Obviously if you have one, cease using it. Return it and report the seller to the appropriate authorities.
WARNING regarding USB chargers after woman dies from apparent electrocution
[Deactivated] on 27/06/2014 - 09:43
Comments
- 1
- 2
hell, if i was in charge i would let people do their own electrical wiring and plumbing. but people in australia have been deemed stupider than other major countries in the world.
i think you are more likely to be killed just standing on a street corner minding your own business
After reading the vast majority of comments, extremely interesting, I think we should be really happy that the average Joe is not wiring up their mains power.
The only people that say this are protectionist electricians.
I'd say they're adults concerned for others' welfare. Standards are basic elements of many walks of life for good reason. They save money in the long run, but in this case they also save lives. When you grow up, like the 16 morons above, you will hopefully realise that.
We live in a Paternalistic society where the average Joe expects the state to legislate what is and isn't safe. In "less developed" societies people think for themselves.
If you don't understand how safety legislation helps societies then who I am I to disabuse you of your simplistic laissez-faire fantasies. However, not understanding how standards save societies and individuals considerable money is inexcusable in this day and age. No doubt you've screamed long and loud about different digital systems and incompatabilities, even if you haven't been on his earth long enough to know about different rail guages and inconsistent interstate laws and regs which cost the economy billions annually. We see regular reminders of how building standards cost lives and money in societies who, according to you, allow "people to think for themselves". Tip of the iceberg. The paternalistic comment is overblown populist nonsense in this case, but I can see how it might appeal to a handful of Ozbargainers whose deepest thoughts are where to find the next "bargain" that they don't need.
If you don't understand how safety legislation helps societies then who I am I to disabuse you of your simplistic laissez-faire fantasies.
I wish for the gov to "save our money" by getting rid of helmet laws, the GST collected on them, the massive money made by enforcing fines and the diabetes and heart disease problems caused by having the law in effect. It's not for safety but massive revenue generation and continued regulation for said massive profits. Furthermore, there are no stats for how many problems and safety issues a sweaty head causes. Dizziness plus fiddling with the helmet while riding. Their use has done nothing to reduce head injuries and made criminals of those riders who wish to ride without one; a basic right. The State has nothing to do with our personal safety except profit on it and sell safety as an excuse for "taking care". I believe they have severely reduced the incidences of getting on the bike for a fun ride and forced more people to drive than necessary. Generating yet more revenue there.
The paternalistic comment is overblown populist nonsense in this case, but I can see how it might appeal to a handful of Ozbargainers whose deepest thoughts are where to find the next "bargain" that they don't need.
Nothing wrong with chasing a bargain. I assume that's why you're here too. We are not asking for hand-outs like the gov is. I should get a gov inspector into my home every 3 months to put some special label on my power tools and check for their safety 'cause I don't feel safe around them, to be honest. Yo overpaid fat gov bureaucrat, can you check my tools for me? Make sure everything is OK?
Of course some standards make sense (rail line widths, etc), but we live in a society where PROFIT rules all and the hand-holding has reached never-before-seen levels and the cost to taxpayers is way too high. You can legislate until you are blue in the face; nothing will prevent accidents from happening.
What a diatribe of anecdotal rubbish. Standard fare for nanny state commenters. Your comment that "nothing" will prevent accidents is arrant nonsense. Plenty of rules and standards have saved lives, injuries and considerable costs to individuals and societies. Even a primary school kid could tell you that. In regard to your personal problem I'll simply say this as a bicycle and motorbike rider. Anyone who rides without a helmet is a fool. Muss up your hair does it? Wait until you fall off and land on your head and see what it does to your skull and brain. There are undoubtedly some compliance rules which are both onerous and over the top in some circumstances but the vast majority are there for good reason. Common sense applies. I have no problem with you riding a bike naked as long as you're prepared to take full responsibility when it comes to paying for the cost of repairs to your body and compensation to your employer if required. In societies, freedom comes with responsibility and nuff nuffs who roll out the generalised nanny state nonsense seem to have a lot of trouble coming to grips with that concept.
Your comment that "nothing" will prevent accidents is arrant nonsense.
Correct. I should have said nothing will ELIMINATE them.
Plenty of rules and standards have saved lives, injuries and considerable costs to individuals and societies.
As I stated above, I am not against standards. Nor do I think standards are the main argument put forth here. I think safety hand-holding is. I consider superannuation a violation of my rights to do with my savings exactly as I wish, too.
Anyone who rides without a helmet is a fool.
I want my right back to be a 'fool'. This is a basic right. A choice we should be able to make without FAT CATS trying to sell us laws and say it's for "our safety" when it's all about revenue generation.
Common sense applies.
I should be able to ride without a helmet without being fined for it. Simple. The State should have no say in this.
I have no problem with you riding a bike naked as long as you're prepared to take full responsibility when it comes to paying for the cost of repairs to your body and compensation to your employer if required.
But I don't get the choice or say in the matter, do I? The gov has a 'problem' with that choice (a personal choice) because it gets in the way of revenue generation (fines) and the massive amount of money siphoned off in health to pay for health 'treatments' which they profit on massively in their deals with various drug companies. As they do on cars.
In societies, freedom comes with responsibility and nuff nuffs who roll out the generalised nanny state nonsense seem to have a lot of trouble coming to grips with that concept.
Freedom. What freedom? I get no choice to decide what is or isn't good for me. What's next? Pre-approved foods that I can and can't eat "for my safety"? We don't vote on wars. We don't vote on Carbon taxes. Voting itself is a scam. It takes millions to put candidates up there and each of them play off each other for our amusement to perpetuate the myth that we have real choice and freedom. The Nanny State logic rules all. I also consider superannuation (the right to put my money where I see fit, including the Mattress Fund without paying Fat Cats management fees, nor putting it in investments I have moral issues with) a basic human right that is lost too. Others see it as "safety". Absolute loss of control over our destinies through less and less control over our finances (and they'll be increasingly confiscated in good time too with gov saying its for the common good when crisis hits. Just wait and see.).
