July 2020 – Page 4 – Consumer Choice Center

Таллин возглавил мировой рейтинг городов с самой развитой системой шеринговой экономики

Таллин занял первое место рейтинга городов мира с самой развитой системой так называемой экономики совместного пользования, или шеринговой экономики.

Рейтинг Sharing Economy Index оценил доступность нескольких десятков шеринговых сервисов – например, каршеринга, городского проката велосипедов, самокатов и других видов транспорта, онлайн-платформ для поиска жилья непосредственно от владельцев, проектов утилизации продуктов, чей срок годности подходит к концу. Составители оценивали города по двум критериям: количество доступных шеринговых сервисов и удобство пользования ими.

В рейтинге рассматривались 52 мегаполиса мира, которые набрали от 40 до 100 баллов из 100 возможных, отмечает Европульс.

Read more here

The Consumer Choice Center is the consumer advocacy group supporting lifestyle freedom, innovation, privacy, science, and consumer choice. The main policy areas we focus on are digital, mobility, lifestyle & consumer goods, and health & science.

The CCC represents consumers in over 100 countries across the globe. We closely monitor regulatory trends in Ottawa, Washington, Brussels, Geneva and other hotspots of regulation and inform and activate consumers to fight for #ConsumerChoice. Learn more at consumerchoicecenter.org

So you think you know about black market trade? Here are some myths, debunked

July 16, 2020
By Fred Roeder
In Harm Reduction Campaign, Harm-Reduction, Recent Media, Vaping
0 comments

KUALA LUMPUR, July 14 — The global trade in counterfeit and pirated goods is a thriving one, rising from US$461 billion (RM1.9 trillion) in 2013 to US$509 billion in 2016 according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and European Union Intellectual Property Office.

A study commissioned by the Confederation of Malaysian Tobacco Manufacturers (CMTM) member companies showed that in Malaysia alone, the tobacco black market has grown over the last few years from 36.9 per cent in 2015 to 62.3 per cent in 2019.

At the same time, there is also a rise in counterfeit alcohol, medicine, luxury goods, consumer electronics and even face masks.

The Consumer Choice Center (CCC), a global consumer advocacy group, today urged Malaysian consumers to reject all black market goods.

“The black market is not just about tax losses to the government or infringement of intellectual property rights. It literally puts consumer health and safety in jeopardy,” said Fred Roeder, managing director of CCC.

“In order to stop the black market, consumers, policymakers and legitimate businesses must first understand what the black market is and is not about,” he added.

Myth No.1 – Consumers know that they are buying black market products.

Roeder said it is not easy to confirm if purchases are genuine, even when bought through trusted sources.

“The majority of online shoppers do not understand the levels of fraud on the internet, nor do they have the software to detect or avoid it. Most think they are just getting a good deal,” he said.

“In the case of illegal cigarettes, it is sometimes hard to tell as the packaging may look the same as the original, inclusive of fake tax stamps.”

Myth No.2 – Black market goods are mainly bought through ‘underground’ channels

“More and more consumers today are turning to online shopping. A ‘black market’ website looks the same as any other e-commerce platform. In fact, some popular e-commerce brands are also selling counterfeit or black market products,” Roeder said.

“Social distancing and the growth of digital currency are expected to drive the growth of counterfeit and illegal products as we move forward in the new normal.”

Myth No.3 – Only those in the low-income brackets buy black market products

“Black market trade happens at all levels of society. As the black market expands to cover more products, while becoming increasingly available ‘online’, a wider population regardless of age, income and location will be exposed to these products,” he said.

Myth No.4 – Consumers buy black market goods because they are cheaper.

“Price is a key factor, but not the only factor.

“Let’s take illegal cigarette trade as an example. The trade has mushroomed in Malaysia after a significant increase in excise duty in 2015.

“Back then, the market share of illegal cigarettes was around 30 per cent, but now it is 62 per cent.

“Clearly, consumers are gravitating towards illegal cigarettes that cost only RM4.50 as compared to RM10 of legitimate products.”

He added that convenience and easy access are also contributing factors. Malaysian law prohibits legitimate cigarettes from being sold online which helps to encourage consumers to turn to illegal cigarettes.

“As it can be easily purchased and paid for online… special couriers can deliver these products to their doorsteps,” he said.

