@article{ref1,
title="Questions and comments about the methodology and conclusions in 'Comparative room burn study of furnished rooms from the United Kingdom, France and the United States', by Blais et al. 2019",
journal="Fire technology",
year="2021",
author="Babrauskas, Vytenis and Rodgers, Kathryn M. and Lucas, Donald and Fuoco, Rebecca",
volume="57",
number="2",
pages="497-502",
abstract="We have concerns about the Blais et al. paper &quot;Comparative Room Burn Study of Furnished Rooms from the United Kingdom, France and the United States&quot; in the March 2020 issue of Fire Technology [1]. The study compared fire growth and smoke toxicity in mock burn rooms each containing a couch and chair purchased from either the United Kingdom, France, or the United States. The authors use the results to draw conclusions about the efficacy of the countries' furniture flammability standards. Unfortunately, the paper was plagued by a number of design flaws, omissions, and conflicts of interest. Our main concerns are summarized briefly here and described in detail below.    1.   The study introduced potential confounding variables into the burn rooms, including a flat screen television.    2.   The authors fail to identify the chemicals used as flame retardants in the individual items in each room.    3.   The toxicity analysis that was done does not serve to quantify the problem.    4.   The authors do not appropriately review the scientific literature on the efficacy of code provisions of home furnishings and electronics.    5.   The burn rooms do not accurately reflect real fire environments.    6.   This study was funded by the North American Fire-Retardant Association and the American Chemistry Council, which should be noted as conflict of interest, not merely an acknowledgement.   Blais et al. attempted to compare the fire safety of furniture from countries with a smolder-only flammability standard (France and the United States) against furniture from a country with a combination open-flame and smolder standard (the United Kingdom). However, the comparison was blurred by, among other problems, confounding variables in the experimental burn rooms.   For example, each burn room had a flat panel television purchased in the same country as the room's couch and chair. Although the authors say the televisions &quot;appeared to be identical,&quot; the chemical analysis of the television casings showed ...<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0015-2684",
doi="10.1007/s10694-020-01087-6",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10694-020-01087-6"
}