Super Baby Album

Posts Tagged ‘air purifier’

it might seem that the ionic air purifier is a complicated gimmick, it is not really like that. And it is, in fact, so easy. When the air goes through the ionic air purifier the pollution molecules which float round in the air are electrically loaded. Inside the machine, metal plates, that are charged oppositely, preserve the polluted substances while they float by.

The only maintenance item in the machine are stainless steel plates, which may be easily pulled out of the machine and wiped clean. And that is the entire procedure! Pull them out, wipe them off, and take them back in. Your purifier will continue filtering as if it was brand new. And, it just has to be done once each few weeks. You’ll be surprised at the amount of black gunk that is stuck to those plates. Furthermore, not having a ionic air purifier this black gunk would’ve ended up in you or your family member’s lungs.

Why does it happen the air stream that produces the pollutants floats by the ionic air purifier? If we know that there is no fan how did the air actually move? Every particle and molecule of air close to the intake of the ionic air purifier is charged. The air molecules and particles near the plates are pulled forward since the stainless steel plates are as well loaded reversely. The result of the air flowing directly to the cleaning plates is known as the ionic breeze, keeping the air flow while the ionic air purifier is plugged in.

The nasties like smoke, chemicals, odors, pollen and even animal dander are stuck to the cleaning plates being left there as long as somebody wipes them off, once in every two weeks. The lighter molecules, like the untainted air, go through the cleaning plates and get back into the room. Finally, you obtain pure, clean and unpolluted air, that will make your breathing easier.

In order to appreciate the ionic air purifier you should really try it. You’ll be content with a twist without fan producing a detectable breeze, and you will realize how much unhealthy substances you breathe. For this reason, great number of merchants will provide you one to try out for free for a limited time, and if you don’t like it, they will give your money back.

Air filter purifier is projected to bring down allergens in house and is dependable for allergy and asthma attack sufferers

Air filter purifier can filter the air your folks suspire by taking away particles like dust, pet allergens, odors and smoke from your home.  The air that is sent back to the room is far better.  Air filter purifiers are acquirable in conveyable units or whole-home systems.  There are lots of on the marketplace with diverse filtration degrees and some possess augmented air quality features, so costs vary considerably.  Before you commence shopping, these points can assist you sort thru the air cleaner features.  

portable air filter purifiers may be employed in whatever dry region of your home.  The likeliest area is the room where it can be of most serious benefit – where there’s the biggest density of allergens, or the bedroom where you spend one or two hours of a twenty-four hr period.  You can even bring a small unit with you on vacation to be used in motel rooms.  If you want to transpose it from room to room frequently you may wish to take into consideration a compact type.  Get a level and ensure post for it close up to a plug-in outlet, and at least 3′ or so from the wall for adequate air movement.  Some types require more clearances – study the product manual.  

Which sizing or capability of air filter purifiers depends totally on the scale of the room area you intend to employ it in.  Efficiency evaluations are based totally on average room sizes, and how many times per hour that amount of air will extend thru the unit.  Measure Out your room’s properties and buy according to the recommended coverage field ( or higher than needed ).  Decide on unique features you’d like, like quiet and multiple settings.  Numerous have nighttime lights which is quite handy.  

Generally, the more filtration – the greater.  Go through the packaging for characteristics such as 3 stage ( or more ) filtration.  You may obtain the CADR rating on the packaging.  The air cleaner retracts air in and it goes first through a pre-filter, pinning bigger particles.  If there are multiple filtration degrees, the air would then pass thru additional filters such as a HEPA-type or a carbon filter.  Authorized HEPA filters can take out more than 98% of motes that are in the air making these the most efficient.  Each filtration point signifies more screening and removal, so more is fresher.  

If your unit is not a common brand, you may have difficulty finding replacement filters later.  This may impact what brand you decide on.  Also check on air filter purifier costs, it’s good to grasp ahead.  HEPA filters cost more than carbon filters.  It’s a smart idea to purchase a replacement set of filters to have available at the same time you purchase your air cleaner.  For best performance, follow the maker’s recommendation as to when to modify filters ; it does vary by type.  

