Skin Deep: Questions Surround Iris Implant Procedure – Skin Deep

ANITA ADAMS was born with one green eye and one brown eye. While differently colored irises, a condition otherwise known as heterochromia, may look exotic on David Bowie and Kate Bosworth, Ms. Adams did not like them on herself.

“I wanted my irises to match,” said Ms. Adams, 41, who works as a caretaker for at-risk adolescents in Grand Junction, Colo.

In mid-2008, she began looking online to see if there was any solution other than colored contact lenses (which comprised about 20 percent of the $7.8 billion global contact lens market in 2011, according to a January 2012 report published by BCC Market Research). She found a company, New Color Iris, marketing a device invented by a Panamanian ophthalmologist, Dr. Alberto Delray Kahn, that could apparently implant an artificial or prosthetic iris over her natural one.

The device was not approved by the Food and Drug Administration, nor were there any clinical studies or peer-reviewed publications about it. But Ms. Adams found Facebook posts and YouTube testimonials from patients whose eyes had gone from drab brown to an icy blue and were thrilled with the results. On his Web site, Kahnmedical.com, Dr. Kahn wrote that he supported “programs for the prevention of blindness in the Kuma and Embera Indians of Panama,” who have high rates of ocular albinism, which makes them sensitive to light. 

Ms. Adams was impressed. At the company’s request, she went for routine tests to her ophthalmologist, who told her he had never heard of the procedure and advised against it. She didn’t listen. “I went, ‘Oh, whatever,’ ” she said. “I don’t think anything was going to convince me not to do it. At that point my mind was made up.”

Ms. Adams is not alone in her quest for symmetry, whatever the risk.

Dr. Gregory J. Pamel, a corneal and refractive surgeon in Manhattan and a clinical assistant professor of ophthalmology at New York University, said that for the last two years he has received about three inquiries a month from patients who have learned from his Web site that he implants artificial irises for medical reasons. “They’d want to enroll in the clinical trial, and I would say, ‘There’s nothing available in the U.S.,’ ” he said. “There are no approved devices in the U.S. to change the eye color cosmetically. There are no clinical trials to date that are looking into this. There’s nothing on the horizon.”

There are, however, iris implants for patients with serious conditions like aniridia, a rare hereditary absence or partial absence of the iris, that are available under a special “compassionate use” F.D.A. provision. The provision allows patients with serious or life-threatening medical conditions to be treated with devices that have not been approved by the F.D.A., but “we can only use it for people with trauma,” Dr. Pamel said. “I would be very hesitant and skeptical about any technology that purports to change the iris color for cosmetic reasons.” 

Dr. Kenneth Steinsapir, an oculofacial surgeon and ophthalmologist in Los Angeles, also received calls from patients wanting their eye color changed, so he began investigating New Color Iris. He found no positive reports, but he did find a number of studies reporting serious complications. In July 2010, he blogged about it on his Web site, lidlift.com. “The colored disk that is put in the eye has been shown to cause harm,” he wrote.  “If you are not albino and missing iris pigment or have part of the iris missing either from a birth defect or from trauma, then there is no compelling medical reason for this surgery.” 

But Ms. Adams was determined to fix her perceived imperfection. In September 2008, she wired nearly $2,000 to New Color Iris, and a month later flew with her mother (paying their airfare) to Panama. She was told the surgery would present no complications other than a slight risk of glaucoma. She signed a consent form, paid an additional $5,000 and underwent the 15-minute procedure.

For two days, Ms. Adams’s vision was blurry, which she was told was normal. By the third day, she could see well enough to tour around the city. “I was happy with the experience at the time,” she said.

She appeared on “Inside Edition” to talk about how delighted she was, for which she said New Color Iris paid her $500, promising an additional $500 for every future media appearance she did. She also allowed the company to use her likeness on its Web site and on YouTube.

Ms. Adams was pleased with her matching irises for about two years. But in fall 2010, she said, her vision grew “spotty,” and she was “scared to death I was going blind.” She repeatedly tried to contact Dr. Kahn as well as the company in New York, but said she received no response. She started a Facebook page (now dismantled) highlighting her negative experience, noticing that other people had shared similar stories.

And when she returned to the New Color Iris Web site, she was redirected to another site, Brightocular.com, which was marketing another implant to cosmetically change eye color and offering more glowing testimonials.

