Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 22nd Jul 2009 18:20 UTC, submitted by tupp
Permalink for comment 374770
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-03-20
different industries,
As P&G provide different product related to health,
it is very risky to let a toxic product in the wild, and
short term toxicity is easier to test and proof
(long term effects on the other hand are impossible to do),
and accident are bound to happen but recall of the batch is the norm
in pharmaceutics.
Apple on the other hand try to use edgy hardware technology
( which is bound to be risky ), add to that that it depend on the
batch of production, combination of material and condition of use,
then you have an impossible test case, plus initiating a recall is costy
(even for Apple ), so considering the occurences and the impact
of the incident the only thing we will have is another restriction on
portable music player on the airplane.