The Alarming Truth - Part One - LHFSN

8/10/2019 The Alarming Truth - Part One - LHFSN

1/12


2/12

The Alarming Truth - Part One

TheAlarmingTruthPartOne-V5.1LHFSN.pdf Published: 07 August, 2010 | Version 5.1 - Updated: 19 October, 2014

This document uses U.S. spelling and is updated frequently. Check for latest version:www.Scribd.com/doc/243428893 1 of 11

Fire off icials have a..Dutyof Care topublicly..denounce ionization so..calledsmoke alarms.

Chief Marc McGinn, Fire

Professional 32 years

Fire Chief 17 years

California, U.S.A.

01 July, 2010

Chief Marc McGinn

Copyright (c) World Fire Safety Foundation Oct, 2014

(page 9)

This is the onemost people havein their homes, that's

the tragedy.

(page 3)

T h e A l a r m i n g Tr u t hPart One:

Why the Smoke Alarm in Your Home Won't Save You.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893


3/12




But isnt any smoke alarm better than no smoke alarm?MY T H

PageContents

60 Minutes Expos

Good Morning America Expos

Who Can You Trust?

Problems with Ionization1.Contains Radioactive Material

2.Unacceptable False Alarm Rate

3. Fails in Smoldering Stage of Fires

4.Affordabil ity

5.The Ion/Photo Combination Myth

6.Sensor Sensitivity Manipulation

Albanys Stand | A Special Duty of Care

Myths Explained | History | Litigation

Help Save Lives

6

6

6

7

7

8

9

10

11

3

4

5

Myths

Explained

see page 10

Peter Cannon, President, Volunteer Fire

Fighters Association, NSW, Australia

from the WFSFs Home Page

Fire Fighters have not beentold the truth . . . discover thefacts about aboutionization

alarms for yourself.

Peter Cannon

A No t- Fo r- Pr of i t Si nc e

March, 2000 |About Us

The smoke alarm industry continues to hide the truth about ionization

alarms from the public and our fire fighters.

They claim, despite overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary,

that ionization alarms are effective. No one disputes theyve saved

lives. This report explains their known and life-threatening defects and

the safe photoelectric alternative.

Due to decades of misinformation, some authorities still unwittingly

defend ionization alarms stating, they pass the standardsor that, anysmoke alarms better than no smoke alarm.

However,as they discover the truth, some authorities are speaking out.

We owe our gratitude to these brave men and women who are

standing up and fighting the status quo and decades of misinformation.

Thank you.

The WorldFire Safety Foundation

Adrian Butler

Chairman, Co-Founder, Former Fire Fighter

NSW, Australia | 19 October, 2014

After Decades of Misinformation. . .

Chief Jay Fleming

I think the ionization alarm isresponsible for as many as10,000 deaths since 1990.

Chief Jay Fleming, Boston Fire Department

MA, U.S.A. | from WFSFs 2012 Report:

Ionization Smoke Alarms Are DEADLY
http://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/aboutushttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/vffahttp://www.thewfsf.org/vffahttp://www.thewfsf.org/aboutushttp://www.thewfsf.org/aboutushttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/http://www.thewfsf.org/http://www.thewfsf.org/comparehttp://www.thewfsf.org/comparehttp://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893


4/12




Australias Worst Ever House Fire

Jeremiah Lale lost his wife and five children

David Isaac, Fire Safety Expert, Standards

Australia Committee Member with Karl Stefanovic

Channel 9 - Austral ia19 October, 2014 | 7:30pm

This report will be updated with thelink to the full story when available

Trai ler

60 Minutes:

It was Australia's worst ever house fire.

Eight children from two families died.But it should never have happened.

Why the smoke alarm in your homewon't save you.

David Isaac:

This is the one most people have in their homes.

That's the tragedy.

Jeremiah Lale:

Lost everyone, everything.

www.jump-in.com.au/show/60minutes

David Isaac with Logan House Fire SupportNetworks Christine and Louie Naumovski

Logan House Fire Support Network

60 Minutes Alarming Truth expos is thebest story ever produced exposing the fortyyear, ionization smoke alarm fraud.

If it was not for the hard work and dedicationof Louie and Christine The Alarming Truthwould never have gone to air.

Their Logan House Fire Support Network isa fabulous organization. They give selflesslywithout getting paid, directly or indirectly.Please visit their website and give them yoursupport.

Louie & Christine - thank you!

