Why Some Facebook Users Constantly Update Status

Scientists have found what compels people to constantly update their Facebook status. College students who posted more status updates than they normally did felt less lonely over the course of a week, even if no one “Liked” or commented on their posts, researchers found.

“We got the idea to conduct this study during a coffee-break sharing random stories about what friends had posted on Facebook,” psychology researcher Fenne große Deters, of the Universitat Berlin, told LiveScience in an email. “Wondering why posting status updates is so popular, we thought that it would be thrilling to study this new form of communication empirically.”

Deters and her colleague recruited about 100 undergraduates (all Facebook users) at the University of Arizona. All participants filled out initial surveys to measure their levels of loneliness, happiness and depression, and they gave the researchers access to their Facebook profiles by friending a dummy user created for the experiment.

The students were sent an analysis of their average weekly status updates (online wall-memos) and some of the participants were then told to post more statuses than usual over the next seven days. During that week, all completed a short online questionnaire at the end of each day about their mood and level of social connection.

Compared with the group of students who didn’t adjust their social media habits, those who went on a status-writing blitz felt less lonely over the week, the team found. Their happiness and depression levels went unchanged, “suggesting that the effect is specific to experienced loneliness,” the researchers wrote. And a drop in loneliness was linked to an increase in feeling more socially connected, which the researchers believe is the cause behind the positive effects of status updating. [6 Personal Secrets Your Facebook Profile Isn't Keeping]

Interestingly, the team found that loneliness levels did not depend on whether the students’ status updates garnered any comments or “Likes” from Facebook friends. One might assume that a lack of response could be considered a form of rejection, but the act of writing a status update itself might help people feel more connected, the researchers said. When crafting a clever status, Facebook users have a target audience in mind. Simply thinking about their friends (or at least their Facebook friends) can have a “social snacking” effect.

“Similar to a snack temporarily reducing hunger until the next meal, social snacking may help tolerate the lack of ‘real’ social interaction for a certain amount of time,” the researchers wrote in a paper published last month in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science.

Now with over a billion users, Facebook has become the focus of an increasing number of studies trying to uncover the real-life social side effects that can accompany using the social media site.

For example, research presented last year at the meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology (SPSP) showed how the site offers a dangerous medium for social comparison. People in that study with lots of Facebook friends had lower self-esteem, feeling worse about their place in life and their achievements if they’d just viewed their friends’ status updates, compared with people who hadn’t recently surfed the site. But for people with just a few Facebook friends, viewing status updates wasn’t a problem.

Another study, detailed in the Sept. 13 issue of the journal Nature, found such Facebook friends can influence real-life actions of one another. In that study, one “get out the vote” message sent to 61 million Facebook users on Election Day 2010 led to 340,000 people casting ballots when they otherwise would not have.

Follow LiveScience on Twitter @livescience. We’re also on Facebook & Google+.

Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Social Media News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Title Post: Why Some Facebook Users Constantly Update Status
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/why-some-facebook-users-constantly-update-status/
Link To Post : Why Some Facebook Users Constantly Update Status
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 “21″ scores again, beating Swift for 2012′s top album

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – British singer Adele‘s Grammy-winning “21″ scored a rare feat in 2012 as it topped U.S. album sales for a second straight year, beating out U.S. country-pop star Taylor Swift‘s “Red, Nielsen Soundscan said on Thursday.

It was the first time a single album had been a top-seller for two years in a row since Nielsen began tracking album sales in 1991, the organization said.

But U.S. album sales overall fell 4 percent in 2012 to 315.96 million albums, after 2011 saw a rare 3 percent bump in sales.

Adele’s “21″ sold 4.41 million units in the United States in 2012 to top Swift’s “Red,” which sold 3.11 million copies. In 2011, “21″ sold 5.82 million units.

“It’s a sort of a once-in-a-lifetime album,” Keith Caulfield, associate director of charts at Billboard, told Reuters of “21.” “Only a few of these albums come along in history.”

The heartbreak record, with hits like “Rolling in the Deep” and “Someone Like You,” earned Adele six Grammy Awards in early 2012, boosting the profile of the 24-year-old singer and songwriter, who records on indie label XL Recordings.