Ms. Adams said she contacted it using a fake name and was told that the procedure was being offered in Istanbul and soon “in all of Europe” and that the company was not affiliated with New Color Iris. Convinced this was untrue, she contacted Dr. Steinsapir in February 2011, and he began blogging about a possible relationship between the two companies. On Aug. 16, 2011, Dr. Steinsapir received a certified letter from Kevin J. Abruzzese, a lawyer in Mineola, N.Y., representing Stellar Devices, which owns the trademark for Brightocular, that denied that any association existed between the two companies. The letter also asserted that Stellar Devices was working with Minnesota Eye Consultants, in Minneapolis, to obtain “F.D.A. compassionate approval for a patient with aniridia,” and ordered  the doctor to remove “any and all defamatory content” about Brightocular.

Still skeptical, Dr. Steinsapir found a registered trademark for Brightocular, originally filed March 18, 2010 and granted registration on April 19, 2011.

But the company to which the trademark was registered was not Stellar Devices, but New Color Iris. What’s more, New Color Iris and Stellar Devices shared the same Midtown Manhattan address. Dr. Steinsapir later published his findings. He said he also arranged surgery for people who had iris color surgery and needed urgent help.

Alain Delaquérière contributed research.

Read More..

Reviving brands that aren't quite forgotten

Twenty-five years ago, a new kind of sparkling water called Clearly Canadian hit store shelves.

In flavors such as Orchard Peach and Western Loganberry, the drink soon was raking in $150 million a year in sales. But when faced by growing competition, Clearly Canadian began to fade. By the early 2000s it had all but disappeared.

Enter Mark Thomann.

Early last year, the Chicago investor bought the Clearly Canadian name, hired a marketing team, contracted a bottler and hammered out a distribution deal to get the drinks back into U.S. supermarkets starting in March.

Thomann is making a bet that enough people remember Clearly Canadian to try it again. He's one of a growing group of entrepreneurs who specialize in digging through the graveyard of consumerism in search of zombie brands that can be revived.

"We believe we can make Clearly Canadian valuable again," said Thomann, chief executive of River West Brands, whose stable of resuscitated brands includes Coleco games and Underalls pantyhose.

Rebooting old names makes sense in a market crammed with products vying for consumers' attention; building a new brand can cost millions in advertising and there's no guarantee of success. But for as little as a $275 fee to the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, one can buy a brand that, albeit dusty, is already familiar to millions of potential customers.

"It's very difficult to get a new brand established in today's marketplace," said Tim Calkins, a professor of marketing at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management. "So if you start with some brand awareness, it can be an advantage."

These trademark trolls scour brand registration databases, clip old magazine ads and interview consumers about beloved brands of their youth. Such efforts have brought back Polaroid, Eagle Snacks and the Sharper Image in recent years.

Attorney Kenny Wiesen revived Bonomo's Turkish Taffy because he missed his favorite childhood candy. He discovered that the trademark was held by Tootsie Roll, which quit making the thin, chewy bars in the 1980s. It took several years, a lawsuit and about $100,000, but eventually Wiesen snagged the Bonomo's Turkish Taffy brand.

That was the easy part. Wiesen and a partner then spent several years tracking down the recipe, relying in part on the memories of an 89-year-old candy chemist. Then they had to find a factory to produce it.

The candy finally hit the market in 2010. Today Wiesen produces about 8 million bars a year distributed to 10,000 stores nationwide.

"It's profitable," said Wiesen, of Carle Place, N.Y., who has acquired other brands he wants to bring back, including Regal Crown Sours hard candies. "But it's not explosively profitable."

Experts say old candy and soft drinks hold particular appeal for defunct brand specialists; consumers are nostalgic for foods they ate as kids. But that can also be a pitfall.

"You have to make the product relevant today," said Ellia Kassoff, chief executive of candy maker Leaf Brands in Newport Beach. "I don't want to sell to the dead."

Kassoff, an executive recruiter, has made a full-time business of buying and updating defunct brands, including Leaf, which he purchased in 2011 with the idea of reviving a full lineup of classic candies.

Last summer, the company reintroduced Astro Pop, a cone-shaped lollipop invented in the 1960s by a pair of California rocket scientists that went out of production in 2004. To appeal to today's kids, Leaf now makes the suckers in two sizes, as well as Astro Pop soda in a variety of flavors. It's also selling David's Signature Beyond Gourmet Jelly Beans, another brand Kassoff rescued.

Although Kassoff has purchased some old brands, others he has acquired for almost nothing thanks to a process known as abandonment. Under federal law, a trademark is considered abandoned if it hasn't been used for three years. After that, anyone can argue that they should be able to use it exclusively and receive legal trademark protection benefits that once belonged to the previous owner.

Kassoff used that strategy two years ago when he applied for trademarks to a suite of extinct department stores, including Abraham & Strauss, Filene's, the Bon Marche, Joseph Magnin and Robinson's. His plan was to license the brands to existing retailers, perhaps for in-house accessory lines.

