A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Windows 10 » Windows 10 Help Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man'selectrocution



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16  
Old March 22nd 17, 11:30 PM posted to alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.cellular-phone-tech
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,718
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution

In article , Alrescha
wrote:



It is impossible for a beverage made with boiling water to be 'too
hot'.


it is when it's served at a temperature that burns on contact, making
it unfit for human consumption.

selling food that is unfit for human consumption is *illegal* and
knowingly doing so even more so, both of which is what mcdonald's did
and by their own admission.

That cup of coffee was the woman's responsibility the moment she
paid for it. Not McDonalds, not the car company.


absolutely false. mcdonald's, as is any restaurant, is required by law
to serve food that is safe to consume.

Her pain was the
result of her choices.


nope.

you're also ignoring the 700+ other victims in the previous ten years,
some of whom were burned after mcdonald's own employees spilled the hot
coffee.

We are all diminished by the fact that she
successfully blamed someone else.


she didn't need to blame anyone.

mcdonald's own testimony stated that they served food that was unsafe
for human consumption, that they had *not* tested it for safety and
that they had no interest in making any changes even though in the
previous ten years, more than one person *per* *week* had been injured,
some of which was caused by mcdonald's own employees.

As for our electrocution victim, I do not know what UK chargers look
like, but in the US if the charger was in the tub, so was the end of
the extension cord. Death was inevitable regardless of manufacturer.


yep.

some have even speculated it was intentional, either suicide or a
murder/coverup.
Ads
  #17  
Old March 22nd 17, 11:42 PM posted to alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.cellular-phone-tech
Alrescha
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution

On 2017-03-22 22:30:41 +0000, nospam said:

it is when it's served at a temperature that burns on contact, making
it unfit for human consumption.


A freshly-made cup of coffee, tea, or hot chocolate is too hot to
drink. I have known this since the age of three. Anyone who has made
themselves a cup of tea knows this. I suggest that "everyone" knows
this.

So, since we all know that fresh (coffee/tea/chocolate) is too hot to
drink right away, we must therefore be talking about some *other*
standard, such as expectation. Since the beverage is made with boiling
water, one has to set aside sensibility to not expect that it might be
that hot.

This woman was burned because she chose to take a fresh cup of coffee,
put it between her legs, and *open* it.

A.

  #18  
Old March 22nd 17, 11:46 PM posted to alt.test, comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.cellular-phone-tech
Nomen Nescio
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 825
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man'selectrocution

In article
nospam wrote:

In article , Silver-Tongued Heel
wrote:

I guess this goes along with the lady that burned herself with
McDonald's hot coffee and won a suit that they should have warned her.

And they walk among us?


The reason the woman was burned, if I recall correctly, is because the
coffee's temperature was too hot (obviously) and because the ****ty car
she was in had no cup holder. In the end, if McDonald's can be sued for
the coffee being too hot then the car manufacturer should also have been
sued for not providing a place for the old bag to put her drink.


you don't recall correctly, or at all, actually.

mcdonald's knowingly served coffee that was far too hot for human
consumption, which they knew could cause serious burns, which had
burned over 700 other people and they had *no* interest in changing
anything.


  #19  
Old March 23rd 17, 12:00 AM posted to alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.cellular-phone-tech
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,718
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution

In article , Alrescha
wrote:


it is when it's served at a temperature that burns on contact, making
it unfit for human consumption.


A freshly-made cup of coffee, tea, or hot chocolate is too hot to
drink. I have known this since the age of three. Anyone who has made
themselves a cup of tea knows this. I suggest that "everyone" knows
this.


this isn't about making one's own coffee or tea.

a restaurant is legally and ethically obligated to serve food that is
safe to be consumed as served.

mcdonald's failed to do that and had no interest in doing that despite
700+ other people being injured.

So, since we all know that fresh (coffee/tea/chocolate) is too hot to
drink right away, we must therefore be talking about some *other*
standard, such as expectation. Since the beverage is made with boiling
water, one has to set aside sensibility to not expect that it might be
that hot.


that expectation is that food served in a restaurant is safe to be
consumed as served.

what mcdonald's was selling was not safe, by their own admission.