Air filter purifiers aren’t cheap, especially those with multi or HEPA filters.  Further features such as an ionizer or nano-silver technology will step-up the price significantly.  There are HEPA-type filters that cost less, but if you want real HEPA, make sure the certified trademark is present on the boxing.  Know what you are buying and inspect the unit for authentication, efficiency ratings and to make sure that it meets the product standards for your area.  Also check for warranty details.  Ensure a parts list is included – this can help you subsequently.  

ensure it keeps operating efficiently.  Change or clean carbon, pre-filters, and HEPA filters frequently.  Some filters need changing every couple of months, and HEPA filters every 2-4 years.  Confirm filter change suggestions as observed in your product manual.  Some pre-filters may be easy-clean.  Vacuum regularly the intake airflow grates on the outside.  They have an inclination to collect a lot of dust and particles when they pull air in, as does the area close to the air outflow.  

Changing the pre-filter often will protect the HEPA air filter purifier that is more expensive to modify.  Keep door closed to the area if feasible for improved cleanup efficiency.  Get a unit made for a bigger area – it’ll clean a small room better.  If unit is in a bedroom, set it to ‘quiet’ manner for nighttime and ‘high’ for daytime.  For best efficiency, it should operate continuously.  

Numerous air filter purifiers have features like an ionizer that releases ions to the room.  This can facilitate to get rid of further particles.  Nano-silver technology has bacterias protection benefits and is a feature in numerous little household widgets.  Some Other air purification system that’s gaining in popularity is bacteria-fighting UV technology.  UV which represents ultra-violet rays that obliterate bacteria and other microbes, has become a standard in several houses to improve drinking water quality.  Some purifiers do not necessarily just pin particles, but demolishes them like Oreck’s pro Air Tower with Truman Cell Technology.

It may come as a surprise, but the air that you breathe in every day is in fact quite dirty. And it looks unlikely that it will get any better in the future. You’re not even safe in your own home. The concentrations of air pollution in present day dwellings are at times so high that they’re putting your health in jeopardy.

This is why you must take measures to ensure that the air you are breathing is as clean and pure as possible. Happily, it’s easier to achieve this than you might suppose. When you utilize an effective home air purifier, it can have a sizeable effect on the air quality in your environment.

Air purifiers successfully do away with dangerous pollutants found in the air within the home. In this category are an assortment of potentially harmful allergens including pet dander, dust and chemicals. This can prevent distress from ailments such as bronchitis, flu, pneumonia and even the common cold, in addition to various respiratory conditions.

A home air purifier can also eliminate household odors like aerosols, cat litter dust, gases, pesticides and the smell of tobacco smoke. Substances including glue, paint and varnish give off dangerous odors and an air purifier will eradicate these as well.

An air purifier is also very useful for fighting all sorts of particles in the atmosphere like mold, bacteria and viruses that surround us all the time. These pollutants can cause health problems if you breathe in too much of them.

After you know the rationale for getting an air cleaner it is then essential to choose a model that will meet your needs as far as your indoor surroundings are concerned. There are various types of air purifiers available. These consist of the HEPA air purifier, the ionic air cleaner or the UV air purifier. All of these types of air cleaners can effectively clean the air and also take away odors and vapors.

One more way to help along the situation is to make sure your home is well ventilated. So you should ensure you let the stale air out from the rooms inside your house to get the greatest possible performance from your air purifying appliance.

You probably think you are well acquainted with everyone you live with – family, friends, housemates, maybe a pet. But almost every home in the UK has unwanted guests. They are mean and ugly, they look like bizarre alien creatures from a science fiction film, and they could be making their home in your bed right now. I’m talking about millions of dust mites, the hidden menace in the home, which can’t be seen by the naked eye but manage to cause trouble wherever they go.