Adrian ButlerChairman, The World Fire Safety Foundation

www.LHFSN.org
http://www.lhfsn.org/http://www.lhfsn.org/http://www.jump-in.com.au/show/60minutes/http://www.jump-in.com.au/show/60minutes/http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893


5/12




May 29, 2014 9:53am

NEOFPA PresidentJohn Desmarteau (left)

with GMAs Gio Benitez

In May 2014 the North Eastern Ohio Fire Prevention

Association (NEOFPA) conducted full-scale tests to

demonstrate the performance differences between

ionization, photoelectric and combination smoke alarms.

The story aired across the USA on the ABCs Good

Morning America Investigates.

1.NEOFPA PresidentOversees Testing

3.Test Aborted at 70 MinutesIonization Alarms Failed

Combination 1:

Combination 2:

22 minutes

49 minutes

Photoelectric 1:

Photoelectric 2:

12 minutes

13 minutes

Did Not Activate

Did Not Activate

Ionization 1:

Ionization 2:

2. Photoelectrics Alarms Sound Before Combos

Ionization Alarms Did Not Sound

The NEOF PA and Ear l Lee Warn ingSpreading the Message in the U.S.A. and Australia

Will Your Smoke Detector Respond Fast Enough?
http://www.getsafealarms.com/http://www.getsafealarms.com/http://www.getsafealarms.com/http://www.getsafealarms.com/http://www.getsafealarms.com/http://www.getsafealarms.com/http://www.getsafealarms.com/http://www.getsafealarms.com/http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/lifestyle/2014/05/gma-investigates-will-your-smoke-detector-respond-fast-enough/http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/lifestyle/2014/05/gma-investigates-will-your-smoke-detector-respond-fast-enough/http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/lifestyle/2014/05/gma-investigates-will-your-smoke-detector-respond-fast-enough/http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/lifestyle/2014/05/gma-investigates-will-your-smoke-detector-respond-fast-enough/http://neofpa.org/announcements/neofpa-abcs-good-morning-america-conduct-smoke-alarm-tests/http://neofpa.org/announcements/neofpa-abcs-good-morning-america-conduct-smoke-alarm-tests/http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893


6/12




3The Ionization/Photoelectric Combination Myth: (see page 7)

2Most Fire Departments today are unaware of the decades of misinformation about ionization alarms and flawed Government

Smoke Alarm Standards. However, as they become aware, an increasing number are making a stand, e.g. the North Eastern

Ohio Fire Prevention Association (www.NEOFPA.org), the Ohio Fire Chiefs Associationand the Queensland Fireand

Emergency Service: www.TheWFSF.org/qfrspromo

1UTC, the worlds second largest ionization alarm manufacturer, failed to disclose the level of smoke their ionization smoke alarms

activated under CSIRO testing to a Member of the Australian Parliament (Hear The Law and You radio interview on page 10).

The above extract (with updates) is from the WFSFs May 2013 report, Can Australian & U.S. Smoke Alarm Standards be Trusted?

See the full report at: www.Scribd.com/doc/192643129

IAFF Resolution on Photoelectric Alarms

Page 3, Line 55 - Adopted August, 2008

Whereas IAFF members shouldadvocate for their mandatoryrequirement for placement anduse of photoelectric alarms infire and building codes . . .

IAFF Resolution: 2008

AFAC Position on Smoke Alarms

Page 3, Clause 3 - Published June, 2006

That all residential..accommodation..

be fitted with..photoelectric..

smoke alarms.

AFAC Position: 2006

Do not risk their lives fighting fires.

Despite empirical scientific evidence and legalprecedence proving ionization alarms are unsafe,continue to fail in their Duty of Careabout life-threatening defects with ionization alarms.1

Recommend using Ionization and Photoelectricalarms or a combination alarm with both sensors.

. . . Government and Manufacturers?When under the International Association ofFire Fighters or the Australasian Fire andEmergency Service Authorities Council they:

Risk their lives fighting fires.

Urge changing to photoelectric alarms because:Ionization smoke alarms may not operate in time to alert occupants early enough to escape from smoldering fires.

. . . Inf orme d Fir e Figh ters?

Recommend Photoelectric alarms - notcombination ionization/photoelectric alarms.

Ionization smoke alarms may not operate in time to alert

occupants early enough to escape from smoldering fires.Extract from IAFF Resolution & AFAC Position above

Ionization Smoke Alarms May Not Operate in Time

The International Association of Fire Chiefs warned about ionization smoke alarms in 1980 2and urged Fire Chiefs

to recommend photoelectric smoke alarms: www.TheWFSF.org/iafc Tragically their message was buried. Since

2006, manufacturers and government have failed to warn the public of the defects inherent in ionization alarms.

They now claim there are two types of fires (smoldering and flaming) so the public need two types of smoke alarms 3.

By doing this, for legal and political reasons, they do not have to admit they failed to warn the public.

However, there are not two typesof fire - there are two stages of a fire. Most fatal fires have a smoldering stage

before bursting into flames. Australian government (CSIRO) test data proves Ionization alarms may not operate in

time for occupants to escape from the early, smoldering stage of fatal fires.

Adrian Butler, Chairman, The World Fire Safety Foundation, NSW, Australia, 18 Oct, 2014
http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.thewfsf.org/iafchttp://www.thewfsf.org/iafchttp://www.thewfsf.org/dutyofcare1http://www.thewfsf.org/dutyofcare1http://www.thewfsf.org/afachttp://www.thewfsf.org/afachttp://www.thewfsf.org/iaffhttp://www.thewfsf.org/iaffhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/192643129http://www.scribd.com/doc/192643129http://www.thewfsf.org/qfrspromohttp://www.thewfsf.org/qfrspromohttp://photoelectricsaves.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Ohio-Fire-Chiefs-Association-Position-Paper.pdfhttp://photoelectricsaves.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Ohio-Fire-Chiefs-Association-Position-Paper.pdfhttp://www.neofpa.org/http://www.neofpa.org/http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893


7/12




Problems With Ionization Technology

But my alarms pass the Standard, surely they must be OK?

Myths

Explained

see page 10 M Y T H

All ionization smoke alarms contain radioactive materialwhich most consumers are unaware of. SeveralEuropean countries have prohibited their use:

1. Contains Radioactive Material

Ionization Smoke AlarmsRadiation Warning Label

Australias smoke alarm standard requires ionization alarms to be

returned to the supplier or the Department of Health for disposal.

Less than 1% are returned. The Public Health Association ofAustralia state, Why use ionization alarms when photoelectric

smoke alarms contain no radioactive material?

...the main criterion for prohibition is that

there is no justification for these products

(including ionization chamber smoke

detectors) as suitable alternatives exist.

Switzerlands official position on ionization chamber

smoke detectors - page 89, 3.3.15, para 1

www.TheWFSF.org/legislation_eu

Europes Radioactivity Concerns

Recommend Photoelectrics

3. Fails in Smoldering Stage of FiresThe fact that ionization smoke alarms are unable tosafely detect fire in the early smoldering stage wasfirst exposed in the 1976 Smoke Detector FraudReport. See The History of Why America isBurning on page 10.

CSIRO Test DataThe Australian governments CommonwealthScientific and Industrial Research Organization

(CSIRO) holds empirical scientific test data whichshows that ionization alarms do not activate inAustralian Standards testing until more than threetimes the limit set for photoelectric alarms.

Photoelectric alarms do notcontain any radioactive material:

www.TheWFSF.org/radiation

2. Unacceptable False Alarm RateMany people say, My smoke alarms goes off whenI cook - It must be working fine.An ionization alarm is a sub-micron (invisible)particle detector.They detect sub-micron particlesfrom cooking or an open flame. They do not detectvisible smoke. A slow smoldering fire emits large(visible) smoke particles. In most cases the ionization alarm willremain silent during the smoldering stage of a fire - until the fire

bursts into flame when it is often too late to escape (see page 4).

Australian smoke alarm standard AS3786-1993 extract: Page 16, Clause 4.2(j)

Each smoke alarm shall be provided with installation instructionswhich shall include the following . . . Where the smoke alarm contains aradioactive source, information about the source and instructions on howto return the smoke alarm to the supplier or to the Department of Health.Warning shall also be given that alternative disposal is not permitted.

Radioactive Materials Pose Health,Transportation, Storage & Disposal Problems

Legal PrecedenceIn The Law and You radio interviewworld experts discuss the gag orderpreventing disclosure of the level ofsmoke ionization alarms activateunder CSIRO testing (see page 10).

Nuisance/false alarms from cooking lead people into a falsesense of security. They think their ionization alarms are ultra-sensitive and will give them an early warning in the event of a realfire. Ionization smoke alarms are, on average, over five timesmore likely to have false alarm than photoelectrics!

