What the hell has happened to kids?

[karlt]

-fewer children die accidental deaths .... electrocuting themselves .... socket covers

oh, come on. you've been reading this forum long enough to know not to put blind faith in little bits of plastic just because they seem like a good idea.

seriously, you're a grown-up and much stronger than a toddler/baby. turn off the power and see if you can get a screwdriver, a car key, pickle fork or anything into an electrical socket. it's impossible unless you've got an earth pin from a plug.
or an earth pin copy snapped off from a socket cover.
or a socket cover bent a bit and turned upside down.

http://www.fatallyflawed.org.uk/

None of the safety socket thingies actually conform to the correct spec (or at least none I know of)

The Bad Science forum did a bit of a take down of that. General conclusion was that accidental electocution as a result of the bad design of the socket covers was about as unlikely as accidental electrocution from the socket itself - vanishingly. Bit of a score draw, really.

[hubgearfreak]

The Bad Science forum did a bit of a take down of that. General conclusion was that accidental electocution as a result of the bad design of the socket covers was about as unlikely as accidental electrocution from the socket itself - vanishingly. Bit of a score draw, really.

i've read bob's link and played at defeating the built in safety device
it seems to me to be impossible to electrocute oneself with a bare socket, but merely quite difficult once you've got the cover to hand. even if you're right, it's still c.£30 down the drain on finite resources at a time of life when you've least spare cash

[karlt]

The Bad Science forum did a bit of a take down of that. General conclusion was that accidental electocution as a result of the bad design of the socket covers was about as unlikely as accidental electrocution from the socket itself - vanishingly. Bit of a score draw, really.

i've read bob's link and played at defeating the built in safety device
it seems to me to be impossible to electrocute oneself with a bare socket, but merely quite difficult once you've got the cover to hand. even if you're right, it's still c.£30 down the drain on finite resources at a time of life when you've least spare cash

If you know how, it's easy either way. Most young kids don't. Waste of money, yes, but actively dangerous, no, not really.

[thirdcrank]

TC: the statistics aren't mine. And in fact it's a combination of things....

I misunderstood what you were getting at - I was thinking only in terms of of things like playing out and freedom to move about independently. So, we look after children more, so they are more looked after seems to sum it up. Whether things are any better for that is a different question.

On the question of electric sockets which has come up as a spur from the main thread, I visited my mother the other day and in spite of all my best efforts she had switched off her central heating on one of the coldest days of the winter. Apparently the relevant gas or electrical regulations require that it has to switchable offable or I'd have had it wired straight into a plain plate. Going even futher down an electrical extension, I read somewhere that part of the reason for the recent new electrical regulations (prohibiting a lot of DIY) came about after a politician's daughter fitting a shelf drilled into an electrical cable and was electrocuted. However, as installing shelves isn't governed by electrical regulations (it's joinery, after all) the regulations wouldn't stop it happening again.

[karlt]

TC: the statistics aren't mine. And in fact it's a combination of things....

I misunderstood what you were getting at - I was thinking only in terms of of things like playing out and freedom to move about independently. So, we look after children more, so they are more looked after seems to sum it up. Whether things are any better for that is a different question.

On the question of electric sockets which has come up as a spur from the main thread, I visited my mother the other day and in spite of all my best efforts she had switched off her central heating on one of the coldest days of the winter. Apparently the relevant gas or electrical regulations require that it has to switchable offable or I'd have had it wired straight into a plain plate. Going even futher down an electrical extension, I read somewhere that part of the reason for the recent new electrical regulations (prohibiting a lot of DIY) came about after a politician's daughter fitting a shelf drilled into an electrical cable and was electrocuted. However, as installing shelves isn't governed by electrical regulations (it's joinery, after all) the regulations wouldn't stop it happening again.

That may have inspired a section on RCDs, where they would be relevant, though, possibly?

[pete75]

-fewer children die accidental deaths .... electrocuting themselves .... socket covers

oh, come on. you've been reading this forum long enough to know not to put blind faith in little bits of plastic just because they seem like a good idea.

seriously, you're a grown-up and much stronger than a toddler/baby. turn off the power and see if you can get a screwdriver, a car key, pickle fork or anything into an electrical socket. it's impossible unless you've got an earth pin from a plug.
or an earth pin copy snapped off from a socket cover.
or a socket cover bent a bit and turned upside down.

It's not socket covers but the change over shuttered sockets rather than the old round bin type - you could shove anything into those.

[Whirlygig]

The Bad Science forum did a bit of a take down of that. General conclusion was that accidental electocution as a result of the bad design of the socket covers was about as unlikely as accidental electrocution from the socket itself - vanishingly. Bit of a score draw, really.

i've read bob's link and played at defeating the built in safety device
it seems to me to be impossible to electrocute oneself with a bare socket, but merely quite difficult once you've got the cover to hand. even if you're right, it's still c.£30 down the drain on finite resources at a time of life when you've least spare cash

Interesting, but it seems that electrocution is only part of the problem Perhaps more significant is the damage that those innocent looking little pieces of plastic can cause?

See http://www.fatallyflawed.org.uk/html/size_matters.html

[karlt]

The Bad Science forum did a bit of a take down of that. General conclusion was that accidental electocution as a result of the bad design of the socket covers was about as unlikely as accidental electrocution from the socket itself - vanishingly. Bit of a score draw, really.

i've read bob's link and played at defeating the built in safety device
it seems to me to be impossible to electrocute oneself with a bare socket, but merely quite difficult once you've got the cover to hand. even if you're right, it's still c.£30 down the drain on finite resources at a time of life when you've least spare cash

Interesting, but it seems that electrocution is only part of the problem Perhaps more significant is the damage that those innocent looking little pieces of plastic can cause?