But when Kassoff won government approval to take over the brands, Macy's Inc., the previous owner, filed a federal lawsuit in late 2011 to stop him. The department store said that it had never abandoned those chains, which it had purchased over the years, even though it had rebranded them all as Macy's. Kassoff counter-sued, saying Macy's was infringing his trademarks.

Read More..

State parks officials deliberately hid millions, report says

SACRAMENTO — Fear of embarrassment and budget cuts led high officials at the California parks department to conceal millions of dollars, according a new investigation by the state attorney general's office.

The money remained hidden for years until it was exposed by a new staff member who described a culture of secrecy and fear at the department.

The attorney general's report, released Friday, is the most detailed official account so far of the financial scandal at the parks department. The controversy broke last summer with the revelation that parks officials had a hidden surplus of nearly $54 million at a time when the administration was threatening to close dozens of the facilities.

Although much of the accounting issues appeared to stem from innocent mistakes and discrepancies, the report said, about $20 million had been deliberately stashed away.

The report said the problem seemed to begin with calculation errors more than a decade ago. But when those mistakes were discovered in 2002, officials made a "conscious and deliberate" decision not to reveal the existence of the extra money, the report said.

Parks officials concealed the funds partly because they were embarrassed, the report said. But they were also worried that their funding would be cut further if state number-crunchers knew they had a larger reserve, according to interviews conducted by a deputy attorney general.

Parks officials underreported the amount of money they had to the Department of Finance, preventing lawmakers from including the extra funds in state spending plans.

The money "was intended to be a safety net," said Manuel Lopez, a former deputy director at the department, who was interviewed in the probe. Lopez resigned in May while being investigated for a separate scheme allowing employees to be improperly paid for unused vacation days.

Multiple high-ranking officials were involved in concealing the parks money, including Lopez and Michael Harris, the chief deputy director who was fired after the scandal broke. Evidence suggests that the initial decision to keep the money secret was made by Tom Domich, an assistant deputy director who left the department in 2004, the report said.

Domich "unpersuasively denies … his role in the deception," according to the report. The Times was unable to reach Domich on Friday.

Staff members who pointed out financial problems were ignored by their bosses.

"Throughout this period of intentional non-disclosure, some parks employees consistently requested, without success, that their superiors address the issue," the report said.

It is unclear whether ousted director Ruth Coleman knew about the accounting problems, the report said. She declined to be interviewed for the investigation; participation was voluntary for former parks personnel.

Officials have not yet determined whether criminal charges will be filed. There's no evidence that any money was stolen or used improperly, the report said.

The accounting problems were eventually exposed by Aaron Robertson, who started an administrative job at the parks department in January 2012. He told a deputy attorney general that people felt uncomfortable raising concerns at the department.

"There was a great deal of distrust," he said. "People felt somewhat fearful of coming forward with information."

John Laird, the California natural resources secretary who oversees the parks department, said new policies and staff are in place to prevent similar problems in the future.

"It is now clear that this is a problem that could have been fixed by a simple correction years ago, instead of being unaddressed for so long that it turned into a significant blow to public trust in government," Laird said in a statement.

A new parks director, retired Marine Maj. Gen. Anthony Jackson, was appointed by Gov. Jerry Brown to replace Coleman in November. Robertson was promoted to become his deputy.

The attorney general's investigation is the third report on the parks department in the last month. One more report, from the state auditor, is due this month.

chris.megerian@latimes.com

Read More..

'McDreamy' says he beat Starbucks for coffee chain

SEATTLE (AP) — "Grey's Anatomy" star Patrick Dempsey may be the real "McSteamy."

The actor, who was dubbed "McDreamy" as a star of the hospital drama while his co-star was called "McSteamy," may soon be serving hot, steaming cups of Joe.

Dempsey won a bankruptcy auction to buy Tully's Coffee, a small coffee chain based in Seattle. Among those he beat out is Tully's much bigger Seattle neighbor, Starbucks Corp., which is known for its ubiquitous white cups with a circular green mermaid logo.

Dempsey, whose company Global Baristas LLC plans to keep the Tully's name, declared victory on the social media site Twitter: "We met the green monster, looked her in the eye, and...SHE BLINKED! We got it! Thank you Seattle!

The win for Dempsey deals a rare setback for Starbucks on its home turf. Starbucks has long been both praised for bringing "coffeehouse culture" to the U.S. and criticized for crushing smaller chains. The coffee giant, which had planned to convert the Tully's cafes to its own brand, last month announced plans to expand its global footprint to 20,000 cafes over the next two years, up from the current 18,000.

