Air Purifier Review – 5 Key Factors Model
By
First it was 4, now it’s the 5 Key Factors Model. Further to our antecedent 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. multitude of concerned parties]|There is a whole [array of interested parties who] would love to have the controversy resolved once and for all. These parties include the scientific community i.e. indoor air quality scientists, environmentalists, government agencies like the US EPA, NIOSH or Canada Health, and many in the medical community who deal with allergies, asthma and other respiratory situations .
It is a commonplace assumption that only the ionic air purifier industry has this setback. Unfortunately, that is definitely misconstrued. It permeates all other technologies in the air purifier industry, be it the well-regarded HEPA or the new (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. Getting it first may well bestow upon that fortuitous manufacturer undisputed domination in the multimillion dollar industry.
Given the supreme (no exaggeration here!) importance of a scientific peer review, the biggest mystery is why no one has deemed it worth their time to embark upon a single review. Rationally, no air purifier manufacturer has commissioned one since that would negate the independence character that is central to a scientific peer review.
What is bewildering is why no scientist or researcher, in particular those in the indoor air quality or environmental sciences disciplines who would seem the most knowledgeable to produce an air purifier review, considers it worth their time to do. Being first in any field must bring accolades. Being first in a multimillion dollar industry must be worth something. Surely there cannot be zero value in a scientific peer review for any air purification technology. Funding is also not an issue. It is a fact that the US EPA had in the past funded such an undertaking for HEPA technology which unfortunately delivered vague data. The US NIOSH has also signaled that it will fund a effectively set up, scientific peer review.
Why is there no scientist or researcher willing to plunge into an autonomous scientific peer review? It begs the million dollar question – is the air purification industry one big hype? Or do the scientists view it a futile task equivalent to seeking the Holy Grail – truth that cannot be proven? Incredibly, we have trouble even finding one comprehensive objective air purifier review.
These highly fascinating questions drive us to greater enquiry 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 piques us to delve deeper.
To recap, the Air Purifier Review – 5 Key Factors Model is as follows:
(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 read via the widget on our blog. Several thousands of our readers have also published our Ezine articles for their own subscriber base. If you have not read or published the complete collection of 5, you are welcomed to.
Also, please sign up at our blog as well as we are about to publish our first product review using the Air Purifier Review – 5 Key Factors Model.
No related posts.
Residential Windmills