See http://www.fatallyflawed.org.uk/html/size_matters.html

When the chap came on Bad Science he wasn't able to back that theoretical danger up with any statistics for it actually causing a problem. It's so small it's lost in the noise.

[meic]

When I was a child, I did stick two 6" nails into the electric socket, good old two pins. A big bang and my legs catapulted me across the room.
No significant harm done. My son on the other hand had a very nasty accident with a mug of tea.

[Whirlygig]

When the chap came on Bad Science he wasn't able to back that theoretical danger up with any statistics for it actually causing a problem. It's so small it's lost in the noise.

But this anecdote on that site sounds convincing:
“I am an electrician, and have been doing electrical maintenance for the past 18 years. I have been telling people of the dangers of these so called safety devices for the past 17 of those years, having seen the results of prolonged use of these covers.

I have found that the way manufacturers make the pins slightly wider, in order to make them difficult to remove, has the effect of widening the contacts inside of the BS 1363 socket. When it is later used with a correct sized plug it either does not work, or worse, it causes arcing within the socket itself! Usually the person using them notices that it is melting and unplugs it. I have replaced in excess of 50 sockets due to this one thing, each time I have told the occupant why, and that the consequences could be worse than just replacement of a couple of sockets!

The worst example I have seen of these being used was in a house where the occupier was running a child care business from their home, and were using these in every socket! One by one all of the sockets were failing, when they saw the burning around the live pin they called me in. When I told them that these things are dangerous, they insisted that the local authority would close them down if they were NOT installed, for the SAFETY of the children!! Madness!!

I now send people to your website, as it illustrates this problem extremely well.”
Marcus Grubb, Electrician (Havant, Hants)

[karlt]

When the chap came on Bad Science he wasn't able to back that theoretical danger up with any statistics for it actually causing a problem. It's so small it's lost in the noise.

But this anecdote on that site sounds convincing:
“I am an electrician, and have been doing electrical maintenance for the past 18 years. I have been telling people of the dangers of these so called safety devices for the past 17 of those years, having seen the results of prolonged use of these covers.

I have found that the way manufacturers make the pins slightly wider, in order to make them difficult to remove, has the effect of widening the contacts inside of the BS 1363 socket. When it is later used with a correct sized plug it either does not work, or worse, it causes arcing within the socket itself! Usually the person using them notices that it is melting and unplugs it. I have replaced in excess of 50 sockets due to this one thing, each time I have told the occupant why, and that the consequences could be worse than just replacement of a couple of sockets!

The worst example I have seen of these being used was in a house where the occupier was running a child care business from their home, and were using these in every socket! One by one all of the sockets were failing, when they saw the burning around the live pin they called me in. When I told them that these things are dangerous, they insisted that the local authority would close them down if they were NOT installed, for the SAFETY of the children!! Madness!!

I now send people to your website, as it illustrates this problem extremely well.”
Marcus Grubb, Electrician (Havant, Hants)

We have a saying - the plural of "anecdote" is not "data". In this case, for example, there's no indication of how the engineer "knows" that every one of those sockets overheated because of the socket cover. His reasoning appears to be "there was a socket cover, socket covers could conceivably cause this problem, therefore the socket cover did cause the problem."

So to be honest I don't find that a remotely convincing anecdotal report. You'd need to compare failure rates of covered and uncovered sockets where sockets had failed in this manner to show the extent (if any) of the problem, and that it's not merely theoretical.

[meic]

Two problems with that:

Firstly if you were to demand such level of investigation before making all decisions, nothing would get done.

Secondly the things do little good so any suspicion that they do harm is a good reason to remove them now.

Then let the manufacturers waste lots of time and money on your over prescriptive scientific tests.
If their results show that in fact the covers do not cause this particular problem, nod and still dont use them.

[Whirlygig]

Two problems with that:

Firstly if you were to demand such level of investigation before making all decisions, nothing would get done.

Secondly the things do little good so any suspicion that they do harm is a good reason to remove them now.

Then let the manufacturers waste lots of time and money on your over prescriptive scientific tests.
If their results show that in fact the covers do not cause this particular problem, nod and still dont use them.

Now that makes a lot of good sense!

I managed to find that "Bad Science" thread that was referred to, it turns out that it is a bunch of people who are committed to statistics but have no interest in physical measurement, they were concerned that there were no statistics to show dangers from socket covers, but not at all troubled by the fact that socket covers are not made the right size to fit sockets! Their defence of socket covers is quite extraordinary when you consider that there are no statistics which support the use of socket covers, and neither the UK government or the safety charities believe them to be necessary, it seems as though the only people who think we should use socket covers are the people who make them, and those they have scared into believing them necessary. No "Good" science there, what a bunch of hypocrites!

[PW]

But you have to use socket covers to stop the electricity from leaking out, it's common sense innit?

[karlt]

No-one concluded that socket covers were a good idea, nor that they should be used. It was merely that the case for them being a terrible evil was not well evidenced. I don't recall much or any defence of socket covers on the thread, merely a lack of any sense that the case for the danger of them had been made.

I have no intention of suggesting that those tests need to be done; the case that socket covers are unnecessary is perfectly well made. But if you're going to start claiming that they're actively dangerous and need to be banned, then you've got to come up with some evidence for your position. The statistics are important because without them you have no reason to suppose that the theoretical danger from the size difference translates to a real danger that requires legislation to ban the things or needs you to encourage people to get all excited about them.

I'm all for chucking them out as useless, but I can't find sufficient reason to say they're actively dangerous, or to get excited about other people having them.