General Purpose Household Cleaners
Twenty years of CPSC NEISS emergency-room records for this consumer product category, combined with demographic breakdowns, multi-year injury trends, and matching recall notices.
Home Workshop Tools & Equipment · CPSC Code 954
Stable over 5 years
The verdict
General Purpose Household Cleaners carry a danger score of 41/100 (moderate risk), driven by roughly 14,660 ER-treated injuries a year that are roughly flat over the last five years.
- 41/100
- danger score (moderate risk)
- 14,660
- ER visits per year (avg)
- 6.7%
- end in hospital admission
- 0-4
- most-injured age group
Every figure is rendered from the CPSC NEISS record for product code 954 - last data year 2024.
PlainSafety danger score
How this 41/100 score is built
The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for general purpose household cleaners - no opinion, no editorializing:
- Injury volume14,660 ER visits/yr
- Severity (hospitalization rate)6.7%
- Fatality rate0.06%
- 5-year trend+4%
See the full methodology for the exact weighting of each factor.
What the CPSC Data Shows
General Purpose Household Cleaners (CPSC product code 954, in the Home Workshop Tools & Equipment category) generate an estimated 14,660 emergency-room visits every year in the United States, adding up to roughly 293,203 ER-treated injuries across the 20-year span from 2005 to 2024. PlainSafety derives a danger score of 41/100 for this category (moderate risk), combining raw injury volume, demographic reach, severity of outcome, and multi-year trend. The five-year trajectory shows that injury counts are roughly flat over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2013 (17,371 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2007 (12,723 estimated visits).
The single most common ER diagnosis for general purpose household cleaners is poisoning to the all parts body, accounting for approximately 134,661 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by derma/conjunct to the eyeball (26,176 cases). The 0-4 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 68,292 cases over the NEISS window, and males appear slightly more often than the opposite sex in that cohort. Severity outcomes from the NEISS disposition field show that 6.7% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer, and a small fraction (0.06%) result in fatality.
Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 142 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how general purpose household cleaners fail in real households. Every figure on this page comes from CPSC-published data: NEISS projects national estimates from a probability sample of about 100 U.S. hospital emergency departments, while SaferProducts.gov collects voluntary reports from consumers, manufacturers, and clinicians. The danger score, trend indicators, and demographic breakdowns update automatically when CPSC releases a new yearly NEISS file, which is why this page is dated 2024-12-31. For regulatory context, consult CPSC recall notices and the SaferProducts.gov public database linked below.
Annual Injury Estimates (2005–2024)
Source: CPSC NEISS national estimates CPSC NEISS national estimates Injuries represent ER-treated cases only
Who Gets Injured?
| Age Group | Male | Female | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0-4 | 40,063 | 28,229 | |
| 5-14 | 6,408 | 8,582 | |
| 15-24 | 16,064 | 15,988 | |
| 25-34 | 19,575 | 24,885 | |
| 35-44 | 19,118 | 24,643 | |
| 45-54 | 13,241 | 22,992 | |
| 55-64 | 9,000 | 19,054 | |
| 65-74 | 6,124 | 8,927 | |
| 75+ | 4,095 | 6,083 |
Most Common Injuries
| Body Part | Diagnosis | Est. Injuries |
|---|---|---|
| All Parts Body | Poisoning | |
| Eyeball | Derma/conjunct | |
| Eyeball | Burn, Chemical | |
| Eyeball | Other | |
| Eyeball | Contusions, Abr. | |
| Hand | Derma/conjunct | |
| All Parts Body | Other | |
| Face | Burn, Chemical | |
| Hand | Burn, Chemical | |
| Face | Derma/conjunct | |
| All Parts Body | Derma/conjunct | |
| Lower Arm | Derma/conjunct | |
| Face | Other | |
| Upper Trunk | Other | |
| Upper Trunk | Derma/conjunct |
Severity Breakdown
ER Visit Narratives
Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.
54YOM WAS HUFFING COMPUTER CLEANER WHEN HE DROVE HIS CAR OFF THE ROAD DX: INHALANT ABUSE
38 YOF TO ED VIA EMS WITH C/O BEING COLD AND HAVING NO WHERE TO GO. ALSO NOTED IS A CHEMICAL BURN TO HER FACE FROM USING *** ON HER FACE. EDEMA NOTED TO L TEMPORAL AND L CHEEK REGIONS. DX: HOMELESS.
