Recalled Mangos

The SharkNinja blender bites a little more than just food. Apparently, it has a taste for fingers, too. Over one million of the appliances have been recalled after 53 consumers reported getting cut.

The recall alert published by the CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission) says that "the blender poses a laceration risk if consumers pour or invert the pitcher after removing the lid while the loose stacked blade assembly is still inside the pitcher."

Twelve different models of the SharkNinja have been recalled. Affected blenders have model numbers that start with the following: BL 660, BL 663 and BL 665. The model numbers appear on the base of the motor at the bottom of the appliances.

The SharkNinja blender line was sold at Kohl's, Bed Bath and Beyond, Macy's, Target, Costco, Walmart and other locations throughout the United States and on the Internet from March 2012 to Sept. 2015.

Consumers Being Advised How to Safely Operate Affected Blenders

Consumers in possession of affected models of the SharkNinja are being asked only to empty the blender of its contents via the pour spout on the locked lid. Alternatively, they should remove both the lid and the blade assembly before they attempt to pour out the blender's contents. Consumers with questions about their particular blenders or the recall are also being asked to contact the Ninja company directly with their concerns.

Will These Accidents Give Rise to Product Liability Claims?

When it comes to product liability claims, they might take a variety of forms, such as manufacturing defects and design defects. In the case of the SharkNinja blender, we encounter a potential design-related defect because the people who were cut were not injured by defective blenders. The recalled SharkNinjas that cut these individuals appear to have been operating as they are supposed to, but because the blade assembly was designed to be loose, it can fall out and hurt people.

Should the Ninja manufacturer have thought through their designs of these blenders more thoroughly? Or are the users to blame for not being more careful? Let us know what you think in the comments section below.