This woman was burned because she chose to take a fresh cup of coffee,
put it between her legs, and *open* it.


how else would one consume a beverage without opening the container?

you continue to ignore the over 700 other patrons who were seriously
burned, some more so than she was and some because mcdonald's spilled
the coffee on the patron.

the fact is that serving food which is unsafe to be consumed is
*illegal*, whether it's too hot or contaminated or anything else that's
unsafe.
  #20  
Old March 23rd 17, 12:28 AM posted to alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.cellular-phone-tech
Alrescha
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution

On 2017-03-22 23:00:59 +0000, nospam said:

you continue to ignore the over 700 other patrons who were seriously burned


Yes, I ignore them, because they are a red herring. What part of "made
with boiling water" do you fail to understand? It is not a surprise
that a few dozen people a year manage to burn themseves.

the fact is that serving food which is unsafe to be consumed is
*illegal*, whether it's too hot or contaminated or anything else that's
unsafe.


You keep harping on "illegal", but McDonalds coffee is the same
temperature as it ever was. It does not appear that anyone but you
considers it against the law. Morever, in 1994 a spokeman for the
National Coffee Association said that McDonalds was following industry
standards. *

A.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebec...7s_Restaurants

  #21  
Old March 23rd 17, 12:34 AM posted to alt.test, comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.cellular-phone-tech
Anonymous
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 370
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man'selectrocution

In article
Snit wrote:

On 3/22/17, 2:34 PM, in article ,
"nospam" wrote:

In article , Snit
wrote:

The reason the woman was burned, if I recall correctly, is because the
coffee's temperature was too hot (obviously) and because the ****ty car
she was in had no cup holder. In the end, if McDonald's can be sued for
the coffee being too hot then the car manufacturer should also have been
sued for not providing a place for the old bag to put her drink.

Was the car manufacture doing something outside the accepted norms and
regulations of their industry? Had they been warned about this before? Were
they actively ignoring those warnings?

If so then I would say you are correct and they, too, could be held liable.


the car had nothing to do with it.


I suspect you are right... was just noting what they would have had to do
with it for the analogy to hold up.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.


  #22  
Old March 23rd 17, 12:46 AM posted to alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.cellular-phone-tech
Alrescha
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution

On 2017-03-22 23:39:32 +0000, Wolf K said:

they knowingly sold coffee that would cause 3rd degree burns.


And they still do. Same temperature as ever. Now with 'coffee is hot'
warning.

I think your surmise is correct about how it happened is correct. Of
course, the other factor is that the UK apparently doesn't require GFI
receptacles in bathrooms.


He used an extension cord...

A.

  #23  
Old March 23rd 17, 01:08 AM posted to alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.cellular-phone-tech
Jolly Roger[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 295
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man'selectrocution

On 2017-03-22, Alrescha wrote:
On 2017-03-22 21:14:00 +0000, Silver-Tongued Heel said:

The reason the woman was burned, if I recall correctly, is because
the coffee's temperature was too hot


It is impossible for a beverage made with boiling water to be 'too
hot'.


Bull****. McDonalds reported during the trial that it held its coffee at
between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit, well above what a typical home
coffee maker uses (generally between 135 and 140 degrees). Their own
quality assurance manager testified that a burn hazard exists with any
food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds
coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into styrofoam cups,
was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat.
The quality assurance manager admitted that burns would occur, but
testified that McDonalds had no intention of reducing the "holding
temperature" of its coffee. Liquids, at 180 degrees, will cause a full
thickness burn to human skin in two to seven seconds - such burns do not
heal without skin grafting; and as the temperature decreases toward 155
degrees, the extent of the burn relative to that temperature decreases
exponentially. For ten years, McDonald's coffee burned more than 700
people (including children and infants), many receiving severe burns to
the genital area, perineum, inner thighs, and buttocks.

That cup of coffee was the woman's responsibility the moment she paid
for it. Not McDonalds, not the car company.