The album sold at a furious pace, reaching the 10 million albums-sold plateau in the span of two years, Caulfield noted. The last album to achieve that feat was boy band ‘N Sync’s “No Strings Attached,” which was released in 2000.

“It’s really the right combination of artistry and hit singles,” Caulfield said of “21′s” success.

“She really crossed over from pop to Latin to adult contemporary to dance,” he added. “Young and old consumers bought it, and because of its mixture of fans, she was able to sell it as well as she did.”

Adele’s success came despite the drop in 2012 U.S. album sales.

“Last year (2011) was a fluke,” Caulfield said. “A year gain in album sales is a mega achievement. … It’s the way the market works now, people buy songs and not albums.”

Indeed, digital song sales rose 5 percent in 2012 to a record high 1.336 billion downloads.

The year’s best-selling albums in the United States had a particularly British flavor as Swift was the lone American in the top five. Swift records for the independently owned Nashville-based Big Machine, distributed by Universal Music Group.

British boy band One Direction’s “Up All Night,” released in 2011 on Sony Music Entertainment’s SYCO/Columbia label, placed third with 1.62 million units sold, while their 2012 follow-up, “Take Me Home,” took the fifth spot with 1.34 million units sold.

Britain’s folk revivalists Mumford & Sons, on indie record label Glassnote, placed fourth with their album “Babel” selling 1.46 million units.

(Reporting by Eric Kelsey; Editing by Jill Serjeant and Peter Cooney)

Celebrity News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Title Post: Adele’s “21″ scores again, beating Swift for 2012′s top album
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/adeles-21-scores-again-beating-swift-for-2012s-top-album/
Link To Post : Adele’s “21″ scores again, beating Swift for 2012′s top album
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..

U.S. unemployment holds at 7.8%

CBS News business and economics correspondent Rebecca Jarvis talks to Norah O'Donnell and Anthony Mason about the final jobs report of 2012 to be released later today.

The pace of hiring by U.S. employers eased slightly in December, pointing to a lackluster pace of economic growth that was unable to make further inroads in the country's still high unemployment rate.

Payrolls outside the farming sector grew 155,000 last month, the Labor Department said on Friday. That was in line with analysts' expectations and slightly below the level for November.

Gains in employment were distributed broadly throughout the economy, from manufacturing and construction to health care.

That should reinforce expectations that the economy will grow about 2 percent this year, unlikely to quickly bring down the unemployment rate or make the U.S. Federal Reserve rethink its easy-money policies, which have been propping up the recovery.

"It's not a booming economy, but it is growing," Jim O'Sullivan, an economist at High Frequency Economics in Valhalla, New York, said before the data was released.

The jobless rate held steady at 7.8 percent in December, down nearly a percentage point from a year earlier but still well above the average rate over the last 60 years of about 6 percent.

The Labor Department raised its estimate for the unemployment rate in November by a tenth of a point to 7.8 percent, citing a slight change in the labor market's seasonal swings.

Most economists expect the U.S. economy will be held back by tax hikes this year as well as by weak spending by households and businesses, which are still trying to reduce their debt burdens.

Friday's data nonetheless gave signals of growing momentum in the labor market's recovery from the 2007-09 recession. Many economists had expected December's payroll gains to be padded by one-time factors like the recovery from a mammoth storm that hit the East Coast in late October.

The government had said last month the storm had no substantial impact on the November data, and many economists expected the government to recant by revising downward in Friday's report its estimate for payroll gains in November. Instead, the government revised its estimate for November payrolls upward by 15,000.

"There is some evidence that underlying jobs growth has improved," Paul Dales, an economist at Capital Economics in London, said before the report was released.

AUSTERITY'S BITE

Despite the signs of some momentum in hiring, a wave of government spending cuts due to begin around March loom over the economy.

Many economic forecasts assume the cuts - which would hit the military, education and other areas - will ultimately be pushed into next year as part of a deal sought by lawmakers to reduce gradually the government's debt burden.

Initially, the cuts were planned to have begun this month as part of a $600 billion austerity package that also included tax hikes. Hiring in December may have been slowed by uncertainty over the timing of the austerity, economists say.

