CPSC budget: Reading between the lines

It doesn’t take much reading between the lines in the latest proposed federal budget to learn what the Bush administration thinks of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

The budget proposal for fiscal 2008 boosts the agency’s  current budget by $880,000 to $63,250,000. In this era of relatively low inflation and high budgetary demands, that may sound sufficient. But when mandatory salary and benefits increases are taken into account, what the increase really means is a staff reduction of 19 employees, bringing the agency’s total to 401 full-time employees. We’ll do the math for you: that’s a 4.5 percent cut in staff.  This will make the third consecutive year of cuts for the agency; in 2005, the agency had 471 full-time employees; in 2006, 440 and this year, 420.

Even the CPSC admits that the staff reduction will have an impact on the agency’s mission. We quote from the agency's budget document:

“The 2008 funding level will challenge the commission’s ability to maintain its existing level of standards development, enforcement, public information and international activities.” The budget also states: “With fewer people, some work will be slowed down or deferred in 2008. Further staff reductions may also force reduction of the targets for CPSC’s annual and strategic goals.” 

The agency adds that staff reductions will be done through attrition.

The agency said it still intends to stick to two previously set strategic goals: reduce the death rate from both fires and carbon monoxide poisonings by 20 percent by 2013. However, it said, reducing child drowning deaths will no longer be a top strategic goal, given the resource limitations and limited ability to develop further technical remedies. The agency will continue however to try to reduce the risk for should this be through public information efforts.

As we have written before, the CPSC is already operating with its hands tied. Former chairman Hal Stratton left seven months ago and the White House has not yet named a replacement. As a result, the agency no longer has a quorum. So until a new chairman is confirmed, the CPSC cannot vote on new safety standards (the agency can, however, levy civil penalties of up to $50,000).

Put that together with the proposed 2008 budget, and it's clear that the agency has some real hurdles to overcome to keep fulfilling its mission.

Just how much support will the agency get from the new Democratic Congress? We hope to get an idea today, when the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government is holding a hearing on consumer issues, with heads of both the Federal Trade Commission and CPSC slated to testify. Also scheduled to testify are three consumer groups, including Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports. Stay tuned.

Total recalls: 471 in 2006

We don’t know if this is good news or bad news: In 2006, the Consumer Product Safety Commission announced more product recalls — 471 — than it had in at least 10 years. In 1996, for example, the agency announced 374 recalls; in 2001, 346, and in 2005, 402.

Does this mean there are a lot more unsafe products in the marketplace?  CPSC spokeswoman Julie Vallese firmly believes that’s not the case: “The U.S. marketplace is one of the safest marketplaces for products. It doesn’t mean that there aren’t problems sometimes, but we’re able to recognize and address them very quickly.”

So what’s behind the increase in recalls? Vallese says retailers and manufacturers better understand federal rules and reporting requirements and are thus doing a better job notifying the government when a potentially dangerous product is discovered.

Recalls are continuing at a rapid pace this year. In the first two months of this year, there have been 53 recalls. And about a third involve problems with children’s products. That includes baby rattles and frame ornaments that can break or detach, posing a choking hazard to young children, magnetic construction toys where tiny magnets can fall out and be swallowed (one version is pictured above), causing intestinal blockage and even death and jewelry with high lead content.

So what does this mean to you? Basically caveat emptor. Most recalls are not highly publicized. So it's important to send in those registration cards when you get a new product (you don't  have to fill in all the extra personal information many companies are seeking for marketing data) so the company can notify you if there is a recall. Better still, visit recalls.gov, a great government Web site that lists all recalls from various safety agencies. And best yet, sign up for electronic e-mail alerts to be informed about any recalls that could affect you.

We also plan on expanding our coverage of recalls here at Consumer Reports on Safety. Soon, you'll be able to get a weekly roundup of key recalls by going to our Recalls category or by subscribing to our Recalls RSS feed. Watch this space for more information.

