At the Consumer Electronics Show, more glitz than gee whiz

The International Consumer Electronics Show next week may be facing questions about its relevance in an Internet world that makes new things seem old in minutes, but it is still the foremost gathering for all things gadgety and geeky.

The annual trade show in Las Vegas has a rich past showcasing such groundbreaking devices as the VCR, the CD player, the camcorder, high-definition television and the Blu-ray disc.

"It was the singular most important technology event of the year," said Zack Zalon, a longtime show attendee and managing partner at the digital product design firm Wilshire Axon in Westwood.

The nature of the glitzy show has shifted in recent years from a focus on new products to one on deal-making and industry schmoozing. Still, the show draws enormous crowds and global publicity — even though the convention isn't open to the public.

When it kicks off Tuesday, more than 3,200 exhibitors are expected to occupy 1.9 million square feet of

exhibition space at the convention center for four days of news conferences, product demonstrations, parties and celebrity appearances. Roughly 150,000 people, about the same as last year, are expected to attend, temporarily swelling the city's population by about 25%.

These days, attendees and exhibitors say they see the show as a time to survey the overall personal electronics landscape and to connect in person with developers, retailers and the media.

Executives at the Beats by Dr. Dre line of high-end headphones, for instance, will be in Las Vegas but plan to hold their meetings and product demonstrations in exclusive suites on the Strip instead of vying for attention in the cavernous exhibit halls of the convention center.

"The brand experience that we want our customers and partners to have with Beats is very personal and it takes a real dialogue," Beats President Luke Wood said. "I want to do that in an atmosphere that is personal and not rushed."

New products will still be launched, preserving a bit of the show's famous wow factor. Show producers say they expect 20,000 new products to be unveiled, including Samsung Electronics Co.'s 85-inch ultra-high-definition TV and LG Electronics' newest organic-LED sets.

But groundbreaking products are rarely launched at the show anymore because of the 24-hour news cycle of the Internet, which makes it easy for companies to promote whatever they want, whenever they want.

Tech behemoths now accustomed to holding their own media events throughout the year don't want to share the limelight with their rivals. Case in point: Microsoft Corp., which unveiled its Xbox video game console at the trade show in 2001, will not host a booth at the show this year nor give its usual keynote address.

Apple Inc., Google Inc. and Amazon.com Inc. don't officially participate in the show, though they typically send executives and other employees to scope out the competition and meet quietly with developers and the media.

Part of the problem with the show is it's "so huge that's it's tough for any announcement to gain any kind of traction," said Zalon of Wilshire Axon.

"I don't think anyone is going to CES under the illusion that they're going to be dramatically educated on the innovations of the near future," he said. "I think most people now go for face time and to hope to pick up on some trends that indicate where things are heading."

Exhibitors are expected to focus on improvements to already-established technologies, emphasizing the fast-growing markets for tablets and smartphones and related products.

Many of the devices and technologies featured at the show will begin appearing on store shelves in the weeks following the event.

With the television industry in a slump and projected to have a flat sales year in 2013, TV manufacturers will be out in force at the show. Many will be touting larger screen sizes as consumers increasingly adopt a bigger-is-better approach when buying TVs.

Samsung will have one of the largest booth spaces at the show, where it will display the 85-inch ultra-HDTV, one of the largest commercially available "4K" sets to hit the market this year. The so-called 4K TVs cram four times as much picture information onto the screen as current high-definition models do.

Samsung also will demonstrate a smart TV camera with features such as gesture control and face recognition, as well as an improved Smart Hub platform for Internet-connected televisions.

Read More..

Eric Schmidt's North Korea Trip May Not Be as Ridiculous as It Sounds

Google chairman Eric Schmidt’s planned trip to North Korea promises few returns for the company’s shareholders. But for the world’s most locked-down country, where only a few thousand citizens have internet access at all, his visit could offer the strongest hint yet of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un’s tortured longing for openness.

To be sure, the gulf between Google and North Korea couldn’t seem wider.

“The face of probably the most important facilitator of borderless information in the world is going into the hyperstate for the control of information,” says Victor Cha, a director of Asian affairs for the National Security Council during the second Bush administration and now a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The past quarter-century has seen ex-presidents, diplomats, and the world’s most powerful nations try and fail to crack open North Korea’s totalitarian regime. During the visit reportedly planned for later this month, Schmidt will join former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson for what Richardson described as a “private humanitarian visit” to free a detained U.S. citizen over the State Department’s objections.

