Podcasts about consumers

The AI race isn't about chips anymore. It's about electricity. In a massive $4.75 billion deal, Google (Alphabet) just acquired Intersect Power, a major clean energy developer, to secure the grid access its data centers desperately need.But Google isn't alone. From Microsoft restarting Three Mile Island to Amazon's massive nuclear contracts, Big Tech is panic-buying power plants.In this video, we break down why the "AI Energy Wall" is forcing tech giants to become utility companies, and what this means for the future of the power grid, nuclear energy, and your electric bill.TIMESTAMPS0:00 – Intro: Bigtech Energy War0:44 – The Deal: Why Google Bought Intersect Power for $4.75B1:30 – The "Energy Wall": AI Power Consumption vs. The Grid2:01 – BigTech Energy Contracts in 20253:21 – Who Pays? The Impact on Consumers and InvestorsKEY TAKEAWAYS✅ Google's $4.75B Bet: Alphabet acquires Intersect Power to build "behind the meter" energy projects, bypassing the clogged public grid.✅ The Energy Crisis: AI queries use 10x more power than search. By 2030, US data centers will consume 9% of all electricity.✅ Nuclear Renaissance: Tech giants are single-handedly reviving nuclear power (SMRs & restarts) because they need 24/7 reliability that solar/wind can't provide.✅ Vertical Integration: Big Tech is now owning the entire stack: from the AI model to the chip to the power plant running it.SOURCES & DATA- Google Acquires Intersect Power ($4.75B Deal)- Microsoft Restarts Three Mile Island (Constellation Energy Deal)- Amazon Signs 1.9GW Nuclear Deal (Talen Energy)- Data Center Power Demand Forecast (Bain/Bloomberg)Links:Prashant Choubey - https://www.linkedin.com/in/choubeysahabSubscribe to VC10X newsletter - https://vc10x.beehiiv.comSubscribe on YouTube - https://youtube.com/@VC10X Subscribe on Apple Podcasts - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/vc10x-investing-venture-capital-asset-management-private/id1632806986Subscribe on Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/7F7KEhXNhTx1bKTBFgzv3k?si=WgQ4ozMiQJ-6nowj6wBgqQVC10X website - https://vc10x.comFor sponsorship queries reach out to prashantchoubey3@gmail.comSUBSCRIBE FOR MORE MACRO INSIGHTSVC10X breaks down the most important stories in finance, tech, and markets every week. If you want actionable insights to help you navigate this volatile economy, subscribe now.COMMENT BELOWIs Big Tech buying power plants a smart move or a dangerous monopoly? Let us know in the comments.#AI #Google #EnergyCrisis #NuclearPower #Investing #TechNews #Microsoft #Amazon #CleanEnergy #IntersectPower #MacroEconomics

“Animal Rights” activists are behind the push to REMOVE domestic livestock, poultry, and other animal-based products from your table.

As the holiday shopping season winds down many are still looking for last minute deals and even finding sales on items for next year's celebrations. Consumers are searching for post-holiday savings during clearance sales on decor and electronics, but also looking to get their finances in order with the goal of resetting spending habits. FOX's Tonya J. Powers speaks with Trae Bodge, a smart shopping expert with a passion for helping you save money, who shares tips on post holiday sales, exchanging unwanted gifts and how to get your savings back on track. Click Here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ To Follow 'The FOX News Rundown: Evening Edition' Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hugh discusses the GDP and inflation numbers that came out, the Tim Walz/Minnesota fraud scandal, talks with callers as well as David Drucker, David Bahnsen, Dr. Michael Oren, Noah Rothman, Adm. Mark Montgomery (USN, Ret.), and Eli Lake.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The year 2025 closed with a series of consumer rights breaches in the services sector. In early December, IndiGo cancelled and rescheduled flights en masse due to operational mismanagement and pilot scheduling issues.In the securities markets, —Avadhut Sathe Trading Academy was alleged to have misled its students on various counts. And, in a lesser-known incident, a consumer approached the Supreme Court over an incorrect negative credit score that refused to rectify despite previous court orders. In all three cases, an arm of the State intervened, but consumers did not get compensation for the harms they suffered. This underscores a larger faultine: the law has weakened the average Indian consumer by taking away their agency to sue the service provider and obtain relief for themselves. If we're serious about consumer welfare, we must empower them to sue, invidually where possible and collectively, where necessary. Watch this week's column by Bhargavi Zaveri-Shah for #ThePrint

US consumer confidence falling for its fifth consecutive month as negative views around the labor market and business conditions persist. Mina Haque, the CEO of the international restaurant chain Tony Roma's writes: "Low confidence and sticky price perceptions are influencing dine-in frequency and check size." Haque joined Bloomberg's Annmarie Hordern and Scarlet Fu to discuss. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The RealReal, an online luxury marketplace, reported earnings last month revising FY 2025 sales higher. The company also reported EPS and sales above estimates.For a look at the luxury consumer, Bloomberg's Emily Graffeo and Vonnie Quinn caught up with the company's CEO, Rati Sahi Levesque. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

From Wall Street to Main Street, the latest on the markets and what it means for your money. Updated regularly on weekdays, featuring CNBC expert analysis and sound from top business newsmakers. Anchored and reported by CNBC's Jessica Ettinger. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

As the holiday shopping season winds down many are still looking for last minute deals and even finding sales on items for next year's celebrations. Consumers are searching for post-holiday savings during clearance sales on decor and electronics, but also looking to get their finances in order with the goal of resetting spending habits. FOX's Tonya J. Powers speaks with Trae Bodge, a smart shopping expert with a passion for helping you save money, who shares tips on post holiday sales, exchanging unwanted gifts and how to get your savings back on track. Click Here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ To Follow 'The FOX News Rundown: Evening Edition' Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Michael and I would like to take a moment and thank all of our great Subscribers and patrons this year. It has been a wildly successful growth year in listens, watches, and articles read, and we are truly blessed to see it. We are striving to improve and keep growing with some different things rolling out next year.While the cancellation is under review with the Department of War for national security risks, I think that if science is applied, it will be an easy ruling. So after reading about these cancellations, I wanted to see who would be impacted by the company and how consumers would be impacted. This will be an ongoing story as it unfolds, but the high utility costs will be passed on to consumers. And make no mistake, the Democrats will use this to their advantage, and Republicans won't do anything.President Trump and Secretaries Doug Burgum and Chris Wright are running down the road trying to do the right thing for the American People. The costs associated with the project are going to be huge, and when the Democrats start ripping President Trump over this, remember the Billions of dollars and the crippling of the economy that Obama, Biden, and the governors of Democratic states cost the US citizens by their overreach and Net Zero enforcement of horrific policies. The main topics discussed1. The Trump administration's cancellation of several major offshore wind projects in the U.S. due to national security concerns. The projects mentioned include Vineyard Wind One, Revolution Wind, Sunrise Wind, Coastal Virginia Wind Offshore, and Empire Wind.2. The potential impact of these project cancellations on companies involved, such as Dominion Energy, GE Vernova, Orsted, and Equinor. The transcript discusses the financial performance and stock price movements of these companies.3. The debate around the definition of "green energy" and the challenges of integrating renewable energy sources like wind and solar into the power grid, including issues around transmission, costs, and reliability.4. The delay or cancellation of the retirement of some fossil fuel power plants in the U.S. in response to increasing electricity demand, particularly from the growth of AI and data centers.5. The global oil market dynamics, including the "oil glut" with a large number of oil tankers at sea, the impact of sanctions on major producers like Russia and Venezuela, and discussions around OPEC's role in oil price determination.6. The overall commentary on the state of the energy industry, policy debates, and Stu's perspectives on the various topics covered.1.All Large Scale Offshore Wind Projects Under Construction Suspended Due to National Security Concerns2.Virginia-based Utility Dominion Energy May Be Hit as Investors Eye This Week's Offshore Wind Cancellations3.GE Vernova Inc: Supplier to Vineyard Wind, Looking at Its Books After This Week's Trump Administration Cancellation of Projects4.U.S. Fossil-Fuel Power Plants Delay Retirement as AI Power Demand Soars5.Oil Glut and Surging Barrels at Sea Have Spooked Oil Traders and the Market, but Is This Market Dysfunction Rather Than a Glut?6.U.S. Department of Energy to Return $13 Billion to the Treasury and a clear definition of green energy is needed.Feel Free to use this as an excuse to not hang out with your in-laws if you need to over the holidays. We may be more fun. Check out the Energy News Beat Substack: https://theenergynewsbeat.substack.com/Check out the Energy News Beat Website: https://energynewsbeat.co/Also, if you need to calculate your tax burden, check out the tax calculator here https://energynewsbeat.co/invest/Merry Christmas to all, and thank you to all of our great followers, subscribers, and patrons.Check out Reese Energy Consulting, Sponsor of the Energy News Beat, Stand Up https://reeseenergyconsulting.com/

As the holiday shopping season winds down many are still looking for last minute deals and even finding sales on items for next year's celebrations. Consumers are searching for post-holiday savings during clearance sales on decor and electronics, but also looking to get their finances in order with the goal of resetting spending habits. FOX's Tonya J. Powers speaks with Trae Bodge, a smart shopping expert with a passion for helping you save money, who shares tips on post holiday sales, exchanging unwanted gifts and how to get your savings back on track. Click Here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ To Follow 'The FOX News Rundown: Evening Edition' Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

"Buying Local" has become important for many consumers, but there's a shortage of local butcher shop facilities and skilled employees.