Aside from the slightly disturbing knowledge that they could be living in your carpets and bedding, dust mites are also one of the most common causes of asthma, eczema and a whole host of other recurrent allergies. Technically it’s dust mites’ droppings rather than the actual mites that cause problems, as they are coated in an enzyme that is highly allergenic to over 20% of the population. They feast on the 50 million dead skin cells that the average human sheds every day, and it can be a nightmare getting rid of them completely. It’s tough, but not impossible. If you suspect mites could be living in your home, there are three important things to remember:

Keep it Clean – the most obvious way to stop dust mites is to get rid of the dust. They like to live in ‘dust bunnies’ and deep in the carpet pile so regular hoovering, daily if you have to, will not only suck many of them out of the carpet but cut off the food supply to those that are left behind. Keep windows open where possible as they don’t like sunlight, and are so small that many of them will get blown away completely in a breeze!

Keep it Fresh –You might not think air quality would have much effect on dust mites considering they live in the carpet and furnishings, but in fact the right air conditioner could make all the difference. Even if you hoover every day the dust particles still have time to settle and create new homes for mites. Installing an air purifier with a HEPA filter literally removes all particles larger than 0.0003mm from the air before the dust can settle, meaning less food for mites.

Keep it Dry – Dust mites like to live in homes where the relative humidity (RH) of the air is above 50%. The ideal RH in the home varies depending on where you live and who you ask, but the most common recommendation is somewhere around 45%. If the normal humidity level in your home is anywhere above 50% trying to reduce it is a good idea as this will not only stop the mites but can also improve the general health of the occupants. Basic things like keeping windows open when cooking or showering can make a difference but if the problem persists then using a dehumidifier is a quick and easy way to remove moisture from the air, maintaining the optimum RH and killing dust mites dead!

It seems the in thing to criticise the ionic air purifier industry. “Absence of scientific peer reviews” has been a frequent criticism posted on influenza, air quality and indoor pollution blogs.

Mr. John Moore, a researcher at Cornell University and firm believer of the peer review system, made some surprising revelations.

He says:

• “a lust for profit has led to too many journals,…all too easy to find…poor-quality work”

• “not everything in the peer-reviewed literature is correct. Indeed, some of it is downright bad science”

• “the peer review system…it’s the least-bad system that can be devised”.

Members of the public, warns Mr. Moore, must never mistake every scientific peer review as the “gold standard” as “even reviewed literature can be cherry-picked to support any argument.” It is enlightening that “professional scientists…know that scientific truth evolves on the basis of a mounting consensus, not through an isolated paper that adopts a maverick position, even if it has been peer-reviewed.”

These nuggets of wisdom from an “insider” like Mr. Moore is of great value to all industries, including the ionic air purifier industry, that are constantly lambasted by critics.

The gold standard, no less, demands critics of the ionic air purifier. So do the powers to be as well. How do we know? We just asked. The US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) responded thus:

“NIOSH is not aware of any peer-reviewed scientific studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of ion generators/ionic air purifiers against viruses. NIOSH does not have any studies planned to evaluate these devices nor do we have a policy on their use.”

But it was encouraging that the NIOSH has not pronounced final judgment as they also said:

“NIOSH provides support for investigator initiated research. Should someone want to conduct such studies they may apply for funding by mechanisms available and described under “Funding Opportunities” at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/oep/. Proposals are funded annually based on availability of funds, relevance of the proposed work to the NIOSH mission, and the quality of the science proposed.”

At our Ezine article (accessible via The Ionic Air Purifier Blog Ezine widget), we have reproduced the NIOSH’s exacting parameters of a scientific peer review.

It is not a question of funding. It is not outright rejection by the governing bodies. Why then isn’t there any scientific peer review of the ionic air purifier after all these years? It would be great to hear from an insider of the ionic air purifier industry.

In our view, advancements in ionic air purifier technologies should encourage manufacturers to tap on available official funding. It may take just one high profile and successful scientific peer review to make all the difference? Ideally, it should be Mr. Moore’s “mounting consensus” in the scientific community in attesting to the safety, efficacy and effectiveness of the ionic air purifier.

