A strange/curious question about smoke alarms

[Villages PL]

I moved to the villages in 1999 and have yet to hear that a smoke alarm saved anyone's life. What I have read about in the newspaper is that a lot of people were helped by neighbors who spotted their roof on fire. On rare occasions, a roof will be hit by lightning and the resulting fire doesn't set off any smoke alarm, at least not for a while. It always seems to be neighbors who save the day by warning residents to get out of the burning house.

Has anyone ever heard of a smoke alarm saving a life? I have lived most of my life without a smoke detector, so it seems strange that so much attention is now paid to having a working smoke alarm. :loco:

To put this in perspective, heart attacks are much more common but I don't see any commensurate level of worry. It would be interesting to know how many times greater your chances are of dying from a heart attack.

:wave:

[buggyone]

Well, Villages PL, to my knowledge there is nothing that says you have to have a smoke detector if you do not want one. One or more will come with your home as required by building codes but I do not know think you have to keep it if you do not want a smoke detector.

Of course, if a fire does occur, don't come crying that your family did not have the opportunity to escape because no alarm sounded.

[Bogie Shooter]

I moved to the villages in 1999 and have yet to hear that a smoke alarm saved anyone's life. What I have read about in the newspaper is that a lot of people were helped by neighbors who spotted their roof on fire. On rare occasions, a roof will be hit by lightning and the resulting fire doesn't set off any smoke alarm, at least not for a while. It always seems to be neighbors who save the day by warning residents to get out of the burning house.

Has anyone ever heard of a smoke alarm saving a life? I have lived most of my life without a smoke detector, so it seems strange that so much attention is now paid to having a working smoke alarm. :loco:

To put this in perspective, heart attacks are much more common but I don't see any commensurate level of worry. It would be interesting to know how many times greater your chances are of dying from a heart attack.

:wave:

Here are a few stories for your consideration, they are from the Internet on fire safety site in New South Wales;

•June 06– at 3.15 am the smoke alarm in a Mayfield house starts to ring. An appliance had caught alight and the fire was fire raging through the kitchen. The smoke alarm wakes a man and his young son who flee from the building. Both are treated for smoke inhalation; they both survive.


•June 06– a mother and her one-year old son are fast asleep when a smoke alarm sounds in their Wetherill Park home. A fire in an air conditioning unit triggers the alarm, which wakes the mother and allows her and her son to escape unharmed.


•June 06 – a person walking their dog in Emu Plains one evening hears the sound of a smoke alarm inside a neighbour's villa. They call Triple Zero. Firefighting crews arrive, conduct a search of the premises and find a 76 year-old resident unconscious in her bedroom. She recovers. Relatives had only checked the smoke alarm in the villa three days prior to the fire. They are extremely happy they did.


•May 06 – two residents of a house in Shoal Bay are asleep in bed and are alerted to the fire raging in the upper storey of their three-storey home by the sound of a smoke alarm. Both escape unharmed.


•May 06– the elderly occupants of a home in Gladesville are fast asleep when a fire begins. The high pitched sound of the smoke alarm wakes them in time to extinguish the flames and escape.


•April 06– a Moss Vale couple is awoken at around midnight to the sound of the smoke alarm and find that their lounge suite on their front porch is on fire. Both escape unharmed. The husband tells the local newspaper: "Without it (the smoke alarm), we wouldn't be standing here."


•April 06– seven-year old twin children are awoken by the sound of a smoke alarm in their home in Koonawarra. They see their fridge is on fire and go and wake their mother and older sister. All escape unharmed.


•April 06– the female occupant of a house in Sadlier is asleep when she is suddenly awoken by the smoke alarm. The kitchen and laundry are ablaze. She survives.


•April 06 – an electrical fire begins in a home in St Andrews. A mother, her daughter and a baby are alerted to the fire by the smoke alarm. All survive.