(December 23,2025) ABC News tech reporter joins the show for ‘Tech Tuesday.’ Today, Mike talks about the best and worst gadgets of 2025. 2025 was the year of the ‘cranky consumer.’ Colleges oversold education, now they need to sell ‘connection.’ Why Japan is obsessed with KFC for Christmas.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The biggest threat to consumer financial health isn't inflation, stagnant wages, or market volatility, but the financial system itself. Not because it's failing, but because it's been silently optimized to benefit the most educated, the wealthiest, and the most sophisticated players. In the new book Fixed, a harsh truth is revealed: from daily saving and borrowing to education loans, insurance, and retirement planning, personal finance is designed to disadvantage the very people it seeks to help. Complexity becomes a source of profit. Friction turns into a deliberate feature. And billions of people, from young families to aging retirees, are left making high-stakes decisions within a system stacked against them. Today on Banking Transformed, I'm joined by the co-author of the book, Tarun Ramadorai. We explore how we got here, why consumers struggle with even the most basic financial choices, and most importantly, what it will take to restore fairness, trust, and transparency. If you care about the future of consumer banking, financial well-being, or rebuilding confidence in the system, this is a conversation you can't afford to miss.

The way consumers buy has fundamentally changed (and, the businesses that win in 2026 will be the ones that understand why). In this episode, Kelly breaks down the five most important consumer trends shaping buying behavior in 2026 and beyond, and explains how to build your offers, marketing, and sales systems to match where the market is actually going.  This episode will give you insight into long-term shifts in trust, spending habits, personalization, community, and brand values, and how to use them to create predictable, sustainable growth. If you want to scale without burnout, stop chasing trends, and position your business to thrive in the next era, this episode will give you the clarity and direction you need. TIMESTAMPS: 00:00 – 02:20: Why understanding consumer behavior is the real competitive advantage in 2026 02:20 – 06:55:  How subscriptions can attract high-ticket buyers when done right 06:55 – 12:10: How ease of use impacts retention, utilization, and upsells (and, what most businesses are getting wrong about automation).  12:10 – 17:35: How paid communities create faster results and deeper trust... and what's resurging in the new year 17:35 – 23:10: Why personal brand will dominate in 2026 23:10 – 29:40: How personalization increases conversion and lifetime value 29:40 – 34:20: Building systems your team can actually run with The Virtual Business School RESOURCES: Join The Virtual Business School and master predictable sales in 2026: www.go.virtualbusinessschool.com/joinvbs    Follow Kelly on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kellyroachofficial Follow Kelly on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/kelly.roach.520/  Connect on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kellyroachint/ 

(December 22, 2025) How a speeding ticket can be worse than killing someone with your car in California. 60 Minutes pulls piece, producer says it's political. The year of the ‘cranky consumer.’ The hottest Christmas gifts! Poop tests & sleep monitors.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Gavin Newsom's California is a travesty for energy policies, and we can see yet another hit to consumers. The Utility companies are now limited in the profits they can make to rebuild the grid. That will SQUASH investment and get more companies to leave California, and take the jobs with them out of the State. As companies shut down and cut jobs, they also cut tax revenue, and that is going to make the financial crisis brought on by Gavin even worse.His Energy Policies have now become a complete national security risk for the western half of the United States. When you consider the corruption, graft, and greed exemplified during Gavin Newsom's Governorship, it won't be easy to rebuild California after he leaves office.1. The energy policies and challenges in California, particularly the regulation of utility profits and the impact on energy reliability.Michael Tanner and Stuart Turley discuss how California's approach to regulating energy providers like PG&E and Edison differs from other states, leading to issues with grid investment and energy reliability. They contrast California's "top-down" policies with a more collaborative approach in different states.2. The geopolitical tensions and sanctions related to Venezuela and Russia.The hosts discuss the Trump administration's actions to intercept oil tankers related to Venezuela, and the potential motivations behind these moves, such as regime change, protecting Gulf Coast refinery interests, and impacting Russia's war in Ukraine.3. The potential of nuclear fusion as an energy source, and its connection to Trump's media company.Stuart Turley discusses the promise of nuclear fusion technology and how Trump's media company, Truth Social, may be involved in developing or licensing fusion-related patents.4. The outlook for the oil and gas industry based on the Dallas Fed survey.Time Stamps00:16 California Cuts PG&E and Edison's profits for grid improvement.03:47 California's Corruption exposed by Katy Grimes at the California Globe08:17 Oil and Venezuela's impact on global markets11:06 Sanctions through Drone strikes13:31 Fusion and President Trump may be a great investment for humanityWe cover key insights from the Dallas Fed's survey of oil and gas executives, including their price expectations, activity levels, and concerns about a potential market oversupply. Is there a glut, or is the glut simply misunderstood, or is the market recalibrating to a new method? You will want to see our Doomberg interview in January.1.California Cuts PG&E's and Edison's Profits for Grid Investments: Gavin Newsom's California Poses a National Security Risk Due to Flawed Energy Policies2.San Francisco Crippled by Widespread Power Outages on Busy Holiday Shopping Weekend3.Trump Administration Intercepts a Second Tanker in Venezuela Oil Tanker Blockade4.Sanctions through Drone Strikes now in the Mediterranean5.Why Fusion Is Considered Energy's Holy Grail, and how President Trump's media company is betting on a breakthrough6.Lingering pessimism, uncertainty further weigh on oil and gas activity – Dallas Fed7.US Oil Drillers Drop 6 Rigs This Week According to Baker Hughes: What Is the Impact to Consumers and Investors?Check out our sponsor, Reese Energy Consulting https://reeseenergyconsulting.com/Check out our website https://energynewsbeat.co/Check out the Energy News Beat Substack https://theenergynewsbeat.substack.com/Questions on Investing in Oil https://energynewsbeat.co/invest/

LANCASTER COUNTY AND A HOLIDAY SPENDING SLUMP Colleague Jim McTague, Author and Journalist. Reporting from Lancaster County, Jim McTague observes a sluggish Christmas shopping season, with consumers buying practical items like gloves rather than expensive packages. While tourist venues like Sight & Sound Theaterremain busy, he predicts a mild recession in 2026 due to rising local taxes and utility costs. NUMBER 5

Consumers are feeling gloomy about the economy, why Christmas music is more popular than ever, and mystery man pays off layaways for dozens of families. 

The problem of misinformation in the current age, argues political scientist Samuel Bagg, is not that reliably truth-producing institutions and practices don't exist, but that people have ceased to trust them. Changing that requires something deeper than factchecking or media literacy. It's a matter of social identity, and solving it will mean reconfiguring the social identity landscape. I talk with Bagg about that daunting conclusion and its implications for democracy. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.volts.wtf/subscribe

Shoot us a Text.Episode #1223: Cars Commerce lines up its next CEO as a new chapter begins for dealer tech. Lucid's factory-backed used pricing puts EV depreciation in plain sight. And even as consumers keep spending this holiday season, a growing “joy deficit” reveals how tired—and cautious—shoppers really are.Show Notes with links:Our good friends at Cars Commerce are teeing up a major leadership transition. Longtime CEO Alex Vetter will hand the keys to Tobias “Tobi” Hartmann in early 2026, marking the end of an era and signaling a renewed push around growth, digital tools, and AI for dealers.Hartmann brings 25+ years of experience leading global marketplaces, most recently as CEO of Scout24 and previously at HelloFresh and eBay Enterprise.Alex Vetter, who has been with Cars.com since its 1998 launch, will step down after transforming the company into a vertical SaaS and marketplace platform for dealers.Under Vetter, Cars Commerce expanded through acquisitions like Dealer Inspire, AccuTrade, and DealerClub, strengthening its dealer-facing tech stack.Alex Vetter: “I'm confident that Tobi will continue our momentum for the next chapter of firsts. He will be a tremendous leader for this next phase of growth.”Lucid just launched its first factory-backed used-car program, and the pricing is doing more talking than the marketing.Lucid Recharged is the brand's certified pre-owned program for the Air sedan, with the Gravity SUV coming later.Eligible cars must be single-owner examples under 62,000 miles and pass a 160+ point factory inspection.Pricing is the headline: a 2023 Air Pure with ~20,000 miles can land in the mid-$40Ks versus a new MSRP just under $71K.Consumers are still spending this holiday season—but they're not exactly enjoying it as a new Retail Dive report says shoppers are leaning heavily on credit and BNPL.Katie Thomas of the Kearney Consumer Institute summed it up bluntly: there's a “real joy deficit for consumers,” driven by high prices and constant anxiety-focused messaging.Despite steady spending, consumers are fatigued, stressed, and increasingly reliant on credit, resale, and “dupe” gifting to get through the holidays.Shoppers feel stuck in an echo chamber of stress—online, in ads, and in daily life—where everything is expensive and brands keep reminding them of it.“Getting emotional doesn't have to be serious,” Thomas noted0:00 Intro with Paul J Daly and Kyle Mountsier6:05 Cars Commerce Announces Leadership Transition9:52 Lucid Launches CPO Program12:31 The Joy Deficit In RetailThank you to today's sponsor, Mia. Capture more revenue, protect CSI, and never miss a call or connection again with 24/7 phone coveraJoin Paul J Daly and Kyle Mountsier every morning for the Automotive State of the Union podcast as they connect the dots across car dealerships, retail trends, emerging tech like AI, and cultural shifts—bringing clarity, speed, and people-first insight to automotive leaders navigating a rapidly changing industry.Get the Daily Push Back email at https://www.asotu.com/ JOIN the conversation on LinkedIn at: https://www.linkedin.com/company/asotu/