Ionic Air Purifier – Without Scientific Reviews, Do We Just Give Up On It?

In the meantime, users searching for the ideal ionic air purifier can look to our Ionic Air Purifier Review – 4 Key Factors Model.

Encouragingly, we now know that a scientific peer review that is acceptable by any authority must cover the 2 safety aspects in our 4 Key Factors Model.

NIOSH states very clearly: “…a scientifically valid study would need to be designed to test whether ion generators are effective in killing viruses to the extent that a hazard no longer remains, and that such technology does not by itself generate new hazards of its own, e.g., ozone or oxidized by-products. The design of such a study would be challenging.”

Sign up at the Ionic Air Purifier Blog to follow our ongoing research.

Rarely does the ionic air purifier industry escape criticism. “No scientific peer review” has been a frequent barb posted on influenza, air quality and indoor pollution blogs.

Mr. John Moore, a researcher at Cornell University and firm believer of the peer review system, made some surprising revelations.

He says:

• “a lust for profit has led to too many journals,…all too easy to find…poor-quality work”

• “not everything in the peer-reviewed literature is correct. Indeed, some of it is downright bad science”

• “the peer review system…it’s the least-bad system that can be devised”.

Members of the public, warns Mr. Moore, must not regard every scientific peer review as the “gold standard” as “even reviewed literature can be cherry-picked to support any argument.” It is instructive that “professional scientists…know that scientific truth evolves on the basis of a mounting consensus, not through an isolated paper that adopts a maverick position, even if it has been peer-reviewed.”

These nuggets of wisdom from an “insider” like Mr. Moore is of great value to all industries, including the ionic air purifier industry, that seem to be wasting funds chasing up the wrong road.

Critics of the ionic air purifier demand the gold standard. So do the authorities as well. How do we know? We just wrote to them. The US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) responded thus:

“NIOSH is not aware of any peer-reviewed scientific studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of ion generators/ionic air purifiers against viruses. NIOSH does not have any studies planned to evaluate these devices nor do we have a policy on their use.”

But it was encouraging that the NIOSH has not pronounced final judgment as they also said:

“NIOSH provides support for investigator initiated research. Should someone want to conduct such studies they may apply for funding by mechanisms available and described under “Funding Opportunities” at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/oep/. Proposals are funded annually based on availability of funds, relevance of the proposed work to the NIOSH mission, and the quality of the science proposed.”

At our Ezine article (accessible via The Ionic Air Purifier Blog Ezine widget), we have reproduced the NIOSH’s exacting parameters of a scientific peer review.

It is definitely not a question of funding. It is not outright rejection by the governing bodies. Why then isn’t there any scientific peer review of the ionic air purifier after all these decades? It would be great to hear from someone in the ionic air purifier industry.

In our view, with the advancements in ionic air purifier technologies, manufacturers see the advantages of tapping on the prestige of official funding. It should take just one successful scientific peer review to make all the difference? Ideally, it should be Mr. Moore’s “mounting consensus” in the scientific community in validating the safety, efficacy and effectiveness of the ionic air purifier.

Ionic Air Purifier – What Can Users Do Until Scientific Reviews Abound?

Meanwhile, users looking for the ideal ionic air purifier can look to our Ionic Air Purifier Review – 4 Key Factors Model.

Encouragingly, we now know that a scientific peer review that is acceptable by any authority must include the 2 safety aspects in our model.

For NIOSH said: “…a scientifically valid study would need to be designed to test whether ion generators are effective in killing viruses to the extent that a hazard no longer remains, and that such technology does not by itself generate new hazards of its own, e.g., ozone or oxidized by-products. The design of such a study would be challenging.”

Sign up at the Ionic Air Purifier Blog to follow our ongoing research.

It seems the in thing to criticise the ionic air purifier industry. “No scientific peer review exists” has been a frequent criticism posted on influenza, air quality and indoor pollution blogs.

Mr. John Moore, a researcher at Cornell University and firm believer of the peer review system, made some surprising revelations.

