The Consumer Council wishes to state categorically that its comparative test report on men's electric shavers is impartial, fair, and truthful consistent with international research and testing in the consumer interest.
The Council is in response to an advertisement which appeared in several Chinese newspapers yesterday (December 17) regarding the test report published in the current issue of CHOICE.
The local supplier and agent of Panasonic ES-SL41-R men's shaver - a Wet & Dry model for fully water-proofed use under the shower - has expressed disagreement with the Council for going ahead with the publication of the report despite its repeated objections.
The main bone of contention concerns the methodology adopted for the test and particularly in regard to the water tightness test preceded by accelerated/climatic ageing designed to simulate conditions after prolonged storage/usage and before the end of the product life.
The test was designed and co-ordinated by the International Consumer Research and Testing (ICRT) as a joint test among some 16 consumer organisations including those in Germany, France, Holland, the UK, Belgium and Australia.
The ICRT is a global consortium of more than 35 consumer organisations dedicated to carry out joint research and testing in the consumer interest. The Consumer Council is a member of the ICRT since 1978.
The water tightness test falls under durability which is an area of reasonable expectation and concern to consumers. The accelerated/climatic ageing (pre-conditioning) process was subscribed to by international members participating in the ICRT joint test and applied uniformly on all test samples covered by the comparative testing.
In the Council's test, all 8 wet and dry models tested were subjected to the same identical test procedure for comparison of their relative performance.
It is the Council's view and position that the subject test being a comparative test, strict adherence to specific requirements of a particular, or any, standard is not imperative as long as conditions are uniformly imposed on all samples tested.
In accordance with the standard pre-publication procedure, the Council has engaged in continued contact in correspondence with the management of the agent as well as their legal counsel in this matter.
The comments of the supplier and agent concerned were noted and duly published in the "Manufacturer's Comments" column alongside with the main body of the test findings in CHOICE, for the information and reference of consumers.
In conclusion, the Council firmly stands by the report for being impartial, fair and truthful.