Re: Re:* air cleaner/ Rosie

[Guest guest]

Dear Rosie,

I really wish you hadn't had brought this up at this time. If you had waited

until after the first of November the results of a number of tests presently

being prepared for publication would have I'm sure proven these EPA opinions

faulty.

In answer to your concern about ozone when used in air purification creating

hazardous substances let me offer the following comment..

The paper of Weschler as referenced here is mis-reported. It is true that a

product was created that is more " toxic " (defined

as meaning a lower dosage is required to produce a harmful effect) than the

original irritating substance that was found in carpets.

But it ignores the fact that the " toxic " chemical that was produced was an

extremely small fraction of a trace amount and its dosage was so small

that it could never accumulate to a level to be harmful. And Weschler never

claimed that it was harmful.

The distortion here is that harmful levels of these chemicals (aldehydes and

Formic acid) can not be reached with trace amounts of ozone. If that were true

an identical problem would occur in a well ventilated building where ozone is

brought in along with ambient air. Weschler himself has given sworn testimonies

that he is

unaware of any instance where a harmful byproduct has been created by the use of

low levels of ozone.

The analysis of complete indoor air reactions is difficult if not impossible to

make. The interactions are far too

complex. But if we accept that the ozone in fresh outdoor air is not harmful

then that same level indoors will also not be harmful.

Test results show that aerosolized bacteria and mold can be reduced nearly 50%

in about 4 minutes using only .05ppm of ozone. The only tests to the contrary

are

those using dry mold spores or environments where the bacteria or mold were not

aerosolized. This has been well established in peer reviewed papers

dating from the 1930's. It is obviously true that ozone or its byproducts

cannot kill that which it cannot come in contact. On the other hand since the

penetration of ozone is a function of time and since in general ozone is most

effective in areas of high moisture, ozone can penetrate even into library books

over a period of time to control mold growth.

The bottom line is these EPA comments are as silly as those of 30 years ago made

by the FDA regarding saccharin being a cause of cancer after they overdosed

laboratory animals with consuming saccharin daily. It took a good many years

before the FDA reversed itself regarding saccharin.

The largest US manufacturer of ozone purifiers has sold over 5 million machines

without one injury or illness. Don't you wish auto manufacturers could have a

record like that!

Did you know that as of last year almost all oranges leaving Florida are being

" washed " in ozone water? Did you know that before the last Olympics in

California the swimming stadiums were made to replace their use of chlorine for

water purification with ozone bubbling through the water as such is considered

safer by the IOC?

Did you know that the meat packing industry estimates that in five years almost

all packaged beef, pork and chicken will be " washed " in a concentrated ozone

bath to kill all surface germs before packaging?

Sincerely,

Ken

[Guest guest]

Ken,

And I am aware of a major study from an independant source in its

final stages whose preliminary data further supports the EPA and

other expert opinions including the jury findings in the Alpine case.

I'll let you and the group know when it is released so we can compare

studies.

Carl Grimes

Healthy Habitats LLC

-----

Ken wrote:

> Dear Rosie,

>

> I really wish you hadn't had brought this up at this time. If you had

> waited until after the first of November the results of a number of

> tests presently being prepared for publication would have I'm sure

> proven these EPA opinions faulty.

[Guest guest]

WANT A STATISTIC ON IT DAMAGING...ME

PULMONARY EDEMA...directly connected to your so called SAFE

product...confirmed by environmental dr.

Can I get you to promote the safety of air fresheners and perfume since

the FDA has not proven them unsafe, yet?!!

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005, kengib . wrote:

> Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:25:19 -0400

> From: kengib . <jkg4902@...>

> Reply-

>

> Subject: Re: [] Re:* air cleaner/ Rosie

>

> Dear Rosie,

>

> I really wish you hadn't had brought this up at this time. If you had

> waited until after the first of November the results of a number of tests

> presently being prepared for publication would have I'm sure proven these

> EPA opinions faulty.

>

> In answer to your concern about ozone when used in air purification

> creating hazardous substances let me offer the following comment..

>

> The paper of Weschler as referenced here is mis-reported. It is true that

> a product was created that is more " toxic " (defined

> as meaning a lower dosage is required to produce a harmful effect) than

> the original irritating substance that was found in carpets.

> But it ignores the fact that the " toxic " chemical that was produced was

> an extremely small fraction of a trace amount and its dosage was so small

> that it could never accumulate to a level to be harmful. And Weschler

> never claimed that it was harmful.

>

> The distortion here is that harmful levels of these chemicals (aldehydes

> and Formic acid) can not be reached with trace amounts of ozone. If that

> were true an identical problem would occur in a well ventilated building

> where ozone is brought in along with ambient air. Weschler himself has

> given sworn testimonies that he is

> unaware of any instance where a harmful byproduct has been created by the

> use of low levels of ozone.

> The analysis of complete indoor air reactions is difficult if not

> impossible to make. The interactions are far too

> complex. But if we accept that the ozone in fresh outdoor air is not

> harmful then that same level indoors will also not be harmful.

>

> Test results show that aerosolized bacteria and mold can be reduced

> nearly 50% in about 4 minutes using only .05ppm of ozone. The only tests

> to the contrary are

> those using dry mold spores or environments where the bacteria or mold

> were not aerosolized. This has been well established in peer reviewed

> papers

> dating from the 1930's. It is obviously true that ozone or its

> byproducts cannot kill that which it cannot come in contact. On the other

> hand since the penetration of ozone is a function of time and since in

> general ozone is most effective in areas of high moisture, ozone can

> penetrate even into library books over a period of time to control mold

> growth.

>

> The bottom line is these EPA comments are as silly as those of 30 years

> ago made by the FDA regarding saccharin being a cause of cancer after

> they overdosed laboratory animals with consuming saccharin daily. It

> took a good many years before the FDA reversed itself regarding

> saccharin.

>

> The largest US manufacturer of ozone purifiers has sold over 5 million

> machines without one injury or illness. Don't you wish auto

> manufacturers could have a record like that!

>

> Did you know that as of last year almost all oranges leaving Florida are

> being " washed " in ozone water? Did you know that before the last

> Olympics in California the swimming stadiums were made to replace their

> use of chlorine for water purification with ozone bubbling through the

> water as such is considered safer by the IOC?

>

> Did you know that the meat packing industry estimates that in five years

> almost all packaged beef, pork and chicken will be " washed " in a

> concentrated ozone bath to kill all surface germs before packaging?

>

> Sincerely,

>

> Ken

>

>