Your 60-second money minute. Today's topic: Weight Loss Drugs Pitched Direct To Consumers Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

As artificial intelligence rapidly becomes a part of everyday life for Australians, the ACCC is warning the technology also brings growing risks. In its AI industry snapshot, the consumer watchdog says AI is being used to fuel fake reviews, ghost websites and increasingly sophisticated online scams, making them harder to detect – and warns the rapid expansion of AI-enabled products and services could pose potential harms to consumers and competition if left unchecked. SBS's Stephanie Youssef spoke with ACCC Chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb about whether AI is creating a new generation of digital monopolies and why it's calling for stronger monitoring powers to keep pace with the evolving industry.

The FTC alleged Instacart misled consumers with unlawful tactics, causing them to pay higher fees while also denying refunds. Also, Apple says it can now collect any money a developer owes the tech giant at any time. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Consumers are being warned of a price hike for technology like phones and computers due to the rise of AI creating a shortage of computer chips. The cost for parts like RAMs have also sky rocketed with some products already costing double, or triple, what they did a year ago. "There's only so much production capability on the planet, and what we're seeing is where these chips are fabricated, they are diverting their production away from the RAM that's used in our consumer devices to the high bandwidth memory that is being used in the AI data centres," Gorilla Tech CEO Paul Spain told Andrew Dickens. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

PREVIEW Guest: Chris Riegel. Riegel analyzes the "K economy," where lower-tier consumers are spending less at quick-service restaurants due to high overhead and inflation. With brands reintroducing value products and people eating at home, Riegel questions if this spending drop will negatively impact Christmas retail sales and future liquidity. 1905 BUTTE MONTANA

More people are falling behind on paying their bills to keep the lights on and heat their homes, according to a new analysis of consumer data—a warning sign for the U.S. economy and another political headache for President Donald Trump. Past due balances to utility companies jumped 9.7% annually to $789 between the April-June periods of 2024 and 2025, said The Century Foundation, a liberal think tank, and the advocacy group Protect Borrowers. The increase has overlapped with a 12% jump in monthly energy bills during the same period. Consumers usually prioritize their utility bills along with their mortgages and auto debt, said Julie Margetta Morgan, the foundation's president. The increase in both energy costs and delinquencies may suggest that consumers are falling behind on other bills, too. "There's a lot of information out there about rising utility costs, but here we can actually look at what that impact has been on families in terms of how they're falling behind," Margetta Morgan said. Troubles paying electricity and natural gas bills reflect something of an economic quandary for Trump, who is promoting the buildout of the artificial intelligence industry as a key part of an economic boom he has promised for America. But AI data centers are known for their massive use of electricity, and threaten to further increase utility bills for everyday Americans. These troubles also come as Trump faces political pressure from voters fed up with the high cost of living. The president spoke about the economy and affordability issues at an event hosted by the McDonald's fast-food company. "We have it almost at the sweet spot, and prices are coming down on different things," Trump said at the event, adding that inflation has been "normalized" at a "low level." During Trump's first six months in office, there was a 3.8% increase in households with severely overdue utility bills. This article was provided by The Associated Press.

U.S. consumers consider shopping several times per week and interact with brands across an average of 11 touchpoints before making a purchase. Over 80 percent of personal care purchases are planned in advance, with routine and brand loyalty influencing most decisions. Advertising maintains influence, with more than 40 percent of shoppers recalling ads before buying, and streaming TV now plays a significant role in brand discovery and engagement. Consumers spend over 90 minutes daily on streaming platforms, where 54 percent report discovering new brands and 72 percent take consideration actions such as researching or bookmarking products. Amazon Ads leverages these trends by connecting brands to audiences through premium entertainment, interactive ad formats, and data-driven marketing strategies.Learn more on this news by visiting us at: https://greyjournal.net/news/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From hotels to fast food restaurants, more companies are luring consumers to sign up for loyalty programs in exchange for points, discounts and other deals. But according to two former FTC officials, loyalty programs have devolved into “data-harvesting machines” that track what we buy and even how much we're willing to pay. And the financial benefits tend to fall far short of the initial promise. We talk to Sam A.A. Levine and Stephanie Nguyen about how loyalty programs exploit consumers, how California is fighting back and how we can stay alert to the pitfalls. Their recent paper is called “The Loyalty Trap: How Loyalty Programs Hook Us with Deals, Hack Our Brains, and Hike Our Prices.” What consumer loyalty programs do you use, and have you ever felt used… by them? Guests: Samuel A.A. Levine, former director, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission - senior fellow, Center for Consumer Law & Economic Justice, UC Berkeley Law School Stephanie Nguyen, former chief technologist, Federal Trade Commission - senior fellow, Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Reports suggest around one-third of U.S. adults use continuous monitoring technology and health wearables…with trends showing persistent growth, especially among younger, educated, and higher-income individuals. And by providing 24/7/365, real-time data on physiological metrics like vital signs, glucose levels, and sleep patterns…continuous monitoring technology and health wearables are becoming increasingly powerful drivers of consumer behavior. And I believe this is super important, especially if you consider how more individuals began viewing themselves as consumers in the healthcare market compared to solely being patients. Also, with the help of continuous monitoring technology and health wearables…consumer healthcare has been evolving from a reactive, one-size-fits-all treatment approach to a distinctively proactive, personalized, and integrative data-led approach. Moreover, empowered by this "proactive health" mindset, consumers increasingly moving closer towards this four-way intersection of taste, convenience, nutrition, and functionality. Therefore, the most direct impact of continuous monitoring technology and health wearables is arguably the mainstreaming of the "food as medicine" philosophy. When consumers receive moment-by-moment feedback on how specific foods, beverages, and dietary supplements affect their bodies…they start demanding products tailored to their unique biological needs. But maybe the most significant example would be glycemic responses detected by continuous glucose monitors. In fact, whether boosted further by the recent FDA clearance for over-the-counter continuous glucose monitors and/or the rising usage of GLP-1 drugs for weight management…heightened interest in blood sugar management has also expanded beyond the diabetic community. Obviously, “war” had been waged on sugar a long time ago…but a “MAHA-influenced marketplace” has slightly shifted, with consumers being more comfortable with sweetness that has natural connotations. Either way, this signals a potentially powerful opportunity for packaged food and beverage companies to embrace diabetic-friendly products (for general wellness), as it's reasonable to imagine a similar adoption trajectory of gluten-free beyond those with celiac disease. Nonetheless, nearly 43% of consumers (today) associate healthy food with boosting performance, which means real-time data has increased demand for ingredients with measurable impacts, such as adaptogens for stress relief and nootropics for cognitive performance. Also, this influx of high-frequency biometric data can help shorten the product development cycle by providing functional CPG companies with "real-world evidence" that was previously unattainable. Next, these health technology wearables have opened a new engagement approach like how seeking to better reach the increasingly influential variations of the “wellness maxxing” internet community, marketers of functional CPG brands have begun showcasing wearable data in social storytelling to help prove product efficacy. While I totally understand the primary business cases involve premium positioning strategies…I'd bet that begins to change, as industry forward-thinkers recognize synthesizing this data into actionable low-cost, high-impact functional product solutions for broader populations is the REAL prize. Lastly, while continuous glucose monitoring revolutionized diabetes care…the same approach applied to inflammatory proteins could transform care for autoimmune diseases or other chronic diseases (i.e. cardiovascular health).