We have reached absolute ridiculous Nanny State levels where anything that gets in the way of profits is 'unsafe'. There is a fine line we crossed years ago.
As I said, a diatribe of piecemeal nonsense, similar to the one you advanced on another forum thread iirc. Yes, I recall now - the how to avoid a no voting fine thread. Like many nanny state promoters your argument falls at the first hurdle - we live in a society which operates, generally pretty successfully, on the basis of cooperation and collective responsibility, rules, regulations, and laws. Why there's even an element of fairness there if you look hard enough - something you rarely do I'd suggest. Naval gazing is far more your bag.
You, and others like you want to do what suits YOU, and hang the consequences and costs to others. It's a selfish, ignorant and puerile position. Your conspiracy theories are laughable. Governments don't profit from health - they/we pay vast amounts of money to assist citizens and keep the country functioning. Why even you have availed yourself of these wonderful facilities on at least one occasion. Ever heard of a pandemic? Probably not - look it up and you'll understand why societal medicine and laws are required to restrict self-centred personal desires. Here's another clue - have a stab in the dark at what drug costs would be without government intervention and subsidy.
We all get a choice, and most of use use the huge amounts of information, knowledge and experience around us when making our choices. Some are less able and good societies assist them in their choices and protect them where necessary. You could choose to live freely in a remote town in this nation - or move to one of those "freer" countries alluded to above - where no-one cares if you fall off your bike and end up a vegetable requiring millions of dollars in assistance for the rest of your life.
No-one is stopping you from being a thoughtless fool. All we're trying to do is mititgate the cost of your foolishness and its effects on ohers. Your family, friends, doctors, nurses, workmates, and every single taxpayer in this country has either a concern for your welfare or an "interest" in your foolishness.
You, and others like you want to do what suits YOU, and hang the consequences and costs to others. It's a selfish, ignorant and puerile position.
Hilarious. We are still talking about bike helmets aren't we? Sorry, I disagree that choosing to wear no helmet while I ride my bike has any effect on you or anyone else. I disagree that it's "selfish, ignorant and peurile position". It's a basic right taken away from me and in so doing has enriched the State tremendously. You sound like someone who could profit off regulation to me.
No-one is stopping you from being a thoughtless fool. All we're trying to do is mititgate the cost of your foolishness and its effects on ohers. Your family, friends, doctors, nurses, workmates, and every single taxpayer in this country has either a concern for your welfare or an "interest" in your foolishness.
Whether you deem breaking the law in this instance 'foolish' is up to you. Fact is nobody is affected when riders ride unregulated. Tell me how any taxpayer is affected versus bad health by not exercising, which is the killer by far. I don't have the choice to even be foolish, do I? The effect on my family and friends on lack of exercise and debilitating illnesses nation-wide is far more 'foolish' to me than a one-in-a-million chance of 1) having an accident and 2) having that accident mitigated in any way, shape or form with a helmet. The law has done nothing but made a heap of money for the Nanny State and that is its intent. You can extrapolate this argument into touchy-feely "your family and friends are affected" and "you selfish bastard" rubbish, but you automatically assume a negative result from not wearing one. Sorry. The real negative results come from laws requiring one through far less inclination to jump on the bike and go for a ride without all the 'approved gear'. And whether or not someone decides to do so or not affects absolutely nobody on the roads. Not a single soul. So don't tell me how this affects anyone outside of me. I see far more effects with peoples diet choices on the nation's purse than ANY silly argument about riding without a helmet. Naturally you assume an accident with the helmet a saviour. I'd have more chance of being hit my lightning than affecting ANY taxpayer with this choice. In other words, this 'freedom' is not costing anyone anything but saving untold $$ from being spent on medicines the gov buys off fat pharmaceutical companies, which in turn use their massive lobbying power to bring the corrupt to 'serve us' while the rest of the nation thinks we have 'choice' and are living 'in a great country'. Didn't say it was the worst, nor did I say it is the best. So don't put those words in my mouth.
The effects of my actions are MY CHOICE, in this case. Not the gov's. Nor should they be. This seems to be a concept you don't understand. It has no business being THEIRS but of course they want MORE CONTROL and more REGULATION of personal choices that have nothing to do with them because they profit tremendously from sales of gear through more taxable income and of course through the enforcement of FINES. I take no passengers and nobody but me is affected. Why is the gov involved in this? Countless actions in life have the potential to affect family and friends negatively. Is that a reason to regulate all these choices? What ridiculous logic. And what a ridiculous statement to call this foolish or selfish.
You don't SEE the effects of lack of exercise and debilitating illnesses and the far less inclination to exercise BECAUSE of these money-sucking laws (pretending to be about safety). All you see in your head is an 'accident' waiting to happen and a helmet as the Saviour. Which it isn't. At all. And that has been proven with the ineffectiveness of the silly law. You are very quick to hurl countless insults when your argument is weak and provide the 'emotional argument' of friends and loved ones affected by my 'bad' foolish choices. Which to me is hilarious. You are a perfect government worker.
PS. Gov does more do keep medical prices high through its deals with pharmaceutical companies and rebates, which we all pay for. If gov subsidies dropped the prices would drop like a stone. Gov loves meddling in the free market and you appear to love this too. From housing to medicines to food. Booms and busts. Wealth extraction. But we can't have people deciding what's good for them and the real market dictating prices. We have to meddle. Please call me foolish again. I love your insults. We should start a long discussion about superannuation too. It's "what's best for us."
