With our country’s system the way it is, it’s a “watch your own pocket” form of these merchandising bandit’s propositions. “Buyer Beware” with little or no recourse to recouping your monetary loss, is the name of the game today. Countless scores of products and incidents can be found of companies thriving off our weakest link of product protection. One that comes to mind though, of the guiltiest of false advertising concepts is the idea that home air purifiers actually do what they claim to be able to. With several years of duping the American and foreign markets, the truth is finally coming out about ionizers and the fraudulent claims that companies make concerning their own various versions of such products. Amongst the most popular brands of these air contaminators are the "Ionic Breeze" by Sharper Image, and the "Orec" "XL Air Purifier".

In a “Buyer Beware” upbringing as we have grown up with concerning consumer health products and advertising, the purchaser has to skeptically analyze literally each and every new product that catches their eye in today’s advertising world. In a system and society where our government is well known to hinder itself and sluggishly supervises health products made in the good old USA, companies and corporations can far-to-easily legally produce just about any type of health product hype or machine they wish to. We…the consumer…are the ones left holding the bag if the product doesn’t live up to its name or worse, is actually damaging and dangerous to us. Few of us in the US are duped into believing that the governmental departments at work today are perfect. Beyond human error and procrastination, there is enough political and financial bed sharing between corporations or large companies and those government offices empowered with the supervision of their products, that we could make novel upon novel of conspiracy theories, and so they do. Departments such as the FDA, USDA and EPA have proven track records showing far to much of a slipper-slide history when it comes to accurately monitoring products that end up being pulled from the shelves ‘after-the-fact’, and way to sluggish a performance record in promoting or monitoring accurate timely testing of direly needed products that companies wish to market. Mind you now, I don’t wish to seem as if I am condemning these agencies. For example, since the FDA’s creation in 1906, its track record has a huge success rate considering all the variables. True, it is far easier to remember anyone’s shortcomings and failures over and above their achievements, that’s just human nature. But never should ANY governmental department be allowed to run unchecked or unsupervised by outside sources.

So it’s you and me against the world of cons and over-exaggerated product claims. EPA has posted results of studies concerning ozone and the de-ionization products and their impact on our environment and atmosphere. Ozone emitters are not what they are trumped up to be, and all companies that produce these forms of air purifiers use a loophole excuse that EPA’s testing result were on the extreme high limits of ozone concentrations, not the amount that their products actually emit. Truth about it is, EPA’s study results fell far short of creating a usable ‘healthy’ standardization for limits within the home environment. Air purifier companies like to promote their claim that their product technology allows for quick decomposition of Ozone, allowing it to change back into it’s purer form of Oxygen. News bulletin to all you folks, Ozone naturally decomposes in this process without their technology prompting it too. The trouble is, if the ozone emittions created by the air de-ionization process isn’t controlled in a timely fashion and strictly monitored burst, you’ve got yourself a high percentage of Ozone no matter what the companies claim.

In a report based on a Consumer Report’s issue concerning dangerous Ozone levels in the home created by air purifiers, it got down to the nitty-gritty and even posted the top 5 offenders in product brands.

Quoting a recent article:

Ionizing Air Purifiers Found to Emit High Levels of Ozone

Consumer Reports magazine recently released the results of its latest studies of indoor ionizing air cleaners. Five of the models were found to generate "potentially harmful" levels of ozone.

The Enironmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers 80 parts per billion of outdoor exposure during an eight hour period to be an acceptable limit, while the World Health Organization (WHO) is much stricter with a limit of 60 ppb.

Fortwayne.com reports:

"Ground-level ozone is a federally regulated pollutant, and long-term overexposure can cause permanent lung damage, even premature death, research indicates. Even short-term exposure can cause wheezing, coughing, chest pain and shortness of breath, according to the American Lung Association. This is especially true for high-risk groups such as individuals with respiratory diseases, senior citizens and children."

The following is a list of the five units Consumer Reports magazine tested and found to generate potentially harmful ozone levels and be ineffective at cleaning the air:

·  Brookstone Pure-Ion V2

·  Sharper Image Professional Series Ionic Breeze Quadra S1737 SNX

·  Ionic Pro CL-369

·  IonizAir P4620

·  Surround Air XJ-2000

There are many other things that you can do to reduce respiratory irritants in your home besides buying an air cleaner. The new free email course "How to Reduce Respiratory Irritants In Your Home" will help you to improve the air quality within your home. You can enroll for these coursees via About.com’s webpage here:

http://lungdiseases.about.com/c/ec/15.htm

but I wish to openly make you aware in the area that the enrollment in this Home Environment Improvements program includes background advertising purposes in your e-mail of postal address, so I merely threw bogus info in except for my e-mail-addy to prevent any snail mail overrun. The information contained there is far worthy enough to enroll and participate.

Large industrial applications of de-ionizers and ozone emitters are used in a safe environment to control mold and bacteria in their expensive extensively emphasized commercial applications of duct work and contained, closed-environmental air quality control systems . Trick to the concept here is that these applications are constantly monitored for percentages within relevance. The equipment includes air monitors throughout to constantly regulate the performance of the system and keep levels within pre-determined ranges. Also, in such ‘sealed’ or practically air tight settings, air exchangers constantly adapt levels from the interior of the buildings with exterior air, pumping percentages of each, swapping controlled amounts of one with the other, or you would obviously be aware of and watching TV news programs of thousands suffocating to death in big building complexes.

So one can easily understand where such products on a larger scale are adapted to perform in controlled air applications and constantly monitored for such purposes. In home usage it is a different story altogether. No matter the brand, what they claim towards the technology and scientific process, you won’t find one, not one of the air purifiers that have anything more than a feeble time burst control that you may or may not be able to adjust accordingly. These are not the high end expensive systems with monitor units which test and calculate and control these bursts. Here are some facts for the interested reader.

The half-life of ozone in air is approximately 72 hours (3 days).

More than we may seem comfortable with, many Ionizers exceed the 50 ppb medical device limit for ozone emissions set for professional health care environments. In a Consumer Reports laboratory test, the Surround Air XJ-2000 produced the most, 319 ppb, followed by the IonizAir P4620 at 168 ppb.

The main points of this article? Research, research, research!

Ozone is a viable, worthy tool to promote cleaner air and prevent mold and disease. But for home use under current product models and their claims? That’s up to each individual buyer, but its not hard to guess whether or not I myself use one at home.