To slow down or stop the spread of the black market in Malaysia, CCC advocates a multi-pronged approach involving all relevant stakeholders, from consumers to policymakers, government agencies to corporations.

“What is required immediately is enhanced policies and regulations that take into account current consumer purchasing behaviour and contemporary methods of distribution for perpetrators of black market products,” Roeder said.

CCC will be opening an office in Malaysia soon as part of its efforts to help the Malaysian government counter this growing problem.

“We hope to engage Malaysian consumers and policymakers through education, knowledge and intelligence sharing and positive advocacy to facilitate economic prosperity,” Roeder added.

Originally published here.

European Parliament has inexplicable double standard on GMOs

Brussels, BE – The European Parliament has recently authorised a temporary derogation from rules on genetic engineering, in order to allow COVID-19 vaccine development to benefit from GMO technology. In a statement, the Parliament said that “The derogation will facilitate the development, authorisation and consequently availability of COVID-19 vaccines and treatments”. The Consumer Choice Center’s Senior Policy Analyst Bill Wirtz says he’s puzzled by the change of heart of Members of the Parliament :

source http://meltwater.pressify.io/publication/5f100b49f90fab00042a9bdc/5aa837df2542970e001981f6

European Parliament has inexplicable double standard on GMOs

from Consumer Choice Center https://ift.tt/3eB9I6h

Is meat unhealthy and killing the climate? No, it isn’t

I had the great fortune to stumble upon an excellent article in the German medical media outlet “Ärzteblatt”. In this piece titled “Nutrition and climate: Eating meat-free, healthy and climate-friendly – the evidence is missing“, Dr. med. Johannes Scholl, President of the German Academy for Preventive Medicine lays out the varying myths surrounding meat consumption. It is increasingly known that the enemies of meat are going to great length to demonise its prevalence, by making statements about its health effects and impact on the environment. I’ve had my own experience arguing against these tendencies on a TV panel on TRT World:

Back to the article in question. Scholl presents a number of highly interesting points, and I’d like to give you the most informative nuggets.

“Reports of disadvantages of meat consumption are increasing and are adding up to a seemingly consistent bouquet of arguments for a meat-free diet. Recently, for example, a new study has been published which proclaims an association between increased meat consumption and cardiovascular mortality and all-cause mortality. In 6 cohorts (29,682 patients), a risk increase was found for both endpoints in 19 years of observation per consumption of 2 portions of unprocessed red meat per week – but only by 3%.

This is a “pseudo result” and can easily be invalidated. Both inaccuracies in data collection and possible systematic errors in observational studies mean that a relative risk of 1.03 (95% confidence interval: 1.01-1.06) simply says nothing. A glance at the details also renders this study unreliable: allegedly, the average alcohol consumption in the study was 1 g per day. This underestimates the real drinking amounts by at least ten times, as has been sufficiently proven by other studies.”

Scholl shows how any blatant claims on nutritional science must be taken with a grain of salt. After decades of nutritional science, we know how difficult it is to account for the multifactorial aspects of human health. He raises a similar point later on:

“For example, studies on meat consumption show that the groups with low meat consumption were on average more educated, slimmer, more athletically active, less likely to smoke, and generally healthier than the groups of meat-eaters. Such systematic differences are attempted to be statistically extrapolated – multivariate adjusted, that is. However, this is often not transparent, because the extent of the adjustment for individual, unevenly distributed risk factors is not disclosed. A distortion of the results is therefore unavoidable even in meta-analyses. A further problem is the so-called “recall bias”. It refers to the uncertainty regarding the correct recall of nutritional behaviour. The authors around Guyatt, therefore, stress that meta-analyses could also provide insufficient evidence for an influence of meat on disease risks. The overall evidential value is too weak to derive serious recommendations for the population.”

Scholl also brings us concerning news about the state of academic debate within nutritional science, notably how some in the camp of activist science are trying to prevent evidence-based information to come out.

“Scientific discussion is called for instead of polemics and defamation, demands Sharp from Harvard. He emphasized that there was no evidence that the meat industry had sponsored the studies. It is true: Texas A&M University, as an institution for its agricultural sector, also receives donations from the meat industry amounting to approximately 1.5% of its total budget.