Dempsey said in an interview on Friday that as the underdog in Seattle, Tully's will need to find its identity.

"It's a much smaller chain that has a lot of potential that hasn't been given the proper care," he said.

But in a statement shortly after the auction on Thursday, Starbucks insinuated that Dempsey shouldn't celebrate just yet.

Starbucks, which wanted to convert the Tully's cafes to its own brand, said that a final determination on the winning bid won't be made until a court hearing on Jan. 11. Starbucks said it's in a "backup" position" to buy 25 of the 47 Tully's cafes, with another undisclosed bidder making an offer for the remainder.

The combined bids of Starbucks and the undisclosed bidder come to $10.6 million, above the $9.2 million Dempsey's company is offering to pay through his company, which was formed in order to purchase Tully's. The other investors in Global Baristas aren't being disclosed.

Tully's Coffee, which is known for serving Joe with a milder taste than Starbucks brand, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in October, citing lease obligations and underperforming stores. Tully's wholesale business, which includes Tully's Coffee in bags and single serve K-cup packs that are sold in supermarkets and other stores, is owned separately by Green Mountain Coffee Roasters Inc.

TC Global Inc., the parent company of Tully's, said in a release Friday that it was "encouraged and excited" about Dempsey's commitment to the chain.

Tully's President and CEO Scott Pearson called the deal a "great match" and that the goal is to make sure creditors get paid and to keep as many people employed as possible.

A bankruptcy court document signed late Friday by Pearson and Dempsey said TC Global had determined that Global Baristas submitted the successful bid.

"With this court filing, it's official - our group has been chosen as the successful bidder," Dempsey said in a statement. "We look forward to the court's final approval on Jan. 11."

Earlier in the day, Dempsey said he planned to be very involved in the running of the company, adding that the immediate challenges were to address bookkeeping issues, staff morale and sprucing up the coffee shops. Once the business is stabilized, Dempsey said the long-term goal would be to take the chain national.

"We can pull this off. We just have to take steps that are slow and smart," he said. "I'm going to get behind the counter. I'm going to serve coffee...I'm going to give the company a boost of energy."

Although Dempsey lives in Los Angeles, he plans to spend more time in Seattle, the city where "Grey's Anatomy" is set in. Dempsey said he believed there is room in the city for Tully's and the much larger Starbucks; he noted there might be people who are rooting for the underdog.

"In a society where there are so many big corporations that swallow the little guy, we thought, let's not let this happen to this company," he said.

Dempsey made an appearance Friday morning at a Tully's near Pike Place Market, shaking hands with workers and greeting customers before visiting other stores. Several dozen people, mostly women, came into the store.

Patrease Estelle, 45, works nearby, and came in with a small group from her office.

"I will take whatever I can get. A photo, a hug, a 'hey, how you doing,' a wink," said Estelle, who got a picture and handshake with the actor.

___

Blankinship reported from Seattle and Choi from New York.

Read More..

F.D.A. Offers Rules to Stop Food Contamination

The Food and Drug Administration on Friday proposed two sweeping rules aimed at preventing the contamination of produce and processed foods, which has sickened tens of thousands of Americans annually in recent years.

Nicole Bengiveno/The New York Times

Checking the temperature of lettuce at an Arizona farm. Safety measures would start at farms.

The proposed rules represent a sea change in the way the agency polices food, a process that currently involves taking action after contamination has been identified. It is a long-awaited step toward codifying the food safety law that Congress passed two years ago.

Changes include requirements for better record keeping, contingency plans for handling outbreaks and measures that would prevent the spread of contaminants in the first place. While food producers would have latitude in determining how to execute the rules, farmers would have to ensure that water used in irrigation met certain standards and food processors would need to find ways to keep fresh food that may contain bacteria from coming into contact with food that has been cooked.

New safety measures might include requiring that farm workers wash their hands, installing portable toilets in fields and ensuring that foods are cooked at temperatures high enough to kill bacteria.

Whether consumers will ultimately bear some of the expense of the new rules was unclear, but the agency estimated that the proposals would cost food producers tens of thousands of dollars a year.

A big question to be resolved is whether Congress will approve the money necessary to support the oversight. President Obama requested $220 million in his 2013 budget, but Dr. Margaret Hamburg, commissioner of the F.D.A., said “resources remain an ongoing concern.”

Nonetheless, agency officials were optimistic that the new rules would protect consumers better.