Richardson told CBS that Schmidt’s presence on the trip had nothing to do with Google.

“I invited Eric. He is going as a private citizen,” Richardson said. “This is not a Google trip.”

Perhaps. “We do not comment on personal travel,” a Google spokeswoman said in response to questions.

But since stepping down as Google’s CEO in 2011, Schmidt has continued to serve as the search giant’s most visible public face. The significance of showing that face in Pyongyang isn’t lost on North Korea, Cha says.

“I don’t know if it’s a good opportunity for Google. But it’s a good opportunity for the North Korean leadership to signal to the world that they’re serious about going forward,” he says.

Cha accompanied Richardson to North Korea in 2007 as part of a team seeking the return of the remains of U.S. soldiers killed during the Korean War. He says about 4,000 North Koreans have internet access out of a population of 25 million. Even then, that access is tightly controlled and only granted in the interest of ensuring that at least some members of the ruling class are conversant in 21st century technology.

It’s also hard to imagine that 29-year-old Kim Jong-un, who was educated in the West, can resist the same tech that defines the lives of twentysomethings around the world. “He’s got to be interested in this stuff,” Cha says. But the risks are great: “As soon as he allows open access to it, he can kiss his leadership goodbye.”

Cha believes that piercing the information bubble could accomplish more than any diplomacy in bringing change to North Korea, which could soon face further sanctions over its successful launch of a long-range rocket last month.

But whether Google could provide the necessary needle also depends on what Google could get out of the deal. In a country where starvation is common and home computers aren’t, the company would seem to have little to gain.

“Google depends on making money from people who have money, and North Koreans don’t have a lot of it,” says Danny Sullivan, founding editor of Search Engine Land and a longtime Google watcher.

At the same time, a successful trip could cement Schmidt in the role of Google’s ambassador to the world. Google may have escaped its recent scrape with the FTC with nothing more than a hand slap, but it still has European regulators to contend with. As the company’s reach extends further around the world, having an international man of mystery with a jet at his disposal could come in very handy going forward. Already a fixture among the Davos set, with this trip Schmidt seems more ready than ever to embrace that role.

“He seems to be doing an exceptional job at government relations — note that Google has avoided antitrust problems, at least in the U.S.,” says Jeffrey Pfeffer, a professor of management at the Stanford Graduate School of Business.

Pfeffer says that while not common in the U.S., it’s typical in other parts of the world for CEOs to stick to their companies’ internal affairs while the chairmen interact with the outside world: “By all indications, this is working stunningly well for Google.”

Read More..

Playboy founder Hugh Hefner marries his “runaway bride”

(Reuters) – Octogenarian Playboy founder Hugh Hefner briefly swapped his iconic silk pajamas for a tuxedo to marry Crystal Harris, the one-time “runaway bride” who followed through this time at a New Year’s Eve wedding.

“Happy New Year from Mr. and Mrs. Hugh Hefner!” the Playboy magazine publisher tweeted early on Tuesday.

The message accompanied a photograph of Hefner, 86, wearing what appeared to be purple silk pajamas under a black bathrobe and snuggling his bride, 26, still wearing her pale pink wedding dress. He also wore his trademark captain’s hat.

An hour earlier, Hefner posted a picture of himself in a tuxedo with his bride under an arch of pink and white flowers at the wedding ceremony in the Playboy Mansion in Beverly Hills, California.

“Crystal & I married on New Year’s Eve in the Mansion with Keith as my Best Man. Love that girl!” Hefner wrote on Twitter with the picture, referring to his brother Keith Hefner, a songwriter.

The couple tied the knot more than a year after their planned 2011 wedding was scuttled when Harris got cold feet.

The blonde Playboy Playmate of the Month for December 2009 jettisoned the adult entertainment mogul in what was called a “change of heart” five days before a lavish June 2011 wedding before 300 guests.

Harris, who appeared on the July 2011 cover of the adult magazine with a “runaway bride” sticker covering her bottom half, tweeted on Monday that she was ready to commit and changed her name to “Crystal Hefner” on the micro-blogging site.

“Today is the day I become Mrs. Hugh Hefner,” Harris, who has a psychology degree, wrote on Twitter after writing “Feeling very happy, lucky, and blessed.”

The San Diego native, whose parents are British, said she asked for Christmas ornaments rather than lingerie at her pre-Christmas bridal shower to help decorate Hefner’s famed mansion.

