I just finished watching one of the Sharper Image air cleaner ads on TV.
I just thought I would share a few observations.

The claim cleaner, fresher smelling air.

True? Sure it is true.

The air will be cleaner even if they remove only 0.00015% of the
pollution in the air. How much cleaner is not stated. They do not even
claim that is will be significantly cleaner. Independent test I have seen
indicate that it has far too little capacity to make a dent in a normal size
room.

Fresher smelling it will be. We all tend to associate that "after the
thunder storm" smell with a fresh clean smell. What they don't say is that
truly clean air has no smell. What we are smelling is the O³ (Ozone) just
as after a thunder storm.

Now get this. The next thing they talk about is their new catalytic
action filter that reduces Ozone (and smog) Ozone is harmful to humans and
nearly all life. The part they don't bother talking about is that O³ is
coming from their own air cleaner! That's right they are telling us they
are "reducing" the contamination with their new device. OK tell me why I
should be happy that I can buy an air cleaner that will produce less
pollution in my home than the same air cleaner the sold last year? Why do I
want an air cleaner that pollutes the air in my home??? Why don't they tell
me how much it lets through??

As PT said .... one is born every minute and Sharper Image is living off
them.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

If I remember correctly, Consumer Reports blew the lid off of some of
their bunk reguarding the air cleaner... and SI sued them...

Joseph,

I know nothing about the "ozone" controversy.
I feel that many folks believe that air is a mixture of gasses with a
known composition but this is not true. Air is that stuff we breath. Air
contains gas, dirt, pet dander, pollen, virii, bacteria, et c. The
composition of air varies depending on many factors. You can have air where
most of the particles of a certain size have been removed. But this does not
make the air purer. There isn't pure air. This purity thing is a marketing
tool.

Dave M.

Jack wrote:
If I remember correctly, Consumer Reports blew the lid off of some of
their bunk reguarding the air cleaner... and SI sued them...

Yea, and Consumer Reports won.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

David Martel wrote:
Joseph,

I know nothing about the "ozone" controversy.
I feel that many folks believe that air is a mixture of gasses with
a known composition but this is not true. Air is that stuff we
breath. Air contains gas, dirt, pet dander, pollen, virii, bacteria,
et c. The composition of air varies depending on many factors. You
can have air where most of the particles of a certain size have been
removed. But this does not make the air purer. There isn't pure air.
This purity thing is a marketing tool.

Dave M.

I also liked their line about it changing O³ and "smog" into pure
oxygen. O³ is pure oxygen. Who knows what smog is.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

oxygen is the element name. It is also the allotropic name for O2,
whereas ozone is the allotropic name for O3. So it is correct to
convert ozone into oxygen, one one sense of the word.

David Martel wrote:

Joseph,

I know nothing about the "ozone" controversy.
I feel that many folks believe that air is a mixture of gasses with a
known composition but this is not true. Air is that stuff we breath. Air
contains gas, dirt, pet dander, pollen, virii, bacteria, et c. The
composition of air varies depending on many factors. You can have air where
most of the particles of a certain size have been removed. But this does not
make the air purer. There isn't pure air. This purity thing is a marketing
tool.


To the contrary, the mixture of gases in air is pretty well fixed. What
else is suspended in the air isn't air, they are various contaiminants.
That they are present in various amounts and in various concentrations
is certainly indubitable. That no filtering system is perfect is also
true. But to say removing contaminants doesn't improve air purity isn't
correct, either.

SI sued CR and CR won based on the real data found. CR determined that the
SI unit did almost ZERO to filter the air. They also found that it actually
CREATED ozone and possibly so much so that it could become unhealthy in your
house after a period of time. This may explain why SI decided to add that
little extra "feature" claiming to remove ozone.

What a joke!


"dean" wrote in message
ups.com...
oxygen is the element name. It is also the allotropic name for O2,
whereas ozone is the allotropic name for O3. So it is correct to
convert ozone into oxygen, one one sense of the word.