Eve gives an overview of current and future consumer trends where dairy can play a role. Functional foods, health and wellness, high protein foods, fermented and cultured foods, women's health, brain health, and aging are all part of the mix. (7:26)The panelists discuss the healthfulness of saturated fats, the resurgence of butter, milk's bioactive compounds, and how best to reach the public about the health benefits of dairy. (10:41)Eve talks about marketing to Gen Z consumers, who are motivated by novelty. How do we reimagine a food that's been here for thousands of years? What new ways can we talk about it? What ways can we optimize dairy science and research to show up in generative systems like ChatGPT? (20:34)The group then tackles the topic of lactose. Lactose and honey are the only two sugars not made by plants. Why is it lactose that is in the milk of mammals? Dr. Jiminez-Flores thinks lactose is a dark horse in dairy and we have much yet to discover about it. He notes that some milk oligosaccharides are not digested by babies, but are used by bacteria in the development of a healthy microbiome. Dr. Lucy notes that dairy also contains peptides that have been found to reduce hypertension. The group also delves into how dairy products can be part of preventative health care. (23:53)Do consumers perceive dairy products to be minimally processed? Eve explains that dairy is perceived as a clean, fresh food. Given the current trend to reduce additives and food dyes, she sees potential for dairy food science innovation in this area. Dr. Aldrich talks about the glycemic index of lactose-free milk. (38:13)The panelists agree that dairy has a great upcycling story to tell. Converting fiber into milk and meat and feeding non-human grade byproducts are just two examples. Eve notes that younger consumers care about sustainability, but there's a huge “say-do” gap: 76% of North American consumers identify as caring about conscious and sustainable practices, but less than 40% actually act on those values when making purchases. The panel also notes that whey is another great upcycling story. Dr. Jiminez-Flores emphasizes how important consumer trust in science and research is, and how we are currently experiencing a loss of that trust. (45:48)Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (1:01:01)Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we'll mail you a shirt.