Hefner, founder of the Playboy adult entertainment empire, has been married twice before. He and his second wife Kimberley Conrad, also a former Playmate, divorced in 2010 after a lengthy separation. His first marriage to Mildred Williams ended in divorce in 1959. He has two children from each marriage.

(Reporting by Eric Kelsey and Barbara Goldberg; Editing by Ellen Wulfhorst and Paul Simao)

Celebrity News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Title Post: Playboy founder Hugh Hefner marries his “runaway bride”
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/playboy-founder-hugh-hefner-marries-his-runaway-bride/
Link To Post : Playboy founder Hugh Hefner marries his “runaway bride”
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..

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

A new rule imposed by the F.D.A. would establish different standards for ensuring the purity of water that touches fruits and vegetables.

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..

Wealth Matters: The End of a Decade of Uncertainty Over Gift and Estate Taxes

FOR many of the wealthy, the American Taxpayer Relief Act, passed this week by Congress, is aptly named.

For estate and gift taxes in particular, all but the richest of the rich will probably be able to protect their holdings from taxes, now that Congress has permanently set the estate and gift tax exemptions at $5 million (a level that will rise with inflation).

“You could say this eliminates the estate tax for 99 percent of the population, though I’ve seen figures that say 99.7 or 99.8,” said Richard A. Behrendt, director of estate planning at the financial services firm Baird and a former inspector for the Internal Revenue Service. “From a policy point of view, the estate tax is not there for raising revenue. It’s there for a check on the massive concentration of wealth in a few hands, and it will still accomplish that.”

And while Congress also agreed to increase tax rates on dividends and capital gains to 20 percent from 15 percent for top earners — in addition to the 3.8 percent Medicare surcharge on such earnings — the rates are still far lower than those on their ordinary income. For the earners at the very top, whose income comes mostly from their portfolios of investments, and not a paycheck like most of the rest of us, this is a good deal.

The estate tax, once an arcane assessment, has been in flux and attracting significant attention since 2001. That was when the exemption per person for the estate tax began to rise gradually from $675,000, with a 55 percent tax for anything above that amount, to $3.5 million in 2009 with a 45 percent tax rate for estates larger than that. Estate plans were written to account for the predictable increases in exemptions.

Then in 2010, contrary to what every accountant and tax lawyer I spoke to at the time believed would happen, the estate tax disappeared. Congress and President Obama could not reach an agreement on the tax. So that year, for the first time since 1916, Americans who died were not subject to a federal estate tax. (Their estates still paid state estate taxes, where they existed, and other taxes, including capital gains, on the value of the assets transferred.)

At the end of 2010, President Obama and House Speaker John A. Boehner reached an agreement that was just as unlikely as the estate tax expiring in the first place: the new exemption was $5 million, indexed to inflation, with a 35 percent tax rate on any amount over that, and it would last for two years. The taxes and exemptions for gifts made during someone’s lifetime to children and grandchildren were also raised to the same level, from $1 million and a 55 percent tax above that.

As I have written many times, this was a far better rate and exemption than anyone expected. It also created a deadline of Dec. 31, 2012, for people who could make a major gift up to the exemption level or above the amount and pay the low gift tax.

Using the gift exemption was enticing because it meant those assets would appreciate outside of the estate of the person making the gift. Even paying the tax became attractive to the very rich because of how estate and gift taxes are levied. Take, for example, someone who has used up his exemption and wants to give an heir $1 million. The amount it would take to accomplish this differs depending on when it is given. In life, it would cost $1.4 million because the 40 percent gift tax is paid like a sales tax. If it was given after death, the estate would have to set aside about $1.65 million after the 40 percent estate tax was deducted. But this presented a conundrum: while it may make perfect sense to give away a lot of money during your lifetime and save on estate taxes, it means ceding control of cash, securities or shares now. What if you end up needing them? It wasn’t an easy decision, and it led to a fourth-quarter rush.

As of this week, this is no longer an issue. The estate and gift tax exemptions are permanently set at the same $5 million level, indexed for inflation, and the tax rate above that exemption is 40 percent, up from 35 percent. With indexing, the exemption is already about $5.25 million per person — double for a couple — and it will rise at a rate that means most Americans will continue to avoid paying any federal estate tax.

Read More..

Bieber urges crackdown on paparazzi after photographer's death

Justin Bieber and his collection of exotic cars have been tantalizing targets for celebrity photographers ever since the young singer got his driver's license.