24YOM WAS CLEANING HIS ROOM WITH *** AND VINEGAR AND DEVELOPED PAIN IN CHEST DX: ACUTE CHEST PAIN
62 YOM WITH RIGHT EYE PAIN AFTER SPLASHING *** IN HIS EYE EARLIER THIS MORNING. DX CHEMICAL CONJUNCTIVITIS RIGHT EYE, CORNEAL ABRASION RIGHT EYE
24YOF PATIENT REPORTS SHE ACCIDENTALLY SPRAYED CARPET CLEANER IN HER RIGHT EYE DX: RIGHT EYE INJURY
48YOM PATIENT ELOPED FROM THE ED LAST NIGHT. HE WAS FOUND WANDERING THE PARKING LOT. HE REPORTEDLY DRANK A BOTTLE OF *** HOUSE CLEANER. HE DENIES DRINKING ANYTHING BUT ALCOHOL. HE SAYS HE IS SEEING SPIDERS AND OTHER THINGS CRAWLING ON HIM. BAL <10. DX: HALLUCINATIONS DUE TO ALCOHOL, ALCOHOL WITHDRAWAL, ENCEPHALOPATHY, TACHYCARDIA
77 YOM WAS AT THE ***. HE BECAME SOB AND BEGAN TO HYPERVENTILATE AFTER BEING EXPOSED TO SOME CLEANING PRODUCTS THAT WERE BEING USED AT THE CENTER. DX SOB
28YOF PT C/O RASH TO HANDS DUE TO BEING EXPOSED TO CLEANERS & CHEMICAL AGENTS DX: RASH OF BOTH HANDS
43YOM PT HUFFING AIR DUSTER; HAD + LOC & APPARENT HEAD INJURY DX: SYNCOPE, INHALANT ABUSE
13YOM WITH :HUFFING DUST REMOVER DX: CHEMICAL INHALATION
61YOF PRESENTS WITH A RASH ON HANDS AND THIGHS S/P PT STATES YESTERDAY SHE WAS USING A NEW CLEANING PRODUCT WITHOUT GLOVES AND LATER THAT EVENING HAD AN ITCHY RASH ON HER HANDS THAT SPREAD TO THE BACK OF HER LEGS. DX: RASH
36YOF PT HAS BURN TO LEFT NECK FROM 10 DAYS AGO WHILE COOKING. ALSO GOT SOME CLEANING PRODUCT ON BURN WHILE CLEANING BATHROOM DX: BURN
Consumer Incident Reports
Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.
I purchased BANG brand shower cleaner from a Dollar Tree and there are two significant issues where I think there may be a problem with the chemical. First, when I use it the fumes cause me to cough a lot even after I have left the bathroom after spraying. I would not characterize the cough as violent but it is a hard cough and lasts quite a few minutes. I had to hold my breath while spraying and then close the bathroom door to escape the fumes. The second issue is the chemical melts the caulk around the fixtures. To make sure the melting was due to BANG I cleaned the melted caulk off, re-caulked the fixtures and used another brand of cleaner for 3 weeks with no problems. After switching back to BANG the caulk again melted within one week. I do have pictures if you wish for me to forward them. Because of these two factors I want to bring this to your attention because this product may be a toxic concern. I contacted Dollar Tree with the above information but they never responded so I wanted to pass it along to you.
14 month old child ingested StylPro Makeup Brush Cleaner - Vegan formula - estimated child drank 75% of 5 fl oz bottle. Child drank cleaner around approximately 11 am, passed away the same day at the hospital by 548 pm. Immediate medical attention was obtained, unknown if poison control center was called. Unknown what type of cap was attached to the bottle (pour out, spray, etc), however per crime scene photos, it was a screw type cap. Cause of death noted to be toxicity of 2, 2, 4, 4, 6, 8, 8 heptamethylnonane.
I am a toxicologist at the poison center and was called last evening on a pediatric ingestion to: Mr Clean Concentrated Multi-Purpose Cleaner without any child protective labeling. The child did fine but the ease of the container opening is worrisome
I purchased a bottle of Pro-Tek cleaner from a door-to-door sales person after he demonstrated the cleaning capability of the product. It was very expensive @ $89 a bottle. The salesman said that it was a concentrated cleaner and was non-toxic. I stored the cleaner in the undersink cabinet in my kitchen. The bottle leaked and ruined my cabinet! Upon discovering the leak, I pulled up the shelf liner and moved the cleansers out and found that about 1/4 of the bottle leaked out. Because the sales person emphasized the non-toxicity of the product, I did not put on PPE such as gloves to clean up the mess. Upon contact with the bottle, the product immediately began to burn my skin! I pulled out some pH paper and tested the liquid, and its pH is approaching 14! How is this purported to be non-toxic?? I called [REDACTED] at Pro-Tek customer service twice and reported the problem. I asked her what could be done about my damaged sink and asked why there is no warning on the bottle about needing to use PPE when using this product. [REDACTED] said that the product is non-toxic and she has used it for 13 years with no problem. She said to pour the remaining product in a milk jug and send the old bottle back for replacement. I told her that maybe her product is not compatible with the bottle that they sell it in. I told her about the burning sensation on my skin and she said that diluted, the product is non-toxic. I told her that the product that leaked out under my sink is not diluted, but concentrated, so the product as it exists in my house right not, has a very high pH. She said that the product is non-acidic. I said that I totally agree - the product is EXTREMELY BASIC, very caustic! She said that she could send me a replacement bottle and that is all she can do for me. This does not seem right!
