Guest guest Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 KL & Group, The research is NOT there for or against, in my opinion. From the research that I have read, I am not willing to take the chance of harming myself or anyone else by using an ozone air purifier that could cause permanent lung damage or irritate the respiratory track. There are professionals on this board that I hope will chime in AGAIN, responding to the ozone issue. KL, I would recommend you take some of these exact questions of yours and experience with the ozone machine to the professional board, IEQ. Just to see what their response would be. I will be watching for your post and their responses.I will post the link below. I really wish it were that simple that one machine is a cure all. I also have been made aware that ozone may even stimulate mold growth and or cause it to release its mycotoxins. Also Ken, you are doing your best to promote the use of ozone and how good and safe it is to members on this board. Why won't you post some of this exact information on the professional board? Until more research is there (and not just done by the company promoting it) either fore or against, I am not willing to promote any product that does not have a proven track record. I could not live with myself if I caused someone further damage to their health. Could you? I don't mean to make it sound like I am attacking you personally Ken, it's the product I have a problem with and would have with anyone promoting it. I have been dealing with the mold issue for many, many years and this is not the first time that the subject and/or use of ozone has come up. So I am still looking for that silver bullet also. And yes, I have been in an office that used an ozone machine and it did irritate my wife (who is the one that is ill) and myself and we couldn't wait to get out of there. The doctor didn't realize and apologized later and tossed it into the garbage once he read the information about it use. I will post some links below and also some previous discussions. Anyone using an ozone generator should be very cautious. KC The IEQ discussion group has been established to provide a forum for IEQ professionals to openly discuss issues. These issues include indoor environmental health, IAQ consulting, toxicology, HVAC engineering, industrial hygiene, risk management, restoration and remediation, insurance coverage, legal issues, medical issues and more. iequality/ From: " Carl E. Grimes " <grimes@...> Date: Mon Oct 11, 2004 1:29 pm Subject: Re: []^ Ozone educational web sites Ken, This is my last comment on this ozone discussion: Ozone is not enriched oxygen. Ozone is a pollutant. The two have different properties. Carl Grimes Healthy Habitats LLC From: RLLIPSEY87@... Date: Wed May 28, 2003 8:53 am Subject: Re: [] Digest Number 1636 Ozone is a toxic chemical whether it is produced naturally in a thunderstorm or produced by ozonators or " air purifiers " (or sold by any other name) . Ozone is an OSHA regulated toxic chemical which is 500 times more toxic than carbon monoxide (CO) that kills hundreds of people each year. The federal air standard for ozone is only 0.1 ppm while it is 50 ppm for CO. Ozone attacks mucous membranes, ie the lungs, and causes chronic respiratory disease. NIOSH has published that ozone is not very effective in killing mold or bacteria. Ozone is not " controversial " . It is toxic and dangerous and not effective in controlling mold or bacteria and should never be used in a room with people present, even to remove odors ie smoke damage odors. Dr. L. Lipsey Professor and Toxicologist University of North Florida, ---OSHA HazMat Cert. U. of Florida Med. Ctr, Jax Poison Control Center Board CV--Toxicology And Environmental Health Assoc From: Joe Klein <epistrophy1@...> Date: Sun Jun 1, 2003 4:45 pm Subject: Re: [] criticism of recent comments on ozone I am concerned that that some of our visitors may be mislead or misinformed concerning ozone. Fact: Ozone can have damaging health effects, especially for persons with asthma and other lung diseases, children and the elderly. Fact: Ozone generators are NOT recommended by the American Lung Association: Fact: Much of the material regarding ozone generators makes claims or draws conclusions without substantiation and sound science. Fact: EPA does not certify air cleaning devices. Fact: " Relatively low amounts(of ozone)can cause chest pain, coughing, shortness of breath, and, throat irritation. Ozone may also worsen chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma and compromise the ability of the body to fight respiratory infections. " Fact: " People vary widely in their susceptibility to ozone. Healthy people, as well as those with respiratory difficulty, can experience breathing problems when exposed to ozone. Exercise during exposure to ozone causes a greater amount of ozone to be inhaled, and increases the risk of harmful respiratory effects. Recovery from the harmful effects can occur following short-term exposure to low levels of ozone, but health effects may become more damaging and recovery less certain at higher levels or from longer exposures (US EPA, 1996a, 1996b). " Fact: Exposure to ozone can cause: 1. Decreases in lung function 2. Aggravation of asthma 3. Throat irritation and cough 4. Chest pain and shortness of breath 5. Inflammation of lung tissue 6. Higher susceptibility to respiratory infection Fact: Ozone is not the same as oxygen and it is not a benign, harmless, molecule that is safe to breathe in. Ozone is a molecule composed of an extra atom of oxygen, in addition to the two atoms which form the basic oxygen molecule that is safe to breathe in. However, the third oxygen atom can easily detach from the ozone molecule, and combine with molecules of other substances, thereby altering their chemical composition. This is how ozone can destroy lung tissue. The free radical of ozone, combines with vital lung tissue essentially forming a new substance and thereby destroying the lung tissue. Fact: Ozone's damaging effects do not stop once the ozone producing machine is shut off due to the production of harmful or irritating by products such as aldehydes and formic acid. " For many of the chemicals with which ozone does readily react, the reaction can form a variety of harmful or irritating by-products (Weschler et al., 1992a, 1992b, 1996; Zhang and Lioy, 1994). For example, in a laboratory experiment that mixed ozone with chemicals from new carpet, ozone reduced many of these chemicals, including those which can produce new carpet odor. However, in the process, the reaction produced a variety of aldehydes, and the total concentration of organic chemicals in the air increased rather than decreased after the introduction of ozone (Weschler, et. al., 1992b). In addition to aldehydes, ozone may also increase indoor concentrations of formic acid (Zhang and Lioy, 1994), both of which can irritate the lungs if produced in sufficient amounts. Some of the potential by-products produced by ozone's reactions with other chemicals are themselves very reactive and capable of producing irritating and corrosive by-products (Weschler and Shields, 1996, 1997a, 1997b). Given the complexity of the chemical reactions that occur, additional research is needed to more completely understand the complex interactions of indoor chemicals in the presence of ozone. " Fact: Ozone generators do not remove particulate matter from air which is causes allergy. Furthermore, even if ozone is used in combination with an " ionizer " it is still not as effective, as a high efficiency particle filter. This is supported by information at the EPA web site. " Ozone does not remove particles (e.g., dust and pollen) from the air, including the particles that cause most allergies. However, some ozone generators are manufactured with an " ion generator " or " ionizer " in the same unit. An ionizer is a device that disperses negatively (and/or positively) charged ions into the air. These ions attach to particles in the air giving them a negative (or positive) charge so that the particles may attach to nearby surfaces such as walls or furniture, or attach to one another and settle out of the air. In recent experiments, ionizers were found to be less effective in removing particles of dust, tobacco smoke, pollen or fungal spores than either high efficiency particle filters or electrostatic precipitators. (Shaughnessy et al., 1994; Pierce, et al., 1996). However, it is apparent from other experiments that the effectiveness of particle air cleaners, including electrostatic precipitators, ion generators, or pleated filters varies widely (U.S. EPA, 1995). " Fact: " If used at concentrations that do not exceed public health standards, ozone applied to indoor air does not effectively remove viruses, bacteria, mold, or other biological pollutants " Fact: " Whether in its pure form or mixed with other chemicals, ozone can be harmful to health. " Fact: The above statements are supported by both The American Lung Association and The EPA. Please don't confuse fact with personal testimonials and personal opinions. The following has been excerpted from the EPA's web site. http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/ozonegen.html " Ozone Generators that are Sold as Air Cleaners: An Assessment of Effectiveness and Health Consequences " There is a large body of written material on ozone and the use of ozone indoors. However, much of this material makes claims or draws conclusions without substantiation and sound science. In developing Ozone Generators that are Sold as Air Cleaners, the EPA reviewed a wide assortment of this literature, including information provided by a leading manufacturer of ozone generating devices. In keeping with EPA's policy of insuring that the information it provides is based on sound science, only peer reviewed, scientifically supported findings and conclusions were relied upon in developing this document. Please Note: EPA does not certify air cleaning devices. The Agency does not recommend air cleaning devices or manufacturers. If you need information on specific devices or manufacturers, one resource you can consult is the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) 1111 19th Street, NW, Suite 402, Washington, DC 20036 (202) 872- 5955. AHAM also provides information on air cleaners on their AHAM- certified Clean Air Delivery Rate site at www.cadr.org Also, the American Lung Association has an Air Cleaning Device fact sheet at: www.lungusa.org/air/air00_aircleaners.html There are other resources provided in this fact sheet. Contents What is ozone? How is ozone harmful? - Ozone Heath Effects and Standards Is there such a thing as " good ozone, " and " bad ozone " ? Are ozone generators effective in controlling indoor air pollution? If I follow manufacturers' directions, can I be harmed? Why is it difficult to control ozone exposure with an ozone generator? Can ozone be used in unoccupied spaces? What other methods can be used to control indoor air pollution? Conclusions Recommendation Additional Resources - Publications - Information Sources Bibliography Introduction and Purpose Ozone generators that are sold as air cleaners intentionally produce the gas ozone. Often the vendors of ozone generators make statements and distribute material that lead the public to believe that these devices are always safe and effective in controlling indoor air pollution. For almost a century, health professionals have refuted these claims (Sawyer, et. al 1913; Salls, 1927; Boeniger, 1995; American Lung Association, 1997; Al-Ahmady, 1997). The purpose of this document is to provide accurate information regarding the use of ozone- generating devices in indoor occupied spaces. This information is based on the most credible scientific evidence currently available. Some vendors suggest that these devices have been approved by the federal government for use in occupied spaces. To the contrary, NO agency of the federal government has approved these devices for use in occupied spaces. Because of these claims, and because ozone can cause health problems at high concentrations, several federal government agencies have worked in consultation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to produce this public information document. What is Ozone? Ozone is a molecule composed of three atoms of oxygen. Two atoms of oxygen form the basic oxygen molecule--the oxygen we breathe that is essential to life. The third oxygen atom can detach from the ozone molecule, and re-attach to molecules of other substances, thereby altering their chemical composition. It is this ability to react with other substances that forms the basis of manufacturers' claims. How is Ozone Harmful? The same chemical properties that allow high concentrations of ozone to react with organic material outside the body give it the ability to react with similar organic material that makes up the body, and potentially cause harmful health consequences. When inhaled, ozone can damage the lungs. Relatively low amounts can cause chest pain, coughing, shortness of breath, and, throat irritation. Ozone may also worsen chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma and compromise the ability of the body to fight respiratory infections. People vary widely in their susceptibility to ozone. Healthy people, as well as those with respiratory difficulty, can experience breathing problems when exposed to ozone. Exercise during exposure to ozone causes a greater amount of ozone to be inhaled, and increases the risk of harmful respiratory effects. Recovery from the harmful effects can occur following short-term exposure to low levels of ozone, but health effects may become more damaging and recovery less certain at higher levels or from longer exposures (US EPA, 1996a, 1996b). Manufacturers and vendors of ozone devices often use misleading terms to describe ozone. Terms such as " energized oxygen " or " pure air " suggest that ozone is a healthy kind of oxygen. Ozone is a toxic gas with vastly different chemical and toxicological properties from oxygen. Several federal agencies have established health standards or recommendations to limit human exposure to ozone. These exposure limits are summarized in Table 1. Table 1. Ozone Heath Effects and Standards Health Effects Risk Factors Health Standards* Potential risk of experiencing: Decreases in lung function Aggravation of asthma Throat irritation and cough Chest pain and shortness of breath Inflammation of lung tissue Higher susceptibility to respiratory infection Factors expected to increase risk and severity of health effects are: Increase in ozone air concentration Greater duration of exposure for some health effects Activities that raise the breathing rate (e.g., exercise) Certain pre-existing lung diseases (e.g., asthma) The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires ozone output of indoor medical devices to be no more than 0.05 ppm. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requires that workers not be exposed to an average concentration of more than 0.10 ppm for 8 hours. The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recommends an upper limit of 0.10 ppm, not to be exceeded at any time. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone is a maximum 8 hour average outdoor concentration of 0.08 ppm. (* ppm = parts per million) Is There Such a Thing as " Good Ozone " and " Bad Ozone " ? The phrase " good up high - bad nearby " has been used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to make the distinction between ozone in the upper and lower atmosphere. Ozone in the upper atmosphere- -referred to as " stratospheric ozone " --helps filter out damaging ultraviolet radiation from the sun. Though ozone in the stratosphere is protective, ozone in the atmosphere - which is the air we breathe - can be harmful to the respiratory system. Harmful levels of ozone can be produced by the interaction of sunlight with certain chemicals emitted to the environment (e.g., automobile emissions and chemical emissions of industrial plants). These harmful concentrations of ozone in the atmosphere are often accompanied by high concentrations of other pollutants, including nitrogen dioxide, fine particles, and hydrocarbons. Whether pure or mixed with other chemicals, ozone can be harmful to health. Are Ozone Generators Effective in Controlling Indoor Air Pollution? Available scientific evidence shows that at concentrations that do not exceed public health standards, ozone has little potential to remove indoor air contaminants. Some manufacturers or vendors suggest that ozone will render almost every chemical contaminant harmless by producing a chemical reaction whose only by-products are carbon dioxide, oxygen and water. This is misleading. First, a review of scientific research shows that, for many of the chemicals commonly found in indoor environments, the reaction process with ozone may take months or years (Boeniger, 1995). For all practical purposes, ozone does not react at all with such chemicals. And contrary to specific claims by some vendors, ozone generators are not effective in removing carbon monoxide (Salls, 1927; Shaughnessy et al., 1994) or formaldehyde (Esswein and Boeniger, 1994). Second, for many of the chemicals with which ozone does readily react, the reaction can form a variety of harmful or irritating by-products (Weschler et al., 1992a, 1992b, 1996; Zhang and Lioy, 1994). For example, in a laboratory experiment that mixed ozone with chemicals from new carpet, ozone reduced many of these chemicals, including those which can produce new carpet odor. However, in the process, the reaction produced a variety of aldehydes, and the total concentration of organic chemicals in the air increased rather than decreased after the introduction of ozone (Weschler, et. al., 1992b). In addition to aldehydes, ozone may also increase indoor concentrations of formic acid (Zhang and Lioy, 1994), both of which can irritate the lungs if produced in sufficient amounts. Some of the potential by-products produced by ozone's reactions with other chemicals are themselves very reactive and capable of producing irritating and corrosive by-products (Weschler and Shields, 1996, 1997a, 1997b). Given the complexity of the chemical reactions that occur, additional research is needed to more completely understand the complex interactions of indoor chemicals in the presence of ozone. Third, ozone does not remove particles (e.g., dust and pollen) from the air, including the particles that cause most allergies. However, some ozone generators are manufactured with an " ion generator " or " ionizer " in the same unit. An ionizer is a device that disperses negatively (and/or positively) charged ions into the air. These ions attach to particles in the air giving them a negative (or positive) charge so that the particles may attach to nearby surfaces such as walls or furniture, or attach to one another and settle out of the air. In recent experiments, ionizers were found to be less effective in removing particles of dust, tobacco smoke, pollen or fungal spores than either high efficiency particle filters or electrostatic precipitators. (Shaughnessy et al., 1994; Pierce, et al., 1996). However, it is apparent from other experiments that the effectiveness of particle air cleaners, including electrostatic precipitators, ion generators, or pleated filters varies widely (U.S. EPA, 1995). There is evidence to show that at concentrations that do not exceed public health standards, ozone is not effective at removing many odor- causing chemicals. In an experiment designed to produce formaldehyde concentrations representative of an embalming studio, where formaldehyde is the main odor producer, ozone showed no effect in reducing formaldehyde concentration (Esswein and Boeniger, 1994). Other experiments suggest that body odor may be masked by the smell of ozone but is not removed by ozone (Witheridge and Yaglou, 1939). Ozone is not considered useful for odor removal in building ventilation systems (ASHRAE, 1989). While there are few scientific studies to support the claim that ozone effectively removes odors, it is plausible that some odorous chemicals will react with ozone. For example, in some experiments, ozone appeared to react readily with certain chemicals, including some chemicals that contribute to the smell of new carpet (Weschler, 1992b; Zhang and Lioy, 1994). Ozone is also believed to react with acrolein, one of the many odorous and irritating chemicals found in secondhand tobacco smoke (US EPA, 1995). If used at concentrations that do not exceed public health standards, ozone applied to indoor air does not effectively remove viruses, bacteria, mold, or other biological pollutants. Some data suggest that low levels of ozone may reduce airborne concentrations and inhibit the growth of some biological organisms while ozone is present, but ozone concentrations would have to be 5 - 10 times higher than public health standards allow before the ozone could decontaminate the air sufficiently to prevent survival and regeneration of the organisms once the ozone is removed (Dyas, et al.,1983; Foarde et al., 1997). Even at high concentrations, ozone may have no effect on biological contaminants embedded in porous material such as duct lining or ceiling tiles (Foarde et al, 1997). In other words, ozone produced by ozone generators may inhibit the growth of some biological agents while it is present, but it is unlikely to fully decontaminate the air unless concentrations are high enough to be a health concern if people are present. Even with high levels of ozone, contaminants embedded in porous material may not be affected at all. If I Follow Manufacturers' Directions, Can I be Harmed? Results of some controlled studies show that concentrations of ozone considerably higher than these standards are possible even when a user follows the manufacturer's operating instructions. There are many brands and models of ozone generators on the market. They vary in the amount of ozone they can produce. In many circumstances, the use of an ozone generator may not result in ozone concentrations that exceed public health standards. But many factors affect the indoor concentration of ozone so that under some conditions ozone concentrations may exceed public health standards. In one study (Shaughnessy and Oatman, 1991), a large ozone generator recommended by the manufacturer for spaces " up to 3,000 square feet, " was placed in a 350 square foot room and run at a high setting. The ozone in the room quickly reached concentrations that were exceptionally high--0.50 to 0.80 ppm which is 5-10 times higher than public health limits (see Table 1). In an EPA study, several different devices were placed in a home environment, in various rooms, with doors alternately opened and closed, and with the central ventilation system fan alternately turned on and off. The results showed that some ozone generators, when run at a high setting with interior doors closed, would frequently produce concentrations of 0.20 - 0.30 ppm. A powerful unit set on high with the interior doors opened achieved values of 0.12 to 0.20 ppm in adjacent rooms. When units were not run on high, and interior doors were open, concentrations generally did not exceed public health standards (US EPA, 1995). The concentrations reported above were adjusted to exclude that portion of the ozone concentration brought in from the outdoors. Indoor concentrations of ozone brought in from outside are typically 0.01- 0.02 ppm, but could be as high as 0.03 - 0.05 ppm (, 1991; U.S. EPA, 1996b; Weschler et al., 1989, 1996; Zhang and Lioy; 1994). If the outdoor portion of ozone were included in the indoor concentrations reported above, the concentrations inside would have been correspondingly higher, increasing the risk of excessive ozone exposure. None of the studies reported above involved the simultaneous use of more than one device. The simultaneous use of multiple devices increases the total ozone output and therefore greatly increases the risk of excessive ozone exposure. Why is it Difficult to Control Ozone Exposure with an Ozone Generator? The actual concentration of ozone produced by an ozone generator depends on many factors. Concentrations will be higher if a more powerful device or more than one device is used, if a device is placed in a small space rather than a large space, if interior doors are closed rather than open and, if the room has fewer rather than more materials and furnishings that adsorb or react with ozone and, provided that outdoor concentrations of ozone are low, if there is less rather than more outdoor air ventilation. The proximity of a person to the ozone generating device can also affect one's exposure. The concentration is highest at the point where the ozone exits from the device, and generally decreases as one moves further away. Manufacturers and vendors advise users to size the device properly to the space or spaces in which it is used. Unfortunately, some manufacturers' recommendations about appropriate sizes for particular spaces have not been sufficiently precise to guarantee that ozone concentrations will not exceed public health limits. Further, some literature distributed by vendors suggests that users err on the side of operating a more powerful machine than would normally be appropriate for the intended space, the rationale being that the user may move in the future, or may want to use the machine in a larger space later on. Using a more powerful machine increases the risk of excessive ozone exposure. Ozone generators typically provide a control setting by which the ozone output can be adjusted. The ozone output of these devices is usually not proportional to the control setting. That is, a setting at medium does not necessarily generate an ozone level that is halfway between the levels at low and high. The relationship between the control setting and the output varies considerably among devices, although most appear to elevate the ozone output much more than one would expect as the control setting is increased from low to high. In experiments to date, the high setting in some devices generated 10 times the level obtained at the medium setting (US EPA, 1995). Manufacturer's instructions on some devices link the control setting to room size and thus indicate what setting is appropriate for different room sizes. However, room size is only one factor affecting ozone levels in the room. In addition to adjusting the control setting to the size of the room, users have sometimes been advised to lower the ozone setting if they can smell the ozone. Unfortunately, the ability to detect ozone by smell varies considerably from person to person, and one's ability to smell ozone rapidly deteriorates in the presence of ozone. While the smell of ozone may indicate that the concentration is too high, lack of odor does not guarantee that levels are safe. At least one manufacturer is offering units with an ozone sensor that turns the ozone generator on and off with the intent of maintaining ozone concentrations in the space below health standards. EPA is currently evaluating the effectiveness and reliability of these sensors, and plans to conduct further research to improve society's understanding of ozone chemistry indoors. EPA will report its findings as the results of this research become available. Can Ozone be Used in Unoccupied Spaces? Ozone has been extensively used for water purification, but ozone chemistry in water is not the same as ozone chemistry in air. High concentrations of ozone in air, when people are not present, are sometimes used to help decontaminate an unoccupied space from certain chemical or biological contaminants or odors (e.g., fire restoration). However, little is known about the chemical by-products left behind by these processes (Dunston and Spivak, 1997). While high concentrations of ozone in air may sometimes be appropriate in these circumstances, conditions should be sufficiently controlled to insure that no person or pet becomes exposed. Ozone can adversely affect indoor plants, and damage materials such as rubber, electrical wire coatings, and fabrics and art work containing susceptible dyes and pigments (U.S. EPA, 1996a). What Other Methods Can Be Used to Control Indoor Air Pollution? The three most common approaches to reducing indoor air pollution, in