A video captured the paparazzi chasing Bieber through Westside traffic in November. When Bieber's white Ferrari stops at an intersection, the video shows the singer turning to one of the photographers and asking: "How do your parents feel about what you do?"

A few months earlier, he was at the wheel of his Fisker sports car when a California Highway Patrol officer pulled him over for driving at high speeds while trying to outrun a paparazzo.

This pursuit for the perfect shot took a fatal turn Tuesday when a photographer was hit by an SUV on Sepulveda Boulevard after taking photos of Bieber's Ferrari. And the singer now finds himself at the center of the familiar debate about free speech and the aggressive tactics of the paparazzi.

Since Princess Diana's fatal accident in Paris in 1997 while being pursued by photographers, California politicians have tried crafting laws that curb paparazzi behavior. But some of those laws are rarely used, and attorneys have challenged the constitutionality of others.

On Wednesday, Bieber went on the offensive, calling on lawmakers to crack down.

"Hopefully this tragedy will finally inspire meaningful legislation and whatever other necessary steps to protect the lives and safety of celebrities, police officers, innocent public bystanders and the photographers themselves," he said in a statement.

It remained unclear if any legislators would take up his call. But Bieber did get some support from another paparazzi target, singer Miley Cyrus.

She wrote on Twitter that she hoped the accident "brings on some changes in '13 Paparazzi are dangerous!"

Last year, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge threw out charges related to a first-of-its-kind anti-paparazzi law in a case involving Bieber being chased on the 101 Freeway by photographer Paul Raef. Passed in 2010, the law created punishments for paparazzi who drove dangerously to obtain images.

But the judge said the law violated 1st Amendment protections by overreaching and potentially affecting such people as wedding photographers or photographers speeding to a location where a celebrity was present.

The L.A. city attorney's office is now appealing that decision.

Raef's attorney, Dmitry Gorin, said new anti-paparazzi laws are unnecessary.

"There are plenty of other laws on the books to deal with these issues. There is always a rush to create a new paparazzi law every time something happens," he said. "Any new law on the paparazzi is going to run smack into the 1st Amendment. Truth is, most conduct is covered by existing laws. A lot of this is done for publicity."

Coroner's officials have not identified the photographer because they have not reached the next of kin. However, his girlfriend, Frances Merto, and another photographer identified him as Chris Guerra.

The incident took place on Sepulveda Boulevard near Getty Center Drive shortly before 6 p.m. Tuesday. A friend of Bieber was driving the sports car when it was pulled over on the 405 Freeway by the California Highway Patrol. The photographer arrived near the scene on Sepulveda, left his car and crossed the street to take photos. Sources familiar with the investigation said the CHP told him to leave the area. As he was returning to his vehicle, he was hit by the SUV.

Law enforcement sources said Wednesday that it was unlikely charges would be filed against the driver of the SUV that hit the photographer.

Veteran paparazzo Frank Griffin took issue with the criticism being directed at the photographer as well as other paparazzi.

"What's the difference between our guy who got killed under those circumstances and the war photographer who steps on a land mine in Afghanistan and blows himself to pieces because he wanted the photograph on the other side of road?" said Griffin, who co-owns the photo agency Griffin-Bauer.

"The only difference is the subject matter. One is a celebrity and the other is a battle. Both young men have left behind mothers and fathers grieving and there's no greater sadness in this world than parents who have to bury their children."

Others, however, said the death focuses attention on the safety issues involving paparazzi

"The paparazzi are increasingly reckless and dangerous. The greater the demand, the greater the incentive to do whatever it takes to get the image," said Blair Berk, a Los Angeles attorney who has represented numerous celebrities. "The issue here isn't vanity and nuisance, it's safety."

richard.winton@latimes.com

andrew.blankstein@latimes.com

Read More..

Record 5-Year Prison Term Handed to Convicted File Sharer

The leader of the in-theater camcording gang known as the IMAGiNE Group was handed a 60-month prison term Thursday in what is the nation’s longest sentence in a file-sharing case.

The sentence handed to Jeramiah Perkins, 40, of Portsmouth, Virginia, surpassed one of largest file-sharing terms handed to IMAGiNE co-defendant Gregory A. Cherwonik, 53, of New York, who received 40 months in November for his role in the operation.

In all, five IMAGiNE members have pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit copyright infringement for operating what prosecutors described as the world’s most prolific piracy release group between 2009 and 2011.