The stumbling block to the fierce dispute was a series of articles published in 2019 in the Annals of Internal Medicine. In it, the authors concluded, on the basis of strictly evidence-based criteria, that there was no qualitatively sufficient scientific evidence to justify a recommendation to reduce meat consumption. One of the main authors of the publication is Dr Gordon H. Guyatt from the Canadian McMaster University in Hamilton/Ontario, one of the fathers of evidence-based medicine.

There are hardly any randomized controlled nutritional studies with hard endpoints on the topic of meat consumption. In the Womensʼ Health Initiative Study, women who were randomized to a low-fat diet reduced their meat consumption by about 20%. However, this did not result in any difference in the various endpoints such as all-cause mortality, cancer or cardiovascular disease.”

In fact, it turns out that a purely plant-based diet might even produce the opposite effect.

“From the point of view of nutritional medicine, the distinction between animal and plant foods makes no sense anyway. Because not only vegetables, fruit and olive oil, but also sugar, soft drinks and all starch-rich white flour products are vegetables. With an assumed basal metabolic rate of 2,000 kcal, the “Planetary Health Diet” would correspond to an intake of more than 330 g of carbohydrates per day or 55-60% of the total calories. The PURE study had shown that such a high-carbohydrate diet is harmful to the vast majority of people and increases overall mortality (23, 24). It is not without reason that many experts consider carbohydrate reduction – “low carb” – to be a milestone in healthy eating.”

Lastly, Scholl also looks at the claim of environmental damage due to meat consumption. Here again, the accusation doesn’t match the crime.

“The argument that meat consumption is already sufficiently high – not least in Germany – and a further increase would definitely not be sensible may be true. But even if all of Germany were vegan, according to climate researcher Frank Mitloehner, the impact on global CO2 emissions would not even be measurable.

In the past it used to be said: “Meat is a piece of vitality”, today it is more likely: “Meat consumption is the number one climate killer” The content of such a statement is however just as questionable as statements about meat consumption that is harmful to health. According to updated data from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the entire agricultural sector contributes 9.3 % of greenhouse gas emissions. However, more than three quarters come from transport (27.9 %), energy production (26.9 %) and industry (22.2 %). Fermentation in ruminants accounts for 2.7% of total emissions. Almost three times as much methane is released from fracking, landfills and coal and gasoline production, an aspect that is often overlooked.”

Meat consumption is under fire from activists who use questionable nutritional science to back up their claims. It is our responsibility as consumer choice advocates to set the record straight and defend choice in all aspects of life. This is not to say that we endorse eating meat per se. We defend the right of responsible consumers to make their own choices, with accurate data-points, driven by science, not ideology.

Sources:

Zeraatkar D, Johnston BC, Bartoszko J, et al.: Effect of Lower Versus Higher Red Meat Intake on Cardiometabolic and Cancer Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials. Ann Intern Med 2019; 171 (10): 721–31 CrossRef MEDLINE

Zeraatkar D, Han MA, Guyatt GH, et al.: Red and Processed Meat Consumption and Risk for All-Cause Mortality and Cardiometabolic Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Cohort Studies. Ann Intern Med 2019; 171 (10): 703–10 CrossRef MEDLINE

Han MA, Zeraatkar D, Guyatt GH, et al.: Reduction of Red and Processed Meat In-take and Cancer Mortality and Incidence: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Cohort Studies. Ann Intern Med 2019; 171 (10): 711–20 CrossRef MEDLINE

Johnston BC, Zeraatkar D, Han MA, et al.: Unprocessed Red Meat and Processed Meat Consumption: Dietary Guideline Recommendations From the Nutritional Recommendations (NutriRECS) Consortium. Ann Intern Med 2019; 171 (10): 756–64 CrossRef MEDLINE

Vernooij RWM, Zeraatkar D, Han MA, et al.: Patterns of Red and Processed Meat Consumption and Risk for Cardiometabolic and Cancer Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Cohort Studies. Ann Intern Med 2019; 171 (10): 732–41 CrossRef MEDLINE

Valli C, Rabassa M, Johnston BC, et al.: Health-Related Values and Preferences Regarding Meat Consumption: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review. Ann Intern Med 2019; 171 (10): 742–55.
CrossRef MEDLINE

Carroll AE, Doherty TS: Meat Consumption and Health: Food for Thought. Ann Intern Med 2019; 171 (10): 767–8 CrossRef MEDLINE

Assaf AR, Beresford SAA, Risica PM, et al.: Low-Fat Dietary Pattern Intervention and Health-Related Quality of Life: The Women‘s Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Dietary Modification Trial. J Acad Nutr Diet 2016; 116 (2): 259–71 CrossRef MEDLINE PubMed Central

Province ends pot shop deliveries and curbside pickup

July 14, 2020
By David Clement
In Cannabis, Cannabis Legalization, Recent Media
0 comments

Ontario pot shops are angry that as of today the province is putting an end to delivery and curbside pickup. The stores were allowed to offer both services under a temporary emergency order during the pandemic. Nicole Martin reports, there are worries this decision will lead to more demand on the black market.