order of effectiveness, are: Source Control: Eliminate or control the sources of pollution; Ventilation: Dilute and exhaust pollutants through outdoor air ventilation, and Air Cleaning: Remove pollutants through proven air cleaning methods. Of the three, the first approach -- source control -- is the most effective. This involves minimizing the use of products and materials that cause indoor pollution, employing good hygiene practices to minimize biological contaminants (including the control of humidity and moisture, and occasional cleaning and disinfection of wet or moist surfaces), and using good housekeeping practices to control particles. The second approach -- outdoor air ventilation -- is also effective and commonly employed. Ventilation methods include installing an exhaust fan close to the source of contaminants, increasing outdoor air flows in mechanical ventilation systems, and opening windows, especially when pollutant sources are in use. The third approach -- air cleaning -- is not generally regarded as sufficient in itself, but is sometimes used to supplement source control and ventilation. Air filters, electronic particle air cleaners and ionizers are often used to remove airborne particles, and gas adsorbing material is sometimes used to remove gaseous contaminants when source control and ventilation are inadequate. See Additional Resources section below for more detailed information about these methods. Conclusions Whether in its pure form or mixed with other chemicals, ozone can be harmful to health. When inhaled, ozone can damage the lungs. Relatively low amounts of ozone can cause chest pain, coughing, shortness of breath and, throat irritation. It may also worsen chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma as well as compromise the ability of the body to fight respiratory infections. Some studies show that ozone concentrations produced by ozone generators can exceed health standards even when one follows manufacturer's instructions. Many factors affect ozone concentrations including the amount of ozone produced by the machine(s), the size of the indoor space, the amount of material in the room with which ozone reacts, the outdoor ozone concentration, and the amount of ventilation. These factors make it difficult to control the ozone concentration in all circumstances. Available scientific evidence shows that, at concentrations that do not exceed public health standards, ozone is generally ineffective in controlling indoor air pollution. The concentration of ozone would have to greatly exceed health standards to be effective in removing most indoor air contaminants. In the process of reacting with chemicals indoors, ozone can produce other chemicals that themselves can be irritating and corrosive. Recommendation The public is advised to use proven methods of controlling indoor air pollution. These methods include eliminating or controlling pollutant sources, increasing outdoor air ventilation, and using proven methods of air cleaning. Additional Resources Publications: Copies of EPA's publications are available from the National Service Center for Environmental Publications (NSCEP) http://www.epa.gov/ncepihom/ (to order EPA documents online). Use the EPA Document Number when ordering. Or call 1-800-490-9198/(513) 489- 8695 (fax), or write to: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Center for Environmental Publications (NSCEP) P.O. Box 42419 Cincinnati, OH 45242 The Inside Story: A Guide to Indoor Air Quality, EPA Document Number EPA 402-K-93-007. U.S. EPA, U.S. CPSC. April 1995. Indoor Air Facts No. 7.- Residential Air Cleaners, EPA Document Number EPA 20A-4-001. U.S. EPA. February 1990. Residential Air Cleaning Devices: A Summary of Available Information, EPA Document Number EPA 402-K-96-001. U.S. EPA. Indoor Air Pollution: An Introduction for Health Professionals, EPA Document Number EPA 402-R-94-007. American Lung Association, EPA, CPSC, American Medical Association. Advisory: " Health Canada Advises the Public About Air Cleaners Designed to Intentionally Generate Ozone (Ozone Generators) " , Health Canada, Canada 1999-19, February 5, 1999. Information Sources: U.S. EPA's Indoor Air Quality Information Clearinghouse (IAQ INFO), PO Box 37133, Washington D.C. 20013-7133; by phone (800) 438-4318. California Department of Health Services, Indoor Air Quality Section, Environmental Health Laboratory, 2151 Berkeley Way, Berkeley, CA 94704; 510-540-3022. Federal Trade Commission , Consumer Response Center, (202) 326-3128. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington D.C. 20207; or call Consumer Hotline, English/Spanish: (800) 638-2772, Hearing/Speech Impaired: (800) 6388270. The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) has developed an American National Standards Institute (ANSI)-approved standard for portable air cleaners (ANSI/AHAM Standard AC-1-1988). This standard may be useful in estimating the effectiveness of portable air cleaners. Under this standard, room air cleaner effectiveness is rated by a clean air delivery rate (CADR) for each of three particle types in indoor air: tobacco smoke, dust, and pollen. Only a limited number of air cleaners have been certified under this program at the present time. A complete listing of all current AHAM- certified room air cleaners and their CADRs can be obtained from CADR Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) 1111 19th Street, NW, Suite 402 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 872-5955 AHAM also provides information on air cleaners on their AHAM-certified Clean Air Delivery Rate site at www.cadr.org American Lung Association Fact Sheet - Air Cleaining Devices: Types of Air Cleaning Processes Bibliography Al-Ahmady, Kaiss K. 1997. Indoor Ozone. Florida Journal of Environmental Health. June. pp. 8-12. American Lung Association. 1997. Residential Air Cleaning Devices: Types, Effectiveness, and Health Impact. Washington, D.C. January. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). 1989. ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals. Atlanta. p. 12.5. Boeniger, Mark F. 1995. Use of Ozone Generating Devices to Improve Indoor Air Quality. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 56: 590-598. Dunston, N.C.; Spivak, S.M. 1997. A Preliminary Investigation of the Effects of Ozone on Post-Fire Volatile Organic Compounds. Journal of Applied Fire Science. 6(3): 231-242. Dyas, A.; Boughton, B.J.; Das, B.C. 1983. Ozone Killing Action Against Bacterial and Fungal Species; Microbiological Testing of a Domestic Ozone Generator. Journal of Clinical Pathology. 36:1102-1104. Esswein, J.; Boeniger, Mark F. 1994. Effects of an Ozone- Generating Air-Purifying Device on Reducing Concentrations of Formaldehyde in Air. Applied Occupational Environmental Hygiene. 9 (2):139-146. Foarde, K.; van Osdell, D.; and Steiber, R.1997. Investigation of Gas- Phase Ozone as a Potential Biocide. Applied Occupational Environmental Hygiene. 12(8): 535-542. , S.R. 1991. Use of an Indoor Air Quality Model (IAQM) to Estimate Indoor Ozone Levels. Journal of Air and Waste Management Association. 41:161-170. Pierce, Mark W.; Janczewski, Jolanda N.; Roethlisbergber, ; Pelton, Mike; and Kunstel, . 1996. Effectiveness of Auxiliary Air Cleaners in Reducing ETS Components in Offices. ASHRAE Journal. November. Salls, Carroll, M. 1927. The Ozone Fallacy in Garage Ventilation. The Journal of Industrial Hygiene. 9:12. December. Sawyer, W.A.; Beckwith, Helen I.; and Skolfield, Esther M. 1913. The Alleged Purification of Air By The Ozone Machine. Journal of the American Medical Association. November 13. Shaughnessy, , J.; Levetin, Estelle; Blocker, Jean; and Sublette, Kerry L. 1994. Effectiveness of Portable Indoor Air Cleaners: Sensory Testing Results. Indoor Air. Journal of the International Society of Indoor Air Quality and Climate. 4:179-188. Shaughnessy, R.J.; and Oatman, L. 1991. The Use of Ozone Generators for the Control of Indoor Air Contaminants in an Occupied Environment. Proceedings of the ASHRAE Conference IAQ `91. Healthy Buildings. ASHRAE, Atlanta. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 1995. Ozone Generators in Indoor Air Settings. Report prepared for the Office of Research and Development by Steiber. National Risk Management Research Laboratory. U.S. EPA. Research Triangle Park. EPA-600/R-95-154. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 1996. Air Quality Criteria for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants. Research Triangle Park, NC: National Center for Environmental Assessment-RTP Office; report nos. EPA/600/P-93/004aF-cF, 3v. NTIS, Springfield, VA; PB-185582, PB96-185590 and PB96-185608. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 1996. Review of National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: Assessment of Scientific and Technical Information. OAQPS Staff Paper. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. Research Triangle Park. NC. EPA-452/R- 96-007. Weschler, J.; Brauer, ; and Koutrakis, Petros. 1992a. Indoor Ozone and Nitrogen Dioxide: A Potential Pathway to the Generation of Nitrate Radicals, Dinitrogen Pentaoxide, and Nitric Acid Indoors. Environmental Science and Technology. 26(1):179-184. Weschler, J.; Hodgson Alfred T.; and Wooley, D. 1992b. Indoor Chemistry: Ozone, Volatile Organic Compounds, and Carpets. Environmental Science and Technology. 26(12):2371-2377. Weschler, J; Shields, Helen C. 1997a. Measurements of the Hydroxyl Radical in a Manipulated but Realistic Indoor Environment. Environmental Science and Technology. 31(12):3719-3722. Weschler, J; Shields, Helen C. 1997b. Potential Reactions Among Indoor Pollutants. Atmospheric Environment. 31(21):3487-3495. Weschler, J; and Shields, Helen C. 1996. Production of the Hydroxyl Radical in Indoor Air. Environmental Science and Technology. 30(11):3250-3268. Weschler, J.; Shields, Helen, C.; and Naik, Datta V. 1989. Indoor Ozone Exposures. JAPCA Journal. 39(12):1562-1568. Weschler, J.; Shields, Helen, C.; and Naik, Datta V. 1996. The Factors Influencing Indoor Ozone Levels at a Commercial Building in Southern California: More that a Year of Continuous Observations. Tropospheric Ozone. Air and Waste Management Association. Pittsburgh. Witheridge, N. And Yaglou, Constantin P. 1939. Ozone in Ventilation--Its possibilities and Limitations. ASHRAE Transactions. 45: 509-522. Zhang, Junfeng and Lioy, J. 1994. Ozone in Residential Air: Concentrations, I/O Ratios, Indoor Chemistry, and Exposures. Indoor Air. Journal of the International Society of Indoor Air Quality and Climate. 4:95-102. " The following excerpt is from the American Lung Association: http://www.lungusa.org/press/envir/asnairc.html http://www.lungusa.org/bin/search/searchit.pl? query=Air+Cleaners & ichoice=index.swish- e & ixname=.swish & results=0 & search.x=9 & search.y=9 OZONE PRODUCTION Some air cleaners (called ozone generators) use an electrical charge to generate ozone. Although ozone (also referred to as trivalent oxygen or saturated oxygen) is a necessary part of the upper atmosphere (10-30 miles above us), in the part of the atmosphere we breathe, ozone is a potent lung irritant. It can have damaging health effects, especially for persons with asthma and other lung diseases, children and the elderly. It is produced directly by ozone generators and indirectly by ion generators and some other electronic air cleaners. The FDA has set a limit of 0.05 parts per million of ozone in indoor air. Ask whether any electronic air cleaner you are considering buying has been tested for ozone production. The American Lung Association suggests that ozone generators not be used. ph P. Klein, Sr, M.D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 KC If an Ozone air cleaner is anything like an Ionic air cleaner, I don't want anything to do with it. Last year, after I had an Ionic air cleaner in my apt. for one hour - only one hour, I had such a difficult time breathing, that I was afraid I would end up having to go to the Emergency Room. Barb E. --- tigerpaw2c <tigerpaw2C@...> wrote: > KL & Group, > > The research is NOT there for or against, in my > opinion. From the > research that I have read, I am not willing to take > the chance of > harming myself or anyone else by using an ozone air > purifier that > could cause permanent lung damage or irritate the > respiratory track. > > There are professionals on this board that I hope > will chime in AGAIN, > responding to the ozone issue. KL, I would recommend > you take some of > these exact questions of yours and experience with > the ozone machine > to the professional board, IEQ. Just to see what > their response would > be. I will be watching for your post and their > responses.I will post > the link below. I really wish it were that simple > that one machine is > a cure all. I also have been made aware that ozone > may even stimulate > mold growth and or cause it to release its > mycotoxins. > > Also Ken, you are doing your best to promote the use > of ozone and how > good and safe it is to members on this board. Why > won't you post some > of this exact information on the professional board? > Until more > research is there (and not just done by the company > promoting it) > either fore or against, I am not willing to promote > any product that > does not have a proven track record. I could not > live with myself if I > caused someone further damage to their health. Could > you? I don't mean > to make it sound like I am attacking you personally > Ken, it's the > product I have a problem with and would have with > anyone promoting it. > I have been dealing with the mold issue for many, > many years and this > is not the first time that the subject and/or use of > ozone has come > up. So I am still looking for that silver bullet > also. And yes, I have > been in an office that used an ozone machine and it > did irritate my > wife (who is the one that is ill) and myself and we > couldn't wait to > get out of there. The doctor didn't realize and > apologized later and > tossed it into the garbage once he read the > information about it use. > > I will post some links below and also some previous > discussions. > Anyone using an ozone generator should be very > cautious. > > KC > > The IEQ discussion group has been established to > provide a forum for > IEQ professionals to openly discuss issues. These > issues include > indoor environmental health, IAQ consulting, > toxicology, HVAC > engineering, industrial hygiene, risk management, > restoration and > remediation, insurance coverage, legal issues, > medical issues and > more. > iequality/ > > From: " Carl E. Grimes " <grimes@...> > Date: Mon Oct 11, 2004 1:29 pm > Subject: Re: []^ Ozone educational web > sites > > Ken, > > This is my last comment on this ozone discussion: > Ozone is not > enriched oxygen. Ozone is a pollutant. The two have > different > properties. > > Carl Grimes > Healthy Habitats LLC > > From: RLLIPSEY87@... > Date: Wed May 28, 2003 8:53 am > Subject: Re: [] Digest Number 1636 > > > > Ozone is a toxic chemical whether it is produced > naturally in a > thunderstorm or > produced by ozonators or " air purifiers " (or sold by > any other name) . > > Ozone is an OSHA regulated toxic chemical which > is 500 times more > toxic than carbon monoxide (CO) that kills hundreds > of people each > year. The federal air standard for ozone is only 0.1 > ppm while it is > 50 ppm for CO. Ozone attacks mucous membranes, ie > the lungs, and > causes chronic respiratory disease. > > NIOSH has published that ozone is not very > effective in killing > mold or bacteria. Ozone is not " controversial " . It > is toxic and > dangerous and not effective in controlling mold or > bacteria and should > never be used in a room with people present, even to > remove odors ie > smoke damage odors. > > > Dr. L. Lipsey > Professor and Toxicologist > University of North Florida, > ---OSHA HazMat Cert. > U. of Florida Med. Ctr, Jax > Poison Control Center Board > CV--Toxicology And Environmental Health Assoc > > > From: Joe Klein <epistrophy1@...> > Date: Sun Jun 1, 2003 4:45 pm > Subject: Re: [] criticism of recent > comments on ozone > > > > I am concerned that that some of our visitors may be > mislead or > misinformed concerning ozone. > > Fact: Ozone can have damaging health effects, > especially for persons > with asthma and other lung diseases, children and > the elderly. > > Fact: Ozone generators are NOT recommended by the > American Lung > Association: > > Fact: Much of the material regarding ozone > generators makes claims or > draws conclusions without substantiation and sound > science. > > Fact: EPA does not certify air cleaning devices. > > Fact: " Relatively low amounts(of ozone)can cause > chest pain, coughing, > shortness of breath, and, throat irritation. Ozone > may also worsen > chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma and > compromise the ability > of the body to fight respiratory infections. " > > Fact: " People vary widely in their susceptibility > to ozone. Healthy > people, as well as those with respiratory > difficulty, can experience > breathing problems when exposed to ozone. Exercise > during exposure to > ozone causes a greater amount of ozone to be > inhaled, and increases > the risk of harmful respiratory effects. Recovery > from the harmful > effects can occur following short-term exposure to > low levels of > ozone, but health effects may become more damaging > and recovery less > certain at higher levels or from longer exposures > (US EPA, 1996a, > 1996b). " > > Fact: Exposure to ozone can cause: > > 1. Decreases in lung function > 2. Aggravation of asthma > 3. Throat irritation and cough > 4. Chest pain and shortness of breath > 5. Inflammation of lung tissue > 6. Higher susceptibility to respiratory infection > > === message truncated === __________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 Barbara, I'm not sure if the Ionic air cleaner is the same thing as an ionizer, which I'm sure it probably is, then according to many experts (not me) this also emits small amounts of ozone. I used to have several in my house (even before my wife got sick)and now that I am aware of what they can produce, they are no longer in my house. I thought to myself, like everyone else before running into this mold issue of course, why would the government allow anything on the market that would harm you. Boy was I nieve/dumb/stupid/ignorant/gullible, etc., etc., etc. lol How things change. KC > > > KL & Group, > > > > The research is NOT there for or against, in my > > opinion. From the > > research that I have read, I am not willing to take > > the chance of > > harming myself or anyone else by using an ozone air > > purifier that > > could cause permanent lung damage or irritate the > > respiratory track. > > > > There are professionals on this board that I hope > > will chime in AGAIN, > > responding to the ozone issue. KL, I would recommend > > you take some of > > these exact questions of yours and experience with > > the ozone machine > > to the professional board, IEQ. Just to see what > > their response would > > be. I will be watching for your post and their > > responses.I will post > > the link below. I really wish it were that simple > > that one machine is > > a cure all. I also have been made aware that ozone > > may even stimulate > > mold growth and or cause it to release its > > mycotoxins. > > > > Also Ken, you are doing your best to promote the use > > of ozone and how > > good and safe it is to members on this board. Why > > won't you post some > > of this exact information on the professional board? > > Until more > > research is there (and not just done by the company > > promoting it) > > either fore or against, I am not willing to promote > > any product that > > does not have a proven track record. I could not > > live with myself if I > > caused someone further damage to their health. Could > > you? I don't mean > > to make it sound like I am attacking you personally > > Ken, it's the > > product I have a problem with and would have with > > anyone promoting it. > > I have been dealing with the mold issue for many, > > many years and this > > is not the first time that the subject and/or use of > > ozone has come > > up. So I am still looking for that silver bullet > > also. And yes, I have > > been in an office that used an ozone machine and it > > did irritate my > > wife (who is the one that is ill) and myself and we > > couldn't wait to > > get out of there. The doctor didn't realize and > > apologized later and > > tossed it into the garbage once he read the > > information about it use. > > > > I will post some links below and also some previous > > discussions. > > Anyone using an ozone generator should be very > > cautious. > > > > KC > > > > The IEQ discussion group has been established to > > provide a forum for > > IEQ professionals to openly discuss issues. These > > issues include > > indoor environmental health, IAQ consulting, > > toxicology, HVAC > > engineering, industrial hygiene, risk management, > > restoration and > > remediation, insurance coverage, legal issues, > > medical issues and > > more. > > iequality/ > > > > From: " Carl E. Grimes " <grimes@h...> > > Date: Mon Oct 11, 2004 1:29 pm > > Subject: Re: []^ Ozone educational web > > sites > > > > Ken, > > > > This is my last comment on this ozone discussion: > > Ozone is not > > enriched oxygen. Ozone is a pollutant. The two have > > different > > properties. > > > > Carl Grimes > > Healthy Habitats LLC > > > > From: RLLIPSEY87@A... > > Date: Wed May 28, 2003 8:53 am > > Subject: Re: [] Digest Number 1636 > > > > > > > > Ozone is a toxic chemical whether it is produced > > naturally in a > > thunderstorm or > > produced by ozonators or " air purifiers " (or sold by > > any other name) . > > > > Ozone is an OSHA regulated toxic chemical which > > is 500 times more > > toxic than carbon monoxide (CO) that kills hundreds > > of people each > > year. The federal air standard for ozone is only 0.1 > > ppm while it is > > 50 ppm for CO. Ozone attacks mucous membranes, ie > > the lungs, and > > causes chronic respiratory disease. > > > > NIOSH has published that ozone is not very > > effective in killing > > mold or bacteria. Ozone is not " controversial " . It > > is toxic and > > dangerous and not effective in controlling mold or > > bacteria and should > > never be used in a room with people present, even to > > remove odors ie > > smoke damage odors. > > > > > > Dr. L. Lipsey > > Professor and Toxicologist > > University of North Florida, > > ---OSHA HazMat Cert. > > U. of Florida Med. Ctr, Jax > > Poison Control Center Board > > CV--Toxicology And Environmental Health Assoc > > > > > > From: Joe Klein <epistrophy1@y...> > > Date: Sun Jun 1, 2003 4:45 pm > > Subject: Re: [] criticism of recent > > comments on ozone > > > > > > > > I am concerned that that some of our visitors may be > > mislead or > > misinformed concerning ozone. > > > > Fact: Ozone can have damaging health effects, > > especially for persons > > with asthma and other lung diseases, children and > > the elderly. > > > > Fact: Ozone generators are NOT recommended by the > > American Lung > > Association: > > > > Fact: Much of the material regarding ozone > > generators makes claims or > > draws conclusions without substantiation and sound > > science. > > > > Fact: EPA does not certify air cleaning devices. > > > > Fact: " Relatively low amounts(of ozone)can cause > > chest pain, coughing, > > shortness of breath, and, throat irritation. Ozone > > may also worsen > > chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma and > > compromise the ability > > of the body to fight respiratory infections. " > > > > Fact: " People vary widely in their susceptibility > > to ozone. Healthy > > people, as well as those with respiratory > > difficulty, can experience > > breathing problems when exposed to ozone. Exercise > > during exposure to > > ozone causes a greater amount of ozone to be > > inhaled, and increases > > the risk of harmful respiratory effects. Recovery > > from the harmful > > effects can occur following short-term exposure to > > low levels of > > ozone, but health effects may become more damaging > > and recovery less > > certain at higher levels or from longer exposures > > (US EPA, 1996a, > > 1996b). " > > > > Fact: Exposure to ozone can cause: > > > > 1. Decreases in lung function > > 2. Aggravation of asthma > > 3. Throat irritation and cough > > 4. Chest pain and shortness of breath > > 5. Inflammation of lung tissue > > 6. Higher susceptibility to respiratory infection > > > > > === message truncated === > > > __________________________________________________ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 Join iequality . It's a professional group of IAQ experts....and the endorsers of 03 would not like the answers to the safety/efficacy of 03 from these members. On Thu, 16 Jun 2005, tigerpaw2c wrote: > Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 17:58:38 -0000 > From: tigerpaw2c <tigerpaw2C@...> > Reply- > > Subject: [] Ozone- Here we go again. > > KL & Group, > > The research is NOT there for or against, in my opinion. From the > research that I have read, I am not willing to take the chance of > harming myself or anyone else by using an ozone air purifier that > could cause permanent lung damage or irritate the respiratory track. > > There are professionals on this board that I hope will chime in AGAIN, > responding to the ozone issue. KL, I would recommend you take some of > these exact questions of yours and experience with the ozone machine > to the professional board, IEQ. Just to see what their response would > be. I will be watching for your post and their responses.I will post > the link below. I really wish it were that simple that one machine is > a cure all. I also have been made aware that ozone may even stimulate > mold growth and or cause it to release its mycotoxins. > > Also Ken, you are doing your best to promote the use of ozone and how > good and safe it is to members on this board. Why won't you post some > of this exact information on the professional board? Until more > research is there (and not just done by the company promoting it) > either fore or against, I am not willing to promote any product that > does not have a proven track record. I could not live with myself if I > caused someone further damage to their health. Could you? I don't mean > to make it sound like I am attacking you personally Ken, it's the > product I have a problem with and would have with anyone promoting it. > I have been dealing with the mold issue for many, many years and this > is not the first time that the subject and/or use of ozone has come > up. So I am still looking for that silver bullet also. And yes, I have > been in an office that used an ozone machine and it did irritate my > wife (who is the one that is ill) and myself and we couldn't wait to > get out of there. The doctor didn't realize and apologized later and > tossed it into the garbage once he read the information about it use. > > I will post some links below and also some previous discussions. > Anyone using an ozone generator should be very cautious. > > KC > > The IEQ discussion group has been established to provide a forum for > IEQ professionals to openly discuss issues. These issues include > indoor environmental health, IAQ consulting, toxicology, HVAC > engineering, industrial hygiene, risk management, restoration and > remediation, insurance coverage, legal issues, medical issues and > more. > iequality/ > > From: " Carl E. Grimes " <grimes@...> > Date: Mon Oct 11, 2004 1:29 pm > Subject: Re: []^ Ozone educational web sites > > Ken, > > This is my last comment on this ozone discussion: Ozone is not > enriched oxygen. Ozone is a pollutant. The two have different > properties. > > Carl Grimes > Healthy Habitats LLC > > From: RLLIPSEY87@... > Date: Wed May 28, 2003 8:53 am > Subject: Re: [] Digest Number 1636 > > > > Ozone is a toxic chemical whether it is produced naturally in a > thunderstorm or > produced by ozonators or " air purifiers " (or sold by any other name) . > > Ozone is an OSHA regulated toxic chemical which is 500 times more > toxic than carbon monoxide (CO) that kills hundreds of people each > year. The federal air standard for ozone is only 0.1 ppm while it is > 50 ppm for CO. Ozone attacks mucous membranes, ie the lungs, and > causes chronic respiratory disease. > > NIOSH has published that ozone is not very effective in killing > mold or bacteria. Ozone is not " controversial " . It is toxic and > dangerous and not effective in controlling mold or bacteria and should > never be used in a room with people present, even to remove odors ie > smoke damage odors. > > > Dr. L. Lipsey > Professor and Toxicologist > University of North Florida, > ---OSHA HazMat Cert. > U. of Florida Med. Ctr, Jax > Poison Control Center Board > CV--Toxicology And Environmental Health Assoc > > > From: Joe Klein <epistrophy1@...