I've always felt these were way over priced. I might try one at $60 but not
at the outragous price they charge. HEPA filters with fans I think do the
best job but with the obvious downside of noise and replacement filters.

I friend got one of the SI cleaners to help with mold contamination and it
didn't help even a little (she ended up in the hospital with pneumonia)

Keeping good filters in the A/C or heating ducts is also very effective



"Joseph Meehan" wrote in message
.. .
I just finished watching one of the Sharper Image air cleaner ads on
TV. I just thought I would share a few observations.

The claim cleaner, fresher smelling air.

True? Sure it is true.

The air will be cleaner even if they remove only 0.00015% of the
pollution in the air. How much cleaner is not stated. They do not even
claim that is will be significantly cleaner. Independent test I have seen
indicate that it has far too little capacity to make a dent in a normal
size room.

Fresher smelling it will be. We all tend to associate that "after the
thunder storm" smell with a fresh clean smell. What they don't say is
that truly clean air has no smell. What we are smelling is the O³
(Ozone) just as after a thunder storm.

Now get this. The next thing they talk about is their new catalytic
action filter that reduces Ozone (and smog) Ozone is harmful to humans
and nearly all life. The part they don't bother talking about is that O³
is coming from their own air cleaner! That's right they are telling us
they are "reducing" the contamination with their new device. OK tell me
why I should be happy that I can buy an air cleaner that will produce less
pollution in my home than the same air cleaner the sold last year? Why do
I want an air cleaner that pollutes the air in my home??? Why don't they
tell me how much it lets through??

As PT said .... one is born every minute and Sharper Image is living
off them.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

Duane,

Are you starting with a definition of air and then insisting that
everything else are contaminants? Air is a mixture of all sorts of stuff.
The composition of air varies. You can strain out particles but I don't see
that you 've made the air purer, you've just changed the mix.

Dave M.

And Sharper Image had to pay Consumer Report's 1/2 Million dollar legal
bill!

Stretch

David Martel wrote:

Duane,

Are you starting with a definition of air and then insisting that
everything else are contaminants?

Yep..."air" is the mixutre of gases, the particulate crap ain't...

Air is a mixture of all sorts of stuff.

Yes, N, and O, w/ small amounts of others. I don't have my Handbook of
Chemistry and Physics at hand for precise numbers, but you got the idea
above...

Comes from being a ChE minor, I suppose...

According to www.dictionary.com:


1. A colorless, odorless, tasteless, gaseous mixture, mainly nitrogen
(approximately 78 percent) and oxygen (approximately 21 percent) with
lesser amounts of argon, carbon dioxide, hydrogen, neon, helium, and
other gases.
2. This mixture with varying amounts of moisture and particulate
matter, enveloping the earth; the atmosphere.

So it does appear that, from definition 2, David M is correct. However,
according to definition 1, Duane is correct.

So you are both correct! Peace!

I guess my cousin did a project on Sharper Image air cleaners. Apparently
the devices do what they claim in terms of purifying the air. However,
because the units lack a fan or any means of circulating air, the devices
actually only purify the air located within a limited range of the device.
Something like a 2 foot radius, but I am not for certain.

Brandon Moses
moses388 AT hotmail DOT com


"Joseph Meehan" wrote in message
.. .
I just finished watching one of the Sharper Image air cleaner ads on
TV.
I just thought I would share a few observations.

The claim cleaner, fresher smelling air.

True? Sure it is true.

The air will be cleaner even if they remove only 0.00015% of the
pollution in the air. How much cleaner is not stated. They do not even
claim that is will be significantly cleaner. Independent test I have seen
indicate that it has far too little capacity to make a dent in a normal
size
room.

Fresher smelling it will be. We all tend to associate that "after the
thunder storm" smell with a fresh clean smell. What they don't say is
that
truly clean air has no smell. What we are smelling is the O³ (Ozone)
just
as after a thunder storm.