The Motion Picture Association of America said IMAGiNE was more successful than any other illegal internet release group because of its “short latency periods between the theatrical release and their pirated release, their consistently good quality of audio captures, their high volume of releases, and their connection to international suppliers.”

What’s more, the group sought “to be the premier group to first release to the internet copies of new motion pictures only showing in movie theaters,” according to the indictment. (.pdf)

According to Perkins’ plea agreement with prosecutors and accepted by U.S. District Judge Arenda Wright Allen of the Eastern District of Virginia, Perkins rented computer servers in France and elsewhere for the group, registered domain names and, among other things, created e-mail and PayPal accounts “to receive donations and payments from persons downloading or buying IMAGiNE Group releases of pirated copies of motion pictures and other copyrighted works,” the authorities said.

Group members would audio-record films such as Friends With Benefits and Captain America: The First Avenger. Others members would record the film at a theater with a camcorder. Then the sound and video would be combined into a full-featured movie, the authorities said.

Other films the group recorded and uploaded included The Men Who Stare at Goats, Avatar, Clash of the Titans, Iron Man 2, The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, and, among others, The Green Hornet.

The authorities said the group utilized servers in France, Canada and the United States to offer in-theater-only movies from websites like unleashthe.net, pure-imagination.us and pure-imagination.info.

The indictment said the group accepted donations “to fund expenses, including the cost of renting servers used by the conspirators, and to accept payments for the unauthorized distribution and sale of pirated copies of copyrighted works.” The indictment charged that the IMAGiNE Group’s websites included member profiles, a torrent tracker, discussion forums and a message board.

Sean Lovelady, 28, of California, was handed 23 months in October for his role. Willie Lambert, 57, of Pennsylvania, was given 30 months. A fifth defendant is expected to be sentenced in March.

Read More..

‘Star Wars’ creator George Lucas engaged to businesswoman

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – “Star Wars” creator George Lucas will marry his longtime girlfriend Mellody Hobson, the director’s production company Lucasfilm Ltd said on Thursday.

Lucas, 68, and Hobson, the president of Chicago investment firm Ariel Investments LLC, have been together for the past six years. It will be Lucas’ second marriage. He was married to Oscar-winning film editor Marcia Lucas from 1969 to 1983.

No date or location for the wedding has been made public.

Hobson, 43, serves on the board of directors for Hollywood studio Dreamworks Animation SKG Inc, cosmetics company Estee Lauder Companies Inc, coffeehouse chain Starbucks Corp and Internet coupon company Groupon Inc.

Lucas, who rose to fame directing the 1971 science-fiction film “THX 1138,” launched “Star Wars” in 1977 developed it into one of the highest-grossing film franchises of all time.

Lucas sold Lucasfilm and the “Star Wars” franchise to the Walt Disney Co in November for $ 4.05 billion.

(Reporting by Eric Kelsey, editing by Jill Serjeant and Lisa Shumaker)

Celebrity News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Title Post: ‘Star Wars’ creator George Lucas engaged to businesswoman
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/star-wars-creator-george-lucas-engaged-to-businesswoman/
Link To Post : ‘Star Wars’ creator George Lucas engaged to businesswoman
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..

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..

High and Low Finance: Lessons From Europe on Averting Disaster

Will the United States follow the European path in 2013?

Let’s hope so.

A year ago, the world’s markets were watching Europe with rising fear. Some expected 2012 to be the year that the euro zone broke up. Germany did not want to pay to bail out its less fortunate neighbors unless they agreed to severe austerity and to what amounted to a surrender of sovereignty — ideas that other countries were loath to accept.

What ensued during the year was a series of summit meetings that often seemed to do more for the hotel business in assorted European capitals than they did to solve the problem. Agreements in principle were announced, sending markets up, only to stumble back when the details got difficult.

What the naysayers missed was that there really was a common commitment to save the euro, and that in the end politicians and central bankers would do what was needed to avert disaster. Finally, in July, the European Central Bank came up with a plan that assured the euro area banks, and the troubled governments, that they would have access to money at reasonable rates. Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, went along, angering some of her German colleagues, who thought she was straying from basic principles.

So it could be in the United States Congress. The outgoing Congress went up to the final minutes, amid much angst, before it averted the fiscal crisis. There are reasons to grumble about the details, and more deadlines loom in the new Congress, but the essential point was that in the end the House Republicans allowed a bill to pass even though a majority of them opposed it.