•April 06– a woman is woken by the beep of the smoke alarm in her home in East Dubbo. She, her husband and three young sons use the home escape plan that they had previously prepared and practised. The husband is quoted in the local newspaper: "There's no other way to say this – if I didn't have a smoke detector put in, I wouldn't be alive, neither would my wife and neither would my kids."


•February 06– neighbours hear a smoke alarm operating in a unit in Bulli and call Triple Zero. Fire crews arrive, enter the premises, and wake the occupant. The fire is traced to the kitchen where food cooking in a griller had ignited. The occupant survives.


•January 06– a mother and her three children are asleep in their home in Lindfield when a bedside lamp in the room of the youngest child catches alight. The piercing sound of the smoke alarm in the hallway wakes the other members of the family. The child is dragged off her bed by her brother and taken to safety. All survive.

[Villages PL]

Of course, if a fire does occur, don't come crying that your family did not have the opportunity to escape because no alarm sounded.

Thanks for the strong warning but I live alone. Now, I ask you, when have we ever heard the same strong warning to those at high risk for a heart attack? I think you proved my point.

[spk7951]

Bogie, thank you for your response to this thread.


For my two cents I can not understand why anyone would not consider having working smoke detectors. I could search the internet and no doubt come up with countless stories where people lost their lives due to not having working smoke detectors. I spent 21yrs as a career firefighter and 15yrs as a volunteer firefighter. While I do not remember all the fires that I have responded to over that time I can tell you about the two fatalities that I have experienced firsthand. Neither home had working smoke detectors and both occurred during the late night hours.

[Bogie Shooter]

Bogie, thank you for your response to this thread.


For my two cents I can not understand why anyone would not consider having working smoke detectors. I could search the internet and no doubt come up with countless stories where people lost their lives due to not having working smoke detectors. I spent 21yrs as a career firefighter and 15yrs as a volunteer firefighter. While I do not remember all the fires that I have responded to over that time I can tell you about the two fatalities that I have experienced firsthand. Neither home had working smoke detectors and both occurred during the late night hours.

More likely those are the ones that we hear about. But I have seen reports on the tv of folks that were saved by the alarm going off.
Living alone would make the need for an alarm even more. Just don't see the line of thinking to not have them.

[Villages PL]

Here are a few stories for your consideration, they are from the Internet on fire safety site in New South Wales;

I appreciate your post, it proves that smoke alarms do save lives. I never doubted that if one were to look accross the U.S.A. or around the world, one would find that lives have been saved. Posts on this board are concerning the Villages and that's what I intended as a limit for my inquiry. So far, no one has come forth with a story of one life being saved in The Villages.

And if one or more lives were saved in the past 10 years or so (in TV), how does that statistic compare with the risk of dying from a heart attack? I don't see any commensurate level of worry for all those who die from a heart attack.

[villages07]

There was a house fire up in the Bonnybrook area 1-2 years ago in the wee hours of the morning. As I recall, the newspaper report said the residents were awakened by the smoke detector and escaped safely. The house was pretty much a total loss.

That is one example, I am sure there are others. But, truth be told, there are very few structure fires here. No real fireplaces to cause chimney or related fires. The vast majority of the homes are less than 10 years old, so, aging or inadequate wiring is pretty much a non issue, etc etc.


Still, I would never be without working smoke detectors. An inexpensive but effective precaution.

[BostonCelt]

And if one or more lives were saved in the past 10 years or so (in TV), how does that statistic compare with the risk of dying from a heart attack? I don't see any commensurate level of worry for all those dying from heart attacks.

I never get lost...just temporarily disoriented. And I think I'm there again. Please help. We're comparing the risk of dying from heart attacks to the value of smoke alarms.....because....um..... What??:loco:

[Mudder]

VillagesPL, it would be more understandable if you wanted to compare lives saved from smoke/fire alarms with lives saved by the use of seat belts wouldn't it? Heart attacks are a stretch for that comparision.
Our house was hit by lightning last summer, the dectector went off. As it was 8 PM or so we were awake, BUT unaware of the smoke pouring from our attic over the garage. When w e heard it we knew something was wrong, exited the house, called fire department.
What is the sense of not having a detector? They don't cost very much. It's America, you can do what you want, so go ahead don't have a detector, eat all the rich artery clogging food you want and don't wear a seat belt either. Good luck to you.