Candy racks may contain an unwelcome "Surprise"

As merchants remove the last remnants of leftover Valentine's Day candy from their shelves and replace it with Easter treats, shoppers should be aware that there may be a hazardous, illegal product mixed in with the marshmallow bunnies and creme-filled eggs. Kinder Surprise eggs, made by Italy's Ferrero Group, are hollow chocolate eggs containing "surprise" toys. The eggs are popular worldwide; there's even a thriving collectors' market for some of the rarer toys. However, Surprise Eggs have been banned in the United States since 1997, when the Consumer Product Safety Commission warned that the toys could pose a choking hazard to children under 3. (That same year, Nestle voluntarily withdrew a similar product, Nestle Magic.) Kinder Surprise also falls afoul of a provision in the 1938 Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, which prohibits embedding "nonnutritive items" in confections.

Despite the ban, which is fully honored by Ferrero's U.S. arm, Surprise Eggs are widely available here, with many imported by companies specializing in foods from countries where the product is available legally. The eggs pictured above, for example, come from Poland, and were purchased for $1.59 each in a suburban New York gourmet food store. A Consumers Union staffer recently confirmed they were available in a German specialty store in the Washington, D.C. area. They are also widely available along the U.S.-Canadian border, since they're legal in Canada. Surprise Eggs are also easily purchased on the Internet, from ethnic importers, candy merchants, and, until recently, even from Amazon.com, which offered Surprise Eggs sold by a Greek importer through its Marketplace program (the products were sold and shipped by the importer, but Amazon provided the e-commerce infrastructure, and they showed up as part of a search on Amazon.com).

What to do: If you see Surprise Eggs on sale at a local or online store, you can notify the CPSC. (The agency contacts vendors and warns them that Surprise Eggs are illegal, though the sheer number of merchants carrying them means that some will inevitably slip through the cracks.) And if you really want to surprise your kids this Easter, you can consider getting them candy and toys separately. Mixing the two, especially when the toy is embedded inside the candy as it is with the Surprise Egg, sends a mixed message about what is and isn't edible, and puts younger children at risk.

Stay on your toes while rolling on your heels

Heelys are hot. 

For kids, the sneakers with wheels in the heels are must-have items, no matter their price, ranging between $59 and $99. 

For investors, Heelys has been an attractive stock since its initial public offering two months ago. It launched at $21 a share, jumping to $32.60 the first day of trading. Today, it is selling around $37. 

But for some local school and government officials as well as shopping mall managers, Heelys are more like a hot potato. Anecdotal reports of broken bones and run-ins with cars have raised a lot of safety concerns, prompting some malls and schools to ban them. One hilly town in England, Yeovil, just banned them altogether; anyone wearing anything that has wheels and can be attached to the feet (that also means skateboards and roller skates) risks being arrested and prosecuted. The maximum potential fine is £500 pounds ($975). 

Based on data submitted so far to the Consumer Product Safety Commission from participating emergency rooms, Heelys — or other sneaker/skates — don’t seem to account for a large number of hospital-treated injuries in the U.S. Records suggest that hospitals treat several hundred related injuries each year. However that number will undoubtedly increase as the popularity of Heelys grows. The 7-year-old company sold 3.9 million pairs for the first nine months of 2006; that’s more than five times the 697,000 pairs sold in 2004. 

Heelys is well aware of the risk, including several different warnings in its shoes and on its Web site. On its Web site, for example, visitors have to read and accept a warning before they can watch any of the videos demonstrating the shoes. “We always recommend that anyone who attempts to use Heelys in any capacity should always wear full protective gear, including: helmets, wrist, elbow, and knee pads … Never use Heelys in an unsafe manner, and never without full protective gear,” the warning says.  The videos, however, feature users who aren’t wearing such safety equipment. Heelys said that's because the video features highly-trained professionals.

To address the risk, Heelys hired Heiden Associates, an economic and product safety consulting firm, to do a study. And according to that study of injuries, based on data from the CPSC and National Sporting Goods Association, Heelys says wheeled shoes have a lower injury rate than nearly all other popular sports. The study estimates that the rate of injuries from wheeled shoes was 33 per 100,000 participants from 2001-2005. That compares to an injury rate of 2,184 for basketball players, 945 for skateboarding, and 358 for inline skating. The study doesn't compare wheeled shoe injury rates with just plain walking, (which we assume many youngsters would be doing if their sneakers didn't have wheels) but Heiden Associates says CPSC emergency room injury data shows that there were almost 19,000 injuries for 7-15 year olds in 2003 associated with shoes and other footwear. 