> > Date: Sun Jun 1, 2003 4:45 pm > Subject: Re: [] criticism of recent comments on ozone > > > > I am concerned that that some of our visitors may be mislead or > misinformed concerning ozone. > > Fact: Ozone can have damaging health effects, especially for persons > with asthma and other lung diseases, children and the elderly. > > Fact: Ozone generators are NOT recommended by the American Lung > Association: > > Fact: Much of the material regarding ozone generators makes claims or > draws conclusions without substantiation and sound science. > > Fact: EPA does not certify air cleaning devices. > > Fact: " Relatively low amounts(of ozone)can cause chest pain, coughing, > shortness of breath, and, throat irritation. Ozone may also worsen > chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma and compromise the ability > of the body to fight respiratory infections. " > > Fact: " People vary widely in their susceptibility to ozone. Healthy > people, as well as those with respiratory difficulty, can experience > breathing problems when exposed to ozone. Exercise during exposure to > ozone causes a greater amount of ozone to be inhaled, and increases > the risk of harmful respiratory effects. Recovery from the harmful > effects can occur following short-term exposure to low levels of > ozone, but health effects may become more damaging and recovery less > certain at higher levels or from longer exposures (US EPA, 1996a, > 1996b). " > > Fact: Exposure to ozone can cause: > > 1. Decreases in lung function > 2. Aggravation of asthma > 3. Throat irritation and cough > 4. Chest pain and shortness of breath > 5. Inflammation of lung tissue > 6. Higher susceptibility to respiratory infection > > Fact: Ozone is not the same as oxygen and it is not a benign, > harmless, molecule that is safe to breathe in. Ozone is a molecule > composed of an extra atom of oxygen, in addition to the two atoms > which form the basic oxygen molecule that is safe to breathe in. > However, the third oxygen atom can easily detach from the ozone > molecule, and combine with molecules of other substances, thereby > altering their chemical composition. This is how ozone can destroy > lung tissue. The free radical of ozone, combines with vital lung > tissue essentially forming a new substance and thereby destroying the > lung tissue. > > Fact: Ozone's damaging effects do not stop once the ozone producing > machine is shut off due to the production of harmful or irritating by > products such as aldehydes and formic acid. > > " For many of the chemicals with which ozone does readily react, the > reaction can form a variety of harmful or irritating by-products > (Weschler et al., 1992a, 1992b, 1996; Zhang and Lioy, 1994). For > example, in a laboratory experiment that mixed ozone with chemicals > from new carpet, ozone reduced many of these chemicals, including > those which can produce new carpet odor. However, in the process, the > reaction produced a variety of aldehydes, and the total concentration > of organic chemicals in the air increased rather than decreased after > the introduction of ozone (Weschler, et. al., 1992b). In addition to > aldehydes, ozone may also increase indoor concentrations of formic > acid (Zhang and Lioy, 1994), both of which can irritate the lungs if > produced in sufficient amounts. Some of the potential by-products > produced by ozone's reactions with other chemicals are themselves very > reactive and capable of producing irritating and corrosive by-products > (Weschler and Shields, 1996, 1997a, 1997b). Given the complexity of > the chemical reactions that occur, additional research is needed to > more completely understand the complex interactions of indoor > chemicals in the presence of ozone. " > Fact: Ozone generators do not remove particulate matter from air > which is causes allergy. Furthermore, even if ozone is used in > combination with an " ionizer " it is still not as effective, as a high > efficiency particle filter. This is supported by information at the > EPA web site. > " Ozone does not remove particles (e.g., dust and pollen) from the air, > including the particles that cause most allergies. However, some ozone > generators are manufactured with an " ion generator " or " ionizer " in > the same unit. An ionizer is a device that disperses negatively > (and/or positively) charged ions into the air. These ions attach to > particles in the air giving them a negative (or positive) charge so > that the particles may attach to nearby surfaces such as walls or > furniture, or attach to one another and settle out of the air. In > recent experiments, ionizers were found to be less effective in > removing particles of dust, tobacco smoke, pollen or fungal spores > than either high efficiency particle filters or electrostatic > precipitators. (Shaughnessy et al., 1994; Pierce, et al., 1996). > However, it is apparent from other experiments that the effectiveness > of particle air cleaners, including electrostatic precipitators, ion > generators, or pleated filters varies widely (U.S. EPA, 1995). " > Fact: " If used at concentrations that do not exceed public health > standards, ozone applied to indoor air does not effectively remove > viruses, bacteria, mold, or other biological pollutants " > Fact: " Whether in its pure form or mixed with other chemicals, ozone > can be harmful to health. " > Fact: The above statements are supported by both The American Lung > Association and The EPA. > Please don't confuse fact with personal testimonials and personal > opinions. > The following has been excerpted from the EPA's web site. > http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/ozonegen.html > " Ozone Generators that are Sold as Air Cleaners: An Assessment of > Effectiveness and Health Consequences " > There is a large body of written material on ozone and the use of > ozone indoors. However, much of this material makes claims or draws > conclusions without substantiation and sound science. In developing > Ozone Generators that are Sold as Air Cleaners, the EPA reviewed a > wide assortment of this literature, including information provided by > a leading manufacturer of ozone generating devices. In keeping with > EPA's policy of insuring that the information it provides is based on > sound science, only peer reviewed, scientifically supported findings > and conclusions were relied upon in developing this document. > Please Note: EPA does not certify air cleaning devices. The Agency > does not recommend air cleaning devices or manufacturers. If you need > information on specific devices or manufacturers, one resource you can > consult is the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) > 1111 19th Street, NW, Suite 402, Washington, DC 20036 (202) 872- > 5955. AHAM also provides information on air cleaners on their AHAM- > certified Clean Air Delivery Rate site at www.cadr.org Also, the > American Lung Association has an Air Cleaning Device fact sheet at: > www.lungusa.org/air/air00_aircleaners.html There are other resources > provided in this fact sheet. > > > Contents > What is ozone? > How is ozone harmful? > - Ozone Heath Effects and Standards > Is there such a thing as " good ozone, " and " bad ozone " ? > Are ozone generators effective in controlling indoor air pollution? > If I follow manufacturers' directions, can I be harmed? > Why is it difficult to control ozone exposure with an ozone generator? > Can ozone be used in unoccupied spaces? > What other methods can be used to control indoor air pollution? > Conclusions > Recommendation > Additional Resources > - Publications > - Information Sources > Bibliography > > > Introduction and Purpose > Ozone generators that are sold as air cleaners intentionally produce > the gas ozone. Often the vendors of ozone generators make statements > and distribute material that lead the public to believe that these > devices are always safe and effective in controlling indoor air > pollution. For almost a century, health professionals have refuted > these claims (Sawyer, et. al 1913; Salls, 1927; Boeniger, 1995; > American Lung Association, 1997; Al-Ahmady, 1997). The purpose of this > document is to provide accurate information regarding the use of ozone- > generating devices in indoor occupied spaces. This information is > based on the most credible scientific evidence currently available. > > Some vendors suggest that these devices have been approved by the > federal government for use in occupied spaces. To the contrary, NO > agency of the federal government has approved these devices for use in > occupied spaces. Because of these claims, and because ozone can cause > health problems at high concentrations, several federal government > agencies have worked in consultation with the U.S. Environmental > Protection Agency to produce this public information document. > > What is Ozone? > Ozone is a molecule composed of three atoms of oxygen. Two atoms of > oxygen form the basic oxygen molecule--the oxygen we breathe that is > essential to life. The third oxygen atom can detach from the ozone > molecule, and re-attach to molecules of other substances, thereby > altering their chemical composition. It is this ability to react with > other substances that forms the basis of manufacturers' claims. > > > > How is Ozone Harmful? > The same chemical properties that allow high concentrations of ozone > to react with organic material outside the body give it the ability to > react with similar organic material that makes up the body, and > potentially cause harmful health consequences. When inhaled, ozone can > damage the lungs. Relatively low amounts can cause chest pain, > coughing, shortness of breath, and, throat irritation. Ozone may also > worsen chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma and compromise the > ability of the body to fight respiratory infections. People vary > widely in their susceptibility to ozone. Healthy people, as well as > those with respiratory difficulty, can experience breathing problems > when exposed to ozone. Exercise during exposure to ozone causes a > greater amount of ozone to be inhaled, and increases the risk of > harmful respiratory effects. Recovery from the harmful effects can > occur following short-term exposure to low levels of ozone, but health > effects may become more damaging and recovery less certain at higher > levels or from longer exposures (US EPA, 1996a, 1996b). > > Manufacturers and vendors of ozone devices often use misleading terms > to describe ozone. Terms such as " energized oxygen " or " pure air " > suggest that ozone is a healthy kind of oxygen. Ozone is a toxic gas > with vastly different chemical and toxicological properties from > oxygen. Several federal agencies have established health standards or > recommendations to limit human exposure to ozone. These exposure > limits are summarized in Table 1. > > Table 1. Ozone Heath Effects and Standards > Health Effects Risk Factors Health Standards* > Potential risk of experiencing: > > Decreases in lung function > > Aggravation of asthma > > Throat irritation and cough > > Chest pain and shortness of breath > > Inflammation of lung tissue > > Higher susceptibility to respiratory infection Factors expected to > increase risk and severity of health effects are: > > Increase in ozone air concentration > > Greater duration of exposure for some health effects > > Activities that raise the breathing rate (e.g., exercise) > > Certain pre-existing lung diseases (e.g., asthma) > The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires ozone output of > indoor medical devices to be no more than 0.05 ppm. > > The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requires that > workers not be exposed to an average concentration of more than 0.10 > ppm for 8 hours. > > The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) > recommends an upper limit of 0.10 ppm, not to be exceeded at any time. > > The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s National Ambient Air > Quality Standard for ozone is a maximum 8 hour average outdoor > concentration of 0.08 ppm. > > > (* ppm = parts per million) > > > > Is There Such a Thing as " Good Ozone " and " Bad Ozone " ? > The phrase " good up high - bad nearby " has been used by the U.S. > Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to make the distinction between > ozone in the upper and lower atmosphere. Ozone in the upper atmosphere- > -referred to as " stratospheric ozone " --helps filter out damaging > ultraviolet radiation from the sun. Though ozone in the stratosphere > is protective, ozone in the atmosphere - which is the air we breathe - > can be harmful to the respiratory system. Harmful levels of ozone can > be produced by the interaction of sunlight with certain chemicals > emitted to the environment (e.g., automobile emissions and chemical > emissions of industrial plants). These harmful concentrations of ozone > in the atmosphere are often accompanied by high concentrations of > other pollutants, including nitrogen dioxide, fine particles, and > hydrocarbons. Whether pure or mixed with other chemicals, ozone can be > harmful to health. > > > > Are Ozone Generators Effective in Controlling Indoor Air Pollution? > Available scientific evidence shows that at concentrations that do not > exceed public health standards, ozone has little potential to remove > indoor air contaminants. > > Some manufacturers or vendors suggest that ozone will render almost > every chemical contaminant harmless by producing a chemical reaction > whose only by-products are carbon dioxide, oxygen