A new analysis by Consumer Reports has determined the most and least expensive U.S. supermarkets, on average, and upscale behemoth Whole Foods Market topped the list of the priciest — with costs nearly 40% higher than what a consumer would pay at big-box retailer Walmart, which was used as a baseline for the study.

The regional New England chain Shaw’s followed Whole Foods, with prices about 32% higher than Walmart’s.

Whole Foods was named the most expensive grocer in the Consumer Reports examination. Christopher Sadowski

Trader Joe’s, often thought to be budget-friendly, was also among the most expensive grocery chains in the U.S., rounding out the priciest’s top 10.

TJ’s prices were nearly 25% higher than Walmart’s — and the differences were even greater in some metro areas like Denver (30% higher) and Dallas-Forth Worth (33% higher).

The cheapest chain for groceries was Costco Wholesale, the findings showed, with prices 21.4% lower than Walmart, with BJ’s Wholesale Club following with 21% less.

Overall, the research found that the difference between the highest- and lowest-priced stores was more than 33% — and differences were even more glaring when including warehouses like Costco and specialty grocers like Whole Foods.

The findings emerge as concerned shoppers have found themselves spending increasingly more at grocery stores. An August 2025 poll found that the vast majority of US adults are at least somewhat stressed about the cost of groceries.

Consumers are growing increasingly concerned about rising grocery prices. stokkete – stock.adobe.com

According to an analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, food prices increased 25.5% between December 2020 and December 2024.

Dairy, beef and pork are near or at record-high prices, and coffee alone is up 20% since a year ago.

The price of a carton of eggs hit a record high of $8.15 in March 2025 amid bird flu-induced shortages, with NYC bodegas even selling “loosie”-style eggs as a result.

For its new research, Consumer Reports compared prices on grocery baskets of commonly purchased items — including packaged goods, produce and meat — at mainstream chains from more than two dozen major retailers in six “regionally representative” cities across the country, areas including Boston, Chicago, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, Southern California and Virginia Beach.

However, the products differed in size depending on availability by store, meaning comparisons were strongest for the mainstream retailers that carried a wide selection of identical brand items.

Comparison baskets were smaller for stores with private-label brands and specialty goods, as they have fewer items in common with Walmart.

Walmart was used as the baseline for grocery prices. Christopher Sadowski

For example, the Chicago analysis had baskets with 56 items when comparing Food4Less, Jewel-Osco, Marianos, Meijer, Target and Walmart; however, comparing a Chicago Trader Joe’s to Walmart featured a basket containing 23 items.

All prices were collected in person within 48 hours during late summer 2025.

Consumer Reports noted that most Americans buy food from at least two retailers each week, and strategically planning where you shop can ultimately save you a lot of money. The nonprofit buyers’ guide partnered with Strategic Resource Group, a New York-based retail- and grocery-industry market research company, for the new study.

Consumer Reports compared prices from more than two dozen major grocery retailers in six major metro areas. Prostock-studio – stock.adobe.com

Top 10 least expensive grocery stores in the U.S., according to Consumer Reports

1. Costco Wholesale (least expensive)
2. BJ’s Wholesale Club
3. Lidl
4. Aldi
5. WinCo
6. H-E-B
7. Walmart
8. Market Basket
9. Target
10. Wegmans

Top 10 most expensive grocery stores in the U.S., according to Consumer Reports

1. Whole Foods (most expensive)
2. Shaw’s
3. El Rancho
4. Jewel-Osco
5. Mariano’s
6. Vons
7. Big Y
8. Tom Thumb
9. Albertsons
10. Trader Joe’s

The post Most, least expensive grocery stores revealed: new study appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Welcome to Today in Books, our daily round-up of literary headlines at the intersection of politics, culture, media, and more.