Still, it pays to be safe not only for your children's sake but for the people around them who stand to get pushed over, should your kids lose control when skating by.

Based just on Heelys videos, it's clear that using sneakers with wheels requires a different technique — even talent — than walking. And in turn, as Heelys and safety officials urge, use protective gear and be attentive to surrounding traffic and other pedestrians, including those who don’t have wheels on their feet. In other words, don't be a heel.

Melting lampshades spark concern on campus

Here’s a scary college tale from the Fredonia campus of the State University of New York (SUNY) involving a popular inexpensive floor lamp: 

“Early Sunday, Jan. 21, at 1 a.m. during a night fire walk, Schulz Hall Director Carrie Davenport traced a smell of something burning to a melting plastic shade on a lamp brought to campus by one of her residents. The heat from a light bulb of correct wattage in the ‘5-Light Multicolored Floor Lamp’ had begun melting its plastic shade, which was dripping onto the resident’s bedspread. The plastic was also releasing toxic fumes. Ms. Davenport took the lamp out of the room, and went looking for another one like it that she had seen in another room. She found it, turned it on, and within 15 minutes, the shade from that lamp also began to melt.”      

This discovery prompted the university to widen its investigation to all the residence halls. The result: three more similar lamps failed safety tests; their shades overheated and melted. “In some cases, the students who kept the lamps in their rooms weren’t aware the lampshades had begun to melt,” the university said, noting that several different brands of the five-bulb lamp were found but only those with plastic shades appeared to pose a hazard. The university said it considered a similar version made with glass shades to be safe. But since those cost considerably more, may not be as popular among the college set. 

SUNY Fredonia subsequently sent a notice to all students asking them to remove these lamps. It also sent emails to several listservs, which in turn prompted some other universities, including Harvard, to issue safety bulletins about the lamps. In addition, officials at Fredonia referred the lamp to the Consumer Product Safety Commission for investigation. Also studying the lamp is Underwriters Laboratories. John Drengenberg, consumer affairs manager, said the nonprofit safety testing organization is concerned because the incidents in question appear to involve lamps that are not the same configuration as models that UL tested and certified. Drengenberg said UL is withholding the UL mark on similar new lamps, which effectively shuts down production, until further study.   

According to SUNY Fredonia, the lamps are available at a number of nationwide retailers for less than $20. “Different models were found defective but all shared the common plastic shade although some required Type A 60 watt bulbs and other required Type B 25 watt bulbs. Damaged shades were found in lamps using both sizes of bulbs,” even when the proper watt bulbs were used, the university said.   

SUNY Fredonia has advised all students to stop using these lamps immediately, and has taken steps to ensure that the lamps have been removed. Until more is known about the scope of the hazards, we recommend all consumers do same

Peanut butter recall highlights food-safety challenges

The latest warning on salmonella comes from the sandwich aisle — this time it's peanut butter that has been recalled. The warning serves as yet another reminder of the gaps in our food-safety infrastructure. Consumers Union, the non-profit publisher of Consumer Reports, has long promoted the creation of a single agency to oversee the nation's food supply, and we continue to do so. "A single food agency with enhanced powers could conduct more systematic inspections, would have authority to recall hazardous food products, could conduct enforcement actions against violators, and could allow for tracing of hazardous food products back to plants or suppliers,"  said Sally Greenberg, Senior Counsel at Consumers Union. "One food agency with strong powers would be better positioned to prevent problems like the recent salmonella outbreak in peanut butter." 

Fortunately, Congress may finally be moving in that direction. Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) are working to revive the Safe Food Act, a long-delayed bill that would establish a single food agency with enhanced powers, to replace the patchwork system of 15 agencies administering at least 30 laws, all having some piece of the regulation of food safety. "Consumers Union supports this legislation and looks forward to working with its sponsors to see it enacted into law," said Greenberg. 

In the meantime, consumers should check their cupboards for any jars of Peter Pan or Great Value peanut butter that have a code on the lid starting with 2111. If you have them, stop using them immediately and contact the manufacturer, ConAgra, at 866-344-6970. More information is also available on ConAgra's web site.