I was cleaning a small area under the stove to place a new stove. Not long after my throat & chest began to hurt. It's been two days I have since still had pain, shortness of breath & have lost my voice.
I purchased a bottle of Olympic Premium Deck Cleaner. When I arrived home, I found that the bottle had tipped over and leaked all over the trunk of my car. The very toxic and caustic chemicals had done significant damage. Ironically, I had tightened the cap prior to putting the bottle in my car to try to make sure that this did not happen. I had no idea that these bottles are not even sealed!!! The design of the bottle is such that it easily tips over. I believe (1) that it is virtually impossible to carry this product in any car or truck without it tipping over and (2) when it tips over the liquid is going to leak and do considerable damage. This is a dangerous situation that needs to be addressed.
On Saturday 9/15/2012, I was washing my kitchen floors with Fabuloso Citrus Cleaner. As we have no children, the bottle was sitting on the counter incase I needed to use an additional amount. My husband remarked as to why I had left a bottle of juice sitting on the counter and not put it in the refrigerator. When I pointed out it was cleaner, he stated how would anyone know? I pulled a bottle of a name brand juice product from the cupboard and place it side by side with the cleaner. The shape and size of the bottles were almost identical. Additionally, the cleaner is a pretty red color, has a very fruity fragrance and the label displays large slices of fruit. Reciently we have red several atricles about children mistaking laundry products and dishwasher soap for candy. I believe Colgate-Palmolive might want to rethink the packaging and appearance of the Fabuloso before some child makes the same mistake and assume it is a juice drink as my husband did.
Just find out that this product was re-called back in 2016, was looking at the website of LOWES for an appliance re-call when I came across this product re-call. Was completely appalled due to the fact that the company never made the re-call. When I see the effects on immunocompromise Individuals, I'm furious I was about to use it again this weekend. But by the light of my HIGER POWER, I was saved. But I recall using this product many times before and now I'm questioning my decline in health as I'm wheelchair-bound at the age of 57 and being home at all times while using this product. Why this and other companies allow to do that? What about my health and others. For the past 4 yrs., this has been in my home, my sanctuary, my peaceful home. What I'm supposed to do?
Showing 8 of 142 reports.
Product Recalls
Search for active and past recalls related to general purpose household cleaners on the CPSC website.
Frequently Asked Questions
How dangerous are general purpose household cleaners?
Based on 20 years of CPSC data, general purpose household cleaners have a danger score of 41/100 (moderate risk). An estimated 14,660 ER-treated injuries occur annually in the U.S. related to this product category.
What are the most common injuries from general purpose household cleaners?
The most common injury is poisoning to the all parts body, accounting for approximately 134,661 injuries over 20 years.
Are injuries from general purpose household cleaners increasing or decreasing?
Stable over 5 years.
Who is most at risk for general purpose household cleaners injuries?
The 0-4 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 68,292 cases recorded over 20 years. Males are more frequently injured in this age group.
What happens when someone is injured by general purpose household cleaners?
Of all ER visits involving general purpose household cleaners, approximately 6.7% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (93.3%) are treated and released from the emergency department.
How can I report a safety problem with general purpose household cleaners?
You can file a consumer incident report at SaferProducts.gov, the official CPSC reporting portal. Reports help the CPSC identify emerging hazards and trigger investigations or recalls. You can also call the CPSC hotline at 1-800-638-2772.
Related Products in Home Workshop Tools & Equipment
Safety Guides
What this means for you
Treat the 41/100 score as relative risk between products, not your personal odds of injury.
- See where this category ranks against every other tracked product. Full rankings
- Injuries cluster in the 0-4 age group, take extra care if that describes your household.
- Check for active recalls on this product before you assume it is safe. CPSC recalls
NEISS estimates ER-treated injuries from a national probability sample of hospitals; they do not capture injuries treated elsewhere or not treated at all.
Data: CPSC National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) 2005–2024 and SaferProducts.gov consumer incident reports. Injury estimates are based on a nationally representative probability sample of U.S. hospital emergency departments. This page is for informational purposes only and is not affiliated with the CPSC.
Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, scored, and verified.