Fewer Americans Are Reading for Fun

Drawing on data from the American Time Use Survey, researchers at University College London and the University of Florida have found that the number of Americans who reported reading for pleasure dropped from a high of 28% in 2004 to 16% in 2023. Put another way: over a period of twenty years, the number of Americans who read for fun dropped by forty percent, a decrease the researchers call “surprising” even though pleasure reading has been declining steadily since the 1940s. While the researchers don’t offer an explanation for the decline, we can do some educated guessing. 2004, the peak year of this study, was the last year before Facebook went wide on college campuses. It was followed by YouTube in 2005, Twitter in 2006, the iPhone in 2007. You know the rest of this song.

I generally resist alarmist interpretations, but I can’t stop thinking about Politico‘s characterization of the Trump-Newsom meme wars as a glimpse of what “the first post-literate presidential campaign might look like.” And how about this: if the number of Americans who read for pleasure drops another forty percent by 2044, we’ll be looking at a nation where less than 10% of people read books, magazines, or newspapers in any format. Literacy matters.

Everything’s Coming Up Kuang

Before it even hits shelves next week, Katabasis, the most anticipated book of the summer—maybe the whole year—is set to be adapted for TV at Amazon MGM Studios. Walking Dead producer Angela Kang will write and showrun the dark academia fantasy, which follows two grad student magicians who journey into Hell to retrieve their recently deceased advisor so they can finish their doctorates. I finished it last night (#galleybrag), and it’s like if Dante’s Inferno had a baby with The Secret History and that baby’s favorite TV show was The Good Place. Smart, funny, adventurous, and, yes, there’s a little bit of a love story. Sharifah is right, this one is going to be a great time.

Today In Books

Sign up to Today In Books to receive daily news and miscellany from the world of books.

Reissued Classics Coming This Fall

Maybe it’s the lingering impact of the phrase “post-literate presidential campaign,” or maybe it’s because I keep getting served this video from a publishing grad student about why all the books seem so similar now, or maybe it’s that I’ve recently had some soon-to-be-announced reasons to revisit classics. The dog days of this summer find me in a decidedly “they don’t make ’em like they used to” kind of mood, so this round-up of six reissued classics coming this fall landed at exactly the right time.

Lesbians in Spaaaaaaace

And now for a good trend! Book Riot’s Danika Ellis explores the 2025 boomlet of books about lesbians in space. If you haven’t read Atmosphere yet, here’s your nudge.

The post Study Shows Less Than 20% of Americans Read for Pleasure appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Nearly one in five US packaged foods and drinks contain synthetic food dyes, according to a startling new study of 40,000 grocery items.

The findings come amid a push by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to eliminate petroleum-based food colorings from the nation’s food supply.

Researchers analyzed the ingredients in products beloved by children — candy, sugary beverages, ready-to-eat meals, breakfast cereals and baked goods like cakes, cookies and pastries. REUTERS

While regulatory agencies have generally considered artificial food dyes safe, a growing body of research suggests they may be linked to hyperactivity, irritability and other potential health issues in kids.

“Given the accumulation of evidence over the last 40 years pointing to the health harms of synthetic dyes, it’s disappointing to see that they’re still so prevalent in our food system, particularly in products that are designed to appeal to children,” said Elizabeth Dunford, a research fellow at The George Institute for Global Health.

Dunford’s team evaluated the ingredients in products beloved by children — candy, sugary beverages, ready-to-eat meals, breakfast cereals and baked goods like cakes, cookies and pastries.

Some 28% of these items contained synthetic dyes compared to 11% of other types of fare, according to the findings published Wednesday in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

The Food and Drug Administration announced plans in April to phase out six dyes — Blue 1, Blue 2, Green 3, Red 40, Yellow 5 and Yellow 6 — by the end of 2026. rfaraino

The researchers determined that confectionery companies had the most products with synthetic dyes. Ferrero (60%) and Mars (52%) were named the “worst offenders.”

Around 79% of sports drinks were found to have these dyes, with researchers highlighting that 51% of PepsiCo’s energy drinks contain them.

The Post reached out to these companies for comment.