Naturally, all this discussion about Nanny State logic profiting off silly laws means I believe in a lawless land where we can all do exactly what we want and of course it means I hate standards even where they make sense for all involved. Feel free to free-form extrapolate into this area now that the emotional arguments about friends and family being affected by 'being a fool' have been extinguished.
"I think we should be really happy that the average Joe is not wiring up their mains power."
the average joe is already able to do their own wiring in new zealand, usa & the uk. their death statistics by electrocution are no bigger than ours.
at the very least, australians should be able to do their own wiring from the fuse box back and then have to get it approved by inspection.
certainly treat all electrical appliances with the greatest of respect, but in the bigger picture stasticially you are much more likely to die being a pedestrian or driving in a car or just doing a crap on the toilet. should we ban all cars?
Yes hilarious to naval gazers with zero sense of society and a lack of balance and perspective no doubt. My generalisation in regards to your particular self-centred philosophy of personal freedom and "free markets" (was there ever such a misnomer in the history of economics -I doubt it) was obvious but for your sake I'll address the bicycling argument specifically.
Your comment that helmet laws might stop some people from exercising actually has some basis in fact - unlike your unsubstantiated claims in regard to drug costs and (the even more laughable) "governments profit from health". However, anyone serious about getting beneficial exercise will make sure that they are doing it safely - and hopefully with at least a little knowledge of the consequences of doing the exercise properly, with adequate protection. My daughter regularly sees the outcomes of those who don't get advice on exercising or who don't follow basic rules, and I can assure you that despite your opinionated ignorance there is a huge cost to many of them personally in pain and inconvenience, not to mention the cost to their wallets. The rest of us, including empoyers, simply subsidise their misfortune/self-inflicted errors.
As I've already said, common sense applies and getting the right balance is always a consideration of legislators, despite the rubbish written by poorly informed people on internet forums. And I put you squarely in that category. Plenty of opinion - very little actual knowledge. The stats are there with regard to bike accidents and the efficacy of helmets, you just don't like what they'd tell you if you bothered to read them. In USA for example >90% of bike deaths involved peoiple not wearing a helmet and studies have found helmets provide a better than 2/3rds reduction in the risk of head, brain and severe brain injury for all ages. In Australia a 2013 controlled study found that "helmet use was associated with reduced risk of head injury in bicycle collisions with motor vehicles of up to 74%, and the more severe the injury considered, the greater the reduction. This was also found to be true for particular head injuries such as skull fractures, intracranial injury and open head wounds". There's plenty more substantive evidence which give the lie to your ludicrous comparison of bike accidents with a lightning strike. Here's just one of many: Bike helmet studies
This is why societies develop standards and draw boundaries - so that we reduce the chances of accidents and where that doesn't work we mitigate the impact. In the case of cycling that includes use of a helmet. Most helmets are lightweight, they breathe perfectly well, and provide reasonable protection in specific accidents - despite your obviously uninformed claim to the contrary. A workmate was hospitalised as a result of a bike-related head injury a while back. The consensus was that his helmet likely saved his life. Just one of many examples. You can read the discussion about bike helmets yourself. Suffice to say that the consensus from experts and serious cyclists about helmets is pretty convincing for anyone with an open mind.
In general your laissez-faire, me, me me, "free" market (lol), law of the jungle philosophy is nothing other than selfish. As I've already indicated it might work for some people some of the time but evidence across the spectrum shows that it has extremely negative consequences for societies in general.
Yes hilarious to naval gazers with zero sense of society and a lack of balance and perspective no doubt.
As usual you start with insults. In fact I have plenty of sense of society and it starts at home; not getting the gov to do it for us for a tidy profit that they are clearly making from all the regulation from the over-taxed Nanny State.
My generalisation in regards to your particular self-centred philosophy of personal freedom and "free markets" (was there ever such a misnomer in the history of economics -I doubt it) was obvious but for your sake I'll address the bicycling argument specifically.
Self-centred. Care to mention which part was self-centred? Was the shock of PERSONAL CHOICE too much for you? If you don't believe in free markets, maybe you can beleive in FREEer ones where the cost of basically EVERYTHING (including the cost of money) isn't decided by a few Fat Cats for us but rather some - some - of those choices made by the market itself.
Your comment that helmet laws might stop some people from exercising actually has some basis in fact…
Of course it does. As does everything I write.
- unlike your unsubstantiated claims in regard to drug costs and (the even more laughable) "governments profit from health".
Hilarity. What you're saying is essentially: I'm in gov and deciding on what does and doesn't get approved and I have no undue influence from those bribes from Big Pharma, nor their lobbying power, nor do I care for anything but my nation's health and low cost of medical care. Everything I do is squeaky-clean. That's basically what you're suggesting by saying gov doesn't profit from health. Everything that's regulated they profit from and we lose from. EVERY single thing. The regulation itself affects prices big-time and we always end up paying too much as a result of their malfeasance. Feel free to call it unsubstantiated; I prefer to call it common sense. Gov both profits from health policy and bends to the influence of their sponsors keeping them in power and WE pay for it all. Both in our health and our wallets. Far more than we should.
However, anyone serious about getting beneficial exercise will make sure that they are doing it safely - and hopefully with at least a little knowledge of the consequences of doing the exercise properly, with adequate protection.
Fantastic. I'm all for personal choice, not regulation. You can get hit and die or fall over when walking. Wear helmets? It shouldn't be my decision what is right for YOU (unless of course I can profit from it while spinning lies about YOUR SAFETY).
My daughter regularly sees the outcomes of those who don't get advice on exercising or who don't follow basic rules, and I can assure you that despite your opinionated ignorance there is a huge cost to many of them personally in pain and inconvenience, not to mention the cost to their wallets.
