Exploding cigarettes.

[meow2222]

5.25v is within the usb spec. IIRC it was phone mfrs that started the 5.25v thing - but I might not RC there.

News reports...

NT

[Johny B Good]

They don't. It's just some wallwarts that offer the higher voltage, usually 5.2v rather than right up against the top of the tolerance range (4.75 to 5.25 volts).

IME, you're unlikely to see a voltage higher than 5.16v on a PC USB socket since it's dependent upon the PSU's 5 volt (or possibly the

5VSB) rail.

It's actually a _LOT_ different to the co-axial plug system commonly used for low voltage DC supplies. For starters, there's the _single_ voltage standard of 5 volts (+/-5%).

[Dave Plowman (News)]

If it were the 'cigarette' which burst into flames when in use, it would be to blame. But when charging? How is it any different from any other device which uses re-chargeable batteries?

And the advice to never leave such things unattended when charging just plain ludicrous. As is any advice which you must know everyone will ignore.

I do use one of these devices. But not the disposable sort, or one which looks anything like a cigarette. It is at least as well engineered as any other similar cordless device I've seen and much better than many. The battery pack includes an electronic push switch which also acts as overload protection. And shuts the pack down before fully exhausted - necessary for decent Li-Ion life.

The charger has an ordinary 5 volt USB outlet wall wart with an adaptor lead which plugs into it. The other end contains the charger and battery pack socket - it screws in. Charge time from flat is about 4 hours, and it shuts off afterwards. None of it gets more than slightly warm.

Perhaps the R4 'expert' would sit watching it charge for those 4 hours or so.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Right. So isn't the cause of these fires, as was implied. They talked about 'the wrong' chargers being used. If they are all to the same spec, they can only have the wrong name on them.

Quite. If the USB voltages from a computer are all over the pace, it likely wouldn't be a working computer. ;-)

Think you missed the point I was making. The expert implied these fires were caused by using the wrong charger. Now since all the cigarette chargers I've seen are USB types this shouldn't be the case. It should be far less likely than before when the same connector was used for a variety of voltages, etc.

Basically, trying to put the blame on the individual, rather than risking the wrath (and possible legal action) of a maker.

[dennis]

They should be as that is still within the USB spec.

Sounds like duff appliances to me.

If we ever see a proper report it will probably say the USB charger was duff in the first place. If it wasn't the cigs need to be recalled.

[Dave Liquorice]

But will have a much better understanding of the consequencies to them and others of an oxygen enriched fire. Far better than just a few words from their consultant or a leaflet that won't be read. As you say the patient will say "just give me the fing oxygen".

I'd say that if some one isn't prepared to make life style changes to improve their health why should the rest of us pick up the tab for their treatment? They had the choice to start with, take the consequencies of that choice.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Dangerous ground, that one. Many get serious injuries playing sports or from dangerous hobbies. Since that was their choice and they knew the risks, why should the rest of us pay for their treatment?

Other thing, of course, is that the taxes raised on tobacco sales is greater than the costs to the NHS for treating smoking related conditions.

[Andrew Gabriel]

The rest of us pick up the tab either way, and it's probably way more expensive to look after someone who can't get out of a chair than it is to supply oxygen to them, keeping them minimally self-mobile to the toilet, kitchen, bed, etc.

[Mike Barnes]

No activity is entirely risk-free, and sports are generally regarded as beneficial to society. Smoking isn't.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Generally regarded. But it is of immense benefit to society. The taxes alone are billions. And the fact that smokers die quickly and unequivocally means less NHS bills for the rest of us to pay.

[Mike Barnes]

Some would disagree.

"Smoking is a health problem, the costs of which include sickness, pain, grief and misery. But tobacco use also imposes a significant economic burden on society. In addition to the direct medical costs of treating tobacco-induced illnesses there are other indirect costs including loss of productivity, fire damage and environmental harm from cigarette litter and destructive farming practices. The total burden caused by tobacco products more than outweighs any economic benefit from their manufacture and sale."

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Sports are regarded as 'beneficial to society' by those who enjoy them or make money out of them. Which is by no means everyone.

We're talking here about using a recreational drug. Which unlike smoking has no obvious issues with others. Unlike alcohol.

Basically people are all too keen to ban something they don't do or see the point in. But don't want the same logic applied to them.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

But doesn't mention the taxation revenue.

And hardly an unbiased viewpoint.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Which BTW is some 12 billion. That article puts the costs to the NHS at

2.7 billion.

[RJH]

Some! FFS, a decent source?!

And to add to other savings/non-spendings mentioned, curtailed pension entitlements, which can find their way to the state.

[The Medway Handyman]

Tax on tobacco products is between 5 & 7 times the cost of treating "smoking related illness" according to NHS figures.

"Factoring in" indirect costs is common practice amongst anti smokers. Can you show figures for the cost of "environmental harm from cigarette litter". Can I see the invoices?

[meow2222]

There's a whole lot of lost productivity, plus care costs. I don't think you'll get an invoice for it. Nor for the misery terminal ilness & deaths in families cause.

NT

[The Natural Philosopher]

Anyone would think you were talking about alcohol.

Or coffee.

The man hours spent round the coffee machine are enormous.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

And *lower* care costs for the elderly as smokers generally don't live so long.

In the same way as you don't get an invoice for any other medical etc costs even when the reasons are self inflicted.

We all die sometime.

I'd remind you this started as a discussion on the costs of smokers to society in monetary terms. And that has been blown out of the water.

Families can be equally distressed by injuries caused through taking part in sports too.

[Tim Streater]

The lurid warnings haver no effect and are a waste of time. At our youth club, more than 50 years ago, they showed a film showing the effects of tar and smoke on lungs and lung tissue. The kids who smoked then continued to do so and when the YC leader asked if they'd stop, they all said no.