and water. This is > misleading. > > First, a review of scientific research shows that, for many of the > chemicals commonly found in indoor environments, the reaction process > with ozone may take months or years (Boeniger, 1995). For all > practical purposes, ozone does not react at all with such chemicals. > And contrary to specific claims by some vendors, ozone generators are > not effective in removing carbon monoxide (Salls, 1927; Shaughnessy et > al., 1994) or formaldehyde (Esswein and Boeniger, 1994). > > Second, for many of the chemicals with which ozone does readily react, > the reaction can form a variety of harmful or irritating by-products > (Weschler et al., 1992a, 1992b, 1996; Zhang and Lioy, 1994). For > example, in a laboratory experiment that mixed ozone with chemicals > from new carpet, ozone reduced many of these chemicals, including > those which can produce new carpet odor. However, in the process, the > reaction produced a variety of aldehydes, and the total concentration > of organic chemicals in the air increased rather than decreased after > the introduction of ozone (Weschler, et. al., 1992b). In addition to > aldehydes, ozone may also increase indoor concentrations of formic > acid (Zhang and Lioy, 1994), both of which can irritate the lungs if > produced in sufficient amounts. Some of the potential by-products > produced by ozone's reactions with other chemicals are themselves very > reactive and capable of producing irritating and corrosive by-products > (Weschler and Shields, 1996, 1997a, 1997b). Given the complexity of > the chemical reactions that occur, additional research is needed to > more completely understand the complex interactions of indoor > chemicals in the presence of ozone. > > Third, ozone does not remove particles (e.g., dust and pollen) from > the air, including the particles that cause most allergies. However, > some ozone generators are manufactured with an " ion generator " > or " ionizer " in the same unit. An ionizer is a device that disperses > negatively (and/or positively) charged ions into the air. These ions > attach to particles in the air giving them a negative (or positive) > charge so that the particles may attach to nearby surfaces such as > walls or furniture, or attach to one another and settle out of the > air. In recent experiments, ionizers were found to be less effective > in removing particles of dust, tobacco smoke, pollen or fungal spores > than either high efficiency particle filters or electrostatic > precipitators. (Shaughnessy et al., 1994; Pierce, et al., 1996). > However, it is apparent from other experiments that the effectiveness > of particle air cleaners, including electrostatic precipitators, ion > generators, or pleated filters varies widely (U.S. EPA, 1995). > There is evidence to show that at concentrations that do not exceed > public health standards, ozone is not effective at removing many odor- > causing chemicals. > > In an experiment designed to produce formaldehyde concentrations > representative of an embalming studio, where formaldehyde is the main > odor producer, ozone showed no effect in reducing formaldehyde > concentration (Esswein and Boeniger, 1994). Other experiments suggest > that body odor may be masked by the smell of ozone but is not removed > by ozone (Witheridge and Yaglou, 1939). Ozone is not considered useful > for odor removal in building ventilation systems (ASHRAE, 1989). > > While there are few scientific studies to support the claim that ozone > effectively removes odors, it is plausible that some odorous chemicals > will react with ozone. For example, in some experiments, ozone > appeared to react readily with certain chemicals, including some > chemicals that contribute to the smell of new carpet (Weschler, 1992b; > Zhang and Lioy, 1994). Ozone is also believed to react with acrolein, > one of the many odorous and irritating chemicals found in secondhand > tobacco smoke (US EPA, 1995). > If used at concentrations that do not exceed public health standards, > ozone applied to indoor air does not effectively remove viruses, > bacteria, mold, or other biological pollutants. > > Some data suggest that low levels of ozone may reduce airborne > concentrations and inhibit the growth of some biological organisms > while ozone is present, but ozone concentrations would have to be 5 - > 10 times higher than public health standards allow before the ozone > could decontaminate the air sufficiently to prevent survival and > regeneration of the organisms once the ozone is removed (Dyas, et > al.,1983; Foarde et al., 1997). > > > Even at high concentrations, ozone may have no effect on biological > contaminants embedded in porous material such as duct lining or > ceiling tiles (Foarde et al, 1997). In other words, ozone produced by > ozone generators may inhibit the growth of some biological agents > while it is present, but it is unlikely to fully decontaminate the air > unless concentrations are high enough to be a health concern if people > are present. Even with high levels of ozone, contaminants embedded in > porous material may not be affected at all. > > > If I Follow Manufacturers' Directions, Can I be Harmed? > Results of some controlled studies show that concentrations of ozone > considerably higher than these standards are possible even when a user > follows the manufacturer's operating instructions. > > There are many brands and models of ozone generators on the market. > They vary in the amount of ozone they can produce. In many > circumstances, the use of an ozone generator may not result in ozone > concentrations that exceed public health standards. But many factors > affect the indoor concentration of ozone so that under some conditions > ozone concentrations may exceed public health standards. > > In one study (Shaughnessy and Oatman, 1991), a large ozone generator > recommended by the manufacturer for spaces " up to 3,000 square feet, " > was placed in a 350 square foot room and run at a high setting. The > ozone in the room quickly reached concentrations that were > exceptionally high--0.50 to 0.80 ppm which is 5-10 times higher than > public health limits (see Table 1). > > In an EPA study, several different devices were placed in a home > environment, in various rooms, with doors alternately opened and > closed, and with the central ventilation system fan alternately turned > on and off. The results showed that some ozone generators, when run at > a high setting with interior doors closed, would frequently produce > concentrations of 0.20 - 0.30 ppm. A powerful unit set on high with > the interior doors opened achieved values of 0.12 to 0.20 ppm in > adjacent rooms. When units were not run on high, and interior doors > were open, concentrations generally did not exceed public health > standards (US EPA, 1995). > > > The concentrations reported above were adjusted to exclude that > portion of the ozone concentration brought in from the outdoors. > Indoor concentrations of ozone brought in from outside are typically > 0.01- 0.02 ppm, but could be as high as 0.03 - 0.05 ppm (, 1991; > U.S. EPA, 1996b; Weschler et al., 1989, 1996; Zhang and Lioy; 1994). > If the outdoor portion of ozone were included in the indoor > concentrations reported above, the concentrations inside would have > been correspondingly higher, increasing the risk of excessive ozone > exposure. > > None of the studies reported above involved the simultaneous use of > more than one device. The simultaneous use of multiple devices > increases the total ozone output and therefore greatly increases the > risk of excessive ozone exposure. > > > Why is it Difficult to Control Ozone Exposure with an Ozone Generator? > The actual concentration of ozone produced by an ozone generator > depends on many factors. Concentrations will be higher if a more > powerful device or more than one device is used, if a device is placed > in a small space rather than a large space, if interior doors are > closed rather than open and, if the room has fewer rather than more > materials and furnishings that adsorb or react with ozone and, > provided that outdoor concentrations of ozone are low, if there is > less rather than more outdoor air ventilation. > > The proximity of a person to the ozone generating device can also > affect one's exposure. The concentration is highest at the point where > the ozone exits from the device, and generally decreases as one moves > further away. > > Manufacturers and vendors advise users to size the device properly to > the space or spaces in which it is used. Unfortunately, some > manufacturers' recommendations about appropriate sizes for particular > spaces have not been sufficiently precise to guarantee that ozone > concentrations will not exceed public health limits. Further, some > literature distributed by vendors suggests that users err on the side > of operating a more powerful machine than would normally be > appropriate for the intended space, the rationale being that the user > may move in the future, or may want to use the machine in a larger > space later on. Using a more powerful machine increases the risk of > excessive ozone exposure. > > Ozone generators typically provide a control setting by which the > ozone output can be adjusted. The ozone output of these devices is > usually not proportional to the control setting. That is, a setting at > medium does not necessarily generate an ozone level that is halfway > between the levels at low and high. The relationship between the > control setting and the output varies considerably among devices, > although most appear to elevate the ozone output much more than one > would expect as the control setting is increased from low to high. In > experiments to date, the high setting in some devices generated 10 > times the level obtained at the medium setting (US EPA, 1995). > Manufacturer's instructions on some devices link the control setting > to room size and thus indicate what setting is appropriate for > different room sizes. However, room size is only one factor affecting > ozone levels in the room. > > In addition to adjusting the control setting to the size of the room, > users have sometimes been advised to lower the ozone setting if they > can smell the ozone. Unfortunately, the ability to detect ozone by > smell varies considerably from person to person, and one's ability to > smell ozone rapidly deteriorates in the presence of ozone. While the > smell of ozone may indicate that the concentration is too high, lack > of odor does not guarantee that levels are safe. > > At least one manufacturer is offering units with an ozone sensor that > turns the ozone generator on and off with the intent of maintaining > ozone concentrations in the space below health standards. EPA is > currently evaluating the effectiveness and reliability of these > sensors, and plans to conduct further research to improve society's > understanding of ozone chemistry indoors. EPA will report its findings > as the results of this research become available. > > > > Can Ozone be Used in Unoccupied Spaces? > Ozone has been extensively used for water purification, but ozone > chemistry in water is not the same as ozone chemistry in air. High > concentrations of ozone in air, when people are not present, are > sometimes used to help decontaminate an unoccupied space from certain > chemical or biological contaminants or odors (e.g., fire restoration). > However, little is known about the chemical by-products left behind by > these processes (Dunston and Spivak, 1997). While high concentrations > of ozone in air may sometimes be appropriate in these circumstances, > conditions should be sufficiently controlled to insure that no person > or pet becomes exposed. Ozone can adversely affect indoor plants, and > damage materials such as rubber, electrical wire coatings, and fabrics > and art work containing susceptible dyes and pigments (U.S. EPA, > 1996a). > > > > What Other Methods Can Be Used to Control Indoor Air Pollution? > The three most common approaches to reducing indoor air pollution, in > order of effectiveness, are: > > Source Control: Eliminate or control the sources of pollution; > Ventilation: Dilute and exhaust pollutants through outdoor air > ventilation, and > Air Cleaning: Remove pollutants through proven air cleaning methods. > Of the three, the first approach -- source control -- is the most > effective. This involves minimizing the use of products and materials > that cause indoor pollution, employing good hygiene practices to > minimize biological contaminants (including the control of humidity > and moisture, and occasional cleaning and disinfection of wet or moist > surfaces), and using good housekeeping practices to control particles. > > The second approach -- outdoor air ventilation -- is also effective > and commonly employed. Ventilation methods include installing an > exhaust fan close to the source of contaminants, increasing outdoor > air flows in mechanical ventilation systems, and opening windows, > especially when pollutant sources are in use. > > The third approach -- air cleaning -- is not generally regarded as > sufficient in itself, but is sometimes used to supplement source > control and ventilation. Air filters, electronic particle air cleaners > and ionizers are often used to remove airborne particles, and gas > adsorbing material is sometimes used to remove gaseous contaminants > when source control and ventilation are inadequate. > > See Additional Resources section below for more detailed information > about these methods. > > > > Conclusions > Whether in its pure form or mixed with other chemicals, ozone can be > harmful to health. > > When inhaled, ozone can damage the lungs. Relatively low amounts of > ozone can cause chest pain, coughing, shortness of breath and, throat > irritation. It may also worsen chronic respiratory diseases such as > asthma as well as compromise the ability of the body to fight > respiratory infections. > > Some studies show that ozone concentrations produced by ozone > generators can exceed health standards even when one follows > manufacturer's instructions. > > Many factors affect ozone concentrations including the amount of ozone > produced by the machine(s), the size of the indoor space, the amount > of material in the room with which ozone reacts, the outdoor ozone > concentration, and the amount of ventilation. These factors make it > difficult to control the ozone concentration in all circumstances. > > Available scientific evidence shows that, at concentrations that do > not exceed public health standards, ozone is generally ineffective in > controlling indoor air pollution. > > The concentration of ozone would have to greatly exceed health > standards to be effective in removing most indoor air contaminants. In > the process of reacting with chemicals indoors, ozone can produce > other chemicals that themselves can be irritating and corrosive. > > > > Recommendation > The public is advised to use proven methods of controlling indoor air > pollution. These methods include eliminating or controlling pollutant > sources, increasing outdoor air ventilation, and using proven methods > of air cleaning. > > > > Additional Resources > Publications: > > Copies of EPA's publications are available from the National Service > Center for Environmental Publications (NSCEP) > http://www.epa.gov/ncepihom/ (to order EPA documents online). Use the > EPA Document Number when ordering. Or call 1-800-490-9198/(513) 489- > 8695 (fax), or write to: > U.S. Environmental Protection Agency > National Center for Environmental Publications (NSCEP) > P.O. Box 42419 > Cincinnati, OH 45242 > > The Inside Story: A Guide to Indoor Air Quality, EPA Document Number > EPA 402-K-93-007. U.S. EPA, U.S. CPSC. April 1995. > > Indoor Air Facts No. 7.