| djgordon 2004-10-31, 7:08 pm |
| Well, I don't know so much about that. I've seen pictures of the garages and
people after an explosion of the cookers because instructions weren't
followed. It all goes back to that Bill Engval routine of "somebody had to
write a letter" --- Package insert on Preparation H - not for oral use; tag
on hair dryer - do not use while sleeping; tag on curling iron - do not
insert into any body orifices. He is so on target with the fact that some
idiot out there had to do it first for there to be a warning, and then to
have to put a warning on something means they know that someone will still
try it and not follow instructions. Oh well, anyway, I didn't know UL hadn't
put their seal of approval on them, so I was just commenting on that. Kinda
wandered away from what was really being discussed.
Dani
"Eliyahu Rooff" <lrooff@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10oa9okofjrfla0@corp.supernews.com...
> Those sound like reasonable precautions, assuming that it's also on a
> non-flammable surface and that there's a fire extinguisher nearby.
> Bottom line, though, is that a cooking appliance shouldn't require the
> same sort of precautions that we associate with hazardous materials,
> bomb disposal or nuclear waste. :-)
>
> Eliyahu
>
> "djgordon" <danigordon@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:Uk9hd.8326$Om6.7417@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
> would
> wind, no
> or
> pot so
> for
> we
> have a
> that
> pot
> to
> about
>
http://www.consumerreports.org/main...folder_id=18151
> class
>
>
|