Air Purifiers Review – 5 Key Factors Model
Posted by admin - 11/09/09 at 09:09 amWe began with 4 factors but have now amended it to the 5 key Factors Model. With reference to our antecedent post, we have now added Scientific Peer Review as the fifth key factor in our air purifier review model.
Our analysis [highlights]|indicate]|indicate]|studies [highlight] that the deficiency of scientific peer reviews is a oversized barrier to all the interested parties in agreeing with the claims of air purifier manufacturers, no matter how well-known the latter may be. 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 situations etc.
Most people will assume that this obstacle is confined to the ionic air purifier industry. But that is quite misguided. It transcends all other technologies in the air purifier industry, be it the revered HEPA or the new (relatively speaking) photo-catalytic oxidation, etc.
It almost seems that, as a basic part of any air purifier review, the scientific peer review is almost like the holy grail of the air purifier industry. Whoever is fortunate enough to get it first will amass the same fabled power of undisputed domination in the multimillion dollar business.
Given the inordinate (no exaggeration 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. It is logical that no air purifier manufacturer has ordained one since that would abrogate the independence factor that is central to a scientific peer review.
What is baffling is why no scientist or researcher, in particular those in the indoor air quality or environmental sciences disciplines who would seem the most proficient to carry out an air purifier review, considers it worth their while to do. Air purification technology can be said to be heralds of nanotechnology. Yet it seems so old-fashioned that no one deems it worth their while to spend time on a scientific peer review. 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 proficient scientific peer review.
The reluctance of any scientist or researcher to embark on the quest for a truly autonomous scientific peer review begs the million dollar question – is the air purification industry a big fraud? One other possibility is that scientists view proving air purification technology as chasing the Holy Grail - a futile pursuit for those with limitless resources? It is a fact that, we have trouble even finding one comprehensive objective air purifier review.
These very intriguing questions drive us to greater investigation with our 5-Key Factors Model. The unwillingness of manufacturers to complete our survey questions based on the said model piques us to explore further, so stay tuned to our efforts.
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 in detail in distinct Ezine articles which you can read via the widget on our blog. Many 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 factors, you are welcomed to do so.
Also, do sign up at our blog too as we will shortly publish our first product review using the Air Purifier Review - 5 Key Factors Model.