Congress this week passed legislation to avoid most of the tax hikes and postpone the spending cuts.

Even with the last-minute deal to avoid much of the "fiscal cliff," most workers will see their take-home pay reduced this month as a two-year cut in payroll taxes expires.

That leaves the Fed's efforts to lower borrowing costs as the main program for stimulating the economy.

The Fed has kept interest rates near zero since 2008, and in September promised open-ended bond purchases to support lending further. On Thursday, however, minutes from the Fed's December policy review pointed to rising concerns over how the asset purchases will affect financial markets.

Analysts ahead of the report expected some of the strength in job creation in December would be due to the Fed's policies.

"Despite the end-of-year angst over the ‘fiscal cliff,' financial conditions remained supportive of job growth in December," economists at Nomura said in a note to clients earlier in the week.
 

Read More..

Sandy Hook kids return to class in neighboring town

MONROE, Conn. — Classes resumed Thursday for the students of Sandy Hook Elementary School for the first time since last month's massacre in Newtown, where a gunman killed 20 first-graders and six educators.

With their original school still being treated as a crime scene, the more than 400 students are attending classes at a refurbished school in the neighboring town of Monroe. Law enforcement officers have been guarding the new school, and by the reckoning of police, it is "the safest school in America."

The school district said parents who want to be close to their children are welcome to visit and stay in classrooms or an auditorium throughout the day. Parents were encouraged to have their children take the bus to help them return to familiar routines.

Still, Newtown Superintendent Janet Robinson said officials will do their best to make the students feel at ease.

"We will go to our regular schedule," she said. "We will be doing a normal day."

Returning students, teachers and administrators were met by a large police presence on a sunny and cold day with temperatures hovering near 10 degrees Several police officers were guarding the entrance to the school, and were checking IDs of parents dropping off children.

On Wednesday, the students and their families were welcomed at an open house at their new school, which was formerly the Chalk Hill Middle School in Monroe but renamed as the Sandy Hook Elementary School. Students received gift boxes with toys inside and shared joyful reunions with teachers.

One father, Vinny Alvarez, took a moment to thank his third-grade daughter's teacher, Courtney Martin, who protected the class from a rampaging gunman by locking her classroom door and keeping the children in a corner.

"Everybody there thanked her in their own way," he said.

The gunman, Adam Lanza, also killed his mother at the home they shared in Newtown before driving to the school and gunning down 26 people, including the school's principal. Lanza fatally shot himself as police arrived. Police haven't released any details about a motive.

Numerous police officers on Wednesday guarded the outside of the Monroe school, which is about 7 miles from the old school, and told reporters to stay away.

"I think right now it has to be the safest school in America," Monroe police Lt. Keith White said.

Teachers attended staff meetings at the new school on Wednesday morning and were visited by Gov. Dannel P. Malloy before the open house, White said.

Robinson said Chalk Hill School has been transformed into a "cheerful" place for the surviving students to resume normal school routines. She said mental health counselors continue to be available for anyone who needs them.

During the open house, Alvarez said his 8-year-old daughter also got to pick out a stuffed animal to take home from the school library.

"I'm not worried about her going back," he said of his daughter Cynthia. "The fear kind of kicks back in a little bit, but we're very excited for her and we got to see many, many kids today. The atmosphere was very cheerful."

Several signs welcoming the Sandy Hook students to their new school were posted along the road leading to the school in a rural, mostly residential neighborhood. One said "Welcome Sandy Hook Elementary Kids," while a similar sign added "You are in our prayers."

Teams of workers, many of them volunteers, prepared the Chalk Hill school with fresh paint and new furniture and even raised bathroom floors so the smaller elementary school students can reach the toilets. The students' desks, backpacks and other belongings that were left behind following the shooting were taken to the new school to make them feel at home.

No new details released

In the meantime, no new details have emerged to explain why the 20-year-old Lanza, armed with a semi-automatic assault rifle, two other firearms and hundreds of rounds of ammunition, targeted the school.