Update: The FDA has advised consumers not to eat any Peter Pan peanut butter purchased since May 2006 and not to eat Great Value peanut butter with a product code beginning with "2111" purchased since May 2006 because of risk of contamination with Salmonella Tennessee. All Peter Pan peanut butter purchased since May 2006 is affected; only those jars of Great Value peanut butter purchased since May 2006 with a product code beginning with "2111” are affected. More information is available at the FDA web site.

Basix U.S.A. recalls children's hooded clothing due to strangulation hazard

Back in December, we shared the story of Janell Mayo Duncan, Senior Counsel at Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports. As you may recall, while on vacation in Martha's Vineyard, Janell noticed some children's hooded sweatshirts and windbreakers with drawstrings, despite the fact that such clothing should always be drawstring-free to avoid any strangulation risks. Janell informed the Consumer Product Safety Commission of her findings, and the agency later issued a recall on clothing from one company, Black Dog Tavern Co. When Black Dog continued selling the clothing, the CPSC hit the company with a $50,000 fine. But the story doesn't end there.

While in the Vineyard, Janell noticed that children's clothing from another company, Basix U.S.A., also had drawstrings. She reported it to the CPSC, and sent the agency photos and an affidavit attesting to her findings. Today, the CPSC issued a recall on the Basix clothing, which includes sweatshirts and windbreakers. Consumers should immediately remove the drawstrings from the sweatshirts to eliminate the hazard, and can contact Basix U.S.A. at (800) 236-8150 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday.

No injuries have been reported related to the Basix U.S.A. clothing. However, from January 1985 through January 1999, the CPSC received reports of 22 deaths and 48 non-fatal entanglement incidents involving drawstrings on children’s clothing. The CPSC issued its guidelines on drawstrings in 1996. While we're proud that Janell played a part in this recall, it's important to note that you don't have to be an attorney for a consumer organization to make your voice heard. As Janell points out, her story illustrates that YOU can make a difference! If you suspect a product of being unsafe or in violation of a voluntary or mandatory standard, contact us  and notify the CPSC as well.

Microwave urban legend shouldn't obscure real risks

A reader recently forwarded us an email that he felt was important enough for us to publicize. Here it is: 

"A 26-year old decided to have a cup of coffee. He took a cup of water and put it in the microwave to heat it up. (Something that he had done numerous times before). I am not sure how long he set the timer for, but he told me he wanted to bring the water to a boil. When the timer shut the oven off, he removed the cup from the oven. As he looked into the cup, he noted that the water was not boiling, but instantly the water in the cup 'blew up' into his face. The cup remained intact until he threw it out of his hand but all the water had flown out into his face due to the build up of energy. His whole face is blistered and he has 1st and 2nd degree burns to his face, which may leave scarring. He also may have lost partial sight in his left eye. ..."

On investigation, we discovered that the reader had never met the 26-year-old burn victim. It was simply a story making the rounds on the Internet, almost identical to one that’s been around for several years, according to Snopes.com, the tracker of urban legends. 

However, that doesn’t mean that we should immediately discard this email as worthless. It does remind us about safe microwave use. According to Consumer Product Safety Commission data, about 4,000 Americans incur injuries from microwaves every year. Almost a third of these injuries are burns and scalds. So while it may seem like a no-brainer to boil that cup of water in the microwave, think again. According to the Food and Drug Administration and the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, over-heating water in a cup can result in superheated water -- or water heated past its boiling temperature. The water does not appear to be boiling, because the air bubbles that trigger boiling have been expelled. The liquid is just waiting to boil.  A speck of dust or a tiny air bubble caused by movement or a slight vibration can initiate vigorous boiling and occasionally cause a violent eruption. 

The AHAM says consumers need to be particularly careful with tall cups and containers because the energy that builds as the temperature rises is forceful enough to eject the liquid. This phenomenon seems more likely if water is heated in a clean cup. The risk is reduced if foreign materials such as instant coffee or sugar are added before heating. AHAM advises consumers to stir liquids before heating them in the microwave to help prevent sudden boil overs. Also, do not heat liquid for more than 2 minutes (and considerably less time if you have less than a cup). After heating, allow the liquid to stand in the microwave for 30 seconds before moving it or putting anything into it. 