Originally published here.

Dangerous quotas: Limiting fertilizer imports might kill competition, benefit oligarchs

Thousands of outraged Ukrainian farmers from across Ukraine descended on Kyiv in late May in an attempt to block new import quotas on fertilizers. The limits, they said, would help monopolies and drive up an essential cost of food production.

Standing in front of the Cabinet of Ministers, they protested against a proposal by the Economy Ministry to cut fertilizer imports to 30%, a move that was supposed to make room for domestic producers.

Read more here

A liberal solution to Britain’s obesity crisis

Once an ardent opponent of sin taxes, Boris Johnson has now experienced a mighty change of heart. We don’t yet know what his new strategy will look like but one thing is clear: more nannying won’t solve Britain’s obesity problem.

In April 2018, as part of the government’s childhood obesity strategy, the UK government introduced a sugar tax to reduce sugar consumption. A year later, it was announced that plain packaging of crisps, sweets and fizzy drinks was also on the agenda.

In light of the coronavirus pandemic and excessive weight having been recognised as a risk factor, the discussion around obesity and ways to tackle it has been spurred into motion again. The lockdown made things even worse. Almost half of Brits – 47 per cent – have put on weight since lockdown began in March.

The UK government has been using various types of interventions to solve the rising national rates of obesity, and more of those are seemingly on the way. However, a substantial societal shift can only be achieved through a partnership between government and other actors such as business, civil society organisations and advocacy groups and education systems.

Challenging times require innovative solutions. In order to drive down obesity, we have to review our incentives. Longevity and a healthy lifestyle is an excellent motivation in itself but monetary incentives might turn out to be more successful.

Obesity is a societal issue, so fighting it requires a multi-faceted approach. Nowadays, companies go out of their way to improve the wellbeing of their employees by providing gyms, yoga classes, company-wide fitness programs and so on.

Many American firms are now incentivising their employees to become healthier in order to reduce overall insurance costs for those in pooled insurance programs. In the UK, if companies were given tax relief when its provisions allow obesity rates among its employees to decrease, it is likely they would take up the burden to solve this social and public health issue themselves.

The results could be astounding provided that transparency is guaranteed. In a similar fashion, the government could cooperate with the IT sector to create an app where citizens could track their lifestyle, earn rewards for eating healthy food and exercising more in the form of income tax reduction upon reaching specific milestones.

One example of such an idea is the Sweatcoin app which converts steps into a currency that can be spent on various goods and services. The UK could succeed in solving one of the world’s most pressing issues if it decides to embrace innovation.

Lastly, we should also focus on educating students about sugar consumption, and generally about health to ensure they are able to make informed and responsible consumer decisions.

Daily calorie intake in the UK is also decreasing with each decade. It is exercise that many people are lacking, and we should educate consumers about this fact. In particular, education should draw the attention of consumers to sugar so that consumers don’t make these consumption choices by inertia but take time to balance out the present and future costs and benefits.

Coronavirus has spurred a great deal of fear, especially around our health and wellbeing. It is, however, key to remember that that government interventionism is expensive, short-sighted and ignores the complexity of the consumer decision-making process. Education and innovation are a smarter way forward.

Originally published here.

[EU] eureporter – Rat beschliesst Überarbeitung der Tabaksteuerrichtlinie 2011/64/EU

July 10, 2020
By Bill Wirtz
In Harm Reduction Campaign, Harm-Reduction, Recent Media, Vaping
0 comments

Auf eureporter ist heute ein Beitrag mit dem Titel “New EU rule changes would mean bad news for #Smokers and #Vapers alike” ¹ von Bill Wirtz zu lesen, welcher über die Beschlüsse des EU-Rates zur Verbrauchersteuerrichtlinie 2011/64/EU ² berichtet.