[Bogie Shooter]

VillagesPL, it would be more understandable if you wanted to compare lives saved from smoke/fire alarms with lives saved by the use of seat belts wouldn't it? Heart attacks are a stretch for that comparision.
Our house was hit by lightning last summer, the dectector went off. As it was 8 PM or so we were awake, BUT unaware of the smoke pouring from our attic over the garage. When w e heard it we knew something was wrong, exited the house, called fire department.
What is the sense of not having a detector? They don't cost very much. It's America, you can do what you want, so go ahead don't have a detector, eat all the rich artery clogging food you want and don't wear a seat belt either. Good luck to you.

I don't see how it can be told any other way...............enought said!:wave:

[graciegirl]

Villagepl. I would like it if you had a smoke detector. I like your posts and had been hoping to really get to know you.

[Mikeod]

Thanks for the strong warning but I live alone.

All the more reason to have a smoke detector!!! With multiple family members in the home, there is a greater chance someone will smell smoke if there is no smoke detector. With only one person in the home, those chances are drastically reduced. In the scenarios described above, notice the similarities in that all the occupants were alerted to the problems by the sound of the alarm, not by the smell of smoke, and thus were able to get to a safe spot in time.

Your comparison with heart attacks is not applicable, Heart attacks occur due to genetic and environmental (lifestyle) factors. House fires are not. Anyone who has a medical exam will be alerted to the risk factors they possess that could lead to a heart attack and thus take precautions (I hope).

Please keep your smoke detectors functioning.

[duffysmom]

What point are you trying to make?

[Villages PL]

I never get lost...just temporarily disoriented. And I think I'm there again. Please help. We're comparing the risk of dying from heart attacks to the value of smoke alarms.....because....um..... What??:loco:

You made me laugh because I figured that might be a problem. Is it too much of a stretch? How about if we were to look at all causes of death. I'm not sure how the rankings would go because I haven't researched this. I just started this thread on impulse. You might say I was being spontaneous. :laugh:

There would be a long list of various causes of death. Let's say heart attacks and strokes would be on top of the list. Then perhaps cancer etc..
How far down the list would we find deaths due to house fires? I suspect it would be way way way down near the bottom. Yet the reminders we get, to take precautions, often have a sense of urgency that you rarely find applied to anything else, like heart attacks and strokes.

Keep in mind that we are talking about lifestyle choices. Putting oneself at high risk for a heart attack or stroke is a lifestyle choice. And not putting fresh batteries in your smoke detector is also a lifestyle choice.

Do you get my drift?

[Villages PL]

VillagesPL, it would be more understandable if you wanted to compare lives saved from smoke/fire alarms with lives saved by the use of seat belts wouldn't it? Heart attacks are a stretch for that comparision.

I guess you're right but if it made perfect sense, it wouldn't have been as interesting. Besides, I was trying to think of something that TV safety department encourages us to do.

Our house was hit by lightning last summer, the dectector went off. As it was 8 PM or so we were awake, BUT unaware of the smoke pouring from our attic over the garage. When w e heard it we knew something was wrong, exited the house, called fire department.

That's a good story. I'm glad you all got out safely. That's a good reason for having a smoke detector. With that story, I'll be very likely to shop for some new batteries soon.


.......eat all the rich artery clogging food you want and don't wear a seat belt either. Good luck to you.

You have the wrong idea on those two because I don't eat processed foods and I do use my seat belt.