And it's all a DROP IN THE OCEAN compared to the fat being made by making people SICK and TREATING them (never curing them). How about that 'silent' killer you don't directly see? We haven't addressed that adequately here. One is FAR BIGGER than the other and there will ALWAYS be accidents no matter how much regulation. So regardless of what your daughter sees, my freedom shouldn't be in the crosshairs because some moron can't take care of themselves and the health implications (and profit generation) of less exercise (and encouragement of taking up a registered vehicle, also an avenue for massive profit) should be addressed here.
The rest of us, including empoyers, simply subsidise their misfortune/self-inflicted errors.
What a joke. You are completely ignoring the ballooning health budgets from not exercising and making a case for the one or two accidents being "tragically bad for employers and so on". What a joke. It's the tragedies you don't see that are generating massive revenue for the gov and its corrupt officials while they do deals with drug companies saying what is and isn't subsidised by YOU AND ME. My sense of society stops at paying for idiots too. I don't want any benefits from my EMPLOYER for MY mistakes, so why are they legislated? Society is often used as a euphemism for "we're all in this together, now COUGH UP." And this couldn't be more clear to me. YOUR MISTAKES. YOUR PROBLEM. Not your employer. And mistakes and accidents will always happen and they are completely and utterly overshadowed by the health costs to every single taxpayer in this country. Nobody cares because there is too much money to be made in treatments and YET MORE regulations that keep the money flowing one-way.
Bike helmet studies
Hah. Quoting HEMETS.ORG. Hilarious. And you talk about chatter on forums being funny. There are plenty of 'studies' pointing to the ineffectiveness of OUR HELMET LAWS (Australian ones) rather than going to Randy Swart in the USA, who runs a nonprofit (which doesn't mean he doesn't make boatloads of money from making SAFETY his business; most directors running such orgs make a killing off them…).Over the past three decades, Swart has played an instrumental role in bringing safer helmets to U.S. riders. Swart is director of the all-volunteer Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute — with a must-see Web site for anyone in the market for a bike helmet. And currently he is also vice chairman of the helmet and headgear subcommittee for ASTM-International, a nonprofit, voluntary standard setting organization.
In case you missed what I said above: making safety his BUSINESS
I'm sure you can do better than this, Possumbly.This is why societies develop standards and draw boundaries - so that we reduce the chances of accidents and where that doesn't work we mitigate the impact
I can tell you one thing's for sure. I had no say in this. Again with your weasel SOCIETY word, as if choosing to ride my bike wtihout a helmet has ANY influence on you or ANY taxpayer. Again, the benefits of taking away this stupid law are evident, even to you. And the profit motives of those MAKING THE CHOICE FOR US should be evident, even to you. We should minimise the impact of head injuries in the home and when walking to the shops because IF IT SAVES ONE LIFE (and allows a nurse twiddle her thumbs for an evening), it's well worth the tremendous cost of over-regulation burdens society with. Anyone that doesn't think like me is anti-society and anti-care and totally unreasonable and against Standards and Regulation to MAKE THINGS SAFER (!).
In general your laissez-faire, me, me me, "free" market (lol), law of the jungle philosophy is nothing other than selfish.
In general your weak arguments ignoring the ballooning health implications of this law while totally ignoring the fact that govs profit tremendously off regulation of all types (making it their business while feeding you lines about your country, WHAT'S GOOD FOR YOU and other Statist nonsense) is - at-best - naive, at worst intentionally deceptive rubbish. Your melodrama about others being affected is totally overshadowed by the effects of lack of exercise on the nation's health and purse and the deals being done to keep the paper-shufflers fat. Your sprinkled insults throughout your argument is your crutch for a totally weak argument for reducing the averaage Commmoner to an over-taxed over-regulated robot incapable of thinking for himself about daily basics and I think you'd be well-suited to a (safe) gov position if you aren't already coming from that perspective.
We really should discuss Superannuation some day too, Possumbly. It's What's Good For Us and 'reasonably safe' to have money tied up this way while they can have a play. It's OK to have others control our life's work until such a time as we are reduced to simple cogs in the machine of the State, only existing to serve its ends (sorry Society's Goals…err, which any reasonably safe and unselfish person wouldn't object to, lol).
There's just so many examples of over-regulated gov nonsense & too little time. Too little time to discuss it with 'reasonably safe' above-board people that are always looking out for the Cost To Society (while ignoring the huge & less visible & less melodramatically described costs to society). Those unruly selfish ones that never think about others are always a problem. They believe in the Free Market of "me, me, me" and their decisions should be made by others. Especially when those decisions can earn those doing the deciding a few bob.
LOL.
Don't tell me what to feel! I am pretty thankful though.
she was also wearing headphones, holding a laptop in her hands or something and charging the phone (and presumably the laptop as well)
thats alot of electricty and wires
You shouldnt listen to music and charge
even though the risk is so low
But this was one of the issues raised against the rumour that apple might change the 3.5mm headphone standard to lightning headphonesthat being said, it doesnt cost too much to find an ebay seller that sells decent Wall chargers
and to clarify its just the part that connects to the wall that is dangerousnot the cable itself. For the cable just make sure you buy highly rated AWG ones. like 24AWG is the best. most of the $1 ones like from kogan are 28 or 26 at best (lower is better)
You also charge faster this way
I love this comment in the article from the NSW Fair Trading Commissioner:
"Mr Stowe said authorities were not aware until now of the large number of the cheap chargers that were available for sale in NSW.".
I love this comment in the article from the NSW Fair Trading Commissioner:
"Mr Stowe said authorities were not aware until now of the large number of the cheap chargers that were available for sale in NSW.".
Yeah, that is a little difficult to believe. I have instigated raids on importers and retailers in the past, via my reports to the Fair Trading NSW Enforcement Team. Unfortunately, I think they are no more due to funding cuts.
haha what a load of rubbish! they are the ostriches with their heads buried in the sand! are these 'commissioner's just old timers with no Techno-Gadgetry know-how. It's no wonder the average citizen aren't getting a fair deal!
