You'd neede the same area using 2 different volages at once (Japan almost counts) or a country switching from one to the other. That way you only have one variable, the others being what Wouter said, along with local laws & requlations, plug & socket design etc. Given that's unlikely to happen you can never really be sure. The statistics seem to indicate it doen't matter all that much anyway, either will happily kill you. Do the British still supply equipment minus the plug, the joke was they were trying to create a nation of electricians (a step up from shopkeepers I suppose) as you needed to wire it up yourself. Do all the plugs still have a fuse? Tony > Well then, what fact about the world would constitute evidence that > high voltage is better (or worse) than low voltage? Where would you > look, if you don't look at death rate from electrocution? > > On 11/20/05, Wouter van Ooijen wrote: >> > If 220 is somehow more dangerous than 110, then there will be >> > statistics (i.e., excess death rate from electrocution) to show that. >> > Are there such statistics? Do more people die from electric shock in >> > the 220 countries? >> >> Statistics is not that easy. The death rate would be influenced by many >> other factors, some of which might be more important than the voltage. >> Like: the climate. In a very dry climate the risk is probably much lower >> than in a wet climate (lower body resistance). OTOH people in a wet >> climate might be more inclined to wear rubber boots, which would >> definitely reduce the risk. The way house wiring is done, whether >> safety-earth and/or differential-current safety breakers are manadtory >> and lots of other technical details would also have a lot of influence. >> >> Wouter van Ooijen >> -- http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist