Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Hi.

I downloaded an operating manual of the Hoover Mach 3 from US web site and also the Vax Mach 3 UK www.vax.co.uk.  The operating manual for the Hoover states in the warning SECTION that "This product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and reproductive toxicity.  Wash hands after handling"  I have looked at the Vax brochure and there is no mention of this.  Obviously this product will also have this,  why is it not mentioned in the Vax manual?  It seems strange.  Is there a difference in laws that it has to be mentioned in the Californian state but in UK it doesn't matter?

I wonder how many other manufacturers have  this 'danger' to their products.

Many of you boys are giving Red-TTI a "pass."  Well, I'm glad some in high places keep an eye on the [at times] abuses of big business and [at times] attempts to protect its people.  United States Government v. TTI makes for a nice read.

DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:
DIB,

This is not about TTI.  Again, I feel vacuum cleaners as sources of exposure may not rank high on the list.  Nonetheless, there are any number of chemical toxin sources we come into contact wwith daily.  PVC has been with us so long that most of us don't think when we get a whiff of a freshly hung shower curtain or a new plastic toy for a kid that we're breathing in toxins or that that little whiff is significant.

Nonetheless, this has all to do with big business and government sanctioning the use of questionable substances without clarifying the level of possible danger..  Corporate industry has always lent a "helping hand" to persons in government and/or government establishment.  That kind of "friendliness" leads to all sorts of deal making.  How do you think the big oil company's keep going and and the alternative energy camp is still somewhat slow going.  How did the term global warming get sweetened to climate change?  The big kids with money will sooner catch the ear of power than the schleps who merely consume.

That in mind Bucks03, what is the UK's policy on the matter.  Is it possible that you're being sold machines with exactly the same components as ours but the warning is not required by your government?

Venson

Hi Venson.

I don't think by law that it is required for manufacturers to mention this as if it was true about the Dyson containing very high levels of Cadmium in the yellow plastic parts and the Vax Mach range not mentioning a warning but Hoover Mach does.

The smell of PVC I remeber the older Dysons used to smell realy strong,  my DC04 which I have changed the hose 5 times on used to be made from PVC then Dyson changed to Polyurethane which doesn't smell like the PVC did and funnily enough the hose hasn't broken since the change.

It seems though that we are continuously exposed to dangers.  My old Indesit  front loader from 1996 used to have asbestos pads to keep the drum tub from bouncing around too much but in turn this used to cause a build up of black dust on the floor when the machine ever had to be pulled out,  no dangers were ever put in the manual.

Venson wrote:
DysonInventsBig wrote:
Venson wrote:
Venson,

I’m not confused, when Red-TTI steals Dyson’s dual cyclone filtration invention and “No Loss Of Suction” messaging and then builds using cancer causing materials, it says much of their lack of moral principles.  Red-TTI says the knock-off can cause cancer, and I believe them.  Printing error?  How about seeing them and posting of them for what they are...  snakes.

DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Whatever you say . . .

Hello Venson and all:

Makes me wonder if HOOVER/TTI is seeking an Energy Star rating/similar such designation for its brand by disclosing a seemingly unimportant health fact that is true for many vacuum brands industry wide. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
Hi Carmine,

I don't whether there's much to that kind of rating in respect to vacuum cleaners. If we were to now start producing vacuums that were designed for higher efficiency but using less power, yes, they could rate big time. However such effort seems very small. Save for Oreck and some other 400 watt uprights and upright/portable canister teams, we don't seem to be much inclined toward forward movement in that area.

Appliance-wise we have come leaps and bounds with refrigerators, washing machines and dishwashers. Dishwashers can do full loads using half the 11 or 12 gallons of water many used 20 years ago. 20 years ago a frost-free refrigerator was estimated to cost about a dollar a day to run per Con Edison here in New York. This appliance too has improved.

I hate bringing up the good old days but the under 600 watt Electrolux G was a highly efficient vacuum despite what it may have lacked in the area of high filtration. It worked relatively as well as current machines that call on twice the current. Nonetheless, it seems we are strongly impressed by big numbers as long as they aren't on price tags.

As for the importance of disclosure, as I said prior, I think its a good tactical move for any business. You can't hang someone out to dry over product issues once they've "warned" you about them. What is frightening is that we, the general public, have little knowledge of the underlying dangers of one manufacturing material from another. Admittedly, there are worse scenarios people are facing every day. While I may wonder at how my exposure to questionable substances used to make my vacuum may effect my future health there are persons living in close proximity of "sour" oil wells, chemical plants, etc., who wonder if they'll wake up the the next morning should some sort of blowout occur.

Rather than speculate I have called "Hoover" and after being on hold for 15 minutes before reaching a obvious (even though an outsourced one) after asking an explanation of the warning in the Mach 5 manual I have been put on hold again. I nonetheless, sent the question via email from the Hoover site's customer support page to see if I can get some info that way. I'll let you know if I hear anything.

Best,

Venson

DysonInventsBig wrote:
Venson wrote:

Sounds like your trust in Red-TTI is solid.  So, what's a little house fire amongst friends.

DysonInventsBig wrote:
To the contrary DIB,

There are larger issues to be addressed. However -- does Satan live at TTI? Most likely he does but he lives just about every where else too-- and for free.

There's not a corporation or corporate head who can claim a mouth that's a prayer book or a butt made from a stack of bibles. The issue of full disclosure re product safety is one we have had lessons in over and over again. Unfortunately, we didn't get the full gist of them until the news came too late. Asbestos, thalidamide, hexachlorophine, polyvinylchloride and on and on. All great modern wonders we later found were not so hot for broad public use since they made as many problems as they solved.

I have little time for fault finding. Life is too short. What I want to learn is how we can fix problems at hand. In any event, each man to his own path. Please keep up the crusade. I expect I'll die one day and wake up in glory to see you sitting by the right hand of the Lord with a Dyson in your lap.

Best,

Venson

Venson wrote:
Hey Venson,

Since you brought it up...  the Book reads - "Satan comes to kill, steal and destroy."  When I layout and compare...  Cancer (kill), taking what’s not theirs - taking intellectual property (steal) and [potential] house fires and monopoly power (destroy).  If so inclined, feel free to compare Dyson using the same criteria.

Integrity does still exist in people and corporations, it is just getting harder to find.  And it's lack of integrity that has got us in this economic mess.


DIB