New Zealand Fire Service -- ‘Saving Face or Saving Lives?’
May, 2006
Mr David Isaac is a Standards Australia committee member. His report addresses the NZFS’s claim:
"Smoke alarms do save lives. All of them give people sufficient warning time to get everyone out.”
Mr Isaac explains, with documentary evidence, why this claim:
The 1980 ‘Residential Smoke Alarm Report’
published by the International Association of Fire Chiefs
September, 1980
In 1980 the International Association of Fire Chiefs warned Fire Chiefs across America that ionization smoke alarms
were unsafe and advised Fire Chiefs to ONLY recommend stand-alone photoelectric smoke alarms.
Closing the Deadly Loophole in Australia’s Flawed Smoke Alarm Standard
‘How Safe are Products Bearing the UL Mark?’
December, 1999
The Washington Post's award-winning article exposed the validity of scientific testing of ionization smoke
alarms performed by Underwriters Laboratories (UL), the worlds largest independent scientific testing agency . . .
‘Photoelectric and Ionization Detectors -- A Review of the Literature - Revisited’
April, 2005
Chief Jay Fleming’s ‘metastudy’ summarises all published scientific smoke alarm research for the past 30 years.
This document, and other research papers by Chief Fleming, have been used by regulators in Australia and the US in formulating mandatory photoelectric smoke alarms legislation . . .
The UL Mark
How safe are
products tested by UL?
Australasian Fire Brigades
Official Position
Photoelectrics in ALL homes
Chief Jay Fleming
Boston Fire Department
Standards Australia
Fighting to close
the Deadly Loophole
1980 Smoke Alarm Report
Warning about ionization
and combination alarms
‘The Corporation’
“The Pathological Pursuit
of Profit and Power
“How could this be possible?” -- ‘The Corporation’
June, 2004
Over one billion "defectively designed" ionization smoke alarms have been sold over four decades, resulting in an
alleged needless death toll totalling into the tens of thousands. How could this be possible? . . .
NOTE:
This report is a ‘must read’ for ALL FireFighters, litigators,
investigative journalists and fire industry professionals.
page 3, clause 3 (emphasis added)
Texas A&M University -- ‘Risk Analysis of Residential Fire Detector Performance’
August, 1995
“The development of the risk analysis offered a clear insight into why there continues to be a high residential
death rate in spite of an increase in the residences reported to have smoke detectors installed.” . . .
Texas A&M Study
Fire Detector Risk
Analysis - Aug 1995
Consumer Product Safety Commission -- ‘Fire Incident Study’
January, 1995
After a 1993 fire killed their 3-year-old son and severely burned their 18-month-old child, an Iowa
couple sued a smoke detector manufacturer and won a $21 million verdict.
CPSC - Nuisance
Alarm Study
“. . . misrepresents the truth to the New Zealand public.” . . .
Mercer v Pittway Corp
April, 1998
After a 1993 fire killed their 3-year-old son and severely burned their 18-month-old child, an Iowa
couple sued the world’s largest smoke detector manufacturer and won a landmark $21 million verdict . . .
“. . . both will sound an alarm in sufficient time to allow you to evacuate the building . . .
if we attempt to educate the consumer to that degree we’re going to confuse them”
Page 1: Here > > >
Pittway Corp’s Senior V.P.
from ABC’s 20/20, 1996
Smoke & Heat Detector Performance
April ~ June, 1992
Correspondence between Richard M Patton, Fire Protection Engineer and the National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA). Patton alleges fraudulent testing of ionization smoke alarms in NISTS Indiana Dunes
Tests (1974 ~ 1976) and warns of the inherent inability of ionization alarms to safely detect smoldering fires.
NFPA - 1992 Letters
Page 2: Here > > >
Page 3: September, 1980 ~ June, 2006
![Senator John Kerry’s Consumer Product Safety Commission Letter
June, 2006
“This should be a no-brainer. If [ionization] smoke detectors are proven to be ineffective,
why are they still being used?”
More > > >](evidence3_files/shapeimage_17.png)
Senator John Kerry
NFPA - The Smoke Detector Fraud Letters - 1992
April ~ June, 1992
Correspondence between Richard M Patton, Fire Protection Engineer and the National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA). Patton alleges fraudulent testing of ionization smoke alarms in NISTS Indiana Dunes
Tests (1974 ~ 1976) and warns of the inherent inability of ionization alarms to safely detect smoldering fires.
NFPA - 1992 Letters
The World Fire Safety
Foundation is non profit
Our Mission:
Stop The Children Burning
Scientific evidence, legal precedence and real-world,
firefighter testing provide unequivocal proof that
ionization smoke alarms have dangerous defects.
Is failing to warn adequately warn the public of this life-threatening danger a criminal act of negligence?*