In this episode of the Leading Voices in Food podcast, Norbert Wilson of Duke University's Sanford School of Public Policy speaks with researchers Jean Adams from the University of Cambridge and Mike Essman from Duke's World Food Policy Center. They discuss the mandatory calorie labeling policy introduced in England in April 2022 for large food-away-from-home outlets. The conversation covers the study recently published in the British Medical Journal, exploring its results, strengths, limitations, and implications within the broader context of food labeling and public health policies. Key findings include a slight overall reduction in calorie content offered by food outlets, driven by the removal of higher-calorie items rather than reformulation. The discussion also touches on the potential impacts on different consumer groups, the challenges of policy enforcement, and how such policies could be improved to more effectively support public health goals. Interview Summary Now everyone knows eating out is just part of life. For many, it's a place to make connections, can be a guilty pleasure, and sometimes it's just an outright necessity for busy folks. But it is also linked to poor dietary quality, weight gain, and even obesity. For policymakers, the challenge is identifying what policy changes can help improve population health. Jean, let's begin with you. Can you tell our listeners about the UK's menu labeling intervention and what change did you hope to see? Jean - Yes, so this was a policy that was actually a really long time in coming and came in and out of favor with a number of different governments. So maybe over the last 10 years we've had various different suggestions to have voluntary and/or mandatory calorie labeling in the out-of-home sector. Eventually in April, 2022, we did have new mandatory regulations that came into a force that required large businesses just in England - so not across the whole of the UK, just in England - if they sold food and non-alcoholic drinks and they had to display the calories per portion of every item that they were selling. And then have alongside that somewhere on their menu, a statement that said that adults need around 2000 calories per day. The policy applied just to large businesses, and the definition of that was that those businesses have 250 or more employees, but the employees didn't all have to be involved in serving food and drinks. This might apply also to a large hotel chain who just have some bars or something in their hotels. And the food and drinks covered were things that were available for immediate consumption. Not prepackaged. And then there was also this proviso to allow high-end restaurants to be changing their menus regularly. So, it was only for things that were on the menu for at least 30 days. You mentioned that this policy or a menu labeling might have at least two potential modes of impacts. There's first this idea that providing calories or any sort of labeling on food can somehow provide information for consumers to make what we might hope would be better choices. Might help them choose lower calorie options or healthier options. And then the second potential impact is that businesses might also use the information to change what sort of foods they're serving. It might be that they didn't realize how many calories were in the foods and they're suddenly embarrassed about it. Or as soon as their customers realize, they start to put a little bit of pressure on, you know, we want something a little bit lower calorie. So, there's this potential mechanism that operates at the demand side of how consumers might make choices. And another one at the supply side of what might be available to consumers. And we knew from previous evaluations of these sorts of interventions that there was some evidence that both could occur. Generally, it seems to be that findings from other places and countries are maybe null to small. So, we were thinking that maybe we might see something similar in England. Thank you for sharing that background. I do have a question about the length of time it took to get this menu labeling law in place. Before we get into the results, do you have a sense of why did it take so long? Was it industry pushback? Was it just change of governments? Do you have a sense of that? Jean - Yes, so I think it's probably a bit of both. To begin with, it was first proposed as a voluntary measure actually by industry. So, we had this kind of big public-private partnership. What can industry do to support health? And that was one of the things they proposed. And then they didn't really do it very well. So, there was this idea that everybody would do it. And in fact, we found maybe only about 20% of outlets did it. And then definitely we have had government churn in the UK over the last five years or so. So, every new prime minister really came in and wanted to have their own obesity policy threw out the last one started over. And every policy needs consulted on with the public and then with industry. And that whole process just kind of got derailed over and over again. Thank you. That is really helpful to understand that development of the policy and why it took time. Industry regulated policy can be a tricky one to actually see the results that we would hope. You've already given us a sort of insight into what you thought the results may be from previous studies - null to relatively small. So, Mike, I want to turn to you. Can you tell us what came out of the data? Mike - Thank you, yes. So, we found a small overall drop in average calories offered per item. That amounts to a total of nine calories per item reduction in our post policy period relative to pre policy. And this is about a 2% reduction. It was statistically significant and we do in public health talk about how small effects can still have big impacts. So, I do want to sort of put that out there, but also recognize that it was a small overall drop in calories. And then what we did is we looked at how different food groups changed, and also how calories changed at different types of restaurants, whether it was fast food, restaurants, sit downs that we call pubs, bars, and inns. And then also other different types of takeaways like cafes and things like that where you might get a coffee or a cappuccino or something like that. What we found was driving the overall reduction in calories was a reduction in higher calorie items. So, as Jean mentioned at the outset, one of the things we were trying to identify in this analysis was whether we saw any evidence of reformulation. And we defined reformulation as whether specific products were reduced in their calories so that the same products were lower calories in the post period. We define that as reformulation. And that would be different from, say, a change in menu offering where you might identify a high calorie item and take it off the menu so that then the overall calories offered goes down on average. We found more evidence for the latter. Higher calorie items were removed. We separated into categories of removed items, items that were present in both periods, and new items added in the post period. There were higher calorie items in the removed group. The items that were present in both periods did not change. The new items were lower calorie items. What this says overall is this average reduction is driven by taking off high calorie items, adding some slightly lower calorie items. But we did not find evidence for reformulation, which is a crucial finding as well. We saw that the largest reductions occurred in burgers, beverages and a rather large mixed group called Mains. So, burgers reduced by 103 calories per item. That's pretty substantial. One of the reasons that's so large is that burgers, particularly if they're offered at a pub and might even come with fries or chips, as they say in the UK. And because they have such a high baseline calorie level, there's more opportunity to reduce. So, whether it's making it slightly smaller patty or reducing the cheese or something like that, that's where we saw larger reductions among the burgers. With beverages, typically, this involved the addition of lower calorie options, which is important if it gives an opportunity for lower calorie selections. And that was the main driver of reduction there. And then also we saw in Mains a reduction of 30 calories per item. A couple of the other things we wanted to identify is whether there was a change in the number of items that were considered over England's recommended calories per meal. The recommended calories per meal is 600 calories or less for lunch and dinner. And we saw no statistical change in that group. So overall, we do see a slight reduction in average calories. But this study did not examine changes in consumer behavior. I do want to just briefly touch on that because this was part of a larger evaluation. Another study that was published using customer surveys that was published in Nature Human Behavior found no change in the average calories purchased or consumed after the policy. This evaluation was looking at both the supply and the demand side changes as a result of this policy. Thanks, Mike and I've got lots of questions to follow up, but I'll try to control myself. The first one I'm interested to understand is you talk about the importance of the really calorie-heavy items being removed and the introduction of newer, lower calorie items. And you said that this is not a study of the demand, but I'm interested to know, do you have a sense that the higher calorie items may not have been high or top sellers. It could be easy for a restaurant to get rid of those. Do you have any sense of, you know, the types of items that were removed and of the consumer demand for those items? Mike - Yes. So, as I mentioned, given that the largest changes were occurring among burgers, we're sort of doing this triangulation attempt to examine all of the different potential impacts we can with the study tools we have. We did not see those changes reflected in consumer purchases. So, I think sticking with the evidence, the best thing we could say is that the most frequently purchased items were not the ones that were being pulled off of menus. I think that would be the closest to the evidence. Now, no study is perfect and we did in that customer survey examine the purchases and consumption of about 3000 individuals before and after the policy. It's relatively large, but certainly not fully comprehensive. But based on what we were able to find, it would seem that those reductions in large calorie items, it's probably fair to say, were sort of marginal choices. So, we see some reduction in calories at the margins. That's why the overall is down, but we don't see at the most commonly sold. I should also mention in response to that, a lot of times when we think about eating out of home, we often think about fast food. We did not see reductions in fast food chains at all, essentially. And so really the largest reductions we found were in what would be considered more sit-down dining establishment. For example, sit-down restaurants or even pubs, bars and ends was one of our other categories. We did see average reductions in those chains. The areas you kind of think about for people grabbing food quickly on the go, we did not see reductions there. And we think some of this is a function of the data itself, which is pubs, bars and inns, because they offer larger plates, there's a little bit more space for them to reduce. And so those are where we saw the reductions. But in what we might typically think is sort of the grab and go type of food, we did not see reductions in those items. And so when we did our customer surveys, we saw that those did not lead to reductions in calories consumed. Ahh, I see this and thank you for this. It sounds like the portfolio adjusted: getting rid of those heavy calorie items, adding more of the lower calorie items that may not have actually changed what consumers actually eat. Because the ones that they typically eat didn't change at all. And I would imagine from what you've said that large global brands may not have made many changes, but more local brands have more flexibility is my assumption of that. So that, that's really helpful to see. As you all looked at the literature, you had the knowledge that previous studies have found relatively small changes. Could you tell us about what this work looks like globally? There are other countries that have tried policy similar to this. What did you learn from those other countries about menu labeling? Jean - Well, I mean, I'm tempted to say that we maybe should have learned that this wasn't the sort of policy that we could expect to make a big change. To me one of the really attractive features of a labeling policy is it kind of reflects back those two mechanisms we've talked about - information and reformulation or changing menus. Because we can talk about it in those two different ways of changing the environment and also helping consumers make better choices, then it can be very attractive across the political landscape. And I suspect that that is one of the things that the UK or England learned. And that's reflected in the fact that it took a little while to get it over the line, but that lots of different governments came back to it. That it's attractive to people thinking about food and thinking about how we can support people to eat better in kind of a range of different ways. I think what we learned, like putting the literature all together, is this sort of policy might have some small effects. It's not going to be the thing that kind of changes the dial on diet related diseases. But that it might well be part of an integrated strategy of many different tools together. I think we can also learn from the literature on labeling in the grocery sector where there's been much more exploration of different types of labeling. Whether colors work, whether black stop signs are more effective. And that leads us to conclusions that these more interpretive labels can lead to bigger impacts and consumer choices than just a number, right? A number is quite difficult to make some sense of. And I think that there are some ways that we could think about optimizing the policy in England before kind of writing it off as not effective. Thank you. I think what you're saying is it worked, but it works maybe in the context of other policies, is that a fair assessment? Jean - Well, I mean, the summary of our findings, Mike's touched on quite a lot of it. We found that there was an increase in outlets adhering to the policy. That went from about 20% offered any labeling to about 80%. So, there were still some places that were not doing what they were expected to do. But there was big changes in actual labeling practice. People also told us that they noticed the labels more and they said that they used them much more than they were previously. Like there was some labeling before. We had some big increases in noticing and using. But it's... we found this no change in calories purchased or calories consumed. Which leads to kind of interesting questions. Okay, so what were they doing with it when they were using it? And maybe some people were using it to help them make lower calorie choices, but other people were trying to optimize calories for money spent? We saw these very small changes in the mean calorie of items available that Mike's described in lots of detail. And then we also did some work kind of exploring with restaurants, people who worked in the restaurant chains and also people responsible for enforcement, kind of exploring their experiences with the policy. And one of the big conclusions from that was that local government were tasked with enforcement, but they weren't provided with any additional resources to make that happen. And for various reasons, it essentially didn't happen. And we've seen that with a number of different policies in the food space in the UK. That there's this kind of presumption of compliance. Most people are doing it all right. We're not doing it a hundred percent and that's probably because it's not being checked and there's no sanction for not following the letter of the law. One of the reasons that local authorities are not doing enforcement, apart from that they don't have resources or additional resources for it, is that they have lots of other things to do in the food space, and they see those things as like higher risk. And so more important to do. One of those things is inspecting for hygiene, making sure that the going out is not poisonous or adulterated or anything like that. And you can absolutely understand that. These things that might cause acute sickness, or even death in the case of allergies, are much more important for them to be keeping an eye on than labeling. One of the other things that emerged through the process of implementation, and during our evaluation, was a big concern from communities with experience of eating disorders around kind of a greater focus on calorie counting. And lots of people recounting their experience that they just find that very difficult to be facing in a space where they're maybe not trying to think about their eating disorder or health. And then they're suddenly confronted with it. And when we've gone back and looked at the literature, there's just not very much literature on the impact of calorie labeling on people with eating disorders. And so we're a little bit uncertain still about whether that is a problem, but it's certainly perceived to be a problem. And lots of people find the policy difficult for that reason because they know someone in their family or one of their friends with an eating disorder. And they're very alert to that potential harm. I think this is a really important point to raise that the law, the menu labeling, could have differential effects on different consumers. I'm not versed in this literature on the triggering effects of seeing menu labeling for people with disordered eating. But then I'm also thinking about a different group of consumers. Consumers who are already struggling with obesity, and whether or not this policy is more effective for those individuals versus folks who are not. In the work that you all did, did you have any sense of are there heterogeneous effects of the labeling? Did different consumers respond differentially to seeing the menu label? Not just, for example, individuals maybe with disordered eating? Mike - In this work, we mostly focused on compliance, customer responses in terms of consumption and purchases, changes in menus, and customers reporting whether or not they increase noticing and using. When we looked at the heterogeneous effects, some of these questions are what led us to propose a new project where we interviewed people and tried to understand their responses to calorie labeling. And there we get a lot of heterogenous groups. In those studies, and this work has not actually been published, but should be in the new year, we found that there's a wide range of different types of responses to the policy. For example, there may be some people who recently started going to the gym and maybe they're trying to actually bulk up. And so, they'll actually choose higher calorie items. Conversely, there may be people who have a fitness routine or a dieting lifestyle that involves calorie tracking. And they might be using an app in order to enter the calories into that. And those people who are interested in calorie counting, they really loved the policy. They really wanted the policy. And it gave them a sense of control over their diet. And they felt comfortable and were really worried that if there was evidence that it wouldn't work, that would be taken away. Then you have a whole different group of people who are living with eating disorders who don't want to interact with those numbers when they are eating out of home. They would rather eat socially and not have to think about those challenges. There's really vast diversity in terms of the responses to the policy. And that does present a challenge. And I think what it also does is cause us just to question what is the intended mechanism of action of this policy? Because when the policy was implemented, there's an idea of a relatively narrow set of effects. If customers don't understand the number of calories that are in their items, you just provide them with the calories that are in those items, they will then make better choices as rational actors. But we know that eating out of home is far more complex. It's social. There are issues related to value for money. So maybe people want to make sure they're purchasing food that hasn't been so reduced in portions that now they don't get the value for money when they eat out. There are all sorts of body image related challenges when people may eat out. We didn't find a lot of evidence of this in our particular sample, but also in some of our consultation with the public in developing the interview, there's concern about judgment from peers when eating out. So, it's a very sensitive topic. Some of the implications of that are we do probably need more communication strategies that can come alongside these policies and sort of explain the intended mechanism impact to the public. We can't expect to simply add numbers to items and then expect that people are going to make the exact choices that are sort of in the best interest of public health. And that sort of brings us on to some potential alternative mechanisms of impact and other modes of labeling, and those sorts of things. Mike, this has been really helpful because you've also hinted at some of the ways that this policy as implemented, could have been improved. And I wonder, do you have any other thoughts to add to how to make a policy like this have a bigger impact. Mike - Absolutely. One of the things that was really helpful when Jean laid out her framing of the policy was there's multiple potential mechanisms of action. One of those is the potential reformulation in menu change. We talked about those results. Another intended mechanism of action is through consumer choice. So, if items have fewer calories on average, then that could reduce ultimately calories consumed. Or if people make choices of lower calorie items, that could also be a way to reduce the overall calories consumed. And I would say this calorie labeling policy, it is a step because the calories were not previously available. People did not know what they were eating. And if you provide that, that fulfills the duty of transparency by businesses. When we spoke to people who worked in enforcement, they did support the policy simply on the basis of transparency because it's important for people to understand what they're consuming. And so that's sort of a generally acceptable principle. However, if we want to actually have stronger population health impact, then we do need to have stronger mechanisms of action. One of the ways that can reduce calories consumed by the consumers, so the sort of demand side, would be some of the interpretive labels. Jean mentioned them earlier. There's now a growing body of evidence of across, particularly in Latin America. I would say some of the strongest evidence began in Chile, but also in Mexico and in other Latin American countries where they've put warning labels on items in order to reduce their consumption. These are typically related to packaged foods is where most of the work has been done. But in order to reduce consumer demand, what it does is rather than expecting people to be sort of doing math problems on the fly, as they go around and make their choices, you're actually just letting them know, well, by the way, this is an item that's very high in calories or saturated fat, or sodium or sugars. Or some combination of those. What that does is you've already helped make that decision for the consumers. You've at least let them know this item has a high level of nutrients of concern. And you can take that away. Conversely, if you have an item that's 487 calories, do you really know what you're going to do with that information? So that's one way to have stronger impact. The other way that that type of policy can have stronger impact is it sets clear thresholds for those warnings. And so, when you have clear thresholds for warnings, you can have a stronger mechanism for reformulation. And what companies may want to do is they may not want to display those warning labels, maybe because it's embarrassing. It makes their candy or whatever the unhealthy food look bad. Sort of an eyesore, which is the point. And what they'll do is they can reformulate those nutrients to lower levels so that they no longer qualify for that regulation. And so there are ways to essentially strengthen both of those mechanisms of action. Whereas when it's simply on the basis of transparency, then what that does is leave all of the decision making and work on the consumer. Mike, this is great because I've worked with colleagues like Gabby Fretes and Sean Cash and others on some menu labeling out of Chile. And we're currently doing some work within the center on food nutrition labels to see how different consumers are responding. There's a lot more work to be done in this space. And, of course, our colleagues at UNC (University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill) have also been doing this work. So, this work is really important because it tells us how it can help consumers make different choices, and how it can affect how companies behave. My final question to the two of you is simply, what would you like policymakers to learn from this study? Or maybe not just this study alone, but this body of work. What should they take away? Jean - Well, I think there's lots of information out there on how to do food labeling well, and we can certainly learn from that. And Mike talks about the work from South America particularly where they're helping people identify the least healthy products. And they're also providing messaging around what you should do with that - like choose a product with fewer of these black symbols. But I think even if labeling is optimized, it's not really going to solve our problem of dietary related diseases. And I think I always want policymakers to know, and I think many of them do understand this, that there is no one magic solution and we need to be thinking about labeling as part of a strategy that addresses marketing in its entirety, right? Companies are using all sorts of strategies to encourage us to buy products. We need to be thinking of all sorts of strategies to support people to buy different products and to eat better. And I think that focuses on things like rebalancing price, supporting people to afford healthier food, focusing advertising and price promotions on healthier products. And I also think we need to be looking even further upstream though, right? That we need to be thinking about the incentives that are driving companies to make and sell less healthy products. Because I don't think that they particularly want to be selling less healthy products or causing lots of illness. It's those products are helping them achieve their aims of creating profit and growth for their shareholders. And I think we need to find creative ways to support companies to experiment with healthier products that either help them simultaneously achieve those demands of profit or growth. Or somehow allow them to step away from those demands either for a short period or for a longer period. I think that that requires us to kind of relook at how we do business in economics in our countries. Mike? Yes, I think that was a really thorough answer by Jean. So, I'll just add a couple points. I think most fundamentally what we need to think about when we're doing policy making to improve diet is we need to always think about are we helping to make the healthier choice the easier choice? And what that means is we're not implementing policies that merely provide information that then require individuals to do the rest of the work. We need to have a food environment that includes healthier options that are easily accessible, but also affordable. That's one thing that's come through in quite a lot of the work we've done. There are a lot of concerns about the high cost of food. If people feel like the healthier choices are also affordable choices, that's one of many ways to support the easier choice. And I really just want to reiterate what Jean said in terms of the economics of unhealthy food. In many ways, these large multinational corporations are from their perspective, doing right by their shareholders by producing a profitable product. Now there are debates on whether or not that's a good thing, of course. There's quite a lot of evidence for the negative health impacts of ultra-processed (UPF) products, and those are getting a lot more attention these days and that's a good thing. What we do need to think about is why is it that UPFs are so widely consumed. In many ways they are optimized to be over consumed. They're optimized to be highly profitable. Because the ingredients that are involved in their production means that they can add a lot of salt, sugar, and fat. And what that does is lead to overconsumption. We need to think about that there's something fundamentally broken about this incentive structure. That is incentivizing businesses to sell unhealthy food products with these food additives that lead to over consumption, obesity, and the associated comorbidities. And if we can start to make a little progress and think creatively about how could we incentivize a different incentive structure. One where actually it would be in a food business's best interest to be much more innovative and bolder and produce healthier products for everyone. That's something that I think we will have to contend with because if we are thinking that we are only going to be able to restrict our way out of this, then that's very difficult. Because people still need to have healthy alternatives, and so we can't merely think about restricting. We also have to think about how do we promote access to healthier foods. This is great insight. I appreciate the phrasing of making the healthy choice the easy choice, and I also heard a version of this making the healthy choice the affordable choice. But it also seems like we need to find ways to make the healthy choice the profitable choice as well. Bios: Jean Adams is a Professor of Dietary Public Health and leads the Population Health Interventions Programme at the University of Cambridge MRC Epidemiology Unit. Adams trained in medicine before completing a PhD on socio-economic inequalities in health. This was followed by an MRC Health of the Population fellowship and an NIHR Career Development Fellowship both exploring influences on health behaviours and socio-economic inequalities in these. During these fellowships Jean was appointed Lecturer, then Senior Lecturer, in Public Health at Newcastle University. Jean moved to Cambridge University to join the MRC Epidemiology Unit and CEDAR in 2014 where she helped establish the Dietary Public Health group. She became Programme Leader in the newly formed Population Health Interventions programme in 2020, and was appointed Professor of Dietary Public Health in 2022. Mike Essman is a Research Scientist at Duke University's World Food Policy Center. His background is in evaluating nutrition and food policies aimed at improving diets and preventing cardiometabolic diseases. His work employs both quantitative and qualitative methods to explore drivers of dietary behavior, particularly ultra-processed food consumption, across diverse environments and countries. Mike earned his PhD in Nutrition Epidemiology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where his research focused on evaluating the impacts of a sugary beverage tax in South Africa. He completed MSc degrees in Medical Anthropology and Global Health Science at the University of Oxford through a fellowship. Prior to joining Duke, he conducted research at the MRC Epidemiology Unit at the University of Cambridge, where he evaluated the impacts of calorie labeling policies in England and led a study examining public perceptions of ultra-processed foods.  