[Pturner]

You made me laugh because I figured that might be a problem. Is it too much of a stretch? How about if we were to look at all causes of death. I'm not sure how the rankings would go because I haven't researched this. I just started this thread on impulse. You might say I was being spontaneous. :laugh:

There would be a long list of various causes of death. Let's say heart attacks and strokes would be on top of the list. Then perhaps cancer etc..
How far down the list would we find deaths due to house fires? I suspect it would be way way way down near the bottom. Yet the reminders we get, to take precautions, often have a sense of urgency that you rarely find applied to anything else, like heart attacks and strokes.

Keep in mind that we are talking about lifestyle choices. Putting oneself at high risk for a heart attack or stroke is a lifestyle choice. And not putting fresh batteries in your smoke detector is also a lifestyle choice.

Do you get my drift?

Um... not really.

[Villages PL]

Villagepl. I would like it if you had a smoke detector. I like your posts and had been hoping to really get to know you.

Thank you, graciegirl. I have just been procrasinating but I intend to get some new batteries soon. I'm usually very conscientious about everything else. But somehow, the standard method of replacing batteries doesn't quite make sense to me.

I have 3 detectors: Two are for smoke and one is for carbon monoxide. I never seem to be synchronized with the Villages advice to throw them all out at the same time and I don't like to be wasteful of a good battery(s). Also, from my experience, these batteries are made to last at least 2 to 3 years. So why replace them yearly? Why not let them last as long as they will last? They are designed to start beeping when the battery goes dead. When one smoke alarm goes dead I usually wait until the other one goes dead too so I can replace both of them at the same time. So that way I still have one working. Now they are both used up and I can put two new ones in. And the one for carbon monoxide is still working so I'll replace that one separately when it goes.

:)

[Pathel]

always-Always-ALWAYS better to be: MORE SAFE THAN SORRY.

[Villages PL]

Um... not really.

Well, The Villages has a Public Safety Department and a health alliance with USF. But, so far, I don't see any comprehensive strategy to make this America's healthiest hometown. We have the yearly reminder to throw out batteries that are only half used up but what else do we really have?

Yes we need the smoke alarms and we need to fasten our seat belts. But, other than that, where's The Villages comprehensive plan to make this America's healthiest hometown? It certainly isn't going to come from the The Villages newspaper or radio station because they can't completely take the side of health and be mindful of commercial interests at the same time. So where does that leave us? Where is the comprehensive plan for a healthy community?

USF is busy with focus groups and I was in one of them. They're asking questions to see what Villagers are interested in. Most of the talk was about the fact that TV is an active community. Okay, we already know that. What's new? I was the only one to raise a question about the importance of eating a healthy diet and it fell flat with the others in the group. So, if Villagers are not interested in a lifestyle that includes healthy eating, it looks like it won't be a significant part of TV/USF program.

[Villages PL]

Your comparison with heart attacks is not applicable, Heart attacks occur due to genetic and environmental (lifestyle) factors. House fires are not. Anyone who has a medical exam will be alerted to the risk factors they possess that could lead to a heart attack and thus take precautions (I hope).

Thanks for your thoughtful post which motivated me to give this subject more thought. And thanks for your concern; I will keep my smoke detectors functioning.

This thread turned out to be a lot more difficult than I ever expected because I kept feeling like I couldn't quite come up with a clear explanation for my decision to compare fires with heart attacks & strokes. So, I'm here today to give it one more shot.

Let's say that your job is to save lives by any means having to do with lifestyle. So, on that basis, you come up with two things to compare:

1) Lifestyle precautions to help prevent death by fire.

2) Lifestyle precautions to help prevent death by heart attack or stroke.

Yes, one is a disease and the other is not. However, what they share in common is the fact that lifestyle precautions can help prevent death.

Also, what they share in common is the fact that one can check national statistics to see which one costs more lives per year:

Number of yearly deaths do to house fires: about 3,000

Number of yearly deaths do to heart attacks and strokes. about 800,000
(And the HHS Secretary has said that most could be prevented with basic health care.)

If you're in the prevention business, which one would you focus more effort on? Which one has the potential to yield the greatest payoff, as far as saving lives?