Photoelectricsare far less prone to falsealarms and may alerttens of minutes earlier than ionization or even combinationionization/photoelectric alarms in an actual fire:www.GetSafeAlarms.com/technical-and-performance-faqs
http://www.getsafealarms.com/technical-and-performance-faqshttp://www.getsafealarms.com/technical-and-performance-faqshttp://www.getsafealarms.com/technical-and-performance-faqshttp://www.thewfsf.org/radiationhttp://www.thewfsf.org/radiationhttp://www.thewfsf.org/legislation_euhttp://www.thewfsf.org/legislation_euhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893


8/12




You dont know what kind of fire.

youre going to have, fast burning.

fire which ionizations prefer or a.

smoldering smoke fire which.

photoelectrics better.ULs statement at Albany, Californias Smoke

Alarm Legislation Hearing, 19 July, 2010

Howard Hopper, UL

Since the mid 60s fire authorities have almostexclusively promoted ionization smoke alarms.

In December 2006, one week before Christmas, theChief of Vermonts Barre City Fire Department lost hisniece and her four children in a home fitted with hard-wired, working ionization alarms. Fire fighters weredevastated, Why had the alarms failed to activate?They investigated and the truth that had been buriedsince the IAFCs 1980 Residential Smoke AlarmReport (page 5) began to re-emerge.

How could the smoke alarm industry cover up the life-threatening defects when fire fighters were beginningto discover their own lives were at risk?

By adding the flawed (ionization) technology with theeffective (photoelectric) technology they hoped no onewould know. Thats why their claim, There are twotypes of fire so you need two type of smoke alarms isso insidious. On the surface it appears to make sense -but is this valid or a myth?

Captain Clayton L. James

Newport Fire Department

Kentucky, USA

Is it possible that therecommendation for.dual or for both ismaybe a.compromiseto transition.awayfrom ionizationdetectors?

Capt. Clayton James

College of Engineering & Applied Sciences

Smoke Detector Seminar www.TheWFSF.org/uc9

The manufacturers, who since 1980, have failedto warn about ionization alarms are claiming,

since 2006, after 26 years of failing to warn us,that we now need two types of smoke alarms.Why didnt they tell us this decades ago? Whyshould we believe them?

Stages of Fire - Not Types of FireHere is what they are not telling us. In most fatalfires there are two stages, smoldering andflaming. You must detect fire in the early,smoldering stage, before the flaming stage, whenit is too late to safely escape.

28 June, 2010

Chief B.J. Jetter

I think what we need to tell...

people is pretty simple...Do you want to live or die?..

And if you want to live,..and you want to get...

out in time, then buy a...photoelectric detector.

William (BJ) Jetter PhD, MIFireE, CFO

OFE, CHSIII, Fire Chief, Sycamore

EMS & Fire Department, Ohio, USA

5. The Ionization/Photoelectric Combination Myth:

Theres Two Types of Fire So You Need Two Types ofSmoke Alarms.

4. AffordabilityCombination alarms cost more than stand-alonephotoelectric alarms. Consumers on limitedbudgets may not be able to afford to protect asmany rooms in their home with combination armsas with stand-alone, photoelectric alarms.

Consumer Groups Speak OutCost is one of several reasons why the IAFF,AFAC and others do not recommend combinationion/photo alarms (see below). Australian, U.S.and New Zealand consumers organizations havediscovered the defects with ionization alarms andrecommend photoelectric smoke alarms.

The ionization models were slightly better

on average at detecting flaming fire, but

were hopeless for smouldering fires.

New Zealand

Austral ia

...its really important that you havephotoelectric alarms in your house; those

smokey, smoldering fires are real kil lers...

U.S.A. People are dying all the time

because these (ionization) smoke

detectors are inadequate.Joan Claybrook CEO, Public Citizen, 26 Feb, 2008

Chris Barnes, Choice Australia, March 2010

Consumer N.Z.after scientific testing, May 2006

see page 10
http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.thewfsf.org/consumerhttp://www.thewfsf.org/consumerhttp://www.thewfsf.org/choicehttp://www.thewfsf.org/choicehttp://www.scribd.com/doc/243140203http://www.scribd.com/doc/243140203http://www.thewfsf.org/choicehttp://www.thewfsf.org/choicehttp://www.thewfsf.org/choicehttp://www.thewfsf.org/choicehttp://www.thewfsf.org/choicehttp://www.thewfsf.org/choicehttp://www.thewfsf.org/consumerhttp://www.thewfsf.org/consumerhttp://www.thewfsf.org/consumerhttp://www.thewfsf.org/consumerhttp://www.thewfsf.org/consumerhttp://www.thewfsf.org/consumerhttp://www.thewfsf.org/uc9http://www.thewfsf.org/uc9http://www.thewfsf.org/choicehttp://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893


