| The ionic air purifier industry clocks multimillion | | | | against viruses. NIOSH does not have any studies |
| dollar sales every year. Manufacturers label their | | | | planned to evaluate these devices nor do we |
| product an essential tool in improving indoor air | | | | have a policy on their use." |
| quality by eliminating airborne microscopic viral and | | | | Asked to elaborate further on "peer-reviewed |
| bacterial contaminants, organic and inorganic | | | | scientific studies", NIOSH replied: |
| allergens, gaseous toxic chemicals and even | | | | "Regarding your questions about the peer review |
| radioactive gases like radon. | | | | process, peer review happens before research |
| Self Endorsement | | | | begins. Study protocols are reviewed by experts |
| Deep-pocketed manufacturers in the industry | | | | in the field to assure that a valid study is |
| spend millions in research and development to | | | | conducted. When the study is completed, data |
| validate their claims. Scientific institutes, academic | | | | analyzed, and interpretations presented, the |
| and commercial, are roped in to conduct multiple | | | | proposed manuscripts are peer reviewed by |
| authentication studies. Reputable virologists and | | | | scientific journals to assure that the analysis is |
| environmental scientists, the entrepreneurial ones | | | | appropriate based on the data obtained. This |
| who commercially run GLP-certified laboratories, | | | | process provides credibility to the research and |
| are engaged to conduct various experiments with | | | | allows individuals like you to assume a degree of |
| the aim of attesting and confirming | | | | expert review of the findings presented." |
| manufacturers' claims. | | | | For the ionic air purifier industry, is the door really |
| Other manufacturers of the ionic air purifier seek | | | | closed? No, it is very heartening that in their reply, |
| certification from non-profit associations and | | | | the NIOSH kept an open view on the issue: |
| societies with interests in promoting indoor air | | | | "NIOSH provides support for investigator initiated |
| quality. Various certifications and awards from | | | | research. Should someone want to conduct such |
| non-profit organisations, like The Association of | | | | studies they may apply for funding by |
| Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM), The | | | | mechanisms available and described under "Funding |
| Asthma & Allergy Foundation of America, | | | | Opportunities" at cdc.gov/niosh/oep. Proposals are |
| The Asthma Society of Canada, etc, are much | | | | funded annually based on availability of funds, |
| sought after. This is a strategy that is adopted all | | | | relevance of the proposed work to the NIOSH |
| over the world and we can only expect more | | | | mission, and the quality of the science proposed." |
| novel ways of gaining market recognition and | | | | Manufacturers in the industry should really take |
| approval. | | | | note of this official stance. One successful |
| For instance, there are other air purifier | | | | scientific peer review may be all that is really |
| manufacturers who believe that user organisations | | | | needed! Ideally, there should be a series of |
| like the Parent Tested Parent Approved Media | | | | iron-clad scientific reviews. |
| provide the legitimacy that they need. No doubt | | | | Ionic Air Purifier - Standing alone with no official |
| manufacturers of the ionic air purifier will soon | | | | endorsement? |
| follow suit in this very competitive industry. | | | | With regard to the HEPA-based air purifier, there |
| No Official Endorsement | | | | has been a report of a scientific peer review by |
| Given all the above concerted efforts by the | | | | the National Jewish Medical and Research Center. |
| industry, why is there no official endorsement | | | | Our research shows that there was in fact an |
| from the authorities? | | | | EPA-funded study by the Center in 2002. Among |
| Even more puzzling is the fact that the authorities | | | | other objectives, "the researchers will also |
| are of the view that the control of indoor air | | | | determine if environmental interventions..., such as |
| quality is critical. For instance, at its website, the | | | | air purifiers and HEPA-filter vacuuming, result in |
| US EPA states that its "Total Exposure | | | | sustained improvements in children's lung function." |
| Assessment Methodology (TEAM) studies found | | | | We have asked the Center where we can find |
| levels of about a dozen common organic | | | | the results of the study but have not received |
| pollutants to be 2 to 5 times higher inside homes | | | | any replies so far. But at the current website, the |
| than outside...and that concentrations of many | | | | Center states "to date, though, the majority of |
| VOCs are consistently higher indoors (up to ten | | | | clinical studies do not prove conclusively that HEPA |
| times higher) than outdoors". In addition, "...during | | | | filters result in a reduction of medication use." |
| and for several hours immediately after certain | | | | It seems that the lack of scientific peer reviews |
| activities, such as paint stripping, levels (of | | | | is a problem for HEPA technology as well. That |
| pollutants) may be 1,000 times background | | | | would seem to apply to photo-catalytic oxidation |
| outdoor levels". | | | | technology as well. |
| Why do the authorities refrain from endorsing the | | | | What Can Users Do? |
| ionic air purifier as an essential tool to improve | | | | In the current less than ideal situation, what can |
| indoor air quality? On one of the EPA's public | | | | users do? Do your own research in as systematic |
| blogs, we put forward this issue as one that is | | | | and thorough a manner as possible. That's where |
| worthy of greater scientific research. To date, | | | | our Ionic Air Purifier Review - 4 Key Factors |
| there is no response from the EPA commentator | | | | Model is relevant. We are also encouraged by the |
| of that blog. | | | | fact that for a scientific peer review to be |
| We also posed this question to the US National | | | | accepted by any authority, it will have to cover |
| Institute for Occupational Safety and Health | | | | the 2 safety aspects in our model. For NIOSH |
| (NIOSH) on one of its public blogs. We highlighted | | | | said: |
| the fact that NIOSH is not averse to endorsing | | | | "...a scientifically valid study would need to be |
| commercial products e.g. the N95 respirator | | | | designed to test whether ion generators are |
| manufactured by 3M. | | | | effective in killing viruses to the extent that a |
| Scientific peer review, or rather the lack of, was | | | | hazard no longer remains, and that such |
| their response. In their exact words: | | | | technology does not by itself generate new |
| "NIOSH is not aware of any peer-reviewed | | | | hazards of its own, e.g., ozone or oxidized |
| scientific studies that demonstrate the | | | | by-products. The design of such a study would be |
| effectiveness of ion generators/ionic air purifiers | | | | challenging. |