“These new rules really set the basic framework for a modern, science-based approach to food safety and shift us from a strategy of reacting to problems to a strategy for preventing problems,” Michael R. Taylor, deputy commissioner for foods and veterinary medicine, said in an interview. The Food and Drug Administration is responsible for the safety of about 80 percent of the food that Americans consume. The rest falls to the Agriculture Department, which is responsible for meat, poultry and some eggs.

One in six Americans becomes ill from eating contaminated food each year, the government estimates; most of them recover without concern, but roughly 130,000 are hospitalized and 3,000 die. The agency estimated the new rules could prevent about 1.75 million illnesses each year.

Congress passed the Food Safety Modernization Act in 2010 after a wave of incidents involving tainted eggs, peanut butter and spinach sickened thousands of people and led major food makers to join consumer advocates in demanding stronger government oversight.

But it took the Obama administration two years to move the rules through the regulatory agency, prompting complaints that the White House was more concerned about protecting itself from Republican criticism than about public safety.

Mr. Taylor said that the delay was a function of the wide variety of foods and the complexity of the food system. “Anything that is important and complicated will always take longer than you would like,” he said.

The first rule would require manufacturers of processed foods sold in the United States to come up with ways to reduce the risk of contamination. Food companies would be required to have a plan for correcting problems and for keeping records that government inspectors could audit.

An example might be to require the roasting of raw peanuts at a temperature guaranteed to kill salmonella, which has been a problem in nut butters in recent years. Roasted nuts would then have to be kept separate from raw nuts to further reduce the risk of contamination, said Sandra B. Eskin, director of the safe food campaign at the Pew Charitable Trusts.

“This is very good news for consumers,” Ms. Eskin said. “We applaud the administration’s action, which demonstrates its strong commitment to making our food safer.”

The second rule would apply to the harvesting and production of fruits and vegetables in an effort to combat bacterial contamination like E. coli, which is transmitted through feces. It would address what advocates refer to as the “four Ws” — water, waste, workers and wildlife.

Read More..

Corporations and execs need penalties that hurt

If you're concerned about corporate crime, 2012 looked like a pretty successful year for the good guys.

The Thousand Oaks biotech giant Amgen paid $762 million in fines and penalties and pleaded guilty to a federal charge related to illegal marketing of its anemia drug Aranesp. Britain's GlaxoSmithKline and Illinois-based Abbott Laboratories paid $3 billion and $1.5 billion in government penalties, respectively, in connection with their off-label promotions of blockbuster drugs. Glaxo's was the biggest drug company settlement in history.

The global bank HSBC paid a record $1.92 billion to settle federal accusations that it operated a huge money-laundering scheme for Mexican drug dealers and Middle Eastern terrorists. BP agreed to pay $4.5 billion and plead guilty to 11 felony counts in connection with the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. It was the biggest federal criminal penalty ever.

To the companies, however, these big numbers are just chump change. Typically they don't even represent repayment of ill-gotten gains — more often merely the cost of doing business. And to the public, they're insults piled atop the injuries caused by the firms' wrongdoing.

"These fines are a carny act to keep the rubes happy," according to William K. Black, who was a thrift regulator during the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s. "It's cynical — the art is to make the amount sound large but make sure that it has no material effect."

What might really get the attention of the CEOs and other top executives of lawbreaking companies would be some time in the hoosegow. Does that sound quaint? If so, it's because not a single high-ranking executive of any of the companies mentioned above faced indictment or was even forced to step down.

The absence of criminal cases against perpetrators of the 2008 financial crisis is a continuing scandal. It's not as though there haven't been suitable candidates for the docket. Angelo Mozilo, the chairman of Countrywide Financial, was the face of mortgage company excesses in the housing bubble.

He settled Securities and Exchange Commission charges against him for $67.5 million (of which $45 million was covered by insurance companies and Countrywide's new owner, Bank of America). But although SEC documents showed he was fully aware that some of the mortgage products his firm was peddling were toxic garbage, federal prosecutors dropped their criminal case.

Earlier scandals produced plenty of pelts. Starting in the 1980s, the savings and loan crisis generated 30,000 criminal referrals from one regulatory agency alone, the Office of Thrift Supervision, according to Black, who oversaw the referral process for federal regulators as litigation director for the Federal Home Loan Bank Board and in other posts. Fast forward to the 2001 collapse of Enron. Its CEO, Jeffrey Skilling, is still serving a 24-year jail term. He might have been joined there by Enron Chairman Ken Lay, had Lay not died before his sentencing for 10 counts of fraud and other charges in 2006.

Federal prosecutors today say multibillion-dollar fines and related good-behavior pledges are as good as jail time at discouraging bad behavior — "the same punitive, deterrent and rehabilitative effect as a guilty plea," as Lanny A. Breuer, the Justice Department's white-collar crime chief, said in a speech last year.