9/12




Photoelectric Alarms More Effective

Studies have shown that photoelectric units are moreeffective at detecting the types of fires that are most likely tobe fatal in homes: smoldering fires . . . . The only case inwhich the ionization alarm responded first was when thealarm was in the room of ignition of a flaming fire. Even then,the photoelectric alarm still provided the occupants withenough time to escape safely. Executive Summary: Page X, para 2

But we dont have an official position on smoke alarms.

6.Sensor Sensitivity Manipulation (SSM)

M Y T H

Combination Smoke Alarms

However, combination units also have their drawbacks.Detectors can be combined using either an AND gate or anOR gate (Ian Thomas Interview, Appendix L). An OR gatewill sound an alarm if the unit receives a signal from eitherone of the detectors. This means that the unit will sound atthe earliest possible time, but also that the unit is susceptibleto the most nuisance alarms due to the cumulativeweaknesses of each detector. A unit designed with anAND gate will not sound until it receives a signal fromboth detectors. Combination Smoke Alarms: Page 36, clause 4.1.3, para 3

www.TheWFSF.org/wpi

The Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) one of Americasoldest technical institutes, is located in Worcester,Massachussetts. The Fire Protection Association of Australia(FPAA) is Australias major technical and educational firesafety organization.

In 2009 the WPI produced a report for the FPAA to aid fireprotection officials around the world in drafting smoke alarmlegislation.

The following quotes are extracts from the report:

Sensor Sensitivity Manipulation (SSM)describes manipulating ionization sensorsettings in combination ionization/photoelectricalarms to reducing nuisance alarming.

In the above CPSC* chart unwanted

activations are shown from two leadingmanufacturers (for legal reasons the CPSCprotects manufacturer identities by namingthem A & B). It should be observed thatmanufacturer A had 115 of the total 127unwanted activations.

*Smoke Alarms - Pilot Study of Nuisance Alarms Associated with Cooking CPSC, 03/10

The WFSF thanks Dean Dennis

from Fathers For Fire Safety

for his research material

A group of fire protection authorities across the world, including Bostons

Deputy Fire Chief Joseph Fleming and New Zealands Adrian Butler,are

leading the push towards requiring photoelectric smoke alarms in all dwellings.

Conclusion

To provide earliest warning for all fires regardless of type,combination detectors (of the OR gate principle) are, ideallyspeaking, most effective. This assumes that they are fullyoperational, and do not have reduced or otherwise alteredsensitivities (Ed Comeau Interview, Appendix A). It must alsobe noted that, due to the frequency of nuisance alarms fromcurrent ionization technologies, combination detectors arelikely to be disabled by a consumer, rendering them uselessto warn occupants of any fire. Conclusion: Page 35, clause 4.1.8, para 2

Worcester PolytechnicsMay, 2009 Report for FPAA

Executive Summary: Page X, para 1

The Global Push for Photoelectric Alarms

You Can Not Hide Ionization

Alarms Inherent Defects by Combining

them with Photoelectric Alarms

Myths

Explained

see page 10

Dean Dennis
http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.thewfsf.org/fffshttp://www.thewfsf.org/fffshttp://www.cpsc.gov//PageFiles/98679/smokealarmnuisance.pdfhttp://www.cpsc.gov//PageFiles/98679/smokealarmnuisance.pdfhttp://www.cpsc.gov//PageFiles/98679/smokealarmnuisance.pdfhttp://www.cpsc.gov//PageFiles/98679/smokealarmnuisance.pdfhttp://www.cpsc.gov//PageFiles/98679/smokealarmnuisance.pdfhttp://www.cpsc.gov//PageFiles/98679/smokealarmnuisance.pdfhttp://www.thewfsf.org/wpihttp://www.thewfsf.org/wpihttp://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893


10/12




Adrian Butler

When you mix clear waterwith muddy water you still have muddy water.

Chief McGinns quote after AFDs

mandating photoelectric smoke

alarms, not combination ionization/photo-

electric alarms | 21 June, 2010

A Special Duty of Care

Adrian Butler, Chairman WFSF, NSW, Australia, 18 October, 2014

But my ionization alarms are great, they go off when I cook.

