Re: [CH] RE: the cheapie dehydrator/ UL vs. ETL
Charles Demas (demas@tiac.net)
Mon, 14 Sep 1998 17:24:59 -0400 (EDT)
On Mon, 14 Sep 1998, Parkhurst, Scott Contractor wrote:
> >From: Bloechl, Sharen Rund
> >The following's a comment from someone at UL. . .
> >
> >"ETL is UL's competitor. Actually I think they're doing business as
> >Inchcape or Intertek now. Some local jurisdictions require UL Listed
> >products and won't accept ETL products. Generally speaking, ETL evaluates
> >products to UL standards or the standards of some other organization-but
> >ETL's evaluation is not as thorough as UL's. I always look for the UL mark
>
> Thanx for the info! I too like to see the UL label on electric appliances
> that run for extended periods. I *did* check out the construction of the
> cheapie. It isn't flimsy, has adequate clearance/support of the heating
> element, no frayed/loose electrical connections, etc. Still, I made sure to
> be around while it was plugged in (no on/off switch). Thanx again.
Be sure to note where that UL tag is placed. If it is on the cord, only
the cord may be UL certified. :-) If it's on the appliance body, that's
different. I'm not sure this game is still being played, but it was at
one time.
Chuck Demas
Needham, Mass.
Eat Healthy | _ _ | Nothing would be done at all,
Stay Fit | @ @ | If a man waited to do it so well,
Die Anyway | v | That no one could find fault with it.
demas@tiac.net | \___/ | http://www.tiac.net/users/demas