Consumer Report on Ionic Breeze Air Cleaners

Air Purifiers America, on the other hand, tests air purifiers in an office environment, with closed doors and windows and ventilation turned off, but with other variables present, like air currents and objects in the room. The company says that this type of testing better simulates normal use. Tested models at Air Purifiers America are measured for particle removal close to the air purifier and in the center of a 132-square-foot room, and are tested on both high and low speed.

Although testing varies, and not all models are tested by each organization, the two testers do agree about one series of models? The Ionic Breeze (*est. $350 to $500, depending on model) made by The Sharper Image. This electrostatic precipitator (meaning it electrically charges airborne particles) has a strong marketing campaign and makes up 25% of the market share for air purifiers, according to Consumer Reports.

The Ionic Breeze is given a "poor" rating by Consumer Reports, who claims that the Ionic Breeze removed very few particles from the air in their tests. The Sharper Image complained about the testing method used by Consumer Reports, so the organization tested the Ionic Breeze a second time, after the testing method was reviewed and validated by an independent expert, and got the same result. The magazine also had two other independent experts examine the research studies provided by Sharper Image "proving" the Ionic Breeze was effective, and those experts found those documents to be unimpressive, with flawed methodology or simply irrelevant as to whether the Ionic Breeze was an effective air cleaner. A third round of testing by Consumer Reports, as reported in their May 2005 update on ionizing air cleaners, again showed the same results.

In a well-publicized lawsuit filed in September 2003 in California, the Sharper Image asserted that Consumer Reports' findings were false and malicious. Consumers Union, the magazine's parent organization, made a motion in October 2003 to throw the case out of court, maintaining that Consumer Reports' tests are valid. That lawsuit was thrown out of court on November 9, 2004, with the court upholding Consumer Reports' First Amendment right to free speech in its assessment and review of the Ionic Breeze Quadra.

Although some experts say that the ozone produced by electrostatic air cleaners is safe for those in normal good health, both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and American Lung Association (ALA) advise against using these devices, since there are many ozone-free HEPA models on the market. We contacted the Sharper Image, who responded with a generous amount of helpful information. The company holds to its claim that the Ionic Breeze is not an ozone generator, and, in fact, in open-lab testing, the Ionic Breeze is within the Food and Drug Administration's 50-ppb guidelines for ozone-producing devices, and it produced much less ozone than some other models. However, when tested in a sealed room (with closed doors and windows), all ionizing models tested produced more than 50 ppb of ozone.