 Re: Car Ionic Air Purifiers with Ozone O3
Ionic devices that can actually make things worse.
**
Into Thick Air
Some Air Cleaners, Says Consumers Union, Produce a Sweet Fresh Smell --
Of Damaging Ozone. But Product Makers Insist Buyers Can Breathe Easy
By January W. Payne
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, April 12, 2005; Page HE01
Growing numbers of people with allergies and asthma are coughing up
hefty sums for heavily marketed indoor air cleaners they hope will
provide purer air to breathe.
But a study in the May issue of Consumer Reports describes some of
these devices as not just ineffective but capable of exposing people to
ozone -- a gas that, in large enough quantities, can damage the lungs,
irritate the respiratory system and aggravate asthma, according to the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Sharper Image, whose Ionic Breeze cleaner ($400) drew particular
criticism in the report, disputed the findings, saying its product is
"safe" and produces only "trace levels of ozone as a byproduct,"
according to a printed statement to which the company referred news
media. Other manufacturers whose products did poorly in the report also
found fault with the study methods and the findings.
The devices, known as ionizing air cleaners or electrostatic
precipitators, work by electrically charging airborne particles and
trapping them on oppositely charged metal plates, according to the
American Lung Association (ALA). Ozone, a super-charged oxygen
molecule, is a byproduct of this process. In contrast, says the
association, the most common type of air purifier includes a
high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter, which traps most
particles and removes odors while producing much lower amounts of
ozone.
The findings are particularly worrisome because about 80 percent of
people who buy air cleaners have asthma or allergies, according to the
magazine. Air ionizers make up about 25 percent of the $410
million-a-year air cleaner market, according to the report, which was
issued by the nonprofit Consumers Union (CU), publisher of Consumer
Reports books and magazines. The report marks CU's second criticism in
two years of the Ionic Breeze ($400), which leads the ionizer market.
Once again, the product earned "poor" ratings from CU for cleaning dust
and smoke from the air; the new report also found the device poor at
removing pollen.
Sharper Image sued CU for libel after an October 2003 report said that
the Ionic Breeze performed poorly at removing dust and smoke particles
from the air; a federal court dismissed the suit.
The more than 1 million Ionic Breeze units sold testify to the
machine's effectiveness, said E. Robert (Bob) Wallach, legal counsel
for Sharper Image.
Ionizers, advertised in TV commercials, infomercials and magazines, are
typically sleek and slender and have quieter motors than other types of
portable air cleaners. And there are many potential buyers: 18.2
million adults had hay fever in 2002, according to the National Center
for Health Statistics, and about 21.9 million had asthma.
Jeff Asher, vice president and technical director at CU, said air
ionizers give off a deceptively "fresh air" smell, similar to the scent
just after a thunderstorm. Buyers, he said, "think that this is a good
smell . . . that in fact, without that smell, that the ionizer isn't
cleaning the air." But what they smell, Asher said, is actually ozone.
Richard Thalheimer, founder, chairman and CEO of Sharper Image, issued
a sharply worded statement disputing the findings. "This Consumer
Reports piece is, in my view, irresponsible in the way it casually and
unscientifically speculates about public health and safety," the
statement read. Calling the report "an unfair assault by Consumers
Union," it stated that the Ionic Breeze was no different than many
common household electronic devices, such as TVs and hair dryers, in
producing "trace levels of ozone as a byproduct."
In a separate statement, Wallach objected to the classification of the
Ionic Breeze as an ionizer rather than an electrostatic precipitator;
the EPA views the terms as synonymous.
Thalheimer distinguished the Ionic Breeze from a category of air
cleaner known as ozone generators, which intentionally produce ozone to
combine with other substances. "Ionic Breeze is emphatically not an
ozone generator," wrote Thalheimer. Thalheimer also stated the Ionic
Breeze "meet[s] the strictest standard" in ozone emissions --
50-parts-per-billion -- referring to a limit set by the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) for indoor medical devices. The agency doesn't
consider air cleaners medical devices.
Allowing large quantities of ozone -- the same gas found in high
amounts on hot, sunny, smoggy summer days, when those with respiratory
ailments are often warned to stay inside -- to be produced indoors can
be harmful to asthma patients, said David M. Lang, head of the allergy
and immunology division at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation. Lang cited
studies that show that exposure to ozone at high concentrations is
harmful to the health of people without asthma; those with the
respiratory ailment face greater risk, he said.
