Air Purifiers Review – 5 Key Factors Model
Posted: August 31, 2009 – 6:01 pmFormerly it was 4, now it’s the 5 Key Factors Model. With reference to our previous post, we have now included Scientific Peer Review as the fifth key factor in our air purifier review model.
No matter how notable the air purifier manufacturer may be, the lack of scientific peer reviews is a humongous obstacle to all the interested parties in approving their claims. These interested 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 manage allergy afflictions etc.
Most people will be cheered that this issue is restricted to the ionic air purifier industry. But that is a misconception. It also affects all other technologies in the air purifier industry, be it the well-trusted HEPA and the new-kid-on-the-block (relatively speaking) photo-catalytic oxidation, etc.
It is almost as if, as an intrinsic requisite of any air purifier review, the scientific peer review is similar to the holy grail of the air purifier industry. Any fortunate manufacturer who gets it first will amass the same legendary leadership in the multimillion dollar industry.
Considering the utmost (no exaggeration here!) distinction of a scientific peer review, it is intriguing that no scientist has deemed it worthwhile to endeavor a single review. It is comprehensible that no air purifier manufacturer has commissioned one since that would annul the independence factor that is central to a scientific peer review.
What is puzzling is why no scientist or researcher, specifically those in the indoor air quality or environmental sciences disciplines who would seem the most knowledgeable to execute an air purifier review, considers it worthwhile to do. At a time when nanotechnology is the rage, it is strange that air purification technologies as pioneers of nanotechnology draws little interest from the scientific community. No one seems to place a value on executing the first scientific peer review in this multimillion dollar worldwide industry. More than strange. As a matter of fact, we know that funding is available from the US NIOSH. They are ready to fund anyone who can deliver a high caliber scientific peer review.
Curiously, why isn’t there a scientist who finds it worthwhile to produce a scientific peer review. A million dollar question begging for an answer - surely the air purification industry is not just science fiction? One other possibility is that scientists view proving air purification technology as chasing the Holy Grail - a futile pursuit for those with limitless resources? Incredibly, we have trouble even finding a single comprehensive independent air purifier review.
These very bewildering questions drive us to greater investigation 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 fully in separate Ezine articles which you can access via the widget on our blog. Thousands of our readers have also published our Ezine write-ups on their own blogs 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 as well as we plan to launch our initial product review utilising the Air Purifier Review - 5 Key Factors Model.