- Residential Air Cleaners, EPA Document Number > EPA 20A-4-001. U.S. EPA. February 1990. > > Residential Air Cleaning Devices: A Summary of Available Information, > EPA Document Number EPA 402-K-96-001. U.S. EPA. > > Indoor Air Pollution: An Introduction for Health Professionals, EPA > Document Number EPA 402-R-94-007. American Lung Association, EPA, > CPSC, American Medical Association. > > Advisory: > > " Health Canada Advises the Public About Air Cleaners Designed to > Intentionally Generate Ozone (Ozone Generators) " , Health Canada, > Canada 1999-19, February 5, 1999. > > Information Sources: > > U.S. EPA's Indoor Air Quality Information Clearinghouse (IAQ INFO), PO > Box 37133, Washington D.C. 20013-7133; by phone (800) 438-4318. > > California Department of Health Services, Indoor Air Quality Section, > Environmental Health Laboratory, 2151 Berkeley Way, Berkeley, CA > 94704; 510-540-3022. > > Federal Trade Commission , Consumer Response Center, (202) 326-3128. > > U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington D.C. 20207; or > call Consumer Hotline, English/Spanish: (800) 638-2772, Hearing/Speech > Impaired: (800) 6388270. > > The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) has developed > an American National Standards Institute (ANSI)-approved standard for > portable air cleaners (ANSI/AHAM Standard AC-1-1988). This standard > may be useful in estimating the effectiveness of portable air > cleaners. Under this standard, room air cleaner effectiveness is rated > by a clean air delivery rate (CADR) for each of three particle types > in indoor air: tobacco smoke, dust, and pollen. > > Only a limited number of air cleaners have been certified under this > program at the present time. A complete listing of all current AHAM- > certified room air cleaners and their CADRs can be obtained from CADR > > Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) > 1111 19th Street, NW, Suite 402 > Washington, DC 20036 > (202) 872-5955 > > AHAM also provides information on air cleaners on their AHAM-certified > Clean Air Delivery Rate site at www.cadr.org > > American Lung Association Fact Sheet - Air Cleaining Devices: Types > of Air Cleaning Processes > > > > Bibliography > Al-Ahmady, Kaiss K. 1997. Indoor Ozone. Florida Journal of > Environmental Health. June. pp. 8-12. > > American Lung Association. 1997. Residential Air Cleaning Devices: > Types, Effectiveness, and Health Impact. Washington, D.C. January. > > American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning > Engineers (ASHRAE). 1989. ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals. Atlanta. p. > 12.5. > > Boeniger, Mark F. 1995. Use of Ozone Generating Devices to Improve > Indoor Air Quality. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. > 56: 590-598. > > Dunston, N.C.; Spivak, S.M. 1997. A Preliminary Investigation of the > Effects of Ozone on Post-Fire Volatile Organic Compounds. Journal of > Applied Fire Science. 6(3): 231-242. > > Dyas, A.; Boughton, B.J.; Das, B.C. 1983. Ozone Killing Action Against > Bacterial and Fungal Species; Microbiological Testing of a Domestic > Ozone Generator. Journal of Clinical Pathology. 36:1102-1104. > > Esswein, J.; Boeniger, Mark F. 1994. Effects of an Ozone- > Generating Air-Purifying Device on Reducing Concentrations of > Formaldehyde in Air. Applied Occupational Environmental Hygiene. 9 > (2):139-146. > > Foarde, K.; van Osdell, D.; and Steiber, R.1997. Investigation of Gas- > Phase Ozone as a Potential Biocide. Applied Occupational Environmental > Hygiene. 12(8): 535-542. > > , S.R. 1991. Use of an Indoor Air Quality Model (IAQM) to > Estimate Indoor Ozone Levels. Journal of Air and Waste Management > Association. 41:161-170. > > Pierce, Mark W.; Janczewski, Jolanda N.; Roethlisbergber, ; > Pelton, Mike; and Kunstel, . 1996. Effectiveness of Auxiliary > Air Cleaners in Reducing ETS Components in Offices. ASHRAE Journal. > November. > > Salls, Carroll, M. 1927. The Ozone Fallacy in Garage Ventilation. The > Journal of Industrial Hygiene. 9:12. December. > > Sawyer, W.A.; Beckwith, Helen I.; and Skolfield, Esther M. 1913. The > Alleged Purification of Air By The Ozone Machine. Journal of the > American Medical Association. November 13. > > Shaughnessy, , J.; Levetin, Estelle; Blocker, Jean; and > Sublette, Kerry L. 1994. Effectiveness of Portable Indoor Air > Cleaners: Sensory Testing Results. Indoor Air. Journal of the > International Society of Indoor Air Quality and Climate. 4:179-188. > > Shaughnessy, R.J.; and Oatman, L. 1991. The Use of Ozone Generators > for the Control of Indoor Air Contaminants in an Occupied Environment. > Proceedings of the ASHRAE Conference IAQ `91. Healthy Buildings. > ASHRAE, Atlanta. > > U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 1995. Ozone Generators > in Indoor Air Settings. Report prepared for the Office of Research and > Development by Steiber. National Risk Management Research > Laboratory. U.S. EPA. Research Triangle Park. EPA-600/R-95-154. > > U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 1996. Air Quality > Criteria for Ozone and Related Photochemical Oxidants. Research > Triangle Park, NC: National Center for Environmental Assessment-RTP > Office; report nos. EPA/600/P-93/004aF-cF, 3v. NTIS, Springfield, VA; > PB-185582, PB96-185590 and PB96-185608. > > U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). 1996. Review of > National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: Assessment of > Scientific and Technical Information. OAQPS Staff Paper. Office of Air > Quality Planning and Standards. Research Triangle Park. NC. EPA-452/R- > 96-007. > > Weschler, J.; Brauer, ; and Koutrakis, Petros. 1992a. > Indoor Ozone and Nitrogen Dioxide: A Potential Pathway to the > Generation of Nitrate Radicals, Dinitrogen Pentaoxide, and Nitric Acid > Indoors. Environmental Science and Technology. 26(1):179-184. > > Weschler, J.; Hodgson Alfred T.; and Wooley, D. 1992b. > Indoor Chemistry: Ozone, Volatile Organic Compounds, and Carpets. > Environmental Science and Technology. 26(12):2371-2377. > > Weschler, J; Shields, Helen C. 1997a. Measurements of the > Hydroxyl Radical in a Manipulated but Realistic Indoor Environment. > Environmental Science and Technology. 31(12):3719-3722. > > Weschler, J; Shields, Helen C. 1997b. Potential Reactions > Among Indoor Pollutants. Atmospheric Environment. 31(21):3487-3495. > > Weschler, J; and Shields, Helen C. 1996. Production of the > Hydroxyl Radical in Indoor Air. Environmental Science and Technology. > 30(11):3250-3268. > > Weschler, J.; Shields, Helen, C.; and Naik, Datta V. 1989. > Indoor Ozone Exposures. JAPCA Journal. 39(12):1562-1568. > > Weschler, J.; Shields, Helen, C.; and Naik, Datta V. 1996. The > Factors Influencing Indoor Ozone Levels at a Commercial Building in > Southern California: More that a Year of Continuous Observations. > Tropospheric Ozone. Air and Waste Management Association. Pittsburgh. > > Witheridge, N. And Yaglou, Constantin P. 1939. Ozone in > Ventilation--Its possibilities and Limitations. ASHRAE Transactions. > 45: 509-522. > > Zhang, Junfeng and Lioy, J. 1994. Ozone in Residential Air: > Concentrations, I/O Ratios, Indoor Chemistry, and Exposures. Indoor > Air. Journal of the International Society of Indoor Air Quality and > Climate. 4:95-102. " > > The following excerpt is from the American Lung Association: > > http://www.lungusa.org/press/envir/asnairc.html > > http://www.lungusa.org/bin/search/searchit.pl? > query=Air+Cleaners & ichoice=index.swish- > e & ixname=.swish & results=0 & search.x=9 & search.y=9 > > OZONE PRODUCTION > > Some air cleaners (called ozone generators) use an electrical charge > to generate ozone. Although ozone (also referred to as trivalent > oxygen or saturated oxygen) is a necessary part of the upper > atmosphere (10-30 miles above us), in the part of the atmosphere we > breathe, ozone is a potent lung irritant. It can have damaging health > effects, especially for persons with asthma and other lung diseases, > children and the elderly. It is produced directly by ozone generators > and indirectly by ion generators and some other electronic air > cleaners. The FDA has set a limit of 0.05 parts per million of ozone > in indoor air. Ask whether any electronic air cleaner you are > considering buying has been tested for ozone production. The American > Lung Association suggests that ozone generators not be used. > > > > ph P. Klein, Sr, M.D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FAIR USE NOTICE: > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 ionic breeze emits a SMALL amount according to the manufacturer. On Thu, 16 Jun 2005, Barbara wrote: > Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 12:06:56 -0700 (PDT) > From: Barbara <floridabound03200@...> > Reply- > > Subject: Re: [] Ozone- Here we go again. > > KC > If an Ozone air cleaner is anything like an Ionic air > cleaner, I don't want anything to do with it. Last > year, after I had an Ionic air cleaner in my apt. for > one hour - only one hour, I had such a difficult time > breathing, that I was afraid I would end up having to > go to the Emergency Room. > Barb E. > > --- tigerpaw2c <tigerpaw2C@...> wrote: > > > KL & Group, > > > > The research is NOT there for or against, in my > > opinion. From the > > research that I have read, I am not willing to take > > the chance of > > harming myself or anyone else by using an ozone air > > purifier that > > could cause permanent lung damage or irritate the > > respiratory track. > > > > There are professionals on this board that I hope > > will chime in AGAIN, > > responding to the ozone issue. KL, I would recommend > > you take some of > > these exact questions of yours and experience with > > the ozone machine > > to the professional board, IEQ. Just to see what > > their response would > > be. I will be watching for your post and their > > responses.I will post > > the link below. I really wish it were that simple > > that one machine is > > a cure all. I also have been made aware that ozone > > may even stimulate > > mold growth and or cause it to release its > > mycotoxins. > > > > Also Ken, you are doing your best to promote the use > > of ozone and how > > good and safe it is to members on this board. Why > > won't you post some > > of this exact information on the professional board? > > Until more > > research is there (and not just done by the company > > promoting it) > > either fore or against, I am not willing to promote > > any product that > > does not have a proven track record. I could not > > live with myself if I > > caused someone further damage to their health. Could > > you? I don't mean > > to make it sound like I am attacking you personally > > Ken, it's the > > product I have a problem with and would have with > > anyone promoting it. > > I have been dealing with the mold issue for many, > > many years and this > > is not the first time that the subject and/or use of > > ozone has come > > up. So I am still looking for that silver bullet > > also. And yes, I have > > been in an office that used an ozone machine and it > > did irritate my > > wife (who is the one that is ill) and myself and we > > couldn't wait to > > get out of there. The doctor didn't realize and > > apologized later and > > tossed it into the garbage once he read the > > information about it use. > > > > I will post some links below and also some previous > > discussions. > > Anyone using an ozone generator should be very > > cautious. > > > > KC > > > > The IEQ discussion group has been established to > > provide a forum for > > IEQ professionals to openly discuss issues. These > > issues include > > indoor environmental health, IAQ consulting, > > toxicology, HVAC > > engineering, industrial hygiene, risk management, > > restoration and > > remediation, insurance coverage, legal issues, > > medical issues and > > more. > > iequality/ > > > > From: " Carl E. Grimes " <grimes@...