Instead of editorializing the link, people might be interested in reading the actual post from the source that explains the discrepancies. <a href="https://www.facebook.com/westernlakesfd/posts/2694821147468850" rel="nofollow">https://www.facebook.com/westernlakesfd/posts/26948211474688...</a><p>That post does not say it was fake news. It does say that the picture used was not of damage caused from such a fire. And the purpose of the story to begin with:<p>"While infrequent, there have been cases in the recent past were reflecting light placed through a clear bottle was able to focus onto a combustible surface and cause a fire. This has primarily been through water bottles but since hand sanitizer is often stored in the same vessel we wanted to pass it along for your safety. The principle is identical and obviously an additional issue would occur if it happened in the presence of an alcohol based product."<p>"Keeping it in your car during hot weather, exposing it to sun, and particularly being next to open flame while smoking in vehicles or grilling while enjoying this weekend can lead to disaster."<p>Hardly scandalous. Editorializing misinterpreted news as fake news minimizes what was actually intended, and especially when the misinterpretation doesn't alter the message.<p>EDIT: Here is an article from 2 years ago about the exact same subject (minus the alcohol content): <a href="https://www.livescience.com/62899-water-bottle-fire.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.livescience.com/62899-water-bottle-fire.html</a>