CPSC NEISS · code 951

Toilet Bowl Products

Toilet Bowl Products: danger rank #370 of 838 is not ER-volume rank #457 of 838 (1,670 estimated ER visits a year; rising by about 19% over the last five years).

Home Workshop Tools & Equipment CPSC NEISS through 2024

Danger score versus ER volume

Danger score versus ER volume

According to CPSC NEISS 2005-2024, Toilet Bowl Products ranks #370 of 838 by danger score (36/100) at ER-volume #457 of 838 (1,670/yr). They are not the same ranking.

#370
danger rank of 838
#457
ER-volume rank of 838
36/100
danger score
1,670/yr
estimated ER visits (avg)

Danger score combines injury volume, hospitalization, fatality, and five-year trend. ER volume is the average annual NEISS estimate alone. Rank 1 is highest on each list.

Where this category's danger score sits nationally

Danger score (36/100) across 838 scored CPSC product categories

36 Around the middle lower than 44% of 838 product categories

scored CPSC product categories, bucketed by value

Each bar is a band; taller bars hold more product categories. The dashed line + filled bar mark this entry. Hover or tap any bar for its full count and share, and where it sits relative to this entry.

Source CPSC NEISS, PlainSafety danger-score model · 2024

Composite verdict

Composite Safety Score: 50/100

One verdict blending 4 independently-sourced dimensions from two separate CPSC systems, each benchmarked against all 838 scored product categories by percentile rather than raw value, so no single huge-volume category can dominate the scale.

C
Dimension Value National percentile Weight applied Source
Injury severity (hospitalization + fatality blend) 6 52nd 35% CPSC NEISS 20-year severity index
Annual ER injury volume 1,670 43rd 30% CPSC NEISS estimated annual ER-treated injuries
5-year injury trend +19% 81st 15% CPSC NEISS 5-year % change in ER-treated injuries
Consumer incident reports 5 34th 20% CPSC SaferProducts.gov public incident report count

Methodology: each dimension is ranked against the full population's p10/p25/p50/p75/p90 breakpoints and interpolated to a 0-100 percentile; the composite is the weighted average of available percentiles. See methodology for the full benchmark table.

Where 33,405 estimated ER injuries land on the body

Body-part shares from the same CPSC NEISS injury_types extract for product code 951. Segments sum to 33,405 - a body-map mix, not a danger score or ER-volume rank.

Two danger lenses

Same-group peer scores and this product's dial

The bars compare PlainSafety danger scores inside the Home Workshop Tools & Equipment group (same CPSC NEISS extract). The dial is this product's score alone on the Low/Moderate/High bands. Do not read a peer bar as an ER-visit count.

Home Workshop Tools & Equipment danger scores

1. Gasoline47/1002. Methyl Alcohol (solvent)45/1003. Caustics43/1004. Lye42/1005. Gasoline Cans41/1006. Paints, Varnishes Or Shel…41/1007. General Purpose Household…41/1008. Toilet Bowl Products36/100
Higher score = higher composite danger in this group. Peer set is other scored products sharing the same CPSC group.
0/100100/10036/100
PlainSafety danger score · Toilet Bowl Products

Source: CPSC NEISS danger-score model As of 2024

How this 36/100 score is built

The score is computed from four CPSC-derived factors for toilet bowl products - no opinion, no editorializing:

  • Injury volume 1,670 ER visits/yr Below median volume
  • Severity (hospitalization rate) 6.0% Above median admission rate
  • Fatality rate 0.00% No recorded fatalities
  • 5-year trend+19%

Band labels compare this category against the corpus of 838 scored CPSC product categories, see the full methodology for the exact weighting of each factor.

What the CPSC Data Shows

Across the 20-year NEISS window from 2005 to 2024, injury counts for toilet bowl products are rising by about 19% over the last five years, with the busiest year on record being 2024 (2,899 estimated ER visits) and the quietest 2023 (860 estimated visits). The single most common ER diagnosis is poisoning to the all parts body, accounting for approximately 20,783 visits across the 20-year NEISS window, followed by burn, chemical to the eyeball (2,544 cases). The 0-4 age group absorbs the largest share of injuries, about 10,873 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 6.0% of ER visits involving this product end in hospital admission or transfer.

