4 ms·

Anything but. They’ve got validated 3rd party studies. Plus they’re a real Hardware product company with a long history of quality product. Not some Silicon Val

Anything but. They’ve got validated 3rd party studies. Plus they’re a real Hardware product company with a long history of quality product. Not some Silicon Valley “ai magic virus eater”.

qz2 6y ago
Yes aware of that. I am mostly concerned about its applicability in places where it'd make a difference compared to other infection controls. Typically when someone comes along with magical unicorn shit, regardless of if it works or not, it's either as a measure to avoid other more inconvenient controls or isn't completely applicable to the scenario it is being applied to.
treis 6y ago
The 3rd party studies are quite unimpressive and lack basic elements of rigor like a control. They don't seem to show anything except that fans mix the air.
Barrin92 6y ago
Those 3rd party studies seem like a pretty big joke >"The test unit was installed in the center of the test chamber with a blade height of 93” from the floor. The test chamber measured 10' x 10' x 10' (3m x 3m x 3m) and a microbial suspension was aspirated into the chamber. Air samples were taken from the test chamber once the unit was turned on, and then at client specified intervals (0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes) over a period of 2 hours and then plated. " https://www.bigassfans.com/docs/clean-air/104380072COL-010-indoor-reversed.pdf https://www.bigassfans.com/docs/clean-air/104380072COL-010-i... A small, sealed chamber were particulates were sprayed into the air once? Test that thing in a restaurant or a hair salon with a dozen people continuously interacting in it and then test the quality of the air
- craftinator 6y ago
  > Test that thing in a restaurant or a hair salon with a dozen people continuously interacting in it and then test the quality of the air That's not how scientific studies work.
  - Barrin92 6y ago
    Of course not, scientific studies create artificial conditions so we can claim that overpriced fans are a magic cure for a virus. They should hire these people at Volkswagen, they'd make great emission testers and splendid scientists
    - craftinator 6y ago
      So, do you have a point, or are you just waving around BS hoping something will stick?
- catherd 6y ago
  That test procedure sounds similar to the standard test for CADR (ANSI/AHAM AC-1-2015), which uses a 1008 square foot test chamber and measures the ability of an air purifier to deliver clean air. CADR is the product of air flow and fractional removal efficiency, and it's the industry standard value if you want to compare performance of one air purifier to another. The CADR test usually makes separate measurements for dust, pollen, and smoke (particulates). It looks like they adapted the normal test procedure to measure the reduction in live/viable microbes. However, in a few minutes of looking at their homepage I don't see anywhere they list a number in CFM of purified air, which is what CADR measures. https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_file_download.cfm?p_download_id=498206 https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_file_download.cfm?p_downl... [Appendix A]
wyldfire 6y ago
If a company is making claims like this, the FDA should review that companies validation of the claims. Yes, I suppose fans' air-quality claims falls in some crack where it's not a food, drug, or medical device. But if you market your device to mitigate germs responsible for a pandemic, it should really fall under the domain of an appropriate agency. The FDA was created to fight bogus miracle cures and tainted food. > they’re a real Hardware product company with a long history of quality product. Not some Silicon Valley “ai magic virus eater”. shrug then they shouldn't mind filing a 510k [1]. [1] https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-approvals-denials-and-clearances/510k-clearances https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-approvals-denials...

Anything but. They’ve got validated 3rd party studies. Plus they’re a real Hardware product company with a long history of quality product. Not some Silicon Valley “ai magic virus eater”.

qz2 6y ago

Yes aware of that. I am mostly concerned about its applicability in places where it'd make a difference compared to other infection controls. Typically when someone comes along with magical unicorn shit, regardless of if it works or not, it's either as a measure to avoid other more inconvenient controls or isn't completely applicable to the scenario it is being applied to.

treis 6y ago

The 3rd party studies are quite unimpressive and lack basic elements of rigor like a control. They don't seem to show anything except that fans mix the air.

Barrin92 6y ago

Those 3rd party studies seem like a pretty big joke >"The test unit was installed in the center of the test chamber with a blade height of 93” from the floor. The test chamber measured 10' x 10' x 10' (3m x 3m x 3m) and a microbial suspension was aspirated into the chamber. Air samples were taken from the test chamber once the unit was turned on, and then at client specified intervals (0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes) over a period of 2 hours and then plated. " https://www.bigassfans.com/docs/clean-air/104380072COL-010-indoor-reversed.pdf https://www.bigassfans.com/docs/clean-air/104380072COL-010-i... A small, sealed chamber were particulates were sprayed into the air once? Test that thing in a restaurant or a hair salon with a dozen people continuously interacting in it and then test the quality of the air

craftinator 6y ago
> Test that thing in a restaurant or a hair salon with a dozen people continuously interacting in it and then test the quality of the air That's not how scientific studies work.
- Barrin92 6y ago
  Of course not, scientific studies create artificial conditions so we can claim that overpriced fans are a magic cure for a virus. They should hire these people at Volkswagen, they'd make great emission testers and splendid scientists
  - craftinator 6y ago
    So, do you have a point, or are you just waving around BS hoping something will stick?
catherd 6y ago
That test procedure sounds similar to the standard test for CADR (ANSI/AHAM AC-1-2015), which uses a 1008 square foot test chamber and measures the ability of an air purifier to deliver clean air. CADR is the product of air flow and fractional removal efficiency, and it's the industry standard value if you want to compare performance of one air purifier to another. The CADR test usually makes separate measurements for dust, pollen, and smoke (particulates). It looks like they adapted the normal test procedure to measure the reduction in live/viable microbes. However, in a few minutes of looking at their homepage I don't see anywhere they list a number in CFM of purified air, which is what CADR measures. https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_file_download.cfm?p_download_id=498206 https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_file_download.cfm?p_downl... [Appendix A]

wyldfire 6y ago

If a company is making claims like this, the FDA should review that companies validation of the claims. Yes, I suppose fans' air-quality claims falls in some crack where it's not a food, drug, or medical device. But if you market your device to mitigate germs responsible for a pandemic, it should really fall under the domain of an appropriate agency. The FDA was created to fight bogus miracle cures and tainted food. > they’re a real Hardware product company with a long history of quality product. Not some Silicon Valley “ai magic virus eater”. shrug then they shouldn't mind filing a 510k [1]. [1] https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-approvals-denials-and-clearances/510k-clearances https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-approvals-denials...