Only part of the equation

Dear editor:
The recent debate about what type of smoke alarm you should have in your home greatly disturbs me.
Not because I believe one technology is better than the other–in fact, experience has shown that both ionization and photoelectric smoke alarms are effective at detecting fires in the home.
My concern is that people may believe the only thing they need to be safe from fire is a smoke alarm. The truth is, if you and your family are going to survive a fire, you may need much more than that.
Most fatal fires occur at night, when people are asleep. Often these are very slow, smoldering fires, which are the most difficult to detect. Photoelectric alarms may respond slightly faster to this type of fire, however when these smoldering fires reach the flaming stage, both alarms will respond effectively.
Ionization type smoke alarms may respond faster to hot, flaming fires, such as those that can occur in the kitchen.
Regardless of the type, the more smoke alarms you have, the earlier a fire may be detected. Fire and smoke can spread at an incredible rate so by the time the alarm sounds, a substantial amount of smoke already may be filling your home. You may only have a very short time to escape so you must be prepared to act immediately.
Developing a home escape plan, and practising it with your family, can greatly improve your chances of surviving.
Of course, the best way to protect yourself from fire is to prevent one from occurring in the first place. Pay close attention when cooking or smoking, and never leave open flame–such as fireplaces or candles–unattended.
Smoke alarms definitely are an essential component of fire safety but they’re only part of the equation. A well-rehearsed home escape plan and good, fire-safe behaviours will go a long way toward protecting you and your family.
Signed,
Bernard Moyle
Fire Marshal of Ontario