Air Purifier Reviews – 5 Key Factors Model

Tuesday, October 27th, 2009    Subscribe To Our Feed

Initially it was 4 factors, now it’s the 5 Key Factors Model. With reference to our last post, we have now included Scientific Peer Review as the fifth key factor in our air purifier review model.

Our research indicates that the lack of scientific peer reviews is a major stumbling block to all the interested parties in accepting the claims of air purifier manufacturers, no matter how reputable the latter may be. These concerned parties include the scientific community such as indoor air quality specialists, environmentalists (both academics and activists), government agencies like the US EPA and NIOSH, the medical community who deal with allergy issues etc.

Commonly, it is taken for granted that this impediment is restricted to the ionic air purifier industry. It is the bane of all other air purification technologies as well, including the respected HEPA technology and the newer photo-catalytic oxidation technology.

It almost seems that, as an intrinsic part of any air purifier review, the scientific peer review is comparable to the holy grail of the air purifier industry. Getting it first may well bestow upon that fortunate manufacturer undisputed domination in the multimillion dollar industry.

Given the inordinate (no embellishment here!) importance of a scientific peer review, the biggest mystery is why no one has deemed it worth their effort to undertake a single review. Luckily, no manufacturer has been reckless enough to ordain a scientific peer review for that would strike at its very integrity, a truly fair judgment.

What is inexplicable is why no scientist or researcher, notably those in the indoor air quality or environmental sciences disciplines who would seem the most knowledgeable to perform an air purifier review, considers it worth their time to do. Being first in any field must bring acknowledgment. Being first in a multimillion dollar industry must be worth a lot more. Surely there cannot be zero value in a scientific peer review for any air purification technology. And we know that funding is not an issue as we have a direct quote from the US NIOSH that it is ready to fund a scientific study that is properly drafted, with the requisite criteria.

The lack of enthusiasm of any scientist or researcher to embark on the quest for a truly independent scientific peer review begs the million dollar question – is the air purification industry a big fraud? Or do scientists view it a futile task akin to seeking the Holy Grail – truth beyond reach? In fact, we have trouble even finding one comprehensive autonomous air purifier review.

Interesting and fascinating, these riveting questions compel us to explore further with our 5-Key Factors Model. Our despatch, to several air purifier manufacturers, of a detailed survey based on our model met with muted response. But this only encourages us to delve deeper.

To recap, the Air Purifier Review - 5 Key Factors Model is as detailed:

(1) Safety – in relation to the reactive agent

(2) Safety – in relation to unintended by-products

(3) Efficacy – the reactive agents work in the lab

(4) Efficiency – the reactive agents work in the real world

(5) Scientific Peer Review.

Each factor of our air purifier review model has been elucidated in detail in distinct Ezine articles which you can gain access to via the widget on our blog. Many thousands of our readers have also published our Ezine write-ups for their own subscriber base. If you have not read or published the full set of 5, you are welcomed to.

Also, please sign up at our blog too as we will shortly launch our initial product review using the Air Purifier Review - 5 Key Factors Model.

Comments are closed.