Now get this. The next thing they talk about is their new catalytic
action filter that reduces Ozone (and smog) Ozone is harmful to humans
and
nearly all life. The part they don't bother talking about is that O³ is
coming from their own air cleaner! That's right they are telling us they
are "reducing" the contamination with their new device. OK tell me why I
should be happy that I can buy an air cleaner that will produce less
pollution in my home than the same air cleaner the sold last year? Why do
I
want an air cleaner that pollutes the air in my home??? Why don't they
tell
me how much it lets through??

As PT said .... one is born every minute and Sharper Image is living
off
them.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

"Brandon Moses" wrote in message
...
I guess my cousin did a project on Sharper Image air cleaners. Apparently
the devices do what they claim in terms of purifying the air. However,
because the units lack a fan or any means of circulating air, the devices
actually only purify the air located within a limited range of the device.
Something like a 2 foot radius, but I am not for certain.


Plus they clean your wallet out pretty good.......

Which leads us to a new question...

Why is there air?


"dean" wrote in message
oups.com...
According to www.dictionary.com:


1. A colorless, odorless, tasteless, gaseous mixture, mainly nitrogen
(approximately 78 percent) and oxygen (approximately 21 percent) with
lesser amounts of argon, carbon dioxide, hydrogen, neon, helium, and
other gases.
2. This mixture with varying amounts of moisture and particulate
matter, enveloping the earth; the atmosphere.

So it does appear that, from definition 2, David M is correct. However,
according to definition 1, Duane is correct.

So you are both correct! Peace!

MrC1 wrote:
Which leads us to a new question...

Why is there air?

It originally was created to give politicians something to make hot.



"dean" wrote in message
oups.com...
According to www.dictionary.com:


1. A colorless, odorless, tasteless, gaseous mixture, mainly nitrogen
(approximately 78 percent) and oxygen (approximately 21 percent) with
lesser amounts of argon, carbon dioxide, hydrogen, neon, helium, and
other gases.
2. This mixture with varying amounts of moisture and particulate
matter, enveloping the earth; the atmosphere.

So it does appear that, from definition 2, David M is correct.
However, according to definition 1, Duane is correct.

So you are both correct! Peace!

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

Actually I was thinking about an old Bill Cosby line, but that works too.

Cosby's answer? To blow up volleyballs and basketballs.


"Joseph Meehan" wrote in message
. ..
MrC1 wrote:
Which leads us to a new question...

Why is there air?

It originally was created to give politicians something to make hot.



"dean" wrote in message
oups.com...
According to www.dictionary.com:


1. A colorless, odorless, tasteless, gaseous mixture, mainly nitrogen
(approximately 78 percent) and oxygen (approximately 21 percent) with
lesser amounts of argon, carbon dioxide, hydrogen, neon, helium, and
other gases.
2. This mixture with varying amounts of moisture and particulate
matter, enveloping the earth; the atmosphere.

So it does appear that, from definition 2, David M is correct.
However, according to definition 1, Duane is correct.

So you are both correct! Peace!

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

MrC1 wrote:
Actually I was thinking about an old Bill Cosby line, but that works
too.

Cosby's answer? To blow up volleyballs and basketballs.

I remember that one.



"Joseph Meehan" wrote in message
. ..
MrC1 wrote:
Which leads us to a new question...

Why is there air?

It originally was created to give politicians something to make
hot.



"dean" wrote in message
oups.com...
According to www.dictionary.com:


1. A colorless, odorless, tasteless, gaseous mixture, mainly
nitrogen (approximately 78 percent) and oxygen (approximately 21
percent) with lesser amounts of argon, carbon dioxide, hydrogen,
neon, helium, and other gases.
2. This mixture with varying amounts of moisture and particulate
matter, enveloping the earth; the atmosphere.

So it does appear that, from definition 2, David M is correct.
However, according to definition 1, Duane is correct.

So you are both correct! Peace!

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

"MrC1" wrote in message
...
Actually I was thinking about an old Bill Cosby line, but that works too.

Cosby's answer? To blow up volleyballs and basketballs.

LOL

You beat me to it!!!

First album I ever owned ("Why Is There Air?"). Picture of Cosby holding a
vollyball on the cover:

http://tinyurl.com/86xp7

What about the UV light that they sell for inside your duct work?