Note: The HHS Secretary said most heart attacks and strokes could be prevented with basic "health care". I would just add that basic health care begins at home with diet, exercise and stress control. And being that 63% of the population is overweight or obese, it seems that some extra reminders may be in order. Doctors alone can't do it so I believe it's important for the community to create an atmosphere conducive to cardiovascular health. For example, I think a reminder (by TV media) before Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year's and other food-holidays might be a good idea.

:)

[Mikeod]

OK, I'll take a shot. With heart attacks and strokes, the majority of victims will be in their adulthood, and usually past 40-50 years. Genetic dispositions can skew this to younger ages, but that range is generally true. So these victims have been exposed to the lifestyle changes/patterns that would minimize their risk. Whether they take heed is a personal choice.

However, house fires are not fussy about the age of their victims. Young or old, it doesn't matter. I always think it is especially tragic when I read of toddlers and infants dying in house fires, since their lives are so dependent on the adults with whom they reside.

I suspect the lower number of victims of house fires is partially due to the years that smoke and CO detectors have been available at reasonable cost and, in some cases, required by code.

[bigalibaba]

I moved to the villages in 1999 and have yet to hear that a smoke alarm saved anyone's life. What I have read about in the newspaper is that a lot of people were helped by neighbors who spotted their roof on fire. On rare occasions, a roof will be hit by lightning and the resulting fire doesn't set off any smoke alarm, at least not for a while. It always seems to be neighbors who save the day by warning residents to get out of the burning house.

Has anyone ever heard of a smoke alarm saving a life? I have lived most of my life without a smoke detector, so it seems strange that so much attention is now paid to having a working smoke alarm. :loco:

To put this in perspective, heart attacks are much more common but I don't see any commensurate level of worry. It would be interesting to know how many times greater your chances are of dying from a heart attack.

Suggest you remove your smoke alarms as there is a good chance they won't work properly after 10 years. I'd also be concerned that the loud noise from a smoke alarm, if it does go off while you're sleeping, may cause you to have a heart attack. Don't take a chance, get rid of them.
:wave:

:wave:[/QUOTE]

[Villages PL]

So these victims have been exposed to the lifestyle changes/patterns that would minimize their risk. Whether they take heed is a personal choice.

However, house fires are not fussy about the age of their victims. Young or old, it doesn't matter. I always think it is especially tragic when I read of toddlers and infants dying in house fires, since their lives are so dependent on the adults with whom they reside.

I suspect the lower number of victims of house fires is partially due to the years that smoke and CO detectors have been available at reasonable cost and, in some cases, required by code.

Do we need to weigh one against the other? The number of children that die in fires every year is about 800. While the number of deaths due to heart attacks and strokes is 800,000. How many adults does it take to equal one child? Just because it's tragic when a child dies doesn't mean we shouldn't value older people. And I'm sure you do; I don't doubt that.

An older person may be someone's spouse, father, grandfather, valued employee, or president of the United States. (Bill Clinton had coronary artery disease.)

I think a life is a life and all life is precious.

Do you think we should take the attitude that adults should know better, so, essentially, let them get the health they deserve? Maybe so, but who do you think will end up paying their health care tab? That's another issue we need to think about. In 2008 the total health care cost in the U.S. was about 2.4 trillion. I remember not that long ago warning people that it would soon be 2 trillion. Now the warning is that it will soon be 3 trillion in a few years. As baby boomers age, it will be 3 trillion and then 4 trillion.

[Villages PL]

:wave:

Suggest you remove your smoke alarms as there is a good chance they won't work properly after 10 years. I'd also be concerned that the loud noise from a smoke alarm, if it goes off while you're sleeping may cause you to have a heart attack. Don't take a chance, get rid of them.

I'm posting the above quote from you to let others know that you were the one who said, "Don't take a chance, get rid of them". In your post, you ran my words together with your own. Are you new here? :ohdear: