Air Purifiers Review – 5 Key Factors Model
To begin with it was 4 key factors, now it’s the 5 Key Factors Model. With reference to our preceding post, we have now added Scientific Peer Review as the fifth key factor in our air purifier review model.
The paucity of scientific peer reviews is a oversized barrier to all the interested parties in agreeing with the assertions of air purifier manufacturers, regardless of how acclaimed the latter may be. myriad of interested parties]|host of concerned parties who] would love to have the issue 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 manage allergies, asthma and other respiratory issues .
It is very important to note that this problem is not confined only to the ionic air purifier industry. It is the bane of all other air purification technologies as well, including the well-regarded HEPA technology and the newer photo-catalytic oxidation technology.
It almost seems that, as a necessary fundamental of any air purifier review, the scientific peer review is similar to the holy grail of the air purifier industry. We truly believe that the fortunate manufacturer to be first will amass the same storied power of leadership in the multimillion dollar industry.
Given the inordinate (no exaggeration here!) importance of a scientific peer review, the biggest mystery is why no one has deemed it worthwhile to endeavor a single review. Luckily, no manufacturer has been desperate enough to commission a scientific peer review for that would strike at its very integrity, a truly independent appraisal.
What is inexplicable is why no scientist or researcher, in particular those in the indoor air quality or environmental sciences disciplines who would seem the most capable to execute an air purifier review, considers it worth their effort to do. We still don’t get it. Would a scientist help us by commenting? Pray tell us why no one is interested in executing an independent peer review of any air purification technology. Lack of initial funding is also not an issue. We know for a fact that the US NIOSH will fund a proficiently planned scientific peer review.
Interestingly, no researcher or scientist seems willing to take on a scientific peer review. This begs the million dollar question. Is the air purification industry simply hot air and nothing else? 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 difficulty even finding a single comprehensive independent air purifier review.
Fascinating and provocative questions, they drive us to intense scrutiny with our 5-Key Factors Model. The aversion of manufacturers to complete our survey questions based on the said model piques us to delve deeper, so stay tuned to our efforts.
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 elaborated fully in individual Ezine articles which you can read via the widget on our blog. Many 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 factors, you are welcomed to do so.
Also, do register at our blog too as we will shortly publish our maiden product review using the Air Purifier Review – 5 Key Factors Model.
No comments yet.