Chief Marc McGinnAlbany Fire Department

California, USA

Cal i fornian Legis lature

Assembly Resolut ion

Albany Fire Departments Stand Against

Ionization & Combo Ion/Photo Alarms

...ionization smoke detectors, which areflame detectors and not smoke detectors...

MY T H

Albany Fire Department Warning About Ionization Alarms

Myths

Explained

see page 10

If you tell the public to buy photoelectric smoke alarms because theyre bettermostpeople will do nothing. Why should they? Ionization alarms will often go off whenopening an oven door or cooking toast, lulling people into a false sense ofsecurity.

Authorities have a Special Duty of Care to warn the public and our fire fighters thationization alarms have life-threaten ing defects. Doing so will allow the public to makean informed decision so they may properly protect their families from fire.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.thewfsf.org/dutyofcare3http://www.thewfsf.org/dutyofcare3http://www.thewfsf.org/resolutionhttp://www.thewfsf.org/resolutionhttp://www.thewfsf.org/resolutionhttp://www.thewfsf.org/resolutionhttp://www.theworldfiresafetyfoundation.org/albanyhttp://www.theworldfiresafetyfoundation.org/albanyhttp://www.theworldfiresafetyfoundation.org/albanyhttp://www.theworldfiresafetyfoundation.org/albanyhttp://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893


11/12




The Law And You Radio Interview24 June, 2014 | Montgomery, Alabama, U.S.A

www.Vimeo.com/99344355

Hear the radio interview with Australian and U.S. smokealarm experts and Americas record-breaking law firm:

Myths

Explained

The Alarming Truth

Part Two
http://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/abouthttp://www.thewfsf.org/firefightersuscahttp://www.thewfsf.org/firefightersuscahttp://www.thewfsf.org/firefightersaunzhttp://www.thewfsf.org/firefightersaunzhttp://www.thewfsf.org/waibhttp://www.thewfsf.org/waibhttp://www.vimeo.com/99344355http://www.vimeo.com/99344355http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893http://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893


12/12



This document uses U S spelling and is updated frequently Check for latest version: www Scribd com/doc/243428893 11 of 11

Help Save LivesFire Fighters

Youve been lied to for decades.

Find out why informed fire fighters aremaking a stand and refusing to defendor hand out ionization smoke alarms.

Read David Isaacs 2006 Report:

Saving Face or Saving Lives

Read the WFSFs 2007 Report:

Recommending Selling or

Installing Ionization Smoke Alarms,A Criminal Act of Negligence?

. .. then watch

Weve been fighting this campaign since March, 2000.

We often wondered, Will this ever come to an end?

We were stunned by 60 Minutes special investigation.

They dug deep. They spoke with the key fire

department personnel, world leading scientists,

legislators and smoke alarm world experts. The

Alarming Truth is without doubt the best ionization

alarm expos ever produced.

Please help make sure it doesnt get buried.

Your organizations logo and message can be put on

a custom versions of our Alarming Truth reports and

on our new website (under construction) e.g.:

www.TheAlarmingTruth.org/YourOrganization

Help spread this vital, life-saving message - for free!

CLICK HEREand well tell you how.

Thank you.

The World Fire Safety FoundationAdrian ButlerChairman, Co-Founder, Former Fire Fighter

Karl WestwellCo-Founder, Director of Strategy & Research

Adrian Butler (left) Moe Stevens (center) and KarlWestwell during filming of Stop The Children Burning

January, 2003 | Waihi, New Zealand
http://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbmailto:[email protected]?subject=Tell%20Me%20About%20the%20WFSF%27s%20Viral%20Marketing%20Campaignmailto:[email protected]?subject=Tell%20Me%20About%20the%20WFSF%27s%20Viral%20Marketing%20Campaignhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/stcbhttp://www.thewfsf.org/savingfacehttp://www.thewfsf.org/savingfacehttp://www.thewfsf.org/savingfacehttp://www.thewfsf.org/savingfacehttp://www.thewfsf.org/savingfacehttp://www.thewfsf.org/savingfacehttp://www.thewfsf.org/savingfacehttp://www.thewfsf.org/savingfacehttp://www.scribd.com/doc/243428893

Date post:	02-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	the-world-fire-safety-foundation
View:	223 times
Download:	0 times

The Alarming Truth - Part One - LHFSN

Documents