You can blab such lies all day, but it won't change the reality that
McDonalds definitely was responsible, which is affirmed by the ruling of
the judges presiding over the case. The styrofoam cups they use are
quite flimsy, and the top of the cups are often difficult to remove
without squeezing the cup into a deformed shape, increasing chances of a
spill. The liquid in the cup was so hot it could cause third degree
burns within seconds. McDonalds failed to warn customers about that,
even after some 700+ people had been scalded over a decade.

Her pain was the result of her choices.


The court system's position on this trumps yours; sorry.

We are all diminished by the fact that she successfully blamed someone
else.


Bull****. My freedom hasn't been diminished at all. How has yours?

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR
  #24  
Old March 23rd 17, 01:26 AM posted to alt.test, comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.cellular-phone-tech
mail.m2n Anonymous
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 31
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man'selectrocution

In article
Scott wrote:

On Wed, 22 Mar 2017 12:51:16 -0700, mike wrote:

On 3/22/2017 5:54 AM, Yes They Are That Stupid wrote:
Here's a candidate for the annual Darwin Awards.

Some folks simply can’t resist taking their smartphone into the
bathtub to check their social media feeds or play games, and
occasional reports of fatal accidents suggest a small percentage
may be going one step further and also charging their device
while in the tub.

One such person, 32-year-old Richard Bull of London, died on
December 11 from an electric shock he received when his iPhone
charger touched the water of the bath he was in. The coroner
examining the case, Dr. Sean Cummings, last week ruled the death
as accidental, but said he intended to ask Apple to take steps
to help prevent further such incidents.

Cummings said that while smartphones “seem like innocuous
devices … they can be as dangerous as a hairdryer in a
bathroom,” adding that handset makers “should attach warnings”
to the devices to warn of the risks.


Problem with warnings is that the more you have, the less likely
you'll read 'em all.

I would be very surprised if there is no warning about not using the
charger in or near water. I assumed this would be standard for all
mains voltage appliances.

As an aside, would the same event have resulted in death in the USA
with 110 Volt supply?


  #25  
Old March 23rd 17, 02:07 AM posted to alt.privacy.anon-server,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.cellular-phone-tech
Davoud[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 32
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man's electrocution

Big Al:
I guess this goes along with the lady that burned herself with
McDonald's hot coffee and won a suit that they should have warned her.

And they walk among us?


Want the truth about that incident? That McDonalds had been warned by
both local health inspectors and the American Restaurant Association
that its coffee was too hot. And THAT is why she rightly won her law
suit--the restaurant was negligent in failing to serve safe coffee.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
  #26  
Old March 23rd 17, 02:12 AM posted to alt.test, comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.cellular-phone-tech
Cornelis Tromp
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 119
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man'selectrocution

In article
nospam wrote:

In article , Silver-Tongued Heel
wrote:

The reason the woman was burned, if I recall correctly, is
because the coffee's temperature was too hot (obviously) and
because the ****ty car she was in had no cup holder. In the
end, if McDonald's can be sued for the coffee being too hot
then the car manufacturer should also have been sued for not
providing a place for the old bag to put her drink.

Was the car manufacture doing something outside the accepted
norms and regulations of their industry? Had they been warned
about this before? Were they actively ignoring those warnings?

If so then I would say you are correct and they, too, could be
held liable.

the car had nothing to do with it.


Yes, because the woman was burned between the legs as a result of
there not being a cup holder in the car. She couldn't hold it for some
reason and had no cup holder to place it into so she left the coffee
cup between her legs. Doing so caused unimaginable damage and those
burns were the reason she ended up suing the company.


nope, that's not why.

she was burned because mcdonald's knowingly sold coffee that was
dangerously hot and which they never tested for safety, by their own
admission, and which had burned over 700 other customers in the
previous ten years, some caused by their own employees.


  #27  
Old March 23rd 17, 02:16 AM posted to alt.test, comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.cellular-phone-tech
Anonymous
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 403
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man'selectrocution

In article
Silver-Tongued Heel wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 22/03/17 05:34 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Snit
wrote:

The reason the woman was burned, if I recall correctly, is
because the coffee's temperature was too hot (obviously) and
because the ****ty car she was in had no cup holder. In the
end, if McDonald's can be sued for the coffee being too hot
then the car manufacturer should also have been sued for not
providing a place for the old bag to put her drink.