It he wasn't aware he should be fired. Fken clown.
Why are people voting this comment down? (serious)
Why are people voting this comment down? (serious)
I think perhaps some misread my comment.
They may have thought that I was disparaging the commenter who said "I love this comment from…" Actually, I was trying to say that I found it hard to believe the authorities statement regarding not knowing about all the cheap (uncertified) chargers in the market place. Then, when there are a couple of negs, the sheep follow.
Alternatively, they may not have believed my statement regarding initiating the raids on importers and retailers such as eBay seller, importer, and retailer (via pop-up stores in major shopping centres), River Trading.
Hard to say sometimes just what really starts these things.
The fact that 48 people, one a very aptly named "doofus", liked the first comment in this thread pretty much dums up what you're dealing with on any public forum.
This is why cuts to government departments are a bad idea sometimes. Fair Trading does not have the resources to conduct spot checks all the time. I know they regularly audit major retailers and major importers, but even then it would be around once every few years. There is no chance for them to do check all the small markets/stalls/shops dotted across NSW.
The rule of thumb when purchasing anything that plugs into a power socket - check for electrical safety markings. There should be a number which you can check whether its electrical safety certificate is valid and up to date. The plug and cable should always have a SAA number!
Please report to the Fair Trading if you find a dodgy product.
The rule of thumb when purchasing anything that plugs into a power socket - check for electrical safety markings. There should be a number which you can check whether its electrical safety certificate is valid and up to date. The plug and cable should always have a SAA number!
This used to be correct. However, the dangerous devices now have copies of the safety approval logos and even faked/copied supplier numbers. The counterfeit Apple 10A 240volt USB chargers I have seen recently carry Apple Australia's N122 supplier number as well as the (now slightly outdated) C-Tick logo.
You really cannot do anything about fakes short of opening the products up and comparing them to the safety reports. Fake products can be of such high quality (superficially at least) that even the original manufacturers cannot tell. There was a case a few years back where there was an ENTIRE factory and corporate headquarters of Samsung that was faked - even staff working there thought they were working for Samsung.
But for the third party products, check the SAA number (C-tick logos are useless for electrical safety).
As I have pointed out in another thread, it is always a good idea to have a powerboard that has a fuse/circuit breaker. One device suddenly drawing more power than it should could cause the surge to go into other devices - I would say, 25% of our TV repairs are due to power surges.
But for the third party products, check the SAA number (C-tick logos are useless for electrical safety).
The C-Tick logo must be followed by the suppliers number. Unfortunately the dangerous copies have either a fake number or a real number copied from a genuine device.
As I have pointed out in another thread, it is always a good idea to have a powerboard that has a fuse/circuit breaker. One device suddenly drawing more power than it should could cause the surge to go into other devices - I would say, 25% of our TV repairs are due to power surges.
Good advice.
A powerboard won't help. Powerboards don't have anything to do with surges(a voltage spike). A powerboards fuse/circuit breaker cut in usually at 10A. In this case this lady would at most be using a couple of amps and the current that killed her through the usb charger a fraction of that measured in milliamps. i.e. electrocution will still occur.
Same goes for a TV, it won't protect it. On the other hand a surge protector may save your TV.
The faulty usb charger simply shorted and supplied 240V through the usb cable that is usually 5V. A powerboard and a surge protector will not help in this case. Only a earth leakage device may have been useful.
I don't see what's stopping a dodgy manufacturer printing genuine logos or numbers onto their products.
The only assurance you have of a buying a genuine product is going to an brick and mortar shop (Apple/JB/DSE etc) and buying one there.
If you already have a product and wish to check if it's genuine, an easy way is to 1) find how much the genuine product weights and 2) weigh your product. Dodgy products will skimp on the good stuff inside the adapter, therefore making it weigh less.
only 1 reported death in australia after how many years? i think they are the least of your worries.
I do not agree.
There may have been other deaths, not reported, of which we have not heard about.
I have personally experienced a laptop charger failing unsafely, and a couple of USB chargers that were unstable and/or failed/overheated.
I now only purchased Chargers etc. that are approved for use in Australia. However, unfortunately, the counterfeiters now copy the Australian Electrical Safety Standards logos and even the supplier numbers.
Many USB chargers, especially the counterfeit Apple ones, have insulation on the pins and carry the correct logos and suppliers number. So they look safe, but the components and clearances inside the chargers are unsafe.
If these chargers fail, the mains voltage can pass through Sending 240 volts to the device connected. Of course they can also melt and catch fire and/or cause a fire to wall plug, carpet etc.
you never know, it might have being used in the middle of an electrical thunderstorm and a surge hit the place. there is too little info in the article to draw any conclusions
Yep, she might even have stuck a fork into an electrical socket, or could even have died of natural causes. Amazing how some people think no-one other than themselves have the common sense to look at different scenarios before before making public statements in regard to product safety issues. Obviously those involved judged that the most likely cause was an unapproved electrical device.
Yep, she might even have stuck a fork into an electrical socket, or could even have died of natural causes. Amazing how some people think no-one other than themselves have the common sense to look at different scenarios before before making public statements in regard to product safety issues. Obviously those involved judged that the most likely cause was an unapproved electrical device.
Yup, the death was back in April. There has been plenty of time for an autopsy and investigation. It seems that a store has been raided and stock seized.
It was sarcasm.
Only three blind mice? Usually far more on forum threads.
A two-headed mouse?
you never know, it might have being used in the middle of an electrical thunderstorm and a surge hit the place. there is too little info in the article to draw any conclusions
Surely an approved device should fail safe? That is the surge or whatever should not get past the device.
i don't think much can protect against a lightning strike. you can try to minimise it with lightning rods, good earthing and surge protectors.