> > > Date: Mon Oct 11, 2004 1:29 pm > > Subject: Re: []^ Ozone educational web > > sites > > > > Ken, > > > > This is my last comment on this ozone discussion: > > Ozone is not > > enriched oxygen. Ozone is a pollutant. The two have > > different > > properties. > > > > Carl Grimes > > Healthy Habitats LLC > > > > From: RLLIPSEY87@... > > Date: Wed May 28, 2003 8:53 am > > Subject: Re: [] Digest Number 1636 > > > > > > > > Ozone is a toxic chemical whether it is produced > > naturally in a > > thunderstorm or > > produced by ozonators or " air purifiers " (or sold by > > any other name) . > > > > Ozone is an OSHA regulated toxic chemical which > > is 500 times more > > toxic than carbon monoxide (CO) that kills hundreds > > of people each > > year. The federal air standard for ozone is only 0.1 > > ppm while it is > > 50 ppm for CO. Ozone attacks mucous membranes, ie > > the lungs, and > > causes chronic respiratory disease. > > > > NIOSH has published that ozone is not very > > effective in killing > > mold or bacteria. Ozone is not " controversial " . It > > is toxic and > > dangerous and not effective in controlling mold or > > bacteria and should > > never be used in a room with people present, even to > > remove odors ie > > smoke damage odors. > > > > > > Dr. L. Lipsey > > Professor and Toxicologist > > University of North Florida, > > ---OSHA HazMat Cert. > > U. of Florida Med. Ctr, Jax > > Poison Control Center Board > > CV--Toxicology And Environmental Health Assoc > > > > > > From: Joe Klein <epistrophy1@...> > > Date: Sun Jun 1, 2003 4:45 pm > > Subject: Re: [] criticism of recent > > comments on ozone > > > > > > > > I am concerned that that some of our visitors may be > > mislead or > > misinformed concerning ozone. > > > > Fact: Ozone can have damaging health effects, > > especially for persons > > with asthma and other lung diseases, children and > > the elderly. > > > > Fact: Ozone generators are NOT recommended by the > > American Lung > > Association: > > > > Fact: Much of the material regarding ozone > > generators makes claims or > > draws conclusions without substantiation and sound > > science. > > > > Fact: EPA does not certify air cleaning devices. > > > > Fact: " Relatively low amounts(of ozone)can cause > > chest pain, coughing, > > shortness of breath, and, throat irritation. Ozone > > may also worsen > > chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma and > > compromise the ability > > of the body to fight respiratory infections. " > > > > Fact: " People vary widely in their susceptibility > > to ozone. Healthy > > people, as well as those with respiratory > > difficulty, can experience > > breathing problems when exposed to ozone. Exercise > > during exposure to > > ozone causes a greater amount of ozone to be > > inhaled, and increases > > the risk of harmful respiratory effects. Recovery > > from the harmful > > effects can occur following short-term exposure to > > low levels of > > ozone, but health effects may become more damaging > > and recovery less > > certain at higher levels or from longer exposures > > (US EPA, 1996a, > > 1996b). " > > > > Fact: Exposure to ozone can cause: > > > > 1. Decreases in lung function > > 2. Aggravation of asthma > > 3. Throat irritation and cough > > 4. Chest pain and shortness of breath > > 5. Inflammation of lung tissue > > 6. Higher susceptibility to respiratory infection > > > > > === message truncated === > > > __________________________________________________ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 > KL & Group, Thank you very much for the extensive information about the hazards of many of the ozone machines and of the ozone molecule itself. I was aware of some of this information, but I also am aware that the EPA is not the be all and end all of answers about public health. Some of their policies are incorrect, but I am not aware of many that are. However, I don't pay that much attention, since my health has been so bad for so long, ly, I don't have enough energy. After having many so called medical experts have no idea for so many years what was wrong with me, and finally being called a hypochondriac, I am just going to do what I think is best, based on my own judgement, taking into account all information I have been able to look at. I have a BS in Geology, and am quite able to make informed, rational decisions on my own. Something most of the doctors I have consulted don't seem to understand. The reason I posted about this topic is that I am having some success with this machine. It is neutralizing some of the allergens in my home. I have asthma, have had it all my life, and this is not causing any problems with my lungs. It is not the same machine, it does not emit nitrous compounds that irritate the lungs. I suppose some other compound could, as a byproduct of the chemical oxidations, but I am not experiencing that. I am only posting about my own experience with this machine, and did not expect to be slammed for expressing MY OPINIONS AND EXPERIENCES. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 KL, I'm very sorry that you feel you are being slammed and it is not really you per se, it's these products, the sales personnel and alot of misinformation that has been given out. I guess some of us may have come across the wrong way, because we feel so strongly concerning the ozone machines. We have had and still do have some people on this board, who read but no longer post, who have had permanent lung damage from ozone. We are just more concerned about you and your health. We don't want you to hurt yourself along the way of trying to recover. I just don't take the word of the EPA, I have spoken to many scientists, researchers, microbiologist, toxicologist who have studied and/or worked with these machines for many, many years. I take into a count what their expert advice and opinion are. One of them is Dr.Eugene Cole, professior at Brigham Young University and an advisor to The World Health Organization. (WHO) I am not doubting your intelligence or lack of making correct decisions, I'm just a person that gets very concerned for others health. I think we have dealt with enough to add more problems to our already fragile health. We care, KC > > KL & Group, > > Thank you very much for the extensive information about the hazards of many of the > ozone machines and of the ozone molecule itself. I was aware of some of this information, > but I also am aware that the EPA is not the be all and end all of answers about public > health. Some of their policies are incorrect, but I am not aware of many that are. However, > I don't pay that much attention, since my health has been so bad for so long, ly, I > don't have enough energy. > > After having many so called medical experts have no idea for so many years what was > wrong with me, and finally being called a hypochondriac, I am just going to do what I think > is best, based on my own judgement, taking into account all information I have been able > to look at. I have a BS in Geology, and am quite able to make informed, rational decisions > on my own. Something most of the doctors I have consulted don't seem to understand. > > The reason I posted about this topic is that I am having some success with this machine. It > is neutralizing some of the allergens in my home. I have asthma, have had it all my life, > and this is not causing any problems with my lungs. It is not the same machine, it does > not emit nitrous compounds that irritate the lungs. I suppose some other compound > could, as a byproduct of the chemical oxidations, but I am not experiencing that. > > I am only posting about my own experience with this machine, and did not expect to be > slammed for expressing MY OPINIONS AND EXPERIENCES. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 KC, Impressive documentation! Best I've seen. Consider the sources you cite vs citations on product Web sites, many of which may have a financial interest in the product. We must all be careful to separate what we want and desperately hope for from what is true. Beware of promises of the " magic bullet. " The only magic is how fast your money flows from your bank account into theirs. Remember the expression, " laughing all the way to the bank? " That usually means someone is left crying. The sad part is that the perveyors of " magic bullets " honestly believe in what they promote, usually to the point of dismissing any information to the contrary. Ask them not only what to expect that their product will do, but also what to expect it won't do. If you decide to try a product, make sure they have an unconditonal money-back guarantee so you don't end up with a house full of gadgets, either harmful or useless. The additional difficulty is that very little works the same for most of us. The only reliable action I've seen and experienced in my 18 years is to stop the exposure by removing the source or by removing yourself from the source. The most effective treatment l've seen for the most people is by Ritchie Shoemaker. Carl Grimes Healthy Habitats LLC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 Do a web search on Mark Boeniger.....his study is the end all of 03 studies. Also, read up on the trigeminal nerve and how 03 effects it. On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, kl_clayton wrote: > Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 04:09:09 -0000 > From: kl_clayton <kl_clayton@...> > Reply- > > Subject: [] Re: Ozone- Here we go again. > > > > KL & Group, > > Thank you very much for the extensive information about the hazards of > many of the > ozone machines and of the ozone molecule itself. I was aware of some of > this information, > but I also am aware that the EPA is not the be all and end all of answers > about public > health. Some of their policies are incorrect, but I am not aware of many > that are. However, > I don't pay that much attention, since my health has been so bad for so > long, ly, I > don't have enough energy. > > After having many so called medical experts have no idea for so many > years what was > wrong with me, and finally being called a hypochondriac, I am just going > to do what I think > is best, based on my own judgement, taking into account all information I > have been able > to look at. I have a BS in Geology, and am quite able to make informed, > rational decisions > on my own. Something most of the doctors I have consulted don't seem to > understand. > > The reason I posted about this topic is that I am having some success > with this machine. It > is neutralizing some of the allergens in my home. I have asthma, have had > it all my life, > and this is not causing any problems with my lungs. It is not the same > machine, it does > not emit nitrous compounds that irritate the lungs. I suppose some other > compound > could, as a byproduct of the chemical oxidations, but I am not > experiencing that. > > I am only posting about my own experience with this machine, and did not > expect to be > slammed for expressing MY OPINIONS AND EXPERIENCES. > > > > > > > FAIR USE NOTICE: > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 Thank you. I thought about it after I went to bed, and realized I was being a little, shall we say, touchy. I am sorry too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 > I am not doubting your intelligence or lack of making correct > decisions, I'm just a person that gets very concerned for others > health. I think we have dealt with enough to add more problems to > our already fragile health. > > We care,> KC KC, very well said. Personally I wasn't slamming anyone; only wanted to further open the discussion to look at all the pros and cons of ozone. Isn't that the purpose of this group; to research and brainstorm without causing hard feelings of what is safest for us, our buildings and environment? I cannot tolerate ozone. Right now we have an ozone warning issued by the local weather stations for all who have respiratory problems to try to stay inside as much as possible. I cannot go into a Sharper Image Store for more than a few minutes before reacting to all the ozone generated by their machines. I have tried ionizers which same ill-effect. When my house was damaged from a major storm 4 years ago and we did have mold I discussed with some very knowledgeable contractors if renting and using a powerful ozone generator would be appropriate. They also cited the EPA warnings and indicated unless we are willing to move out of the home, move all the plants and electrical products with wires then no we shouldn't. In order for the ozone machines to actually kill mold it must be very powerful and will have negative effects on plants and wiring plus the added cost of clean-up from the resulting chemical reaction. Sigh, I was disappointed thinking I had a quick fix for my problems. Remember also we all react differently to any and all substances; some are more reactive than others. I'm like the canary in the coal mine; can detect dangerous odors before anyone else and my nose and body are always right. Bottom line; no one was slamming you; only wanting to open the discussion for further research for the benefit of the ENTIRE group. Rosie -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.3/15 - Release Date: 6/14/2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 > > We must all be careful to separate what we want and desperately hope > for from what is true. Beware of promises of the " magic bullet. " The > only magic is how fast your money flows from your bank account into > theirs. Remember the expression, " laughing all the way to the bank? " > That usually means someone is left crying. The sad part is that the > perveyors of " magic bullets " honestly believe in what they promote, > usually to the point of dismissing any information to the contrary. " Carl, bravo. I'm a clinical herbalist and have warned so many who are desperate not to try the latest hype products for their condition because of claims and testimonies. We must research, ask questions, determine if the products are safe for us, our homes and our environments rather than looking for a magic bullet as you said. Too often we are so desperate we are willing to risk our health for a quick fix. How often do I hear and read we all need to detox? It's not safe; first we prepare the body for the detox and while using appropriate and well made herbals we must help the body to eliminate the toxics. I still hear of herbalists laughing when their clients complain of detox side effects; these herbalists are ignorant and hurting their clients yet they convince the clients they must suffer through these detox symptoms because that's a good sign. grrrrrrrrrrrr. Rosie -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.3/15 - Release Date: 6/14/2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.