“Ferrero and its related affiliated companies, including Ferrara Candy Company, are and will continue to be in compliance with local, state and federal laws and regulations, including those related to food additives. Our products are safe to enjoy,” a Ferrero spokesperson told The Post.

PepsiCo said in April that it has been phasing out artificial colors.

Remarkably, the average sugar content of synthetically dyed products was more than double that of foods without the dyes, the study also found.

“The high levels of sugar in these brightly colored products suggests that companies are using synthetic dyes to market sweet foods and beverages, but both ingredients are linked to poor health outcomes,” said Dunford, an adjunct assistant professor in the Department of Nutrition at the University of North Carolina.

Colorful candies are shown in a bowl with small flags indicating food additives. Natalia – stock.adobe.com

The study was denounced by the National Confectioners Association (NCA), which accused the researchers of “major gaps in their analysis.”

“For instance, this report measures the amount of dyes in the food system but ignores exposure to consumers,” Christopher Gindlesperger, NCA senior vice president of public affairs and communications, told The Post in a statement.

“According to the federal government’s National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), people in the US enjoy chocolate and candy two to three times per week, averaging just 40 calories and about one teaspoon of added sugar per day — which is far less than the other categories of food examined.”

The Food and Drug Administration already announced plans in April to phase out six dyes — Blue 1, Blue 2, Green 3, Red 40, Yellow 5 and Yellow 6 — by the end of 2026.

Two other dyes, Citrus Red No. 2 and Orange B, are on the chopping block as well.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been pushing to eliminate petroleum-based food colorings from the nation’s food supply. Getty Images

RFK Jr. also encouraged companies to speed up their removal of Red No. 3, which is supposed to be out of food by January 2027.

Several states have taken separate action to regulate or ban certain synthetic dyes used in food.

While these rules take effect, Dunford recommends parents and consumers check ingredient labels for synthetic dyes and high levels of added sugar.

“If a product contains either, you are better off not buying it, especially for your kids,” she said.

The post Synthetic dyes found in 19% of US foods and drinks — ‘worst offenders’ ID’d in new study appeared first on Our Story Insight.

In 2023, the Winooski River in Vermont spilled its banks, kissing the green truss bridge that spanned it. River water poured onto the marble floors of the State House. Up to nine inches of rain fell within 48 hours, causing hundreds of millions of dollars in damage.

A year later, Vermont enacted the Climate Change Superfund Act, which holds oil and gas companies financially responsible for climate damage in the state. Similar legislation passed in New York in 2024 and is pending in California, Maryland, and Massachusetts.

Underpinning the laws is attribution science, which models huge numbers of scenarios using global temperature data to determine the likelihood that extreme weather events like floods or heat waves are related to emissions from burning oil, gas and coal.

A new paper published on Wednesday in the journal Nature expands this type of work to link the emissions from specific emitters to the economic burden of extreme events.

“The oil industry is alarmed by state climate superfund laws and their growing popularity because they are the first policies adopted anywhere in the world that make climate polluters pay a fair share of the enormous damage their products have caused,” said Lee Wasserman, director of the Rockefeller Family Fund, the New York-based charitable foundation that helped created the climate superfund law.

Reaction to the laws was swift. In February, West Virginia and other Republican-led states sued to block New York’s law, saying that only the federal government could regulate emissions. President Trump signed an executive order this month calling the state laws “burdensome and ideologically motivated” and asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to block their enforcement.

For decades, environmental lawyers have been considering how to attribute the harm from greenhouse gas emissions, according to Martin Lockman, a climate law fellow at Columbia University’s Sabin Center.

“Attribution science is incredibly important because it draws a link between specific activities from a company profiting from fossil fuels and specific harms to states and communities,” Mr. Lockman said. “If you cause harm you should be responsible for cleaning it up, it’s as simple as that.”

The new study refines an approach known as “end-to-end” attribution, which links one particular emitter (a company, for instance) to one particular climate-related impact (extreme heat, for example) to a specific damage (a downturn in the global economy).