But who would be willing to live in one all the time?
due to cut cost all power plug has no earth pin……. so not much of protection will protect from genuine plug too….
and it was connected to laptop with power supply making it a close loop….. (full circuit)Earth pin's are there to protect people against a metal (or conductive) case shorting the elctronics inside.
Cluster's link show's exactly how safe Apple's two plug power supplies can be:
http://www.righto.com/2014/05/a-look-inside-ipad-chargers-pr…
there are reports that apple power plug causing electric shocks too…… Apple acknowledged it and investigating as well……
truly safe?
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2547504?start=0&tstart=…
https://discussions.apple.com/message/19706190
It's rather common issue from apple. why ppl downvote my comments? ignorant apple fan not going to save you from electric shock…….
It's rather common issue from apple. why ppl downvote my comments? ignorant apple fan not going to save you from electric shock…….
Thank you for the links.. However, the first is from 2010. It may have refered to the early cube type charger that Apple recalled in the USA. The replacements can be identified by a small green dot.
The alleged 'problem' in your second link was 'covered' by this reply.
"As Apple told you, it is normal - whether you accept it, or not - and the sensation can be alleviated using the 3-prong AC power adapter cable pluged into a properly-grounded AC outlet."
"It will cause the macbook to conduct electricity as the plug has no ability to transfer excess electricity to the ground. However, if you use the long cable provided in the box (not for travel), the issue of static electricity on the metal part of the macbook will be gone."
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/5762010
since you insisted 2014 incidents on iphone 5……
I just grab whatever on top list before….Thanks again, but.. reading that thread it appears to just be the same thing as before. Nothing dangerous at all. No failure of the Apple charger. No fault(s) in the charger.
:)
I do know some people got killed by 9V battery, some declare it as static fun……
that must be some special effect Apple provide to user to have static fun…..
I'm not arguing about how bad Apple is, just in general, famous brand do has it's fault….. and I'm not satisfied that the electronic sector has moved to such requirement that earth pin is not compulsory anymore.
It used to be required for all appliances under BI (british standard), even for toilet, old BI stated no power plug allowed, where US is allowed and many people got electricuted during a bath.
Edger, the three chargers you linked to are grounded, or three pronged chargers. These should always be earthed.
Twin pronged, or unearth devices need to have extra protections, like physical isolation of the (relatively) high voltage and low voltage circuits as well as non-conductive cases.
When you buy a car, you trust that the engineers who designed it made sure it won't blow up on you. The unsafe chargers are cheap knock offs. Would you replace your car's motor with a cheap knock off?
The guy who got killed by a 9V battery stabbed himself in two different places. If someone can stab themselves with a macbook in two different places while open circuiting the ground pin… well they would be a special person indeed and it would be sad to hear they died. The headphone incident in this case is especially sad, but different
Bear in mind that while some chargers have 3 pins, the earth is not connected to any of the output pins and the low voltage side is floating. The reason for this is that no standard specifies if the negative or positive line of the LV side should be earthed. So imagine the fireworks if you connected two devices that have adaptors of opposite conventions by say an audio cable. Another reason has to do with earth loops which can happen when the devices are plugged into different outlets.
SMPS are very safe when properly designed and manufactured. Practically all the low voltage electronics in your home are run off an SMPS adapter. There are probably a dozen or more SMPS in a typical home. This case was a sub-standard device that failed, plain and simple.
Talk about bathrooms and what not are not relevant. Sean Connery will get you somehow, if not with a hair dryer, something else. :)
There may have been other deaths, not reported, of which we have not heard about.
How exactly do you have an unreported death? Any unnatural/unexpected death is investigated rigorously by the Police and Coroner for a cause.
How exactly do you have an unreported death? Any unnatural/unexpected death is investigated rigorously by the Police and Coroner for a cause.
I was thinking that there may have been cases of death(s) where it/they did not make it to the news media.
Also, there may have been cases where death was fie to heart failure, and the Electrical shock factor was not known about.
In any case there are many instances of these devices failing in an unsafe manner that have never made it I to the news.
I know of two where computers were 'fried', and on done where a small fire started.
Cheap (but perfectly legal) power supplies often fry computers, even without lightning. This is not new.
Cheap (but perfectly legal) power supplies often fry computers, even without lightning. This is not new.
I am not sure about "power supplies" - if you meant the ones that are inside PC cases.
However, USB chargers, and notebook computer chargers (such as the ones for Apple, Toshiba, etc.) should not allow 240v to get to the device being charged.
Of course, if there was a lightning strike on the 240v line to the house…..
I have only seen a cheap USB charger explode. I haven't seen any standards compliant ones do so (but this could just be luck).
On the other hand, cheaper (but still standards compliant) laptop chargers and desktop PSUs fry whatever they're connected to all the time.
I have only seen a cheap USB charger explode. I haven't seen any standards compliant ones do so (but this could just be luck).
Price should have nothing to do with failures and/or explosions. A 'compliant' charger (indeed any legal electrical device) should fail-safe. Non complaint devices may or may not fail - if they do fail, they could well catch fire and/or pass high voltage through to the item they are charging/powering and possible any user of such item.
On the other hand, cheaper (but still standards compliant) laptop chargers and desktop PSUs fry whatever they're connected to all the time.
This should not be possible in normal use (not counting lightning hitting the cable entering the premises). Laptop AC chargers and the power supplies inside desktop computers, if they are truly compliant with Australian standards, should failsafe - and not allow danderous voltages to reach the laptop or the PC motherboard/case.
In theory, I agree with you. However, there were many instances where we submitted compliant products to Dick Smith for their approval and their chief engineer suggested we add myelin sheath to the circuit board before he would approve in ranging the products. Although DSE went over and above the legal requirements for electrical safety, there were several occasions where they had to recall products over safety concerns.