Described by family friends as having Asperger's syndrome, a form of autism, Lanza shot and killed his mother, Nancy Lanza, at their home about 5 miles from the school before driving to Sandy Hook and embarking on the massacre, police said. He then took his own life as police were arriving at the school, which had an enrollment of 456.

Police have offered no firm motive for the attack, and state police investigators have said it could be months before they finish their report.

The massacre in Newtown, a rural New England town of 27,000 residents about 70 miles northeast of New York City, stunned the nation, prompting President Barack Obama to call it the worst day of his presidency and reigniting an extensive debate on gun control. Obama has tasked Vice President Joe Biden with assembling a package of gun-control proposals to submit to Congress in the next several weeks.

The National Rifle Association, the most powerful gun-rights lobby in the United States, has rebuffed calls for more stringent firearms restrictions and instead called for armed guards to patrol every public school in the country.

Associated Press and Reuters contributed

Read More..

The Most and Least Influential Social Media Celebs

While he isn’t currently available for promotional work, businesses would have the most success on social media with President Barack Obama endorsing their goods and services, new research shows.

A study by social marketing platform SocialToaster revealed that Obama is considered the most influential celebrity on social media. Justin Bieber, Lady Gaga, Ashton Kutcher and Anderson Cooper followed the president on the rankings of social influencers.

On the flip side, the research found that former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney was the least influential celebrity on social media, finishing just below Madonna, Kanye West and Sean Hannity.

While celebrities might be influential on social media in some aspects, it’s those closest to us who make the largest impact when it comes to the important issues. Nearly all of the social media users surveyed agreed that a social media post from a close friend or family member was most likely to influence them on important subjects, with politicians and athletes the least likely to influence them.

“While it was no surprise that in this election year Barack Obama would be ranked the most influential person in social media, it was surprising to us that Justin Bieber and Lady Gaga would beat Madonna and Kanye West,” said Brian Razzaque, CEO of SocialToaster. “We were also surprised to see that friends had more pull than family when it came to influencing the sharing of social media content.”

Regardless of whom it comes from, there are some posts that will quickly result in an unfollowing, the study discovered. Nearly three-quarters of those surveyed said a racist post would cause them to immediately unfollow someone on social media. Other types of posts that result in a loss of followers include sexism, pornography, repetitive, overly personal posts and those that use poor grammar.

The researcher was based on surveys of 3,000 SocialToaster Super Fans, which consist of social media experts and professionals, many of whom work with some of the nation’s leading brands. The experts range from those who work in the entertainment industry who represent numerous television shows and movies to those who work in professional sports, including the Baltimore Ravens and the Detroit Pistons.

This story was provided by BusinessNewsDaily, a sister site to LiveScience. Follow Chad Brooks on Twitter @cbrooks76 or BusinessNewsDaily @BNDarticles. We’re also on Facebook & Google+.

Copyright 2012 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Social Media News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Title Post: The Most and Least Influential Social Media Celebs
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/the-most-and-least-influential-social-media-celebs/
Link To Post : The Most and Least Influential Social Media Celebs
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..

“Hunger Games” and “Hobbit” most-anticipated films of 2013: poll

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – This year will look a lot like 2012 at the box office, with “The Hunger Games” and Hobbits at the top of cinemagoers must-see lists, according to a survey by ticket-seller Fandango released on Thursday.

The second installment in “The Hunger Games” trilogy, “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire,” which is set for a November release, topped the list as 2013′s most-anticipated blockbuster.

The first film in the life-or-death thriller series starring Jennifer Lawrence, raked in some $ 687 million at the worldwide box office in 2012.

“The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug,” director Peter Jackson‘s second installment in the “The Hobbit” series of elves and dwarves, ranked second on the survey that polled more than 2,000 moviegoers during the final week of 2012. It is scheduled to hit the big screen in December.

“People love the mega-franchises and that is what gets them most excited,” Dave Karger, Fandango chief correspondent, told Reuters. “The first ‘Hunger Games‘ whetted peoples’ appetites for more. The same can be said for ‘The Hobbit‘ and ‘Iron Man.’”

The superhero thriller “Iron Man 3″ starring Robert Downey Jr. ranked third on the list and is set for a May 3 release.