Beyond the hospital-sampled NEISS projections, this page also aggregates 5 consumer incident reports filed directly on SaferProducts.gov, plus 20 anonymized ER narratives - together forming a layered picture of how toilet bowl products 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)

5001K2K2K3K3K4K 20052008201120142017202020232024 3K
Estimated annual emergency-room visits for Toilet Bowl Products, CPSC NEISS

Source: CPSC NEISS national injury estimates As of 2024

Source: CPSC NEISS national estimates Injuries represent ER-treated cases only

Who Gets Injured?

Age Group Male Female Total
0-4 5,898 4,975 10,873
5-14 1,005 607 1,612
15-24 1,094 1,787 2,881
25-34 839 3,001 3,840
35-44 1,059 2,391 3,450
45-54 1,388 2,266 3,654
55-64 1,354 1,812 3,166
65-74 612 1,846 2,458
75+ 528 942 1,470

Most Common Injuries

Body Part Diagnosis Est. Injuries
All Parts Body Poisoning 20,783
Eyeball Burn, Chemical 2,544
Eyeball Derma/conjunct 2,378
Eyeball Other 1,239
Lower Trunk Other 711
Eyeball Contusions, Abr. 445
Upper Trunk Other 335
Lower Arm Burn, Chemical 313
Head Internal Injury 278
All Parts Body Anoxia 243
Face Laceration 234
Knee Strain, Sprain 204
Pubic Region Other 195
All Parts Body Other 194
Not Stated/unk Other 190

Severity Breakdown

Treated/examined And Released 90.2% (30,138)
Treated And Admitted/hospitalized 3.1% (1,050)
Left Without Being Seen 2.6% (856)
Treated And Transferred 2.4% (796)
Held For Observation 1.7% (565)

ER Visit Narratives

Real anonymized emergency room reports from the CPSC NEISS database.

Age 71 · Female · All Parts Body · Poisoning · 2024

71 YOF WITH DEMENTIA ACCIDENTLY INGESTED A TOILET BOWL CLEANER TABLET. FAMILY CALLED POISION CONTROL. PATIENT THREW UP AND FAMILY BROUGHT HER TO ER. DX: INGESTION OF TOXIN, N/V

Age 51 · Male · Upper Leg · Other · 2024

51 YOM C/O RED, SWOLLEN THIGH SINCE REMOVING AN OLD TOLIET AND SPILLED SEWAGE LIKE CLEANING PRODUCTS ON HIMSELFT AT HOME DX CELLULITIS THIGH

Age 44 · Female · Eyeball · Contusions, Abr. · 2024

44YOF STS GOT TOILET BOWL CLEANER IN EYE C/O R EYE PAIN +CORNEAL ABRASION PRESENT DX L EYE CORNEAL ULCER

Age 2 · Male · All Parts Body · Poisoning · 2024

2YOM FOUND IN CLOSET DRINKING TOILET BOWL CLEANER. DX: CHEMICAL EXPOSURE.

Age 63 · Female · Ear · Foreign Body · 2024

63YOF - PATIENT PRESENT FOR FOREIGN BODY. PT STATES SHE WAS CLEANING EAR WITH TOILET PAPER AND IT GOT STUCK. DX: FOREIGN BODY OF LEFT EAR

Age 62 · Female · Eyeball · Other · 2024

62YOF REPORTS WITH EYE PAIN AND REDNESS AFTER CONTACT WITH CLEANING PRODUCT. PATIENT DOES NOT KNOW THE PRODUCT BUT WAS CLEANING THE TOILET. DX CHEMICAL INJURY TO EYE

Age 59 · Female · All Parts Body · Poisoning · 2024

59YOF STATES THAT SHE USED A NEW BLUE CHEMICAL TABLET IN HER TOILET BOWL WHEN SHE DEVELOPED FACIAL SWELLING AND ITCHING ALL OVER DX: ALLERGIC REACTION