He says:

• “a lust for profit has led to too many journals,…all too easy to find…poor-quality work”

• “not everything in the peer-reviewed literature is correct. Indeed, some of it is downright bad science”

• “the peer review system…it’s the least-bad system that can be devised”.

Members of the public, warns Mr. Moore, must never over-rate every scientific peer review as the “gold standard” as “even reviewed literature can be cherry-picked to support any argument.” It is enlightening that “professional scientists…know that scientific truth evolves on the basis of a mounting consensus, not through an isolated paper that adopts a maverick position, even if it has been peer-reviewed.”

These nuggets of wisdom from an “insider” like Mr. Moore is a boon to all industries, including the ionic air purifier industry, that have fallen short on the burden of proof.

Critics of the ionic air purifier demand the gold standard. So do the governing bodies. How do we know that? We simply asked. The US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) responded thus:

“NIOSH is not aware of any peer-reviewed scientific studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of ion generators/ionic air purifiers against viruses. NIOSH does not have any studies planned to evaluate these devices nor do we have a policy on their use.”

But it was encouraging that the NIOSH has not pronounced final judgment as they also said:

“NIOSH provides support for investigator initiated research. Should someone want to conduct such studies they may apply for funding by mechanisms available and described under “Funding Opportunities” at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/oep/. Proposals are funded annually based on availability of funds, relevance of the proposed work to the NIOSH mission, and the quality of the science proposed.”

At our Ezine article (accessible via The Ionic Air Purifier Blog Ezine widget), we have reproduced the NIOSH’s exacting parameters of a scientific peer review.

Shortage of funding is definitely not the issue. Neither is it outright rejection by the authorities. Why aren’t there any scientific peer reviews of the ionic air purifier after all these years? If only we could hear from an insider of the ionic air purifier industry.

In our view, advancements in ionic air purifier technologies should encourage manufacturers to tap on available official funding. It may take just one successful scientific peer review to grab the lead? The ideal state would be Mr. Moore’s “mounting consensus” of peer reviews in authenticating the safety, efficacy and effectiveness of the ionic air purifier.

Ionic Air Purifier – Until Scientific Reviews Abound, What Can We Do?

In the meantime, users searching for the ideal ionic air purifier can look to our Ionic Air Purifier Review – 4 Key Factors Model.

Encouragingly, we now know that a scientific peer review that is acceptable by any authority must cover the 2 safety aspects in our model.

For NIOSH said: “…a scientifically valid study would need to be designed to test whether ion generators are effective in killing viruses to the extent that a hazard no longer remains, and that such technology does not by itself generate new hazards of its own, e.g., ozone or oxidized by-products. The design of such a study would be challenging.”

Sign up at the Ionic Air Purifier Blog to follow our ongoing research.

It seems the in thing to criticise the ionic air purifier industry. “No scientific peer review exists” has been a frequent criticism posted on flu, indoor air quality and pollution blogs.

Mr. John Moore, a researcher at Cornell University and firm believer of the peer review system, made some surprising revelations.

He says:

• “a lust for profit has led to too many journals,…all too easy to find…poor-quality work”

• “not everything in the peer-reviewed literature is correct. Indeed, some of it is downright bad science”

• “the peer review system…it’s the least-bad system that can be devised”.

Lay persons, warns Mr. Moore, must not regard every scientific peer review as the “gold standard” as “even reviewed literature can be cherry-picked to support any argument.” It is enlightening that “professional scientists…know that scientific truth evolves on the basis of a mounting consensus, not through an isolated paper that adopts a maverick position, even if it has been peer-reviewed.”

These nuggets of wisdom from an “insider” like Mr. Moore is of great value to all industries, including the ionic air purifier industry, that are constantly lambasted by critics.

Critics of the ionic air purifier demand the gold standard. So do the powers to be as well. How do we know? We simply asked. The US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) responded thus:

“NIOSH is not aware of any peer-reviewed scientific studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of ion generators/ionic air purifiers against viruses. NIOSH does not have any studies planned to evaluate these devices nor do we have a policy on their use.”