Myelin? That's insulation for nerves. Perhaps you meant Mylar.
Personally I agree with what A3Australia said and would be very careful buying those chargers from stalls in the shopping centre or eBay. Newer devices are now drawing more current and require more sophisticated design.
Interestingly however noted from the SMH article:
Authorities are warning consumers against buying rip-off USB-style chargers after a young woman wearing headphones and holding her laptop was found dead with burns on her ears and chest, in an apparent electrocution.
I guess the headphones are connected to her laptop? And her laptop is charged by the USB-style chargers? The only "laptop" I know that charges on 5V micro-USB is the Asus T100. Could that be the case?
I thought the same thing. How does a laptop get electrified from a USB charger?
I guess the headphones are connected to her laptop? And her laptop is charged by the USB-style chargers? The only "laptop" I know that charges on 5V micro-USB is the Asus T100. Could that be the case?
I doubt it…the media doesn't have a reputation for reporting accurate details. I wouldn't be surprised if they used the word "laptop" to describe an android/ipad tablet with a keyboard attached - the bulk of which can be charged with a "USB-style" charger.
nvm
I still don't get it. From SMH
It is believed a dodgy $4.95 phone charger sent a high-voltage electrical pulse into her phone, which transferred to the earphones she had connected to a laptop.
Edit: Further down it says:
“The voltage seems to travel up through the faulty charger into her phone and she was wearing earplugs and also operating a laptop which was also plugged into a power point,” Ms Collins said.
“So the (electricity) travelled back down through the earphones to the laptop and into the power point,” she said.
“Two-hundred-and-forty volts (then) travelled up into the phone which obviously the phone isn’t designed to handle.
Yeah, that makes sense. I live in Campsie and I think I've been past that particular store. It used to sell a model that looks like this:
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/AU-US-UK-EU-USB-Wall-Home-AC-Char…Note how it only has two pins. There is no earth pin. So technically if she wasn't wearing earphones, there would have been nothing to complete the circuit. She might have not been electrocuted. In fact the circumstances required that the earphones completed the circuit and the charge was grounded through her laptop…
This is very tragic indeed. Most people might get away with using the non-insulated chargers. I have a non-insulated lamp from 1997 and it works fine as there is nothing else connected to my table. Either way, in light of these circumstances. I think I'll be upgrading to a new LED lamp soon.
Most chargers and many household appliances do not have earth pins. In the past the earth connection used to be connected to the metal casing of equipment to prevent it from going live. With plastic bodies this becomes irrelevant and provides no protection from mains voltage crossing over to the low voltage side. So having three pins would not have prevented this failure mode anyway.
FYI the earth line does not complete the circuit, it's the neutral line that does. If any significant current flows through the earth line the circuit breaker should trip.
Two pin equipment have been in use safely in Europe for many years and they also have 220-240V mains there.
Oh, that's interesting. It turns out what I was told about hair dryers having two pins and lowered electrocution risk due to the fact that it wasn't grounded might be incorrect. Damn.
The article just confuses me. ;-(
Appliances are either class1(earthed) or class2(double insulated) . Most portable equipment such as hair dryers and charges are double insulated and do not rely on earth for safety. Earth generally is more a protection for the wiring than people. Because you need a short or very large current (16 amps or more) before the breaker kicks in. Double insulation means you have 2 layers of insulation between any exposed metal parts and mains coming into the appliance and hence is a safer design. RCD rather than breaker is the device that protects people . In this case I assume no RCD.
Circuit breaker is a generic term and RCD is one type of circuit breaker. RCD is quite sensitive, trips on tens of milliamps imbalance between the live and the neutral lines. In the past, an older type of circuit breaker worked on detecting the flow in the earth line but this is less sensitive and also doesn't trip where the current doesn't flow through the earth line, but through the victim, so this type is no longer used.
As I have already mentioned, if the equipment has metal parts a person could come touch in normal use, this is normally earthed so that it doesn't becomes live. The RCD may or may not trip if a person forms a path, it depends on the imbalance, and even small currents can kill if they go through certain parts of the body.
So earthing and RCD serve additive purposes. With plastic bodies there is nothing to "earth". So it shouldn't be assumed that if there is no earth line, it is less safe.
In the case of power adaptors, which are nearly always switching mode PS these days, the mains side is supposed to be isolated from the low voltage side by a high frequency transformer. However various scenarios can breach this isolation. Poor quality wiring, just one mains wire breaking free and hitting the low voltage circuit would do it. Or perhaps the transformer broke down under high temperature. And so forth.
"With plastic bodies there is nothing to "earth". So it shouldn't be assumed that if there is no earth line, it is less safe."
You would normally assume that it is more safe with no conducting parts!That's why people shouldn't toss around terms like no earth line like it's a danger without understanding what the earth line does.
But one has to look at the design of the appliance rather than just the exterior. My plastic kettle has an earth line. Why? Because the heating element is metal and in contact with the water. So there is some chance a fault in the element would make the water live.
"FYI the earth line does not complete the circuit, it's the neutral line that does. If any significant current flows through the earth line the circuit breaker should trip."
Only if you have an RCD breaker - which admittedly is law in newer places. But in older places (such as mine), they only have standard over-current breakers.
That's a pity, maybe you should get your place fixed up. Even decades ago, there were earth fault breakers which detected current in the earth line. I used to trip these once in a while building valve amplifiers and accidentally bridging the live to the chassis. An overcurrent breaker is just a reusable fuse.
indeed
likely there is an electrical fault and both equipments are connected to create a close loop of 240V transfer
and both plugs have no earth pin.Highly possible.