Wie Ende Mai 2020 berichtet ³ fordern viele EU-Mitgliedsstaaten eine Überarbeitung der EU-Tabaksteuerrichtlinie 2011/64/EU. Das Thema war laut Protokoll am 02. Juni 2020 auf dem Tisch. Das Protokoll ⁴ trägt den hübschen Namen “Council conclusions concerning the structure and rates of excise duty applied to manufactured tobacco – Schlussfolgerungen des Rates betreffend die Struktur und die Sätze der Verbrauchsteuern auf Tabakwaren“. Die wichtigsten Aussagen:

RECOGNISES that the current provisions of Directive 2011/64/EU have become less effective, as they are either no longer sufficient or too narrow to address current and future challenges, concerning some products, such as liquids for e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products and other types of next-generation products, which are entering the market;

ERKENNT AN, dass die derzeitigen Bestimmungen der Richtlinie 2011/64/EU weniger wirksam geworden sind, da sie entweder nicht mehr ausreichen oder zu eng gefasst sind, um den derzeitigen und künftigen Herausforderungen in Bezug auf einige Produkte, wie Flüssigkeiten für E-Zigaretten, Tabakerhitzer und andere Arten von Produkten der nächsten Generation, die auf den Markt kommen, zu begegnen;

REITERATES that it is therefore urgent and necessary to upgrade the EU regulatory framework, in order to tackle current and future challenges in respect of the functioning of the internal market by harmonising definitions and tax treatment of novel products (such as liquids for e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products), including products, whether or not containing nicotine, that substitute tobacco, in order to avoid legal uncertainty and regulatory disparities in the EU, taking into account the relevant good practices and experience gained by Member States in this area, and, where appropriate, the objectives of Directive 2011/64/EU, which also includes the objective that the various types of tobacco products, distinguished by their characteristics and by the way in which they are used, should be defined

BEKRÄFTIGT, dass es daher dringend und notwendig ist, den Regelungsrahmen der EU zu verbessern, um die derzeitigen und künftigen Herausforderungen in Bezug auf das Funktionieren des Binnenmarktes zu bewältigen, indem die Definitionen und die steuerliche Behandlung neuartiger Produkte (wie Flüssigkeiten für E-Zigaretten und Tabakerhitzer), einschließlich nikotinhaltiger und nikotinfreier Ersatzprodukte, harmonisiert werden, zur Vermeidung von Rechtsunsicherheit und regulatorischen Unterschieden in der EU, unter Berücksichtigung der einschlägigen bewährten Verfahren und der von den Mitgliedstaaten in diesem Bereich gesammelten Erfahrungen sowie gegebenenfalls der Ziele der Richtlinie 2011/64/EU, die auch das Ziel umfasst, dass die verschiedenen Arten von Tabakerzeugnissen, die sich durch ihre Merkmale und die Art und Weise ihrer Verwendung unterscheiden, definiert werden sollten

Im Klartext: den EU-Mitgliedsstaaten ist die Tabaksteuer nicht genug, nein der EU-Rat fordert eine “Tabaksteuer” auf Nicht-Tabakprodukte wie die E-Zigarette, egal ob mit oder ohne Nikotin!

Bill Wirtz dazu in dem Artikel:

This would make it hard for member states to pretend that the objective is public health and not reducing treasury deficits, as the logical equivalent of this move would be to classify non-alcoholic as an alcoholic beverage.
Dies würde es den Mitgliedsstaaten schwer machen, so zu tun, als sei das Ziel die öffentliche Gesundheit und nicht die Verringerung der Haushaltsdefizite, da das logische Äquivalent dieses Schrittes darin bestünde, Nichtalkoholisches als alkoholisches Getränk einzustufen.

Wie absurd ist das denn? Produkte die Rauchern erwiesenermaßen dabei helfen das Rauchen aufzugeben ⁵ mit einer “Sündensteuer” zu belegen, nur um die Finanzen aufzupolieren?
Dabei zeigt ein Negativ-Beispiel ⁶ aus den USA, dass eine Verbrauchersteuer auf E-Dampfprodukte dazu führt, dass zum einen die Menschen glauben, E-Dampfprodukte seien genauso schädlich wie Tabakzigaretten und zum anderen erhöht sich im gleichen Zuge der Absatz von Tabakwaren.