John A. Boehner, the speaker who has often seemed scared to do anything that his Tea Party colleagues might oppose, not only allowed the vote but chose to vote for the proposal. The first indication of whether this is a new dawn, or simply a case of the House Republicans being outmaneuvered, could come when the debt ceiling is addressed. Logically, the debt ceiling is an absurd vote to begin with. Raising it simply allows the government to pay the bills for spending the Congress already approved. To allow the spending bills to pass, but to then refuse to raise the debt ceiling, is equivalent to a family’s deciding to refuse to pay the credit card bill while continuing to spend. That will only accomplish destruction of the family’s credit.

Perhaps some Republicans will threaten to keep the country from paying its bills to accomplish something they don’t otherwise have the votes to accomplish. But if the European precedent holds, the final result will at least avert disaster.

Whether more than that can be hoped for may depend in part on whether those screaming for major cuts in federal spending actually believe their rhetoric — the talk about the United States becoming another Greece.

The reality is that the current budget deficit largely reflects two things: exceptionally low government revenue and the continuing problems caused by the financial crisis and recession that followed the bursting of the housing bubble. Bringing tax revenue back to historical levels, as well as the growth in revenue and reductions in spending that will automatically follow an improving economy, will make a major difference.

There are issues that must be addressed regarding health care costs and Medicare, as well as the fact that there will be fewer workers for each retiree as the baby boomers retire. But those who see a Greek-type crisis here should ask themselves why the government can borrow at interest rates that remain extraordinarily low. The world’s trust in Uncle Sam’s ability to pay its debts has remained high.

What are not high are taxes, although a poll would no doubt show that many people think otherwise.

Federal taxes, relative to the size of the economy, are significantly lower than they were after Ronald Reagan cut them. During 2012 federal revenue amounted to around 17 percent of gross domestic product. At the Reagan low point, the figure was a full percentage point higher. In 2009, when the deficit was ballooning, the figure fell below 16 percent, something that had happened only once during the more than 60 years for which comparable data is available.

Back in 2000, federal revenue approached 21 percent of G.D.P. The assumption that such strong collections would continue played a major role in the forecasts of budget surpluses as far as the eye could see. In 2001, aides to President George W. Bush pointed to the figure as proof that Americans were overtaxed. It turned out that tax revenue figures were temporarily inflated in two ways by the bull market in technology stocks. Not only were there a lot of capital gains to be taxed, but soaring share prices also produced a lot of ordinary income for those employees and executives who could cash in stock options.

At the time, it was assumed that such options had no significant impact on tax revenue, because the income that went to the employee provided an offsetting tax deduction for the company that issued the options. That might have been true had the companies been paying taxes, but many of the most bubbly stocks were in companies that never had, and never would, pay a dollar in income taxes.

That revenue would have come down sharply after the technology stock bubble burst, even without the Bush tax cuts. But those tax cuts worsened the situation and are a major cause of the current deficits.

It might be interesting to consider what would have happened in the 2012 presidential campaign had either candidate been willing to, as Adlai Stevenson once said, “talk sense to the American people.”

In reality, neither candidate would have dreamed of saying, as an economist did a week ago: “Ultimately, unless we scale back entitlement programs far more than anyone in Washington is now seriously considering, we will have no choice but to increase taxes on a vast majority of Americans. This could involve higher tax rates or an elimination of popular deductions. Or it could mean an entirely new tax, such as a value-added tax or a carbon tax.”

It would have been only a little more likely to hear a candidate say, as another economist said after the fiscal deal was reached, “We need a tax system that can promote economic growth and raise the revenue the American people want to devote to government.”

The first quote came from a column in The New York Times by N. Gregory Mankiw, a Harvard economist. The second statement was made W. Glenn Hubbard, the dean of the Columbia University business school, who was chairman of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers when the Bush tax cuts were enacted. He went on to say, a Times article reported, that some Bush-era policies were no longer relevant to the task of tailoring a tax code to a properly sized government.

Mr. Mankiw and Mr. Hubbard were among the top economic advisers to Mr. Romney. If they advised him to make similar statements during the campaign, he did not take the advice.

“Fiscal negotiations might become a bit easier if everyone started by agreeing that the policies we choose must be constrained by the laws of arithmetic,” Mr. Mankiw added.

Floyd Norris comments on finance and the economy at nytimes.com/economix.

Read More..