“Star Trek into Darkness” – the follow-up to 2009′s “Star Trek” science-fiction adventure – and “The Great Gatsby” starring Leonardo DiCaprio rounded out the top five. Both films are set to open in May.

‘JAZZED’ ABOUT FRANCHISES

The heavy dose of franchise films on the list indicates how familiarity can build buzz among moviegoers, Karger said.

“In the case of ‘The Hunger Games,’ many people who loved the movie have read the other books so they’re excited to see it brought to life,” he said. “The same with ‘The Hobbit‘ too.

“Some people say, ‘Where is the originality?’ but the fact of the matter is that these franchises are what people get most jazzed about.”

The survey also asked film fans to vote on the sexiest man and woman on the big screen in 2013, as well as best villain, breakout stars and best apocalyptic films.

Mila Kunis, who stars in upcoming film “Oz: The Great and Powerful,” was voted sexiest actress, while Channing Tatum was voted sexiest man for Paramount’s “G.I. Joe: Retaliation.” Both films are set for March releases.

Ben Kingsley (“Iron Man 3″) was voted most-anticipated villain, and June’s zombie thriller “World War Z” starring Brad Pitt was voted most-anticipated apocalyptic film.

British actress Alice Eve was voted biggest breakout actress for “Star Trek” while fellow Brit Henry Cavill got the nod as biggest breakout actor for playing Superman opposite Russell Crowe and Amy Adams in “Man of Steel,” which will be released in June.

Full results can be viewed at Fandango.com.

(Reporting by Eric Kelsey, editing by Jill Serjeant and Sandra Maler)

Movies News Headlines – Yahoo! News

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..

Net worth of world's richest rose by $241B in 2012

The richest people on the planet got richer in 2012, adding $241 billion to their collective net worth, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, a daily ranking of the world's 100 wealthiest individuals.

The aggregate net worth of the world's top moguls stood at $1.9 trillion at the market close on Dec. 31, according to the index. Retail and telecommunications fortunes surged about 20 percent on average during the year. Of the 100 people who appeared on the final ranking of 2012, only 16 registered a net loss for the 12-month period.

"Last year was a great one for the world's billionaires," said John Catsimatidis, the billionaire owner of Red Apple Group, in an e-mail written poolside on his BlackBerry in the Bahamas. "In -- that will give them an advantage."

Amancio Ortega, the Spaniard who founded retailer Inditex SA, was the year's biggest gainer. The 76-year-old tycoon's fortune increased $22.2 billion to $57.5 billion, according to the index, as shares of Inditex, operator of the Zara clothing chain, rose 66.7 percent.

"It's an amazing company that has done great and the gains are quite justified given its performance," said Christodoulos Chaviaras, an analyst at Barclays Plc in London who has had an "equalweight" rating on Inditex for about a year. "Can they repeat that? It will be harder. A lot of the positive news is already reflected in the share price."

Global stocks soared in 2012. The MSCI World Index gained 13.2 percent during the year to close at 1,338.50 on Dec. 31. The Standard and Poor's 500 Index rose 13.4 percent to close at 1,426.19.

European stocks surged in the second half of the year. The Stoxx Europe 600 is up 19.6 percent since June 4, advancing as the European Central Bank introduced bond-buying programs, S&P upgraded Greece's debt and German business confidence rose more than forecast. The benchmark gauge's 14.4 percent advance for the year was the best annual return since 2009.

Carlos Slim, the telecommunications magnate who controls Mexico's America Movil SAB, remained the richest person on Earth for the year. The 72-year-old's net worth rose $13.4 billion -- or 21.6 percent -- through Dec. 31, making him the second-biggest gainer by dollars.

Gains by Slim's industrial conglomerate, Grupo Carso, and Grupo Financiero Inbursa, his banking and insurance operation, more than offset the decline posted by America Movil, his biggest holding. The largest mobile phone operator in the Americas by subscribers fell 5.8 percent to close at 14.9 pesos at the end of the year.