Or what would you guys suggest besides a good filter?

--

---------------------------------------
Brian Dye

http://tech-home.com
---------------------------------------


"PipeDown" wrote in message
nk.net...
I've always felt these were way over priced. I might try one at $60 but
not at the outragous price they charge. HEPA filters with fans I think do
the best job but with the obvious downside of noise and replacement
filters.

I friend got one of the SI cleaners to help with mold contamination and it
didn't help even a little (she ended up in the hospital with pneumonia)

Keeping good filters in the A/C or heating ducts is also very effective



"Joseph Meehan" wrote in message
.. .
I just finished watching one of the Sharper Image air cleaner ads on
TV. I just thought I would share a few observations.

The claim cleaner, fresher smelling air.

True? Sure it is true.

The air will be cleaner even if they remove only 0.00015% of the
pollution in the air. How much cleaner is not stated. They do not even
claim that is will be significantly cleaner. Independent test I have
seen indicate that it has far too little capacity to make a dent in a
normal size room.

Fresher smelling it will be. We all tend to associate that "after the
thunder storm" smell with a fresh clean smell. What they don't say is
that truly clean air has no smell. What we are smelling is the O³
(Ozone) just as after a thunder storm.

Now get this. The next thing they talk about is their new catalytic
action filter that reduces Ozone (and smog) Ozone is harmful to humans
and nearly all life. The part they don't bother talking about is that O³
is coming from their own air cleaner! That's right they are telling us
they are "reducing" the contamination with their new device. OK tell me
why I should be happy that I can buy an air cleaner that will produce
less pollution in my home than the same air cleaner the sold last year?
Why do I want an air cleaner that pollutes the air in my home??? Why
don't they tell me how much it lets through??

As PT said .... one is born every minute and Sharper Image is living
off them.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

Brian wrote:
What about the UV light that they sell for inside your duct work?

Or what would you guys suggest besides a good filter?


The UV light is not a filter.

UV lights kill living things. If your problem is caused by things like
dust mites or mold that might be in the ducts, it may do some good. However
it will not do anything to eliminate dust or allergens that are already
there or drawn into the system or are created in other parts of the system.

It all depends on what your problem is.

Sales folk like Sharper Image like to make you thing that they have the
cure for every evil know to man.



"PipeDown" wrote in message
nk.net...
I've always felt these were way over priced. I might try one at $60
but not at the outragous price they charge. HEPA filters with fans
I think do the best job but with the obvious downside of noise and
replacement filters.

I friend got one of the SI cleaners to help with mold contamination
and it didn't help even a little (she ended up in the hospital with
pneumonia)
Keeping good filters in the A/C or heating ducts is also very
effective


"Joseph Meehan" wrote in message
.. .
I just finished watching one of the Sharper Image air cleaner
ads on TV. I just thought I would share a few observations.

The claim cleaner, fresher smelling air.

True? Sure it is true.

The air will be cleaner even if they remove only 0.00015% of the
pollution in the air. How much cleaner is not stated. They do not
even claim that is will be significantly cleaner. Independent test
I have seen indicate that it has far too little capacity to make a
dent in a normal size room.

Fresher smelling it will be. We all tend to associate that
"after the thunder storm" smell with a fresh clean smell. What
they don't say is that truly clean air has no smell. What we are
smelling is the O³ (Ozone) just as after a thunder storm.

Now get this. The next thing they talk about is their new
catalytic action filter that reduces Ozone (and smog) Ozone is
harmful to humans and nearly all life. The part they don't bother
talking about is that O³ is coming from their own air cleaner! That's
right they are telling us they are "reducing" the
contamination with their new device. OK tell me why I should be
happy that I can buy an air cleaner that will produce less
pollution in my home than the same air cleaner the sold last year?
Why do I want an air cleaner that pollutes the air in my home??? Why
don't they tell me how much it lets through??
As PT said .... one is born every minute and Sharper Image is
living off them.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit