#THE WIRECUTTER MONITOR UPDATE#

The viruses that Wirecutter says HEPA can’t handle were not addressed in their testing. Chemicals like formaldehyde and turpentine that off-gas from furniture and other products are becoming an increasing concern and are smaller in size than what HEPA testing looks for. Taking measurements of the air other than just raw particle count is a more holistic approach to air quality. It does not take into account that lower air flow can improve destruction efficiency leading to cleaner air in the long run.The EPA has issued a statement on VOCs’ impact on indoor air quality, showing that there are currently no federal standards on VOCs in the home but pointing out their risks. It does not test for VOCs, and research into the health effects of VOCs suggests a variety of concerns that are very different from the effects of particulate matter.It does not test for biological particles in the air, such as mold and microorganisms.This testing methodology is too narrow because: This just isn’t a complete enough approach for consumers to know whether an air purifier is going to work for them. Wirecutter reviews only one aspect of air quality, and admitted in this now-deleted tweet that they don’t even have the means to test PECO adequately.įurthermore, Wirecutter states on their website that PECO is distinct from HEPA, yet applied HEPA testing standards to the device. While this is certainly one way to test air purifiers, it is not the most advanced, and it certainly does not take into account all of the modern scientific research on air quality. In particular, Wirecutter uses data from a hand held high-grade particle sensor in a home or office setting to measure the particle capture rate of the units they test, which drastically affected the validity of the review.

Wirecutter’s testing, and even more broadly, public discussions of air quality sensors, regulations, and testing standards, have focused on larger particulate matter, which represents only one component of what actually contributes to air quality. Treating every pollutant in the air equally ignores what we have learned in that past 80 years of science, and we hope they soon take a fuller range of air pollutants into account. We implore publications like Wirecutter and Consumer Reports to embrace the latest scientific knowledge about the complexity of indoor air when they review air filtration technology. Air pollution, both indoor and outdoor, is still one of the leading causes of death worldwide and though it has dipped during the quarantine, there is still a lot to be done to leave the air safe to breathe for later generations. In the climate of the Covid-19 pandemic, scientific inquiry is more important than ever. While online reviews can have value, we believe it is important to have the highest quality data possible when exploring a topic as complex as indoor air quality because every room is different, every source of pollution is different, and no two air purifiers are built the same. The researchers involved were leaders in their field and honest explorers of the new frontiers in aerosol science, biology, and virology.

Most recently the University of Minnesota performed testing on how Air Mini inactivates different strains of coronavirus and the H1N1 virus.

#THE WIRECUTTER MONITOR UPDATE#

Update January 21st, 2021: We continue to produce research that is scientifically valid and executed by professionals in third-party, high-tech labs.

The wirecutter monitor