“What's Buggin' You” segment for Tuesday 12-16-25

From the BBC World Service: "It's like I'm standing inside a cloud of dust and smoke," says BBC correspondent Devina Gupta of air quality in India's capital. Residents there have been urged to stay indoors, and new restrictions are affecting worker productivity and costing businesses. Then, a Hong Kong court has found media tycoon Jimmy Lai guilty of sedition. And later, retailers in the U.S. are hiring a record low number of seasonal employees.

From the BBC World Service: "It's like I'm standing inside a cloud of dust and smoke," says BBC correspondent Devina Gupta of air quality in India's capital. Residents there have been urged to stay indoors, and new restrictions are affecting worker productivity and costing businesses. Then, a Hong Kong court has found media tycoon Jimmy Lai guilty of sedition. And later, retailers in the U.S. are hiring a record low number of seasonal employees.

In an era where consumers gather inspiration everywhere else, branded eCommerce sites face an existential crisis: prove your utility or become irrelevant. This episode examines how consumer expectations have shifted toward "get me what I want, when and how I want it," with 58% finding returns the most frustrating aspect of online shopping. We dissect why guest checkout remains a universal pain point and how brands can differentiate through seamless utility rather than flashy features.The Foundational Basis Matters MostKey takeaways:eCommerce sites have evolved from discovery engines to confirmation engines—customers arrive with pre-baked decisions seeking reassurance, not persuasion.Speed, clarity, and consistency are the new table stakes. Flashy features mean nothing if your site is slow, your checkout is clunky, or your shipping policy is unclear.Personalization should be engagement-based, not identity-based. Customers want relevance without creepiness—focus on their behavior in the moment, not invasive tracking.AI is an enabler, not the answer. Use it to understand cross-platform touchpoints and customer frustrations, not as a magic bullet for conversion. [00:04:06] "By the time they land on your site, they have pretty much created an idea of who you are, of what you offer, of what your product is. It's more on the choice confirmation bias...they don't want to be challenged. They just want to be reassured that they made the right decision." – Felipe Pose[00:14:00] "The role of the website has become more about clarity and reassurance, and not about communicating everything that you are, everything that you do, everything that you provide." – Felipe Pose[00:20:33] "I think that is one of the most powerful insights that we have gathered from many reports...they don't want to be really over targeted. They don't want identity based personalization. It's more based on what I want in this moment. What do I need from you? It's personalization based on engagement." – Felipe Pose[00:29:11] "If you are playing like a Jenga game...if you don't have a really strong foundation, if you don't have a site that is working correctly, a site that has some really slow pages, you have an unclear shipping policy...those are the things that will end up moving the needle the more." – Felipe Pose[00:32:46] "It's all about being prepared for the future and really understanding. Do I have everything I need today to be prepared for that? Because if you are on a really slow platform, something that is not scalable, you will not have a good experience today, even more so in 2026." – Felipe PoseAssociated Links:Check out Future Commerce on YouTubeCheck out Future Commerce+ for exclusive content and save on merch and printSubscribe to Insiders and The Senses to read more about what we are witnessing in the commerce worldListen to our other episodes of Future CommerceHave any questions or comments about the show? Let us know on futurecommerce.com, or reach out to us on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, or LinkedIn. We love hearing from our listeners! Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Your 60-second money minute. Today's topic: Consumers Hunt For Holiday Bargains Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Despite logging a record trade surplus, economic data for November showed China's domestic woes are deepening. Retail sales grew at their slowest pace in three years and investment slowed sharply, signalling that Chinese consumers and businesses are becoming increasingly cautious. Plus, Roomba maker iRobot has filed for bankruptcy after struggling with competition, debt, tariffs and Amazon's buyout offer later being called off. It's now being taken private by its main Chinese supplier. 