Was the car manufacture doing something outside the accepted
norms and regulations of their industry? Had they been warned
about this before? Were they actively ignoring those warnings?

If so then I would say you are correct and they, too, could be
held liable.


the car had nothing to do with it.


Yes, because the woman was burned between the legs as a result of
there not being a cup holder in the car. She couldn't hold it for some
reason and had no cup holder to place it into so she left the coffee
cup between her legs. Doing so caused unimaginable damage and those
burns were the reason she ended up suing the company.

- --
Silver-Tongued Heel
Korora Linux Sponsor
EFF & OpenMedia Member
Gab.ai: @silverslimer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJY0vMiAAoJEECBkWZkIkW3jMYP/1Dv34Wx4nuEJ9RoOqgGkA9L
A7hVRhZDQ/vUD9TOxOrzcFoLM5mo90l/Q+p34hJzVhT05juGtvRaLfOmt1a9UbGA
8OW9Iugjv9KsOSmEZZLucGDSPddRw6mWWm9e8v73pLgRHViBp1 nSfgF1GUOhzOFX
AMw0OOoiCPYk2I8g/T8Y115atTxeqqouztxUn1c4aj/sQ1i6aUd21FbJq0/08sB+
2OzK1LlriDZX3iUpFw3XUxSoDdbPvmzXUHo/ihXzZKLt0eU/a01HU8J52fHNhsP+
5G83DzloR5ebJjHCGrorJGD+xYwbhXZpWSXwpNQAwcDRzZFW/qg6l69h+Mg90wzJ
GAzBLX19fle70E7Odyi8lIamuPtt9ZWQ0KzGQg9NMy0g/HTgVkcyJCob236Dwa2d
neTJAL7P3eAYKo7cY6eRhZuO6W55pAjo8J3MZ1mYsKwwAOhTcj ATRdYso46TPFPT
To9uklqGqtayyhGK9zJucRHkEEIpw2B/MifMorH4kaADVx2zP2iHZpvFUiZpkK06
bbHmiJYAWpmF93X/NKh/1nI42ZG0uYKpptiX7Jm/7wUTOnqMN+lcB8GmfWWZvLv+
6UDNsi0RlXxZZPxYeOhFMUqTSMymWqVsRXQdeDLQwFNCB+2kUa e0KmxQ/KUEit+0
1Kw0wk9bAb0VL0O/JQrR
=aPOj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  #28  
Old March 23rd 17, 02:58 AM posted to alt.test, comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.cellular-phone-tech
Anonymous
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 34
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man'selectrocution

In article
Snit wrote:

On 3/22/17, 3:00 PM, in article ,
"nospam" wrote:

In article , Silver-Tongued Heel
wrote:

The reason the woman was burned, if I recall correctly, is
because the coffee's temperature was too hot (obviously) and
because the ****ty car she was in had no cup holder. In the
end, if McDonald's can be sued for the coffee being too hot
then the car manufacturer should also have been sued for not
providing a place for the old bag to put her drink.

Was the car manufacture doing something outside the accepted
norms and regulations of their industry? Had they been warned
about this before? Were they actively ignoring those warnings?

If so then I would say you are correct and they, too, could be
held liable.

the car had nothing to do with it.

Yes, because the woman was burned between the legs as a result of
there not being a cup holder in the car. She couldn't hold it for some
reason and had no cup holder to place it into so she left the coffee
cup between her legs. Doing so caused unimaginable damage and those
burns were the reason she ended up suing the company.


nope, that's not why.

she was burned because mcdonald's knowingly sold coffee that was
dangerously hot and which they never tested for safety, by their own
admission, and which had burned over 700 other customers in the
previous ten years, some caused by their own employees.


For those who want to know more details on this case:
https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts
-----
Here is some of the evidence the jury heard during the trial:

* McDonald's operations manual required the franchisee to hold its
coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit.

* Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns
in three to seven seconds.

* The chairman of the department of mechanical engineering and
biomechanical engineering at the University of Texas testified that
this risk of harm is unacceptable, as did a widely recognized expert
on burns, the editor-in-chief of the Journal of Burn Care and
Rehabilitation, the leading scholarly publication in the specialty.

* McDonald's admitted it had known about the risk of serious burns
from its scalding hot coffee for more than 10 years. The risk had
repeatedly been brought to its attention through numerous other
claims and suits.

* An expert witness for the company testified that the number of
burns was insignificant compared to the billions of cups of coffee
the company served each year.

* At least one juror later told the Wall Street Journal she thought
the company wasn't taking the injuries seriously. To the corporate
restaurant giant those 700 injury cases caused by hot coffee seemed
relatively rare compared to the millions of cups of coffee served.
But, the juror noted, "there was a person behind every number and I
don't think the corporation was attaching enough importance to
that."

* McDonald's quality assurance manager testified that McDonald's
coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into Styrofoam
cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth
and throat.

* McDonald's admitted at trial that consumers were unaware of the
extent of the risk of serious burns from spilled coffee served at
McDonald's then-required temperature.

* McDonald's admitted it did not warn customers of the nature and
extent of this risk and could offer no explanation as to why it did
not.
-----

Some say it was frivolous. Some say it was reasonable and with merit. Either
way, those are (from what we know) the facts of the case.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.


  #29  
Old March 23rd 17, 03:07 AM posted to alt.test, comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.cellular-phone-tech
Nomen Nescio
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 825
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man'selectrocution

In article
Alrescha wrote:

On 2017-03-22 21:14:00 +0000, Silver-Tongued Heel said:

The reason the woman was burned, if I recall correctly, is because the
coffee's temperature was too hot


It is impossible for a beverage made with boiling water to be 'too
hot'. That cup of coffee was the woman's responsibility the moment she
paid for it. Not McDonalds, not the car company. Her pain was the
result of her choices. We are all diminished by the fact that she
successfully blamed someone else.

As for our electrocution victim, I do not know what UK chargers look
like, but in the US if the charger was in the tub, so was the end of
the extension cord. Death was inevitable regardless of manufacturer.

A.


  #30  
Old March 23rd 17, 04:16 AM posted to alt.test, comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.system,alt.comp.os.windows-10, alt.cellular-phone-tech
Jorge
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Apple told to warn against charging phone in bath after man'selectrocution

In article
Silver-Tongued Heel wrote:

On 22/03/17 03:11 PM, Big Al wrote:
On 03/22/2017 08:54 AM, Yes They Are That Stupid wrote:
Here's a candidate for the annual Darwin Awards.

Some folks simply can�t resist taking their smartphone into the
bathtub to check their social media feeds or play games, and
occasional reports of fatal accidents suggest a small percentage
may be going one step further and also charging their device
while in the tub.

One such person, 32-year-old Richard Bull of London, died on
December 11 from an electric shock he received when his iPhone
charger touched the water of the bath he was in. The coroner
examining the case, Dr. Sean Cummings, last week ruled the death
as accidental, but said he intended to ask Apple to take steps
to help prevent further such incidents.

Cummings said that while smartphones �seem like innocuous
devices � they can be as dangerous as a hairdryer in a
bathroom,� adding that handset makers �should attach warnings�
to the devices to warn of the risks.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/iphone-charging-
accident/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=referral&utm_ca
mpaign=sidebar

I guess this goes along with the lady that burned herself with
McDonald's hot coffee and won a suit that they should have warned her.

And they walk among us?


The reason the woman was burned, if I recall correctly, is because the
coffee's temperature was too hot (obviously) and because the ****ty car
she was in had no cup holder. In the end, if McDonald's can be sued for
the coffee being too hot then the car manufacturer should also have been
sued for not providing a place for the old bag to put her drink.

--
Silver-Tongued Heel
Korora Linux Sponsor
EFF & OpenMedia Member
Gab.ai: @silverslimer


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.