More: Tips for safe microwave use from the FDA

Proposed "iPod ban" won't help most pedestrians

New York State Senator Carl Kruger made headlines earlier this week when word got out that the legislator wants to ban the use of iPods, cell phones, and other electronic devices by pedestrians in crosswalks. "You can't be fully aware of your surroundings if you're fiddling with a BlackBerry, dialing a phone number, playing Super Mario Brothers on a Game Boy, or listening to music on an iPod," Kruger said in a statement. Although Kruger didn't have any detailed statistics to back up his plan, he said the impetus for his bill (which would apply only to large cities) was a January accident in which a headphone-wearing pedestrian was killed after walking in front of a bus. 

We agree with the Senator on one point: cellphones and other electronic devices can definitely be a dangerous distraction. However, most of the risks relate to drivers using such gadgets, not pedestrians. According to the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles, cell phones or other electronic gadgets used by drivers were a factor in 29 accidents involving pedestrians in New York State in 2005. And the number involving hand-held cellphones actually went up, to 26 in 2005, from 22 a year earlier, despite a state ban on use of such phones by drivers. However, the majority of accidents were related to other factors, including non-specified driver distractions (2,847 accidents and 46 fatalities) and failure by drivers to yield the right of way (2,041 accidents; 23 fatalities). Carelessness by pedestrians and bicyclists did account for a significant amount of accidents: 3,131 incidents, and 117 fatalities, but a DMV spokesman said that this "wouldn't be a number you'd use" to account for use of electronic devices. 

Kruger's bill would also provide little protection for the most vulnerable pedestrians: those who attempt to cross streets at locations other than crosswalks or traffic signals. According to DMV statistics, such accidents accounted for nearly a third of all pedestrians involved in fatalities in 2005 (109 out of 352). We believe the Senator's intentions are good, but a better course of action might be more aggressive enforcement of laws already on the books, including those banning hand-held cell phone use by drivers, laws giving pedestrians in crosswalks the right of way (88 pedestrians were killed in crosswalks in 2005), and those that hold bicycles to the same regulations as other vehicles. And pedestrians shouldn't be let off the hook either. They should be careful when crossing the street, and that includes looking where they're going, instead of thumb-typing on their BlackBerrys. However, instead of an unenforceable and largely symbolic ban on gadgets, maybe New York should revive the classic "cross at the green, not in between" campaign. A good public awareness campaign may be just the thing to help improve pedestrian awareness.

GAO joins call for food-safety reform

The General Accounting office (GAO), Congress’ analytical watchdog arm, added the nation’s food safety system to its list of “high risk” areas in need of immediate attention from Congress and the Executive Branch. 

The GAO conducts analytical reviews of all government functions and in 1990 developed a system for identifying the greatest threats to public health and well-being, the economy and citizen confidence in government and the democratic process. The list is presented to each new Congress. Food safety was one of three new items included in the 2007 update to the 110th Congress. 

The new designation is a response to several problems facing the nation's food supply which are cited in the GAO report and which Consumers Union and others have long recognized as critical to address. In addition to issuing the report, the GAO is testifying on food safety today before the House Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies. Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports, reiterated its endorsement of the creation of a single agency to regulate food, with a letter to Representative Rosa DeLauro, the chairwoman of the subcommittee. You can read the full letter here. 

For more information, visit the Consumers Union "Not in My Food" blog.

Hasbro recalls 985,000 Easy-Bake ovens

Toymaker Hasbro, whose Easy-Bake Ovens have turned many a child into an wannabe chef, announced a recall today of its current model, a plastic range that’s supposed to look just like Mom’s and Dad's — except that it’s pink and purple. About 985,000 ovens are affected by the recall, all sold since May 2006.

The problem: the design is such that young children can insert their hands into the oven’s opening and get their hands or fingers caught. Easy-Bake has received 29 reports of children getting their hands or fingers caught in the oven’s opening, including five reports of burns.

These ovens bake “just as America bakes, at 350 to 400 degrees ... it does get extremely hot,” said Julie Vallese, spokeswoman for the Consumer Product Safety Commission. In other words, the Easy-Bake oven isn’t something to be toyed with.

The CPSC and Hasbro reminded parents to keep the Easy-Bake away from children under 8. Hasbro spokeswoman Gail Carvelli said the five incidents of burns involved children  ages 3, 4, and 5 — "significantly under" the recommended age. "This is an electrical product," Carvelli said. Children under 8 shouldn't use it and over 8, "adult supervision is required."