"America Movil is no longer the growth story that it has been, given the increase in Latin American wireless penetration over the last five years," said Chris King, an analyst at Stifel Nicolaus & Co. in Baltimore, Md. "It continues to generate a very high amount of cash flow and has the best set of telecom assets across Latin America."

According to King, one of Slim's biggest challenges will be dealing with regulation in Mexico and Colombia designed to punish or even-out the market share between America Movil and its competitors. Of the 14 analysts who cover the stock, 71 percent have a buy rating on the company, with an average target price of 19.15 pesos per share, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

U.S. software mogul Bill Gates, 57, ranks second on the list, trailing Slim by $12.5 billion. The Microsoft co-founder added $7 billion to his net worth as shares of the Redmond, Wash.-based company rose 2.9 percent. Microsoft stock accounts for less than 20 percent of the billionaire's fortune.

Warren Buffett, 82, lost his title as the world's third- richest man to Ortega Aug. 6. The Berkshire Hathaway chairman gained $5.1 billion during the year, even after donating 22.3 million Berkshire Class B shares in July to charity. The billionaire, who has pledged to give away most of his fortune, spent much of the year pressing for higher taxes on the wealthy.

"On incomes of over $1 million, the excess $1 million should have a minimum tax of 30 percent. And then over $10 million, 35 percent," Buffett said in an interview with Charlie Rose in November. "Tax law should be progressive. And I think that when people make $15 million or $20 million or $200 million and pay a 10 percent rate, something should be done about it."

IKEA founder Ingvar Kamprad, 86, is the world's fifth- richest person with a $42.9 billion fortune. The complex ownership structure behind IKEA, the world's largest furniture retailer, became more transparent in August after IKEA's franchisor published its financial performance publicly for the first time. His net worth rose 16.6 percent in 2012.

Brazil's Eike Batista, 56, was the year's biggest loser by dollars, falling $10.1 billion. The commodities maven, who vowed a year ago that he'd become the world's wealthiest man by 2015, sold a 5.63 percent stake in his EBX Group in March to Abu Dhabi's Mubadala Development.

As part of the deal, he pledged an unspecified additional stake in 2019 if he fails to meet a 5 percent annual return on the sovereign wealth fund's $2 billion investment, according to a person with knowledge of the deal. Batista now ranks 75th in the world with a $12.4 billion net worth. On March 27, he was worth $34.5 billion and ranked 8th on the Bloomberg index.

"Next year is going to be a lot of work for Eike," said Lucas Brendler, who helps manage about 6 billion reais at Banco Geracao Futuro de Investimentos in Porto Alegre, Brazil. "It's going to be a year for him to recover investors' confidence, and to leave the realm of theory and start delivering results. The EBX companies have great growth potential."

Batista's former title as the richest Brazilian is now held by 73-year-old banker Jorge Paulo Lemann, who ranks 37th with an $18.8 billion fortune. The country's second-richest person is Dirce Camargo, the matriarch behind Camargo Correa SA, the Sao Paulo-based conglomerate that has interests in cement, electricity and Havaianas flip-flops. Her net worth is $13.4 billion, according to the Bloomberg ranking.

Read More..

Taxes to rise for most Americans despite 'fiscal cliff' deal

WASHINGTON — While the tax package that Congress passed New Year's Day will protect 99 percent of Americans from an income tax increase, most of them will still end up paying more federal taxes in 2013.

That's because the legislation did nothing to prevent a temporary reduction in the Social Security payroll tax from expiring. In 2012, that 2-percentage-point cut in the payroll tax was worth about $1,000 to a worker making $50,000 a year.

The Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan Washington research group, estimates that 77 percent of American households will face higher federal taxes in 2013 under the agreement negotiated between President Barack Obama and Senate Republicans. High-income families will feel the biggest tax increases, but many middle- and low-income families will pay higher taxes too.

Households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will face an average tax increase of $579 in 2013, according to the Tax Policy Center's analysis. Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will face an average tax increase of $822.

"For most people, it's just the payroll tax," said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center.

The tax increases could be a lot higher. A huge package of tax cuts first enacted under President George W. Bush was scheduled to expire Tuesday as part of the "fiscal cliff." The Bush-era tax cuts lowered taxes for families at every income level, reduced investment taxes and the estate tax, and enhanced a number of tax credits, including a $1,000-per-child credit.

