Air Purifier Reviews – 5 Key Factors Model

We began with 4 factors but have now amended it to the 5 key Factors Model. Further to our preceding post, we have now included Scientific Peer Review as the fifth key factor in our air purifier review model.

The deficiency of scientific peer reviews is a significant setback to all the interested parties in approving the postulations of air purifier manufacturers, no matter how celebrated the latter may be. Concerned 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 afflictions.

It is very vital to note that this issue is not restricted only to the ionic air purifier industry. It transcends all other technologies in the air purifier industry, be it the respected HEPA or the new (relatively speaking) photo-catalytic oxidation, etc.

It almost seems that, as a basic component of any air purifier review, the scientific peer review is comparable to the holy grail of the air purifier industry. We truly believe that the fortunate manufacturer to be first will command the same storied power of leadership in the multimillion dollar industry.

Given the inordinate (no exaggeration here!) weight of a scientific peer review, it is perplexing that no one envisages it worth their while to produce a single review. Fortunately, no manufacturer has been foolhardy enough to ordain a scientific peer review for that would strike at its very essence, a truly independent judgment.

What is surprising is why no scientist or researcher, notably those in the indoor air quality or environmental sciences disciplines who would seem the most proficient to produce an air purifier review, considers it worth their time to do. We still don’t get it. Would a scientist help us by commenting? Pray tell us why no one is interested in accomplishing an independent peer review of any air purification technology. 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.

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 science fiction 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 trouble even finding one comprehensive autonomous air purifier review.

These highly riveting questions drive us to greater scrutiny 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 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 explained fully in distinct Ezine articles which you can access via the widget on our blog. Several thousands of our readers have also published our Ezine write-ups for their own subscriber base. If you have not read or published the complete set of 5 factors, you are welcomed to do so.

Also, do sign up at our blog as well as we will shortly publish our first product review utilising the Air Purifier Review – 5 Key Factors Model.