventually offered screening and people who received an invitation but chose not to participate.

The study ultimately included 376,511 people, and researchers tracked participants for as long as 14 years. During that time, 1,668 colorectal cancer deaths were recorded.

The results could encourage more people to get screened

The researchers found that simply being invited to screening was associated with a 26% lower risk of dying from colorectal cancer. But the difference was even larger among people who actually participated: Their risk of dying from the disease was 43% lower.

That distinction is important because roughly one-third of people offered screening in the program did not submit a sample.

Although screening is offered free of charge and the test is simple to carry out, around a third of people do not submit a sample, Blom said. Our study highlights the importance of taking part in colorectal cancer screening, and shows that it can actually save lives.

The researchers note that their findings rely on statistical adjustments, so some uncertainty remains. Still, the results suggest that participating in colorectal cancer screening could make a meaningful difference in the risk of dying from the disease.

For consumers, the takeaway is fairly straightforward: If you're offered a colorectal cancer screening test, completing it may be an important step toward detecting potential problems and reducing the risk of dying from colorectal cancer.