But that's nonsense. For a corporation, the fines aren't even that big. The HSBC settlement comes to about 11 days' worth of revenue for that bank holding company; Abbott's about two weeks' worth. Amgen sells about $2 billion of Aranesp every year; the mismarketing for which it forked over $762 million lasted for years.

Prosecutors' interest in corporate white-collar cases has been dissipating like the air in an old balloon. The cases are complex and time consuming and require facts to be gathered by aggressive regulators (themselves a vanishing breed). After 9/11, national security became the hot field for ambitious crime fighters. The fewer convictions for corporate crime there are to make the news, the less interest there is in finding more. An important turning point came in 2008, when then-U.S. Atty. Gen. Michael Mukasey refused to appoint a task force to investigate mortgage fraud, dismissing it as "white-collar street crime."

Even when prosecutors are handed a weapon, they don't use it. The post-Enron Sarbanes-Oxley Act carries stiff criminal penalties for top executives who sign off on false financial statements. Statistics are hard to come by, but when the law marked its 10th birthday in mid-2012 the number of prosecutions it had produced appeared to be less than five.

But Black and other experts in white-collar crime say that effective deterrence comes only from putting the responsible executives in jail. "I question the efficacy of bringing a criminal case against an institution," says former California Treasurer Phil Angelides, who chaired the government's Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, which held public hearings and issued a report on the causes of the 2008 financial meltdown. "Where they're warranted, the pursuit of criminal charges ought to be focused on individuals and the leadership, not inanimate entities."

Yet federal policy is moving in the opposite direction. Instead of criminal sanctions, the Justice Department relies increasingly on "corporate integrity agreements" or "deferred prosecution agreements." In the first case, a company averts indictment by agreeing to augment its internal legal controls; in the second, it acknowledges that it might be subject to prosecution if it's caught breaking the law again.

Either way, it's a free pass.

Corporate lawyers love these deals because history shows that the threat of subsequent prosecution is a paper tiger. Indeed, enforcement in the pharmaceutical industry, where illegal off-label marketing of drugs is an epidemic, is a joke. Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly and Schering-Plough have all entered into multiple corporate integrity agreements or other consent decrees; in almost every case, when the first one is breached, it's simply replaced by a new one. As of mid-2012, when the Glaxo settlement was announced, 25 major drug companies were operating under corporate integrity agreements, including eight of the 10 biggest firms in the industry — and more cases of illegal drug marketing were coming to light all the time.

Prosecutors resort to these deals because they're afraid that stringent penalties that damage a corporation will hurt innocent victims such as employees or suppliers. Imposing the nuclear option on a drug company, which is forbidding it to do business with Medicare and Medicaid, could mean depriving patients of needed medicine. Prohibiting a big bank from doing certain transactions could hurt the financial system.

But that means the regulation of corporate wrongdoing has become "all about damage control, not crime control," says Henry N. Pontell, a leading criminologist at UC Irvine. That gives corporations powerful leverage to avoid serious penalties, and it encourages the imposition of penalties firms can absorb as merely the cost of doing business.

There's light on the horizon, but it's not yet shining brightly. An SEC whistle-blowers program established by the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, which allows tipsters to share in recoveries in securities fraud cases, received more than 3,000 tips in its first full year. But so far there's been only one payout, for $50,000.

And whistle-blowers can't shoulder the burden by themselves. What's needed is a new regulatory mind-set, and rewards for prosecutors who put guilty executives behind bars. You'll never stem corporate crime if it's treated as something to be wrist-slapped away while Jean Valjeans rot in jail for petty offenses.

"I always cite the following," says Angelides. "If someone robbed a 7-Eleven for $1,000 and they could settle a week later for $25 and no admission of wrongdoing, would they do it again? Absolutely."

Michael Hiltzik's column appears Sundays and Wednesdays. Reach him at mhiltzik@latimes.com, read past columns at latimes.com/hiltzik, check out facebook.com/hiltzik and follow @latimeshiltzik on Twitter.

Read More..

Audit of L.A. County assessor's office urges key changes

An audit of the embattled Los Angeles County assessor's office released late Thursday recommends key changes, including the appointment of a chief deputy with "managerial competence" and the requirement that private tax consultants register with the county.

Conducted by Strategica Inc., the audit comes as elected Assessor John Noguez fights accusations that he pocketed $185,000 in bribes from a prominent tax consultant and campaign contributor who requested lower tax appraisals on client properties.

Though the audit did not comment specifically on Noguez's alleged malfeasance, its authors wrote that the controversy had helped undermine public confidence in the department with potentially grave results.

"If taxpayers feel that the property tax system in Los Angeles County is being gamed by politically connected taxpayers or contributors to the Assessor's political campaigns then they will be tempted to game the system themselves to re-establish equity," the auditors wrote.

As a means of improving overall management of the department and restoring integrity, auditors said, the county charter should be amended so that supervisors could appoint a permanent chief deputy with strong management and tax assessment skills. Doing so would ensure institutional knowledge and continuity as newly elected assessors rotate through the post.

The position also would make up for the elected official's operational shortcomings.

"The criteria for being the Assessor is not management experience but rather the number of votes received," the auditors wrote.

To avoid potential abuses or the perception of favoritism, the county should adopt new rules that essentially treat tax agents as lobbyists, requiring them to register with the county, prohibiting them from offering gifts and outlining exactly which officials they are authorized to negotiate with.

The audit released Thursday is one of four that have been commissioned by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. It will be formally presented to the board Tuesday.

Among other findings, auditors cited a significant "brain drain" in the assessor's office: 44% of its senior managers have left since 2010 and have been replaced by managers who lack experience or training in running a department. Additionally, the report said, staffers have been given very little supervisory or management training since 2007.

The assessor's office oversees 2.4 million parcels and has a staff of almost 1,400 employees, making it the largest assessment jurisdiction in the nation.

In the last five years, the office has seen the number of assessment appeals quadruple. That increased workload, combined with an antiquated computer system, has greatly increased staff workload, according to the report. Auditors recommended establishing a $35 fee for the filing of all assessment appeals, to help offset expenses and to deter frivolous appeals.

Supervisors called for the audit in April after several stories by The Times about allegations that Noguez and his staff were giving tax breaks to political supporters, who then donated to Noguez's campaign fund. About the same time, Noguez gave two conflicting projections of 2012-2013 tax roll revenues. In December 2011, Noguez estimated that the county's property tax base would grow by $18.7 billion, but then changed the number to $5.1 billion.

So far, the ongoing probe at the assessor's office has resulted in the arrests of Noguez, his chief deputy Mark McNeil, former county appraiser Scott Schenter and private tax consultant Ramin Salari. All four have pleaded not guilty to numerous charges, including conspiracy, bribery and misappropriation of public funds.

To date, auditors have completed three of four audits that the board has requested. The next audit will focus on properties with reductions in value exceeding 20%.

ruben.vives@latimes.com

Read More..

Facebook updates Messenger app to support voice messages

Title Post: Facebook updates Messenger app to support voice messages
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/facebook-updates-messenger-app-to-support-voice-messages/
Link To Post : Facebook updates Messenger app to support voice messages
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment

Read More..

Adele's 2011 holdover '21' still tops in 2012

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Turns out Adele ruled 2012, too — and set a record while she was at it.

The British singer's "21" was the highest-selling album in the U.S. for the second consecutive year, according to 2012 sales figures released by Nielsen SoundScan on Thursday. That's a first in the SoundScan era.

Adele sold 4.4 million copies of the album in 2012 after selling 5.8 million in 2011. She crossed the 10 million threshold in November and was only rivaled by Taylor Swift, whose "Red" was second on the list. If her album sales continue apace in 2013, '21' will move into the top 10 list for sales since 1993, when SoundScan began current tracking methods.

Gotye scored the year's top-selling song with "Somebody That I Used To Know" featuring Kimbra. The song was downloaded a record 6.8 million times. Carly Rae Jepsen's "Call Me Maybe" was next at 6.5 million. Both songs are the first to cross the 6 million digital sales mark, while fun. came close with 5.9 million downloads of "We Are Young" featuring Janelle Monae.

Forty-one songs crossed the 2 million download mark, helping drive digital and overall sales to a new high even as album sales began to drop again after a momentary gain.

A record 1.65 billion music units — combining physical albums, digital albums and digital songs — were sold in 2012, fueled by an increase of 9.1 percent in total digital sales and a 14.1 percent increase in digital album sales.

Overall, however, album sales declined 4.4 percent. That continues a downward trend since 2004 that was only briefly halted by last year's 3 percent gain — mostly due to the surprise success of "21." Only two genres showed album sales gains in 2012. Rock gained by 2 percent and country, fueled by the format's assault on the top 10, jumped 4.2 percent.

Swift led a record five country artists into the top 10, selling 3.1 million copies of "Red" in just over two months. Other country artists on the list included Carrie Underwood's "Blown Away" at No. 7 (1.2 million) followed by Luke Bryan's "tailgates & tanlines" (1.1 million), Lionel Richie's duets album "Tuskegee" (1 million) and Jason Aldean's "Night Train" (1 million).