Age 50 · Female · Eyeball · Derma/conjunct · 2024

50YOF PRESENTS WITH BURNING AND BLURRINESS TO RIGHT EYE AFTER ACCIDENTALLY GETTING TOILET BOWL CLEANER SPLASHED IN IT. DX: CHEMICAL CONJUNCTIVITIS OF RIGHT EYE, CORNEAL ABRASION, EYE PAIN

Age 39 · Male · All Parts Body · Poisoning · 2024

39YOM, COMING IN WITH COUGH AFTER MIXING BLEACH WITH TOILET BOWL CLEANER AND INHALED THE FUMES, WAS IN THE ROOM FOR ABOUT 5 MINUTES, DX: ACUTE COUGH; TOXIC INHALATION, ACCIDENTAL

Age 72 · Female · Not Stated/unk · Other · 2024

72YOF PRESENTS AFTER A SYNCOPAL EPISODE IN HER BATHROOM WHERE SHE FELL FROM THE TOILET TO THE FLOOR. DX: FALL WITHOUT INJURY, COVID 19

Age 48 · Male · All Parts Body · Poisoning · 2024

48YOM PRESENTS WITH INHALTION INJURY. PT STATES THAT HE WAS CLEANING HIS BATHROOM AT HOME WHEN HE USED *** BLEACH AND *** TOILET CLEANER WHICH CONTAINS HYPOCHLOROUS ACID, WHEN THETWO MIXED HE BEGAN TO SMELL BURNING SCENT.HE STATES HIS EYES BECAME IRRITATED AND HE BEGAN COUGHING HAVING SOB. DX: TOXIC EFFECT OF CHLORINE GAS

Age 2 · Female · All Parts Body · Poisoning · 2024

2YOF, BROUGHT IN BY DAD WHO REPORTS THAT SHE WAS HOLDING TOILET BOWL CLEANER, IN HAND AND MAY HAVE LICKED IT, AS HER TONGUE WAS ALL BLUE, PATIENT IS COMPLETELY ASYMPTOMATIC AND ACTING AT HER BASELINE, POISON CONTROL IDENTIFIED THE PRODUCT AS ***, DX: CHEMICAL EXPOSURE

Consumer Incident Reports

Reports filed by consumers on SaferProducts.gov.

6/9/2023 · Injury, Level of care not known · Bowlsparkle · Virginia

I ordered a product called Bowlsparkle from a website called bowlsparkle.com. It was advertised to be a foaming powder that would clean and sanitize toilet bowls while emitting a "fresh scent." When it came in I used it as directed. Immediately my throat began to burn and I was having trouble breathing due to the fumes. Then my son and I both got headaches. There was no ingredients listed on the box so I tried to [REDACTED] "bowlsparkle ingredients" and landed on a site for the Consumer Product Information Database for a product called "[REDACTED]." If I'm reading the site right, the product is 24 percent hydrochloric acid and has been discontinued due to warnings about irritation of the respiratory tract among other things. The effects of inhaling the fumes lasted all evening. I would really like for this product to be investigated as I believe it is very dangerous

6/2/2025 · Injury, Emergency Department Treatment Received · MISCO Products Corporation · Texas

Dear Consumer Product Safety Commission, I am writing to report a serious incident involving a hazardous chemical product that has caused me significant health issues and emotional trauma. I believe it highlights a dangerous gap in product safety and labeling that leaves consumers vulnerable to severe harm. I was exposed to Triple S Strong Arm Heavy Duty Clinging Bowl and Restroom Cleaner, which is labeled For Industrial and Institutional Use Only. Despite this label, the product is easily purchased online by consumers with no meaningful barriers to access. A friend who works in commercial cleaning recommended it and assured me it was safe for home use. After using the product to clean my bathroom, I experienced: Constant burning skin, swelling, and severe allergic reactions. My potassium levels dropped to a dangerously low level, resulting in a critically low heart rate that required emergency medical care. The chemical spread throughout my apartment, contaminating my bedding, clothing, carpet, appliances, and other surfaces. I was trapped in my own home for 40 days with constant exposure. Even after professional decontamination, I continue to fear my home, living with ongoing anxiety and trauma. I believe this product poses a serious risk to consumers, especially given its easy online availability despite its labeling. I am requesting: 1. That the CPSC investigate the products labeling and sales practices to ensure it is not accessible to untrained consumers. 2. That the CPSC review whether the products labeling, warnings, and instructions are adequate to prevent harm in residential settings. 3. That the CPSC consider regulatory or enforcement actions to protect consumers from hazardous products labeled for industrial use. I can provide documentation, medical records, and photos if needed. Please let me know how best to submit them. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. I look forward to your response. Sincere

5/4/2011 · Incident, No Injury · CHURCH & DWIGHT CO., INC. · Pennsylvania

I used KABOOM Bowl Blaster Foaming Toilet Cleaner today, May 4, 2011. My primary concern is that use of the product produces a dust cloud no matter how carefully it is used. The dust is labelled as causing eye and respiratory tract irritation (it does). The product is scented in a way that makes it attractive to children, but it does NOT have a childproof cap. The front label states, "CAUTION: KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN. HARMFUL IF SWALLOWED. CAUSES EYE IRRITATION. READ ADDITIONAL CAUTIONS ON BACK PANELCAREFULLY BEFORE USING." This is a dangerous product that should be made less attractive and accessible to children.

5/16/2011 · Injury, Seen by Medical Professional · CHURCH & DWIGHT CO., INC. · Unspecified

A 51-YOF PATIENT C/O SOB, COUGH, HAD WHEEZING IN LUNGS, FROM EXPOSURE TO BLEACH, AMMONIA AND TOILET BOWL CLEANER WHILE CLEANING BATHROOM; DX: CHEMICAL PNEUMONITIS.

1/17/2023 · Injury, No First Aid or Medical Attention Received · Henkel Corporation · New Jersey

(01/14/2023) The consumer has a safety concern about the product. He stated that they should be removed from the shelves. The consumer used the product for the first time on 1-14. He stated that the fumes bother his nose and gives him a headache. He also stated that the fumes are toxic and gets worse each time the toilet is flushed.

Product Recalls

Search for active and past recalls related to toilet bowl products on the CPSC website.

Compare beyond Home Workshop Tools & Equipment

Nationwide peers by danger score, ER volume & hospitalization

Three PlainSafety-derived comparison paths for Toilet Bowl Products: cross-group products nearest on danger score (36/100), estimated annual ER visits (1,670/yr), and hospitalization share (6.0%). Same-group neighbours stay in Related Products above.

Read with this product

About this data

CPSC National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) 2005–2024 and SaferProducts.gov consumer incident reports form the basis of this page. Injury estimates are based on a nationally representative probability sample of U.S. hospital emergency departments.

According to PlainSafety's CPSC NEISS corpus ranking, Toilet Bowl Products ranks #370 of 838 scored CPSC product categories by PlainSafety danger score and #457 of 838 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume.

Frequently Asked Questions

Where does toilet bowl products rank on danger score versus ER volume?

Among 838 scored CPSC product categories, toilet bowl products ranks #370 by PlainSafety danger score (36/100) and #457 by 20-year estimated ER injury volume (1,670/yr). The two rankings come from the same NEISS extract and are not the same order.

What are the most common injuries from toilet bowl products?

The most common injury is poisoning to the all parts body, accounting for approximately 20,783 injuries over 20 years.

Are injuries from toilet bowl products increasing or decreasing?

Up 19% over 5 years.

Who is most at risk for toilet bowl products injuries?

The 0-4 age group accounts for the most injuries, with approximately 10,873 cases recorded over 20 years. Males are more frequently injured in this age group.

What happens when someone is injured by toilet bowl products?

Of all ER visits involving toilet bowl products, approximately 6.0% result in hospital admission. The majority of patients (94.0%) are treated and released from the emergency department.

How can I report a safety problem with toilet bowl products?

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.

Data on Toilet Bowl Products is compiled directly from CPSC NEISS and SaferProducts.gov records, current through 2024. See our methodology for details.

Disclaimer: This page is for informational purposes only and is not affiliated with the CPSC.

PlainSafety is rendered directly from U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission recall and incident records, no number is typed in by an editor. Product recall timelines and hazard labels are drawn from CPSC recall records for this product. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error. Data current as of August 2026.