Under the recall, Easy-Bake will issue a free retrofit kit for the oven. To obtain, contact Easy-Bake at www.easybake.com or 1-800-601-8418.

Consumers Union names experts to review car seat tests

Consumers Union has named two independent auto safety experts to review the infant car seat tests that were conducted for Consumer Reports. As previously noted, Consumer Reports withdrew the report based on these tests after it was determined that the simulated side-impact crashes were more severe than intended. Consumers Union President Jim Guest has directed that the report’s Ratings and other recommendations regarding specific car-seat models remain suspended until the review and any retesting are completed.

The experts are Brian O'Neill, the former president of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) and the Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI); and Dr. Kennerly H. Digges, the director of Vehicle Safety and Biomechanics at the Federal Highway Administration/ National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) National Crash Analysis Center of George Washington University. "Dr. Digges and Mr. O'Neill are among the nation's most respected experts on car safety issues," said Guest. "We are confident that they will conduct a thorough review of this incident and determine what went wrong." 

Dr. Digges has been involved in safety research for over thirty years, and spent fourteen years as a senior executive with NHTSA. As Director of Vehicle Safety Research, he managed NHTSA's research to maintain and advance the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. In 1978,he originated and directed NHTSA’s first New Car Assessment Program (NCAP).  He also directed NHTSA’s research programs that led to improved  safety standards for frontal and side crash protection.

In his current position as Research Professor at the George Washington University, he teaches graduate courses and conducts research to assess the safety performance of vehicles. In addition, he currently serves as the Director of Research for the William Lehman Injury Research Center, Ryder Trauma Center, University of Miami School of Medicine. In this role, he conducts research in how occupants are injured in vehicle collisions to determine ways to reduce the severity of injuries and their consequences.

Brian O'Neill spent more than thirty-five years with the IIHS and the HLDI, over twenty of them as president. He was one of the founders of the HLDI in 1972, and in 1992 he led the effort to build a state-of-the-art vehicle crash testing and research facility near Charlottesville, Virginia. He was directly responsible for the research programs of both organizations, and over the years he has been personally involved in research covering virtually all aspects of highway loss reduction, including vehicle and highway design, emergency medical care, the effectiveness of traffic laws, and driver behavior.

Stay safe while driving this winter

If you live in the Northeast, chances are you may not have even realized it was winter until this week (if you live in Colorado, of course, it's another story). But with temperatures hovering in the teens all across the region this week, there's no mistaking the season. And that makes this as good a time as any for us to reiterate some tips for safe winter driving. The tips below come from our colleagues on the Consumer Reports auto team. For more details, be sure to visit CR's complete Guide to Safe Winter Driving. There you'll find information on winterizing your car, what to do in a roadside emergency, and more.

• Pick the right tires. If you need to drive a lot in slippery conditions, it's a good idea to replace worn tires before the winter months, rather than wait until spring.
• Clear off the snow and ice before driving. If snow has fallen since your car was parked, take the time to thoroughly brush it off the vehicle--including the roof--and scrape any ice from the windows.
• Accelerate slowly to reduce wheel spin. If starting from a standstill on slick snow or ice, start in second gear if you have a manual transmission so the vehicle is less likely to spin the tires.
• Reduce your speed and drive smoothly. In slippery conditions, tires lose their grip more easily, affecting all aspects of your driving: braking, turning, and accelerating.
• Allow longer braking distances. Plan on starting your braking sooner than you normally would in dry conditions to give yourself extra room, and use more gentle pressure on the brake pedal.
• Don't lock your wheels when braking. Locked wheels can make the vehicle slide or skid. If you have a vehicle without an antilock braking system (ABS), you may need to gently apply the brakes repeatedly to avoid having them lock up the wheels. If your vehicle has ABS, simply depress the brake pedal firmly and hold it down.
• Perform one action at a time when accelerating, braking, and turning. Asking a vehicle to do two things at once--such as braking and turning, or accelerating and turning--can reduce your control. When taking a turn, for instance, slowly apply the brakes while the vehicle is going straight.
• Avoid sudden actions when cornering. A sudden maneuver--such as hard braking, a quick turn of the steering wheel, sudden acceleration, or shifting a manual transmission--can upset a vehicle's dynamics when it's taking a turn. In slick conditions, this can cause it to more easily go out of control.
• Be ready to correct for a slide. Should the rear end of the vehicle begin to slide during a turn, gently let off on the accelerator and turn the steering wheel in the direction of the slide. This will help straighten it out.
• Don't let four- or all-wheel drive give you a false sense of security. 4WD and AWD systems only provide extra traction when accelerating. They provide no advantage when braking or cornering. And use the above tips no matter what type of vehicle you're driving.
• Be extra wary of other motorists. They may not be driving as cautiously as you.