The New York Times Editorial Board published a piece on October 31, 2025, about a variety of indicators that should alarm everyone about the threat President Trump poses to our democracy.The first is Trump's effort to stifle dissent, something we haven't seen before with other presidents. The Associated Press has been denied access to the White House because the AP prefers the name “Gulf of Mexico” to the “Gulf of America.”To get access to the Pentagon, journalists have been told they must sign a pledge that limits their access to information. Even Fox refused to sign.Senator Mark Kelly, a retired Navy captain, has been threatened with court martial for stating publicly that service members are not obligated to obey unlawful orders.Trump has usurped Congress' right to tax by setting tariffs on just about everything. If you don't think tariffs are taxes, ask yourself who pays tariffs in the end. Consumers do. All the while, Congress stays quiet; our senators and representatives are more concerned about keeping office then speaking out against Trump and getting primaried.Same thing for Trump directing the military to sink boats that supposedly running drugs in the Caribbean. What's going on certainly looks like an act of war that only Congress can declare but, once again, Congress sits by and says nothing. Trump has turned the Department of Justice into his own personal law firm, something no former president ever did. And then there's the matter of misinformation and disinformation that comes from the White House, and Trump always changing the narrative to suit his needs. Trump has created a national police force of sorts—ICE agents—that conducts raids and wear masks and rounds up people without explanation simply because of skin color and accent. And there's more that is equally frightening. Listen to the conversation.

How do you make sense of an industry that is changing at a pace few predicted, especially with SIGNAL London still fresh in our minds and Twilio unveiling the next stage of its vision for customer engagement? That question sits at the heart of today's conversation with Peter Bell, VP of Marketing for EMEA at Twilio, who joined me to unpack what the past year has taught both companies and consumers about AI's role in shaping modern experiences. Peter begins by grounding everything in a single, striking shift. Only a year ago, AI-powered search barely registered in global traffic. Today it accounts for around a fifth of all searches. That leap signals a broader behavioral shift as consumers move instinctively toward conversational interfaces, which, in turn, leaves brands with a clear message. The clock has moved on. AI is no longer a nice-to-have. It is a direct response to how people now choose to discover, question, and buy. Our conversation turns to the gap between customer expectations and the experiences they receive. Peter discusses why brands often struggle to integrate channels, data, and AI coherently. He explains how first party data has become the anchor for any serious AI strategy, why generic public models cannot solve brand-specific tasks, and why the most successful teams start with simple, tightly scoped problems. A password reset may not sound glamorous, yet it is the kind of focused use case that teaches teams how to govern data, automate safely, and build confidence in the process. We also spend time on branded calling, RCS, and the evolution of voice. Peter breaks down what modern messaging now looks like and why trust sits at the center of every interaction. His explanation of Conversational Relay shows why natural voice exchanges finally feel within reach after years of frustration with rigid IVR systems. The thread running through all of this is clear. Consumers want speed and clarity, but they want reassurance too, and brands need to honor both sides of that equation. Later in the conversation, Peter makes one of the episode's most compelling points. Brand visibility has become harder, not easier, because much of the early research now occurs within AI tools. Buyers form opinions long before they speak with a sales rep. That shift explains why so many B2B companies are returning to high-impact brand channels, whether that is F1 sponsorships or other standout moments that keep them in the initial consideration set. We close with the topic that Peter believes will define the next stage of enterprise AI. Model Context Protocol. MCP has emerged as a quiet breakthrough, enabling LLMs to access data across CRM systems, files, and other software through a standard protocol. This removes one of the biggest blockers in AI projects: the practical challenge of connecting disparate data to a model built for a specific purpose. As Peter puts it, MCP gives companies a realistic way to make the special-purpose models that deliver reliable ROI. It is a wide-ranging conversation shaped by SIGNAL London's announcements, the evolving customer journey, and a year in which AI moved from curiosity to expectation. I would love to know what part stood out most to you. Are you seeing the same shifts Peter describes in your own business, and how are you preparing for the year ahead? Useful Links Interact with the Inside the Conversational AI Revolution report. Learn more about the Signal event Connect with Peter Bell, VP of Marketing for EMEA at Twilio. Tech Talks Daily is sponsored by Denodo

Consumers don't want more banking messages — they want relevance. And right now, most banks are wildly out of sync with what their communities actually need. Consumers want communication that reflects their neighborhood, life stage, and immediate financial needs — and broad, one-size-fits-all marketing isn't effective. Hyperlocal strategies are emerging as some of the most powerful ways to drive acquisition, strengthen relationships, and capture market share. In this episode of Banking Transformed, I talk with Fred Cadena, Head of Client Strategy at Vericast, about how real-time data, household insights, and neighborhood-level trends are changing the way banks compete. Fred explains why “relevance beats reach,” how new mover and life-event signals drive growth, and what it takes to activate hyperlocal marketing without adding complexity. If your institution is seeking affordable, data-driven strategies to boost growth in 2025, this conversation provides a clear roadmap — and questions long-standing assumptions about how banks engage with their communities. This episode of Banking Transformed is sponsored by Vericast Vericast's Hyperlocal Marketing solution is a fully managed, precision-engineered, data-driven approach to personalized digital advertising at the branch level enabling financial institutions to build stronger community connections, increase engagement and conversions, and optimize advertising spend for maximum impact. Vericast.com

   Who even knew T-Mobile still had 3500 employees at 119th and Nall in Overland Park at what used to be the Sprint Campus?  Well, the Royals now  controll it all and T-Mobile says the owners are not allowing T-Mobile to stay after their lease expires in 2029.  We all know what that means.    Trump's talking affordability as drivers line up around the country for really, really cheap gas.    The J6 bomber, Brian Cole Jr, is a bit of a gender twisted man as he spent hours and hours online as a "Brony."  You won't believe what this is.    Consumers complain Instacart is gouging them, I have a solution for them.    The Royals get a rare off season win in the draft lottery as the draw for position moved the team up 10 spots in the draft.  What a gift!   Philip Rivers is back as he signs on to the practice squad for the Colts.  Oregon's QB is threatening to not play in the college playoff first round game.  Big 12 commish  Brett Yormark blasts the AD at Notre Dame.  Troy Aikman cuts off UCLA and Bill Self names his MVP so far this season.   Our Final Final is what Amelia Earhart's mom thought happened to her daughter in 1937.

Host: Darryl S. Chutka, M.D. Guest: Andrew R. Jagim, Ph.D. Nutritional supplements are very popular with our patients. They are supposed to provide benefits that may not be present in our typical diet. Vitamins and minerals are the most common supplements taken, followed closely by sports nutrition products such as protein powders and energy drinks. Consumers buy supplements because they're readily available, relatively low cost and they believe that supplements will help them achieve health benefits. Patients often assume that supplements are safe, yet some can cause significant health problems, especially when taken in higher doses. Some have the potential to interact with various prescription medications. Are there nutritional supplements our patients should be taking? Which ones are potentially harmful? How safe are these products and do supplements have any regulatory oversight? These are questions I'll be asking my guest, Andrew R. Jagim, Ph.D., Director of Sports Medicine Research at the Mayo Clinic as we discuss “Nutritional Supplements”. Connect with us and learn more here: https://ce.mayo.edu/online-education/content/mayo-clinic-podcasts 

What are supermarkets and consumer brands saying about shoppers? And which companies are getting a boost from higher-income customers? Plus, who are the winners and losers after Netflix's biggest acquisition? Host Francesca Fontana discusses the biggest stock moves of the week and the news that drove them. Sign up for the WSJ's free Markets A.M. newsletter.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What are supermarkets and consumer brands saying about shoppers? And which companies are getting a boost from higher-income customers? Plus, who are the winners and losers after Netflix's biggest acquisition? Host Francesca Fontana discusses the biggest stock moves of the week and the news that drove them. Sign up for the WSJ's free Markets A.M. newsletter.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