But it was encouraging that the NIOSH has not pronounced final judgment as they also said:

“NIOSH provides support for investigator initiated research. Should someone want to conduct such studies they may apply for funding by mechanisms available and described under “Funding Opportunities” at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/oep/. Proposals are funded annually based on availability of funds, relevance of the proposed work to the NIOSH mission, and the quality of the science proposed.”

At our Ezine article (accessible via The Ionic Air Purifier Blog Ezine widget), we have reproduced the NIOSH’s exacting parameters of a scientific peer review.

Shortage of funding is definitely not the issue. It is not rejection, overt or otherwise, by the governing bodies. Why aren’t there any scientific peer reviews of the ionic air purifier after all these years? It would be great to hear from someone in the ionic air purifier industry.

In our view, advancements in ionic air purifier technologies should encourage manufacturers to tap on available official funding. It may take just one high profile and successful scientific peer review to grab the headlines? The ideal situation would be Mr. Moore’s “mounting consensus” in the scientific community in attesting to the safety, efficacy and effectiveness of the ionic air purifier.

Ionic Air Purifier – What Can Users Do Until Scientific Reviews Abound?

For the time being, users hunting for the ideal ionic air purifier can vote at The Ionic Air Purifier Blog for our Ionic Air Purifier Review – 4 Key Factors Model.

Encouragingly, we now know that a scientific peer review that is acceptable by any authority must include the 2 safety aspects in our model.

NIOSH states categorically: “…a scientifically valid study would need to be designed to test whether ion generators are effective in killing viruses to the extent that a hazard no longer remains, and that such technology does not by itself generate new hazards of its own, e.g., ozone or oxidized by-products. The design of such a study would be challenging.”

Sign up at the Ionic Air Purifier Blog to follow our ongoing research.

It seems the in thing to criticise the ionic air purifier industry. “No scientific peer review exists” has been a frequent criticism posted on flu, indoor air quality and pollution blogs.

Mr. John Moore, a trained researcher at Cornell University, New York, may yet surprise these supporters of the peer review system.

He says:

• “a lust for profit has led to too many journals,…all too easy to find…poor-quality work”

• “not everything in the peer-reviewed literature is correct. Indeed, some of it is downright bad science”

• “the peer review system…it’s the least-bad system that can be devised”.

Lay persons, warns Mr. Moore, must not regard every scientific peer review as the “gold standard” as “even reviewed literature can be cherry-picked to support any argument.” It is enlightening that “professional scientists…know that scientific truth evolves on the basis of a mounting consensus, not through an isolated paper that adopts a maverick position, even if it has been peer-reviewed.”

These nuggets of wisdom from an “insider” like Mr. Moore is of great value to all industries, including the ionic air purifier industry, that seem to be wasting funds chasing up the wrong road.

Critics of the ionic air purifier demand the gold standard, nothing less. So do the authorities as well. How did we discover that? We just asked. The US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) responded thus:

“NIOSH is not aware of any peer-reviewed scientific studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of ion generators/ionic air purifiers against viruses. NIOSH does not have any studies planned to evaluate these devices nor do we have a policy on their use.”

But it was encouraging that the NIOSH has not pronounced final judgment as they also said:

“NIOSH provides support for investigator initiated research. Should someone want to conduct such studies they may apply for funding by mechanisms available and described under “Funding Opportunities” at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/oep/. Proposals are funded annually based on availability of funds, relevance of the proposed work to the NIOSH mission, and the quality of the science proposed.”

At our Ezine article (accessible via The Ionic Air Purifier Blog Ezine widget), we have reproduced the NIOSH’s exacting parameters of a scientific peer review.

Funding shortage is definitely not the problem. It is not outright rejection by the governing bodies. Why aren’t there any scientific peer reviews of the ionic air purifier after all these years? It would be great to hear from someone in the ionic air purifier industry.