You can get more details about these and other winter driving issues on ConsumerReports.org. 

Maytag recalls over 2 million dishwashers due to fire hazard

Maytag, the company that has long prided itself on making reliable appliances (remember its very lonely repairman?) is recalling about 2.3 million Maytag and Jenn-Air brand dishwashers sold between July 1997 and June 2001 because they pose a fire hazard. 

The Consumer Product Safety Commission said Maytag has received 135 reports of dishwasher fires, resulting in product and/or property damage. Four injuries have been reported. The hazard: Liquid rinse-aid can leak from the dishwasher dispenser and come into contact with the dishwasher’s internal wiring which can short-circuit and ignite, posing a fire hazard. The recall involves both under counter and portable plastic tub dishwashers. To see if your dishwasher is affected, visit www.repair.maytag.com. 

The CPSC says consumers should stop using these dishwashers immediately and disconnect the electric supply by shutting off the fuse or circuit breaker controlling it. They should contact Maytag for either a free in-home repair or a $75 cash back reimbursement to purchase a new Maytag, Jenn-Air, Whirlpool, or KitchenAid dishwasher. Do not return the dishwasher to the retailer where it was purchased because retailers are not prepared to take the appliances back. 

This recall comes nearly a year after the CPSC recalled 162,000 Whirlpool and Kenmore dishwashers for also being a fire hazard. In that case, the products had an electrical defect within the wash motor wiring that posed a risk of the motor overheating and possibly catching fire. 

Over the past 15 months, Consumer Reports has received about eight dishwasher-fire reports from readers involving several different brands. CPSC spokeswoman Julie Vallese said that according to agency policy, she cannot comment on whether there are any other pending investigations into other dishwashers. These reports and today’s recall underscore the need for consumers to report problems, not just to us but, more importantly, to the CPSC. To do that, call the CPSC’s hotline at 1-800-638-2772 or visit CPSC’s Web site.

Stay safe on Super Sunday

We've commented more than once on the tip-over risks posed by heavy furniture and televisions. And the danger from tipping televisions has only grown, as Americans have purchased ever larger TVs in recent years. Indeed, we can bet that a lot more big TVs will be purchased between now and Sunday in time for the Super Bowl, an event that draws in as many as 90 million viewers. Indeed, the smallest TV reviewed in our latest issue is 26 inches, while the biggest is over 60 inches.  And despite their svelte profiles, most flat-screen sets larger than 42 inches weigh more than 100 pounds, regardless of the technology used; that makes them as heavy as the 30-inch or smaller tube TVs they replace. While the modern, flatter sets don't have the low center of gravity that makes tube sets more tip-prone, they may suffer from another risk factor: old furniture that isn't designed to handle such a large set. The right furniture — and the right installation — can make the difference between a TV that can hold up to a linebacker's advances and one that collapses after the first place kick. So, do yourself — and your kids — a favor: Before you put out the chips and salsa, follow this advice to make sure that the only things flying in your living room this Sunday are those long snaps on the screen.

• If available, buy a stand specifically designed for your TV by the manufacturer, as well as any hardware to secure the TV to the stand or wall.
• If you put your TV on other furniture, make sure it’s sturdy before you put the TV on it, and that it can handle the TV’s weight. 
• Never put a large TV on a stand or entertainment center designed for a smaller set.
• Furniture holding a TV should be anchored to the floor or wall using brackets, screws, or braces.
• Do not put a TV on furniture with drawers -- such as dressers or chests -- that can be pulled out by young children and used to climb.

More tips from ConsumerReports.org are available here.