Bill Wirtz fragt zu recht in dem Artikel, wie ernst es den EU-Mitgliedsstaaten eigentlich mit der Verbesserung der öffentlichen Gesundheit sei, wenn sie auf einer der Präventionsmethoden (E-Zigarette) die Steuerlast für Verbraucher erhöhe? Dabei sollten die Konsequenzen klar sein: eine Erhöhung der Steuerlast korreliere automatisch damit, dass sich gefährliche Schwarzmärkte bilden und damit die Verbraucher kriminalisiert, sowie gesundheitlichen Gefahren ausgesetzt werden.

Laut dem Autor sind die vom EU-Rat vorgeschlagenen Änderungen an der Tabakrichtlinie kontraproduktiv für die öffentliche Gesundheit und schränken die Wahlmöglichkeiten der Verbraucher massiv ein. Solche Regeländerungen sollten immer auch auf voraussichtliche Ergebnisse hin analysiert werden und nicht nur auf ihre zugrundeliegenden Absichten.

Originally published here.

TikTok is problematic, and consumers should beware

CONTACT:
Yaël Ossowski
Deputy Director
Consumer Choice Center

TikTok is problematic, and consumers should beware

WASHINGTON, D.C. – This week, both President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo have floated a ban on the controversial Chinese-owned video-sharing app TikTok, for national security concerns.

Consumer Choice Center Deputy Director Yaël Ossowski responded: “While the proximity to the Chinese Communist Party makes TikTok problematic, an outright ban would go too far by setting a dangerous precedent.

“The fact that the long arm of the Chinese Communist Party can reach into the phones of citizens of liberal democracies is indeed troubling and individuals should remain vigilant. A ban similar to critical network hardware components from companies like Huawei or ZTA is, however, not necessary. Contrary to infrastructure and network software, consumers can consciously choose to stay away from apps like TikTok,” said Ossowski.

“It is concerning that TikTok, with its security flaws and significant privacy issues, is used by over 80 million people in the United States.

“Rather than a ban, we should be educating the public, especially younger consumers, on the dangers of low-security and risky applications tied to foreign regimes like the Chinese Communist Party.

“Resorting to bans should always be a last resort, while innovation and education can and should be used when all possible when faced with security concerns in the tech space,” said Ossowski.

***CCC Deputy Director Yaël Ossowski is available to speak with accredited media on consumer regulations and consumer choice issues. Please send media inquiries HERE.***

—

Cookie	Duration	Description
__cf_bm	1 hour	This cookie, set by Cloudflare, is used to support Cloudflare Bot Management.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-advertisement	1 year	The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Advertisement".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional	11 months	The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance	11 months	This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
CookieLawInfoConsent	1 year	CookieYes sets this cookie to record the default button state of the corresponding category and the status of CCPA. It works only in coordination with the primary cookie.
elementor	never	The website's WordPress theme uses this cookie. It allows the website owner to implement or change the website's content in real-time.
JSESSIONID	past	Used by sites written in JSP. General purpose platform session cookies that are used to maintain users' state across page requests.
viewed_cookie_policy	11 months	The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
wpEmojiSettingsSupports	session	WordPress sets this cookie when a user interacts with emojis on a WordPress site. It helps determine if the user's browser can display emojis properly.

Cookie	Duration	Description
__sharethis_cookie_test__	session	This cookie is set by ShareThis, to test whether the browser accepts cookies.
bcookie	2 years	This cookie is set by linkedIn. The purpose of the cookie is to enable LinkedIn functionalities on the page.
lang	session	This cookie is used to store the language preferences of a user to serve up content in that stored language the next time user visit the website.
lidc	1 day	This cookie is set by LinkedIn and used for routing.
pll_language	1 year	This cookie is set by Polylang plugin for WordPress powered websites. The cookie stores the language code of the last browsed page.