The package passed Tuesday by the Senate and House extends most the Bush-era tax cuts for individuals making less than $400,000 and married couples making less than $450,000.

Obama said the deal "protects 98 percent of Americans and 97 percent of small business owners from a middle-class tax hike. While neither Democrats nor Republicans got everything they wanted, this agreement is the right thing to do for our country."

The income threshold covers more than 99 percent of all households, exceeding Obama's claim, according to the Tax Policy Center. However, the increase in payroll taxes will hit nearly every wage earner.

Social Security is financed by a 12.4 percent tax on wages up to $113,700, with employers paying half and workers paying the other half. Obama and Congress reduced the share paid by workers from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent for 2011 and 2012, saving a typical family about $1,000 a year.

Obama pushed hard to enact the payroll tax cut for 2011 and to extend it through 2012. But it was never fully embraced by either party, and this time around, there was general agreement to let it expire.

The new tax package would increase the income tax rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent on income above $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for married couples. Investment taxes would increase for people who fall in the new top tax bracket.

High-income families will also pay higher taxes this year as part of Obama's 2010 health care law. As part of that law, a new 3.8 percent tax is being imposed on investment income for individuals making more than $200,000 a year and couples making more than $250,000.

Together, the new tax package and Obama's health care law will produce significant tax increases for many high-income families.

For 2013, households making between $500,000 and $1 million would get an average tax increase of $14,812, according to the Tax Policy Center analysis. Households making more than $1 million would get an average tax increase of $170,341.

"If you're rich, you're almost certain to get a big tax increase," Williams said.

Deal 'does not ... address the serious fiscal challenges we face'

Business and deficit-reduction groups said the "fiscal cliff" deal enacted Tuesday night was a positive step because it averts huge tax hikes, but they said it falls short of what's needed to stabilize the rising U.S. debt.

Thomas J. Donohue, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said the deal "does not even begin to address the serious fiscal challenges we face."

"The new Congress and the administration must begin work immediately to slow runaway spending through structural entitlement reforms," Donohue said Wednesday. He said policymakers needed to spur economic growth by overhauling the tax code and increasing U.S. energy production.

The Business Roundtable, a group of top corporate chief executives, said President Obama and Congress have only started to deal with the nation's fiscal problems by pulling back from the "cliff" of severe, automatic tax increases and government spending cuts that were to go into effect with the new year.

"When pressed to the limit, political leaders averted some of the most immediate negative consequences of the short-term fiscal cliff, but left unaddressed the most serious and fundamental reforms required for the country’s long-term economic health," the group said. "We hope political leaders will now work continuously to agree on market-credible structural fiscal and spending reforms needed for America to compete in a modern global economy."

The Campaign to Fix the Debt, a coalition that included top chief executives, said the compromise legislation that preventing most of the automatic tax increases from taking effect was "a small step forward" in efforts to reduce the deficit.

But it also was "a missed opportunity to do something big to reduce our long term fiscal problems," said the group's cofounders, Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, who headed President Obama's deficit reduction commission.

"Washington missed this magic moment to do something big to reduce the deficit, reform our tax code, and fix our entitlement programs," they said.

"We have all known for over a year that this fiscal cliff was coming," Bowles and Simpson said. "In fact, Washington politicians set it up to force themselves to seriously deal with our nation’s long term fiscal problems. Yet even after taking the country to the brink of economic disaster, Washington still could not forge a common-sense bipartisan consensus on a plan that stabilizes the debt."

A short-term tax deal was necessary to "protect the fragile economic recovery in the short term" said Michael A. Peterson, chief operating officer of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, a leading deficit-reduction advocacy group. But he said more needs to be done.

"The goal of any sustainable fiscal policy must be to stabilize the debt as a share of the economy and put it on a downward path," Peterson said. "Until we have a plan that stabilizes our federal debt, uncertainty and lack of confidence will continue to be a drag on our current economy and threaten our future prosperity."

Associated Press and Jim Puzzanghera of the Los Angeles Times contributed

Read More..