Strange but true. It’s very, very difficult to find a well-organized, properly documented research on technologies for ionic air purifiers, multi-million dollar global industry!
strange, because if science earthed , I would expect any manufacturer ionic air purifiers to sound scientific basis of its brand. I would expect that they set out on the effectiveness and efficiency of their unique technology. Especially, I would expect them profusely users claim that their technology is completely safe, they kill germs, but it is harmless to humans. Unfortunately, my expectations were not fulfilled.
However, because I have spent many hours in search of for the scientific and technical work supporting the technology underlying the existing ionic air purifiers, which are on the market, and yet I have very little to show it. Whether it is intentional or not, marketers ionic air purifiers simply do not bother to put the scientific papers on their websites. Where they do, they do not distinguish between security, efficiency and effectiveness of their individual brands. Scientific references are mentioned only briefly and does not provide sufficient detail for the study of serious potential buyers of a particular air purifier. It’s as if the manufacturers do not expect anyone to ask questions and examine their products carefully!
Where I came across relevant research projects on the Internet, they were not easily accessible, since they tend to come to the exorbitant costs is charged on the basis of the article! I believe that if I make a new entrepreneur looking Ionic Air Purifier I would be willing to invest in hundreds and possibly thousands of technical documents referred to in some scientific journal sites. But I’m looking only for a reliable safe product to buy for my personal use!
Unfortunately, the scientific world also commercially managed in such a way that the research is of great importance not made freely available to anyone interested in or who need to know.
Nevertheless, although my head is still spinning from the flood futile and intricate web of data, my search for the perfect air purifier continues, according to these criteria:
(1) Security – the ionic air purifier technology should not cause any injury to users;
(2) Efficiency – the ionic air purifier technology has been tested in the laboratory to really work on the basis of some deep research;
(3) Efficiency – the ionic air purifier technology has been successfully transplanted from the laboratory into the device, which will deliver the same results in the user settings, ie home, office, factory, school, etc.
in this article I want to focus on the security of ionic air purifiers, a factor which I believe cancels the other two criteria of efficiency and effectiveness. There’s no sense to have something that works well in eliminating germs, but it is so strong that it harms our health. you need to answer two important questions:
(1) the expected useful surfactants of ionic air purifier technologies to harm human tissue it? Are negative ions, bipolar ions, hydroxyl radicals, ions patented Sharp’s Plasmacluster or any other name, they are safe?
(2) Is there any unintended byproducts of ionic air purifier technology can harm human tissue? Byproducts include ozone and nitrogen oxides, which are highly reactive and known to be harmful in higher concentrations.
The beneficial biologically active substances – whether they harm a person Fabric?
There is no scientific data is not available on the Internet on the feasibility of negative ions, bipolar ions, hydroxyl radicals, Plasmacluster ions, etc. They are safe in that they do not harm the human tissue. There is plenty of data that shows that these active ingredients to effectively remove germs, a subject that I will deal with in the next article. Here I am concerned that the advertised active agents activity is equally damaging to the fragile human tissue. Why is there a lack of scientific data, when millions of dollars are spent by consumers on ionic air cleaners each year?
After extensive but fruitless Web, I did the next logical thing – ask the producers of ionic air purifiers! Of the several requests, the answer slowly became clear – the scientific data exist, but the manufacturers do not want to make them available to the public, so they do not incur the wrath of animal protection groups! Is this a real fear or they hide some unpleasant truths about their product?
Googling “animal testing” immediately threw up a huge controversy surrounding the use of animals to test the safety of products intended for the people. A case in point would be that the Huntingdon Life Sciences, UK research company that conducts testing of commercial food safety, pharmaceuticals and household appliances. Today, there are many conflicts between the testing companies, and animal protection groups. Not surprisingly, the secrecy ionic air purifier manufacturers, who are likely to carry out safety tests using the company’s similar tests.
Documented animal testing
Result Opportunity Web helped me to better understand the animal testing controversy. Safety tests indicated on the site associated with the liquid product, are not directly linked with any ionic air purifier technology. Liquid is applied to the furniture and other household fittings. In the explanation of one of the benefits, he argued that when the ultraviolet light in sunlight shines on a liquid, hydroxyl radicals and superoxide ions are released into the air, thus destroying any germs, such as bacteria, viruses and fungi that may be present.
In order to prove that the liquid is harmless to humans, four categories of safety tests on mice, guinea pigs and rabbits were performed (please keep in mind that you can find the next point advance, and you can skip to the next paragraph).
(1) The test for acute oral toxicity – liquid orally fed mice;
(2) Test for primary skin irritation – the liquid applied to the skin of rabbits intentionally erased;
(3) The test for skin sensitivity – liquid is injected under the skin of guinea pigs;
(4) Test on mutagenicity – Salmonella liquid was applied on to determine if they cause a mutation in the nuclei of bacteria in order to determine if the liquid has the ability to cause cancer.
Quite dark and repulsive stuff! I feel, even though the reports show that the tests were conducted in accordance with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Guidelines chemical tests. I can begin to empathize with animal welfare camp about such safety testing. Fortunately, this liquid product were found unharmed its use of all animals (even salmonella).
This is a brief understanding of animal testing explains why producers of ionic air purifiers to refrain from propaganda or even thinking of such tests when they are held.
Despite these concerns producers, my web search revealed footnotes for some brands as a result they show that the safety tests were performed on the active agents. Looking for my ionic air purifier, I would look for such footnotes. I would expect that no animal was harm or cleaner will not have any reason to be in the market for a person. I would also like to ensure that the safety tests authoritative institutions was carried out, which are accredited as GLP (Good Laboratory Practice), a set of guidelines issued by the OECD to recognize organizations which meet the strict standards of scientific testing.
The human testing
Ultimately, this means that in fact no security testing for the effects of active substances on the human that use ionic air purifiers? Hardly, if you think about it. All users are testers, being unconsciously act voluntarily purchase one and use it!
Unfortunately, all that we hear on the websites maufacturers “will be glowing testimonies about the benefits of a cleaner. Such responses, while helpful, fall under a cloud of cherry-picking that is only positive signs. For In order to be considered a solid scientific proof that the active substance does not cause any harm to human tissue, the parameters of the ionic air purifier user would have to be subject to very strict criteria and GLP parameters testing laboratory.
it would seem that this a question that will never be adequately addressed. the only consolation for me is the fact that many other products in the consumer market are sold in the same manner, only the integrity of manufacturers and are considered safe until proven otherwise.
security – The second aspect
In the next article I will discuss the second aspect of security. Quite apart from the active agents of human tissue may be harmed potential byproducts intentional or unintentional, ionic air cleaner.