Cookie	Duration	Description
__gads	1 year 24 days	This cookie is set by Google and stored under the name dounleclick.com. This cookie is used to track how many times users see a particular advert which helps in measuring the success of the campaign and calculate the revenue generated by the campaign. These cookies can only be read from the domain that it is set on so it will not track any data while browsing through another sites.
_ga	2 years	This cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to calculate visitor, session, campaign data and keep track of site usage for the site's analytics report. The cookies store information anonymously and assign a randomly generated number to identify unique visitors.
_ga_*	1 year 1 month 4 days	Google Analytics sets this cookie to store and count page views.
_gat_gtag_UA_111177680_1	1 minute	This cookie is set by Google and is used to distinguish users.
_gid	1 day	This cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to store information of how visitors use a website and helps in creating an analytics report of how the website is doing. The data collected including the number visitors, the source where they have come from, and the pages visted in an anonymous form.
CONSENT	16 years 4 months 8 days 16 hours	These cookies are set via embedded youtube-videos. They register anonymous statistical data on for example how many times the video is displayed and what settings are used for playback.No sensitive data is collected unless you log in to your google account, in that case your choices are linked with your account, for example if you click “like” on a video.

Cookie	Duration	Description
_fbp	3 months	This cookie is set by Facebook to deliver advertisement when they are on Facebook or a digital platform powered by Facebook advertising after visiting this website.
_tt_enable_cookie	1 year 24 days	Tiktok set this cookie to collect data about behaviour and activities on the website and to measure the effectiveness of the advertising.
_ttp	1 year 24 days	TikTok set this cookie to track and improve the performance of advertising campaigns, as well as to personalise the user experience.
bscookie	2 years	This cookie is a browser ID cookie set by Linked share Buttons and ad tags.
fr	3 months	The cookie is set by Facebook to show relevant advertisments to the users and measure and improve the advertisements. The cookie also tracks the behavior of the user across the web on sites that have Facebook pixel or Facebook social plugin.
IDE	1 year 24 days	Used by Google DoubleClick and stores information about how the user uses the website and any other advertisement before visiting the website. This is used to present users with ads that are relevant to them according to the user profile.
li_sugr	3 months	LinkedIn sets this cookie to collect user behaviour data to optimise the website and make advertisements on the website more relevant.
muc_ads	1 year 1 month 4 days	Twitter sets this cookie to collect user behaviour and interaction data to optimize the website.
personalization_id	2 years	This cookie is set by twitter.com. It is used integrate the sharing features of this social media. It also stores information about how the user uses the website for tracking and targeting.
test_cookie	15 minutes	This cookie is set by doubleclick.net. The purpose of the cookie is to determine if the user's browser supports cookies.
VISITOR_INFO1_LIVE	5 months 27 days	This cookie is set by Youtube. Used to track the information of the embedded YouTube videos on a website.
VISITOR_PRIVACY_METADATA	6 months	YouTube sets this cookie to store the user's cookie consent state for the current domain.
YSC	session	This cookies is set by Youtube and is used to track the views of embedded videos.
yt-remote-connected-devices	never	These cookies are set via embedded youtube-videos.
yt-remote-device-id	never	These cookies are set via embedded youtube-videos.
yt.innertube::nextId	never	These cookies are set via embedded youtube-videos.
yt.innertube::requests	never	These cookies are set via embedded youtube-videos.

Cookie	Duration	Description
__gpi	1 year 24 days	No description
_gtm_session_start	1 hour	Description is currently not available.
_mailmunch_visitor_id	never	This cookie is set by MailMunch which is email collection and email marketing platform. We do not know the exact purpose of the cookie.
AnalyticsSyncHistory	1 month	No description
asp_transient_id	7 days	No description available.
GoogleAdServingTest	session	No description
li_gc	2 years	No description
mailmunch_second_pageview	never	This cookie is set by MailMunch which is email collection and email marketing platform. We do not know the exact purpose of the cookie.
raygun4js-userid	never	Description unavailable.
st_samesite	session	No description
UserMatchHistory	1 month	Linkedin - Used to track visitors on multiple websites, in order to present relevant advertisement based on the visitor's preferences.

Month: July 2020

So you think you know about black market trade? Here are some myths, debunked

European Parliament has inexplicable double standard on GMOs

European Parliament has inexplicable double standard on GMOs

Is meat unhealthy and killing the climate? No, it isn’t

Sources:

Province ends pot shop deliveries and curbside pickup

Dangerous quotas: Limiting fertilizer imports might kill competition, benefit oligarchs

A liberal solution to Britain’s obesity crisis

[EU] eureporter – Rat beschliesst Überarbeitung der Tabaksteuerrichtlinie 2011/64/EU

TikTok is problematic, and consumers should beware

TikTok is problematic, and consumers should beware

Fun Police

ConsEUmer Podcast

Consumer Choice Center Cast

Recent Posts

Follow us

Contact Info