« Misc pics of the day 07-24-2007 (40 pics) | Main | New York International Autoshow (20 pics) »
Chinese flip flop: so cheap, so dangerous (29 pics)
All images contained in this web site were found on the internet – all their rights will be kept. If by anyhow any of them is offensive to you, please, contact us asking for the removal. If you own copyrights over any of them and do not agree with it being shown here, please send us an email with ownership proof and we will remove it.
The STATiC goal is to entertain his users. Feel free to comment any of the image series, offensive word or offense towards other users will not be tolerated. Thank you by your visit and come back soon. If you do enjoy the images, click on the Stumble Upon button to share them to more people.
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://static.iftk.com.br/mt/mt-tb.cgi/449
Comments (22)
What happened? Was this an allergic reaction? How long were the sandals worn?
Posted by Cory | July 24, 2007 6:04 PM
Posted on July 24, 2007 18:04
It sucks that these were posted without attributing the source.
These were ganked from this site:
http://www.lamanaphotography.com/walmart.htm
She purchased the flip flops at Walmart and the company is giving her the run around and refuses to pull the shoes from their shelves. Another person also apparently received chemical burns from wearing them.
Posted by VSC | July 27, 2007 1:35 AM
Posted on July 27, 2007 01:35
Wow! At what point do you look at your feet and think "maybe I should take these things off and NOT put them back on"? Apparently for some people, it's not until they start bleeding and having open sores. I know that I would have taken them off at the first sign of trouble, but that's mostly because common sense isn't something I have to strive for. Darwin's law, I guess.
Posted by FatMan | July 27, 2007 1:55 AM
Posted on July 27, 2007 01:55
Wow that is really GROSS! What was the diagnosis? Athletes foot?
Posted by Matt | July 27, 2007 1:56 AM
Posted on July 27, 2007 01:56
What were you thinking when this allergic reaction begins,you should stop wearing it when the symptom buded or buy another pair of sandals more loose
Posted by pobosee | July 27, 2007 2:09 AM
Posted on July 27, 2007 02:09
Maybe you guys dont get it, or dont want to get it, While this person was wearing the sandals there were no symptoms, and then a day or two after having worn them, they started to appear. Quit making the lady out to be the dipshit and realieze this is walmarts fault, not hers.
Posted by Epoc | July 27, 2007 3:03 AM
Posted on July 27, 2007 03:03
Maybe a latex allergy?
Posted by Scott | July 27, 2007 3:18 AM
Posted on July 27, 2007 03:18
Not bright, is she? Why would wal-mart listen to her? Though they'd probably listen to a lawyer. First thing she should have done was contact one to sue wal-mart. That would get their attention. Oh, and yeah she said she wasn't rich, who cares? There are plenty of lawyers who would just take their cut out of what they get from wal-mart so she doesn't need money. It's probably not to late to get a lawyer. Wal-mart isn't going to give a **** about one person complaining online.
Posted by phazei | July 27, 2007 10:44 AM
Posted on July 27, 2007 10:44
Yes, It does look like a latex allergy. The sandals should have a latex warning on them at minimum. By looking at the picture of the yellow sandals, it appears as if she wore them more than a couple of times. A latex allergy can take time to appeaar as repeated exposure to the allergen will intensify the body's response.
Posted by MickieLyn | July 27, 2007 1:21 PM
Posted on July 27, 2007 13:21
Doesn't look like a latex allergy at all. Looks like a burn - the straps were probably treated with a chemical like an acid which was never properly washed off so the chemical residue transferred over to the skin. Find a lawyer to take this on contingency (33.3% of any amount collected, nothing out of pocket to you if you lose) and sue Walmart.
Posted by Mike | July 27, 2007 6:24 PM
Posted on July 27, 2007 18:24
Why should Walmart worry? Walmart rule!
Posted by TopSod | July 27, 2007 7:12 PM
Posted on July 27, 2007 19:12
This exact same thing happened to me, but with a pair of Sketchers. My ankles were red the evening after I wore them, then a day or two later they broke out and got swollen every place the straps touched me. The doctor said it was contact dermatitis - my skin reacting to some chemical on the shoes. My ankles looked worse than any of these pictures, and I only had the shoes on for a few hours.
Posted by chills | July 28, 2007 6:23 PM
Posted on July 28, 2007 18:23
discusting
Posted by Mciheal | July 28, 2007 7:23 PM
Posted on July 28, 2007 19:23
There is no way that's an allergic reaction, imho. The very defined area of reaction, the extreme amount of skin damage, the depth of skin loss - that looks much more like chemical burn. Like something left on the sandals after manufacturing, or the solvents used in cleaing them prior to shipment, or error in composing the mixture using in the injection molding process to form them.
Posted by Jerome Ball | July 28, 2007 11:27 PM
Posted on July 28, 2007 23:27
É preciso ter muito cuidado com certos produtos
Posted by jose cunha | July 30, 2007 1:07 AM
Posted on July 30, 2007 01:07
its a chemical burn, she went to an emergency room for it...
someone else was also burned.
Posted by drgdasf | July 30, 2007 9:43 PM
Posted on July 30, 2007 21:43
Use Havainas, as legítimas!!
Posted by Priscila (BRAZIL) | July 31, 2007 2:05 AM
Posted on July 31, 2007 02:05
That looks painful. You'd think they would've taken them off long before it got that bad.
Posted by Dave | July 31, 2007 7:52 AM
Posted on July 31, 2007 07:52
sith
Posted by Anonymous | August 2, 2007 6:14 AM
Posted on August 2, 2007 06:14
That is Formal Dehyde.
Posted by Kev | August 2, 2007 5:18 PM
Posted on August 2, 2007 17:18
Typical Americans!! Either dumb or litigious.
Posted by Anonymous | August 5, 2007 2:25 AM
Posted on August 5, 2007 02:25
What puzzles me is that on this website, anything that isnt understood by the person posting is labeled as "Chinese".
Why is that?
Posted by MJ | September 1, 2007 2:56 PM
Posted on September 1, 2007 14:56