#666: In this First Friday economic update, we explore the paradox defining our current economy: record-breaking retail numbers alongside plummeting consumer confidence. In this First Friday economic update, we explore the paradox defining our current economy: we're spending more than ever, while feeling worse about money than we have in years. The Bureau of Labor Statistics hasn't released jobs data for two consecutive months. The Federal Reserve must make a critical interest rate decision flying blind. Meanwhile, private sector data reveals troubling trends. Small businesses are hemorrhaging jobs while discount chains like Dollar General see their stock prices soar 44%. Americans are spending differently this holiday season. They're shopping earlier, using AI to find deals, and turning to buy-now-pay-later options. Households are spending less than last year, yet total spending increases because more people are participating. This K-shaped recovery benefits luxury retailers and bargain stores while crushing the middle market. We also cover essential year-end financial moves. From maximizing retirement contributions to tax-loss harvesting strategies, we help you navigate your personal finances amid economic uncertainty. The disconnect between what the numbers say – and how people feel – reveals deeper truths about an economy that's technically growing while leaving many behind. Timestamps: Note: Timestamps will vary on individual listening devices based on dynamic advertising run times. The provided timestamps are approximate and may be several minutes off due to changing ad lengths. (0:00) Spotify Wrapped and podcast listener data (2:05) Jobs report missing, BLS delays (5:01) ADP shows 32,000 job losses (8:00) Youth unemployment over 10% (10:32) Fed meeting without data (12:24) Mortgage rates might drop below 6% (20:06) Holiday spending hits $1 trillion (23:43) Consumers spend less individually (26:36) Discount stores outperform market (28:29) Shopping starts in October now (30:22) AI helps holiday shopping (36:09) Giving Tuesday up 11% (38:28) Year-end money moves (45:00) Charity and gift tax limits Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Live from the Morgan Stanley Global Consumer & Retail Conference in New York, our analysts discuss the latest macro trends and pressures impacting the U.S. consumer.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Michelle Weaver: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. We're coming to you live from Morgan Stanley's Global Consumer and Retail Conference in New York City, where we have more than 120 leading companies in attendance. Today's episode is the first in a two-part special focused on the consumer where we'll focus on the K economy and the health of the U.S. Consumer. Tomorrow for the next episode, we'll turn our attention to AI. My colleagues and I are eager to dig into this discussion. With me on stage, we have Arunima Sinha from the Global and U.S. Economics team, Simeon Guttman, our U.S. Hardlines, Broad Lines, and Food Retail Analyst, and Megan Clap, U.S. Food Producers and Leisure Analyst.It's Thursday, December 4th at 10:00 AM in New York. So, to start, I want to go through the health of the consumer. That's of course been a theme that's been on display at the conference today. And 2025 has really been a year of mixed signals. But overall spending has held up while inflation has weighed on confidence, especially among lower- and middle-income households. Arunima, I want to start with you on the macro front as we head into year end. How would you describe the overall state of the consumer? What are you expecting in terms of real wage growth and spending? Arunima Sinha: If we'll just look at the rearview mirror in terms of Q1 through Q3, this year spending growth on a real basis has been holding up. So, in the first half of this year, about 1.5 percent on average. For the third quarter, given the data that we do now have in hand, we're tracking about 3 percent, quarter-on-quarter, on a real basis. But I think it is important to emphasize that this is already a step down than the numbers that we were seeing last year. So, in 2024 on these Q-on-Q numbers, we were running somewhere between 3.9-4 percent. So there already has been some slowdown. The recurring theme that we've had this year is how are the drivers of consumption going to weigh on different cohorts? And so, how is the labor market going away and how are wealth effects going to play out? And that, sort of, tied in squarely with the narrative that we've been emphasizing this whole year, which is that for the upper income cohorts, those net wealth effects have been very, very supportive. $50 trillion in net wealth that's been created just over the last three years. And that has continued for this year as well. And so, meanwhile the labor market has downshifted and that's had a read through into both just nominal wage growth as well as real wage growth. So, for example, on a three-month, three-month basis, that real wage growth, after we've adjusted for the nominal for inflation, has slowed down essentially to stall speed. It used to run, somewhere between 2-2.5 percent, in the first part of this year. And that we think is going to have a read through as we go into this upcoming quarter of Q4, as well as in the first quarter of next year. So just this lagged effect from the slowdown on labor market income is going to weigh; continue to weigh on the middle-income and sort of the upper-, lower- part of the income cohort. So, in terms of our growth forecasts for spending, over this quarter in Q4 and over next quarter in Q1, we are expecting about 1 percent real growth for consumption. That is a two-percentage point step down from where we were in Q3. And then just in terms of disposable income, we're also thinking this particular quarter in Q4 is going to be fairly weak. Michelle Weaver: You spoke a little bit about the different income cohorts there, but I want to double click on that. The K economy has been a really persistent theme as higher income households have benefited from strong market returns. But higher price levels have weighed on lower-income households. What are your expectations for the high versus low-income consumer next year? Arunima Sinha: So next year, we do think that there could be some broadening out in consumption growth. Just overall we have a sequential step up in growth that begins to take place, starting in the second quarter of [20]26. So, we have consumption growth that starts to slowly inch up from about just under 1 percent in the first quarter of [20]26 – all the way up to about 2 percent by the end of the year. What that's going to be driven by, we think that there are going to be some lessening of pressures on the middle-income cohorts. And where is that going to come from? It's going to come from perhaps a still moderate labor market. So, we're not – we don't think we're going to be seeing these big 100,000-150,000 plus jobs being added every month. We're thinking maybe about 60,000 on average per month, for most of next year. But just less policy uncertainty, some boost from the fiscal bill, the fact that monetary policy is going to be heading towards neutral. All of those things should be supportive. Given that the upper-income didn't really slow down this year, we'd also don't think there's going to be a giant acceleration next year. And so, some of that uptick in consumption growth, we think could actually come from the middle-income. And we also think that some of those tariff pressures on inflation are going to start to dissipate after peaking in the first quarter next year. Michelle Weaver: And Simeon, I want to bring the company side into the conversation. What's the early read you've gotten on Black Friday? Expectations into the shopping season were pretty weak. Do you think things could turn out to be better than feared? And are you seeing any differences by income cohort there? Simeon Gutman: The overall take is, it's mixed – to maybe slightly a little worse. I'll answer it in a few different ways. First, the old-fashioned tire kicking that the retail analysts have done during the holiday season. In our hard line, broad line, food retail space mixed to slightly a little worse. In Alex Straton's softline world sounded a little bit better. And then if we combine the takeaways that we've had from companies, at least who presented yesterday, Walmart, Target and some other category killer retailers, it sounded about inline. Underlying trend is relatively stable.I sat on a panel earlier today, with a data aggregator who suggested that the holiday was a little underwhelming. What we don't see; and the underwhelming being at a minus 2 percent run rate for the – I guess, the November to date period, that doesn't include Cyber Monday. What this doesn't account for is the market share shifts. So, one of the ongoing themes across the entire retail landscape has been this big, getting bigger – we say it a lot – but the narrowing funnel of market share. So, the inline updates are probably coming from some of the largest companies, even if the overall holiday was a little underwhelming. Now inline is not anything to write home about. It's harder to get to an inline holiday if you started out below. So inline's okay but not gangbusters. That's probably the right way to characterize it. Michelle Weaver: Megan, same question to you. How is holiday shopping tracking in your space? Have you learned anything surprising about holiday during the conference? Megan Clap: Yeah, I would agree with Simeon relatively inline. I'd say kind of so far so good is what we heard from companies at the conference. We had both Mattel and Shark Ninja product companies that sell into many of the larger retailers that are winning that – that Simeon talked about.Holiday matters a lot for both of them. So, we're still many weeks ahead of us in terms of POS, but Mattel talked about positive POS continuing through the Black Friday season. They left their guidance unchanged today. They're seeing replenishment from their retailers and orders in line with expectations, which was a question just given some of the uncertainty in the landscape. Shark Ninja sells small appliances. They spoke to a strong Black Friday – again, seeing the fourth quarter and holiday play out in line with their expectations. Maybe a couple themes that stood out and one of them was particularly interesting to me. You talked about the K economy, I think, you know, it was very clear the higher end consumer continues to spend and outperform. Value and innovation continue to be things that consumers are looking for. Online seem to do better than in stores. That's what we heard from a lot of companies coming out of last week. And then newer channels like TikTok Shop are coming into the mix and, and brands are seeing, you know, strong growth from those channels as well. Michelle Weaver: And Arunima, I want to wrap this section on Fed policy. How do you expect Fed policy in 2026 to influence consumer spending and recovery, especially for those middle- and lower-income households? Arunima Sinha: We still have the Fed on an easing path into the first half of 2026. So we think 75 basis points and additional policy cuts into next year. But that more or less just takes monetary policy to some estimate of neutral. So, the point is that it's not monetary policy's becoming easier, it is simply just getting too neutral. And so, if we think about the most interest sensitive types of consumption, it's going to come from Housing and it's going to come from Durables. And what our housing strategists are thinking is that given this sort of front end of the curve, our tenure forecast for the middle of next year is still at about 3.75. And so, mortgage rates could dip below 6 percent. So, it's not the front end of the curve. It is that sort of belly of the curve there that's important there. And so there could be some pickup in housing that's going to be important. I think for the middle-income consumer affordability, we think it's still going to be an important concern for housing, but perhaps the middle-income could benefit from some of those lower mortgage rates that are going to come in. Michelle Weaver: ​ Arunima, Simeon, and Megan, thanks for all your insights. And to our live and podcast audiences, thanks for listening. If you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please leave us a review wherever you listen to the show and share the podcast with a friend or colleague today.