"I think it's reasonable to discourage the purchase of the air cleaners
that emit substantial amounts of ozone . . . based on the fact that
this may be injurious to your health, particularly if you have asthma,"
said Lang. "I think it's a situation where . . . caveat emptor -- buyer
beware -- is appropriate."
Last year two large studies, one in the Journal of the American Medical
Association and the other in the American Journal of Respiratory and
Critical Care Medicine, linked high ozone exposure in cities to a rise
in premature deaths from cardiovascular and respiratory causes. The EPA
neither certifies nor recommends air cleaners.
While all air ionizers create ozone, some give off more than others.
The report recommended only one ionizing air cleaner -- the Friedrich
C-90A ($450) -- calling it a "fine" performer "with negligible ozone."
All five other ionizers were giving failing grades because of "poor
performance, some with relatively high ozone." A HEPA device, the
Whirlpool 45030 ($250), also won high marks from CU's testers.
CU evaluated the cleaners in a sealed room, where testers measured
ozone amounts two inches from the machines, and in an "open,
well-ventilated lab," where testers took measurements two inches and
three feet from the machines, according to the report. The Whirlpool
and Friedrich models earned a mix of "excellent" and "very good"
ratings for ridding the air of particles containing dust, cigarette
smoke and pollen; both got only fair ratings for noise. The Ionic
Breeze earned an "excellent" noise rating.
Any air cleaner that produced ozone amounts exceeding the FDA's 50 ppb
ozone limit failed CU's tests. Only the Whirlpool and the Friedrich
models passed the sealed-room test.
In the two-inch test in the open lab, the Surround Air XJ-2000 ($80)
produced the most ozone, 319 ppb, followed by the IonizAir P4620 ($70)
at 168 ppb, the Ionic Breeze at 48 ppb, the Ionic Pro CL-369 ($150) at
33 ppb and the Brookstone Pure-Ion ($300) at 26 ppb. In the three-feet
open lab test, the Brookstone emitted the least ozone of the ionizers
at 2 ppb, and the IonizAir producing the most at 28 ppb.
The makers of the Brookstone, Ionic Pro and SurroundAir disputed the CU
findings and said their products are safe and effective; they said that
independent tests show their devices meet ozone emission standards. The
maker of the IonizAir did not return several calls seeking comment.
The two recommended cleaners, in contrast, emitted far less ozone than
the others. In the open lab, the Whirlpool produced 2 ppb of ozone at
two inches away; the Friedrich emitted 5 ppb. At three feet away, the
Whirlpool produced 1 ppb, and the Friedrich emitted 4 ppb.
Some allergists said that they have long recommended HEPA cleaners over
ionizers because of fears about ozone output. They advise consumers to
eliminate allergens such as tobacco smoke, mold and pet dander from the
home instead of relying on an air cleaner to do the job.
Resources
=B7 The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (www.aham.org) has
developed standards for portable air cleaners that may help in
evaluating their effectiveness in cleaning tobacco smoke, dust and
pollen particles.
=B7 Consumer Reports. www.consumerreports.org; view suggestions for
improving indoor air quality. Subscription ($26 a year, or $4.95 a
month) required to view the entire air cleaners report.
=B7 Mayo Clinic's guide to allergy-proofing your home.
www.mayoclinic.com; search for "allergy-proof."
=B7 American Lung Association air cleaners information.
www.lungusa.org; search for "air cleaning devices."
=A9 2005 The Washington Post Company
|
Last Thread
Next Thread
07-06-06 09:22 PM
We tried on loan an Ecoquest ionic air purifier in the office; all of
us complained that it made our throats hurt, and I'm the only one that
has really been having respiratory problems. We gave it back.. The
lady that loaned it to me has one in her house, she sold one to a local
motel that uses it and loans it to certain regular guests.. So I
guess it helps some people - just not ME. *cry*
Guess at $10 it'd be an interesting paperweight if it didn't work
otherwise. Anything more expensive, I'd try to find a place that would
let me try it for 30 days or a friend that has one I could try.
Ferrari3@gmail.com wrote:
> Car Ionic Air Purifiers with Ozone O3
>
> These things sound good, has nayone tried them? I found them on EBay
> for under $10 