When you've got Apple charging (no pun intended) you $65 for a wall charger and cable combo, what else can you do when you own their products?
http://store.apple.com/au/product/MD836X/A/apple-12w-usb-pow…
http://store.apple.com/au/product/MD819ZM/A/lightning-to-usb…When you've got Apple charging (no pun intended) you $65 for a wall charger and cable combo, what else can you do when you own their products?
It would be great if Apple repeated that deal where they gave you a free Apple charger in exchange for your un-certified charger.
I guess that the $65 charger to which you were referring is for a MacBook? I thought they were around $99 ?
This has happened before. It's not a one off incident:
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/15/world/asia/china-smartphon…
If you want the details on why counterfeit products are so dangerous have a read of this:
http://www.righto.com/2014/05/a-look-inside-ipad-chargers-pr…
There's a lot of engineering in that little package, with multiple layers of safety. The counterfeits have blatant disregard for basic engineering, quality and safety standards.
If you want the details on why counterfeit products are so dangerous have a read of this:
http://www.righto.com/2014/05/a-look-inside-ipad-chargers-pr…
also
http://www.righto.com/2012/10/a-dozen-usb-chargers-in-lab-ap…
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/118705
:)If you want the details on why counterfeit products are so dangerous have a read of this:
http://www.righto.com/2014/05/a-look-inside-ipad-chargers-pr…the author of the article also states he thinks that many generic chargers are fine. it all depends on the product:
"You should definitely stay away from the cheap counterfeit chargers, as they are low quality and dangerous. Non-Apple name brand chargers are generally good quality according to my tests, with some better than Apple."
brand-name manufacturers have had their fair share of problems & recalls. the bottom line is sometimes stuff ups occur.
Is this issue only related to apple iPhones ie metal antenna around outside of phone , cause I'm yet to hear of anyone being electrocuted from a android phone?
Is this issue only related to apple iPhones
No. The "issue" is the importation, distribution, and sales of potentially unsafe (non-compliant with Australian Safety Standards) AC Input USB Wall Chargers..
Is this issue only related to apple iPhones ie metal antenna around outside of phone
No. In the case in the news, it seems that the failure of the USB wall charger allowed mains voltage to pass through and reach the phone (make unknown) and then exit the phone via the head/ear phones.
I'm yet to hear of anyone being electrocuted from a android phone?
We do not know what brand of phone was being used. The victim may not have been holding/touching the phone itself anyway. It appears from later information that it was the head/ear phones that carried the voltage to her body.
What about fake cables? I'm throwing away all the pinheads now.
If an approved charger doesn't output over the 5v then the cable can be as cheap and nasty as you want, from a safety perspective.
Cheap chargers are pretty much a race to the bottom - standardised product, cheaper they are to make, more $$$.
Unfortunately this means lower reliability and regarding this article more importantly safety shortcuts.Does anyone know where to buy a cheap phone with a micro usb charger?
I don't care if it is a slow or fast charger. I would use my computer to charge overnight but the ports don't support "sleep and charge" as the motherboard has a power saving feature.
This is to replace my Huawei charger that recently died. I am currently using my zte v9 charger but the touch screen acts weirdly when the 1.5 AMP charger is plugged in. The Huawei was rated at 0.4 AMP.
A new charger with insulated wiring and that meets Australian standards, costs around $20 for a slow charger. $30 for a fast charger. I'm sure you at one point you could pick up a cheap coles phone for $35.
Are there any such deals at the moment? Most of us are really just looking for a spare charger, and we end up buying something cheap from a dodgy store in the suburbs that are known to specialise in random imports.
EDIT: Found a cheap one.
http://www.dicksmith.com.au/prepaid-mobile-phones/optus-sams…
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Samsung-GT-E3309T-mobile-phone-AS…
It looks like a micro usb charger from the pictures.Although, I would probably have preferred that Huawei y201 from coles.
You might also be able to buy a cheap used phone with a genuine charger included. Although, it might not last as long.
Does anyone have any other recommendations, preferably for a phone similar to the Y201? Otherwise, I'll probably get a used one from gumtree. http://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/northbridge/mobile-phones/sam…
ZTE V9 uses different voltage from my memory, u looking for trouble……
Where does it state that is uses a different voltage? It's the Optus MyTab…
she was quite a nice looking chick - such an unfortunate loss, why couldn't it have happened to the fat computer geek eating hamburgers?? tragic.
LOL
If it didn't cost $40 to buy a 2.1a USB wall charger from a DSE or HN then people would be less likely to import a $2.87 free ship unapproved unsafe death trap. Therefore I directly blame "The great Australian rip off Tax".
agreed. GST sucks, my Electricity bills - GST $25 on top. What a bloody rip off!
I was referring to the unnecessary mark-up companies add just because its Australia (not GST).
the GST was the icing on the cake, check again on the rates you're paying.
Are there any phones that are cheap and come bundled with an adaptor like this? I mentioned the zte v9 which is high amperage, but are there other cheap phones that pass the australian standard?
I am not sure why anyone negged my post but I know I have one of those dodgy chargers bought in Campsie.
EDIT:
I have decided to post an image as proof.http://img.acianetmedia.com/i/ulBme.jpg
Most likely, cheap tablets will come with a fast charger. I should have paid a bit more attention to the $30 tablet for sale on ozbargain recently.
There must be a cheaper way to get your hands on a legitimate high current charger. As mentioned, the prices can start from $40 for these higher current chargers. I've seen 0.5 AMP start at around $20, 1 AMP to 1.5 AMP start at $30. 2 AMP chargers probably start around $40.
Buying 2A charger and connecting your phone doesn't mean that phone will charge with 2A of current. All this rating means that it can support upto 2A of current requirement from the device that is attached to it. Just refer to your manual to see what Max current the device can draw and then look for a charger suitable for it. Just my 2cents worth.
- 1
- 2
only 1 reported death in australia after how many years? i think they are the least of your worries.