It is our view that with the advancements in ionic air purifier technologies, manufacturers should tap on the prestige of official funding. It may take just one successful scientific peer review to make all the difference? Of course, the ideal should be Mr. Moore’s “mounting consensus” of peer reviews in authenticating the safety, efficacy and effectiveness of the ionic air purifier.

Ionic Air Purifier – Without Scientific Reviews, Do We Just Ignore It?

Meanwhile, users looking for the ideal ionic air purifier can look to our Ionic Air Purifier Review – 4 Key Factors Model.

Encouragingly, we now know that a scientific peer review that is acceptable by any authority must cover the 2 safety aspects in our model.

NIOSH states categorically: “…a scientifically valid study would need to be designed to test whether ion generators are effective in killing viruses to the extent that a hazard no longer remains, and that such technology does not by itself generate new hazards of its own, e.g., ozone or oxidized by-products. The design of such a study would be challenging.”

Sign up at the Ionic Air Purifier Blog to follow our ongoing research.

Criticism of the ionic air purifier industry is fashionable. “No scientific peer review exists” has been a frequent barb posted on influenza, air quality and indoor pollution blogs.

Mr. John Moore, a researcher at Cornell University and firm believer of the peer review system, made some surprising revelations.

He says:

• “a lust for profit has led to too many journals,…all too easy to find…poor-quality work”

• “not everything in the peer-reviewed literature is correct. Indeed, some of it is downright bad science”

• “the peer review system…it’s the least-bad system that can be devised”.

The public, warns Mr. Moore, must not regard every scientific peer review as the “gold standard” as “even reviewed literature can be cherry-picked to support any argument.” It is instructive that “professional scientists…know that scientific truth evolves on the basis of a mounting consensus, not through an isolated paper that adopts a maverick position, even if it has been peer-reviewed.”

These nuggets of wisdom from an “insider” like Mr. Moore is of great value to all industries, including the ionic air purifier industry, that seem to be wasting funds chasing up the wrong road.

Critics of the ionic air purifier demand the gold standard, nothing less. So do the governing bodies. How did we find that out? We just wrote to them. The US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) responded thus:

“NIOSH is not aware of any peer-reviewed scientific studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of ion generators/ionic air purifiers against viruses. NIOSH does not have any studies planned to evaluate these devices nor do we have a policy on their use.”

But it was encouraging that the NIOSH has not pronounced final judgment as they also said:

“NIOSH provides support for investigator initiated research. Should someone want to conduct such studies they may apply for funding by mechanisms available and described under “Funding Opportunities” at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/oep/. Proposals are funded annually based on availability of funds, relevance of the proposed work to the NIOSH mission, and the quality of the science proposed.”

At our Ezine article (accessible via The Ionic Air Purifier Blog Ezine widget), we have reproduced the NIOSH’s exacting parameters of a scientific peer review.

Shortage of funding is definitely not the issue. Neither is it outright rejection by the authorities. Why then isn’t there any scientific peer review of the ionic air purifier after all these years? If only we could hear from an insider of the ionic air purifier industry.

It is our view that with the advancements in ionic air purifier technologies, manufacturers should tap on available official funding. It may take just one successful scientific peer review to make all the difference? The ideal situation would be Mr. Moore’s “mounting consensus” of peer reviews in validating the safety, efficacy and effectiveness of the ionic air purifier.

Ionic Air Purifier – Without Scientific Reviews, Do We Just Give Up On It?

Meanwhile, users looking for the ideal ionic air purifier can look to our Ionic Air Purifier Review – 4 Key Factors Model.

Encouragingly, we now know that a scientific peer review that is acceptable by any authority must cover the 2 safety aspects in our 4 Key Factors Model.

NIOSH states very clearly: “…a scientifically valid study would need to be designed to test whether ion generators are effective in killing viruses to the extent that a hazard no longer remains, and that such technology does not by itself generate new hazards of its own, e.g., ozone or oxidized by-products. The design of such a study would be challenging.”

Sign up at the Ionic Air Purifier Blog to follow our ongoing research.