One Direction nearly matched Swift's sales total, but did it by placing two 2012 releases in the top 10 — "Up All Night" placed No. 3 with 1.6 million sold and "Take Me Home" was fifth with 1.3 million.

Mumford & Son's "Babel" at No. 6 (1.4 million) and Justin Bieber's "Believe" at No. 6 (1.3 million) round out the top 10. Only 10 albums reached 1 million in sales.

Katy Perry received the most radio airplay for the second year in a row with 1.4 million spins, while Swift was the most streamed artist at 216 million streams.

Read More..

Scant Proof Is Found to Back Up Claims by Energy Drinks

Energy drinks are the fastest-growing part of the beverage industry, with sales in the United States reaching more than $10 billion in 2012 — more than Americans spent on iced tea or sports beverages like Gatorade.

Their rising popularity represents a generational shift in what people drink, and reflects a successful campaign to convince consumers, particularly teenagers, that the drinks provide a mental and physical edge.

The drinks are now under scrutiny by the Food and Drug Administration after reports of deaths and serious injuries that may be linked to their high caffeine levels. But however that review ends, one thing is clear, interviews with researchers and a review of scientific studies show: the energy drink industry is based on a brew of ingredients that, apart from caffeine, have little, if any benefit for consumers.

“If you had a cup of coffee you are going to affect metabolism in the same way,” said Dr. Robert W. Pettitt, an associate professor at Minnesota State University in Mankato, who has studied the drinks.

Energy drink companies have promoted their products not as caffeine-fueled concoctions but as specially engineered blends that provide something more. For example, producers claim that “Red Bull gives you wings,” that Rockstar Energy is “scientifically formulated” and Monster Energy is a “killer energy brew.” Representative Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, a Democrat, has asked the government to investigate the industry’s marketing claims.

Promoting a message beyond caffeine has enabled the beverage makers to charge premium prices. A 16-ounce energy drink that sells for $2.99 a can contains about the same amount of caffeine as a tablet of NoDoz that costs 30 cents. Even Starbucks coffee is cheap by comparison; a 12-ounce cup that costs $1.85 has even more caffeine.

As with earlier elixirs, a dearth of evidence underlies such claims. Only a few human studies of energy drinks or the ingredients in them have been performed and they point to a similar conclusion, researchers say — that the beverages are mainly about caffeine.

Caffeine is called the world’s most widely used drug. A stimulant, it increases alertness, awareness and, if taken at the right time, improves athletic performance, studies show. Energy drink users feel its kick faster because the beverages are typically swallowed quickly or are sold as concentrates.

“These are caffeine delivery systems,” said Dr. Roland Griffiths, a researcher at Johns Hopkins University who has studied energy drinks. “They don’t want to say this is equivalent to a NoDoz because that is not a very sexy sales message.”

A scientist at the University of Wisconsin became puzzled as he researched an ingredient used in energy drinks like Red Bull, 5-Hour Energy and Monster Energy. The researcher, Dr. Craig A. Goodman, could not find any trials in humans of the additive, a substance with the tongue-twisting name of glucuronolactone that is related to glucose, a sugar. But Dr. Goodman, who had studied other energy drink ingredients, eventually found two 40-year-old studies from Japan that had examined it.

In the experiments, scientists injected large doses of the substance into laboratory rats. Afterward, the rats swam better. “I have no idea what it does in energy drinks,” Dr. Goodman said.

Energy drink manufacturers say it is their proprietary formulas, rather than specific ingredients, that provide users with physical and mental benefits. But that has not prevented them from implying otherwise.

Consider the case of taurine, an additive used in most energy products.

On its Web site, the producer of Red Bull, for example, states that “more than 2,500 reports have been published about taurine and its physiological effects,” including acting as a “detoxifying agent.” In addition, that company, Red Bull of Austria, points to a 2009 safety study by a European regulatory group that gave it a clean bill of health.

But Red Bull’s Web site does not mention reports by that same group, the European Food Safety Authority, which concluded that claims about the benefits in energy drinks lacked scientific support. Based on those findings, the European Commission has refused to approve claims that taurine helps maintain mental function and heart health and reduces muscle fatigue.

Taurine, an amino acidlike substance that got its name because it was first found in the bile of bulls, does play a role in bodily functions, and recent research suggests it might help prevent heart attacks in women with high cholesterol. However, most people get more than adequate amounts from foods like meat, experts said. And researchers added that those with heart problems who may need supplements would find far better sources than energy drinks.

Hiroko Tabuchi contributed reporting from Tokyo and Poypiti Amatatham from Bangkok.

Read More..