The AirPurifiers-Report.com is established to help you choose better machines for your home.
We’ve been in the air purifiers industry before establishing this site. So, we know that finding a useful air cleaner is quite a complicated task. What we want to do is try our best to tell you which machine to buy and which to avoid.
Our Small Site vs A Corporation
Within 6 months of operating, a representative from the Friedrich Corporation emailed and threatened to sue us when we criticized it’s Friedrich C-90A / C-90B. He claimed that we had misled our readers with our review. He had also threatened to take down our site because we said that the machine is unsafe.
In his email, he said our review was “absolutely baseless and obviously defamatory, as well as actionable in legal venues”.
The fact that the Consumer Report magazine recommended the machine for it’s readers didn’t help our case either.
So to avoid lawsuits, we edited our information. But we still told our readers to avoid the machine. And the same went to Oreck’s and Sharper Image’s machines. The case was closed.
Consumer Report Adjusted It’s Position
In 2007, Consumer Report made a complete u-turn on it’s finding. It said,
“For the past 15 years, CONSUMER REPORTS has recommended some electrostatic precipitators. The Friedrich C-90B and Aprilaire 5000 were effective air purifiers with low annual maintenance costs but produced small amounts of ozone. These products’ performance has not changed significantly, but our advice has.”
It added, without apology, “We now believe that air purifiers that emit even small amounts of ozone (less than 50 parts per billion) are not your best choice … If you own one of these models, we suggest that you err on the side of caution.”
At AirPurifiers-Report, we err on the side of caution at all times. For us, your health is too precious for us to make bad recommendations.
Consumer Report can give you 15 years of possibly harmful advice without the word “Sorry”.
For a small site like us, that’s an enormous mistake to make.