The study found that Chevron’s emissions had caused up to $3.6 trillion in heat-related losses to global gross domestic product. Christopher Callahan, a postdoctoral earth scientist at Stanford University and an author of the study, said such a high cost was still a gross underestimate of the global impact of burning fossil fuels, especially in poorer, tropical regions that are least responsible for emissions.

“That staggering figure represents damages from just one climate impact,” said Delta Merner, associate director of the Science Hub for Climate Litigation at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “The total harm attributable to major emitters is undoubtedly far greater when the full range of climate hazards is taken into account.”

Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr., a lawyer for the Chevron Corporation said the Nature article “ignores the scientific impossibility of attributing particular climate and weather events to any specific country, company, or energy user. It is part of a misleading advocacy campaign on behalf of wasteful and unconstitutional state lawsuits and energy penalty laws.”

Overall, the paper found that the world would be $28 trillion richer were it not for the extreme heat caused by the emissions from 111 major carbon producers between 1991 and 2020.

Since 2017, more than 100 climate-related lawsuits have been filed each year, according to the new study. But the attribution studies those cases relied on often failed to link emissions to estimated economic damages.

This new framework could provide a function similar to other big damage and loss cases, like holding tobacco companies responsible for lung cancer cases or pharmaceutical companies for opiate addiction.

“Legal scholars have called this kind of attribution the holy grail of climate liability,” said Justin Mankin, a geography professor focused on climate science at Dartmouth College and an author of the Nature paper.

World Weather Attribution, a group run out of Imperial College London, has regularly issued attribution reports over the past decade.

“Sadly we’re still the only ones who really do this, and we’re not an institution, it’s basically a project I do as a university professor working with a team of people,” said Friederike Otto, a physicist who helps to lead World Weather Attribution.

Dr. Callahan and Dr. Mankin used open source tools for their models, and they have made the code and data sources they used to compile the global costs of climate change publicly available on their websites.

“We believe in openly transparent science, especially since the work was paid for by U.S. taxpayers,” said Dr. Mankin, noting that much of the support for the research was financed by the National Science Foundation and NOAA, two of the nation’s largest climate science agencies that have been targeted for funding cuts under the Trump administration.

Extreme weather events continue disrupt communities and strain finances. The 2023 flooding cost Vermont hundreds of millions of dollars, according to Anne Watson, a Vermont state senator who sponsored the bill quantifying the state’s damages between 1995 and 2024. It passed the Legislature last year and the state’s Republican governor allowed it to become law without his signature.

Julie Moore, secretary for the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, helped organize the request for more information to help the state better understand different approaches to attribution science and how to allocate damages caused by greenhouse gas emissions.

“The charge to us is to adopt rules of how we’ll apply attribution science and ultimately send out cost recovery letters,” Ms. Moore said. The state law says oil and gas corporations will receive letters at the start of 2027.

“The hope is that it’ll result in a significant amount of money coming into Vermont to help both pay for the damage and help us adapt to a hotter, wetter climate that’s a result of this carbon in the atmosphere,” Ms. Watson said. “We need to go to the source of who’s responsible for this.”

The post New Study Could Bolster Climate Laws to Make Polluters Pay appeared first on Our Story Insight.

New Study Explores the Impact of Book Bans on Library Circulation

Researchers at Carnegie Mellon and George Mason University have published a new study about the impact of book bans on the consumption of banned books, and the results might surprise you. Using book circulation data from a “large library content and services supplies to major public and academic libraries in the United States” about the top 25 most-banned titles, found that:

• Book bans increase the circulation of banned books by 12% compared to a control group. That is, book bans lead to a Streisand effect rather than having a chilling effect on readership.
• The effect spills over to states without bans and is only slighlty lower (11.2% increase).
• The increase in readership centers on books related to race, gender, and LGTBQ+ issues.
• Book bans expose new readers to inclusive content; on average, children read banned books 19% more than the control titles after a book banning event.
• Circulation of banned books increases in red states that have book bans and in blue states regardless of book ban status.

(This feels like a good time to remind you that, regardless of circulation and readership numbers, book bans are not good for authors. If you’re working on a “well, actually” with a positive spin about book bans, just stop.)

The findings above might lead you to wonder: if book bans are driving increased engagement with the very content activists claim to be trying to protect children from, why do they continue to pursue book bans? Follow the money. The study also looked at political messaging and donations and found that Republican politicians in red states saw an estimated 30% increase in donations under $500 after book ban events.

One more time for the folks in the back: it’s not about the books. As Book Riot’s Kelly Jensen reminds us, “books are an easy, on-the-ground, tangible target” that far-right groups have used as a thin end of the wedge in their pursuit of suppressing representations of and information about race and LGBTQ+ issues. Does it matter to conservative politicians that kids are actually reading more banned books? Not if their coffers are full and their voters are turning out.

It’s Been Five Years Since American Dirt, and We’re Still Salty

Five years ago, Jeanine Cummins’s American Dirt went from being the biggest book of the season to being the biggest controversy in publishing. Like, so big that she had to do a whole Oprah sit-down about it. Here’s Vanessa with a great piece on what happened with American Dirt and why it still stings.

Today In Books

Sign up to Today In Books to receive daily news and miscellany from the world of books.

The post New Study Finds That Book Bans Lead to Increased Readership appeared first on Our Story Insight.

An estimated 54 million employed, alcohol-drinking Americans are expected to tune in Sunday to watch the Kansas City Chiefs go for a three-peat against the Philadelphia Eagles — with nearly 23 million expected to call out of the work the next day.

And if they do show up, they’re probably not working very hard. Whether viewers are toasting in celebration or drowning their sorrows, hungover workers are about 25% less productive and fumble about two hours of the workday, research shows.

People are 25% less productive at work when they are hungover, research shows. diy13 – stock.adobe.com

The average US employee earns $222 per day so if they waste a quarter of that on company time on what has become known as “Super Sick Monday,” it will cost their employers about $55 per person, totaling a whopping $3 billion, online marketing site NetVoucherCodes found.

“It’s very easy to take things too far and find yourself hungover the next day which can severely reduce your productivity depending on the amount you’ve had to drink and how you handle your alcohol,” said Rebecca Bebbington, finance expert for the marketing service.

“A hangover can impair your performance, making it harder to concentrate, solve problems, or make sound decisions,” she added.

Kansas City Chiefs fans celebrated their team’s win over the San Francisco 49ers in Super Bowl LVIII last year. Getty Images

Meanwhile, millions don’t plan to touch down at their place of work on Feb. 10, with plans to call out altogether or use sick days after the Patrick Mahomes and Jalen Hurts showdown, potentially costing businesses even more.

A record-breaking 22.6 million football fans anticipate missing work following Super Bowl LIX, up from 16.1 million last year and 18.8 million in 2023, according to a UKG-Harris poll.

An additional 12.9 million US employees will be saying their Hail Mary’s as they head into work late the morning after the big game.

Tens of millions of employees are planning to use sick days or show up to work late the day after the Super Bowl. TheVisualsYouNeed – stock.adobe.com

And for many it’s not even a question — 36% admit they will be less productive than usual if they do go in, up from 30% last year.

That would all be solved if the Monday after the Super Bowl was a national holiday, which 43% of workers want to see happen, up from 37% in 2024.

The post ‘Super Bowl flu’ could cost businesses over $3B: study finds appeared first on Our Story Insight.

Daphna Blatt, the NYPL’s Senior Director of Strategy & Public Impact and one of the people involved in the study, underscored the significance of confirming through scientific method what many library lovers have known for awhile, saying, “Libraries & Well-Being is an innovative study in how it applies positive psychology frameworks to the library world, to show for the first time that library usage positively contributes to externally validated measures of well-being. Our research found that patrons experience refuge, joy, connection, purpose, and expansion through their library use.”

The post Innovative Study by UPenn and NYPL Finds That Public Libraries Positively Impact Community Health and Well-Being appeared first on Our Story Insight.