Read on Twitter
Here is a collection of cheating techniques of ionizers when reporting test results 
@jljcolorado
@jljcolorado
1) Use a small chamber or position their equipment above a tiny surface (example Petri dish) when reporting efficiency to exaggerate the %.
For example, reported efficiency of an equipment positioned above a tiny surface is 93%. Applying to real conditions (duct, with appropriate surface area and contact time), this efficiency will be 0.0016%.
2) Run for a long duration not relevant for air flow/speed when installed in ducts.
3) Only report the efficiency in %. Do not report CFM or CADR.
4) Compare results to guidelines that are NOT relevant to indoor settings.
3) Only report the efficiency in %. Do not report CFM or CADR.
4) Compare results to guidelines that are NOT relevant to indoor settings.
5) Do not report by-products (ozone, formaldehyde, ultrafine particles). If they do, they use less than x ppb rather than report the actual value and again choose guidelines that are not relevant to indoor conditions. Or 6) Use a large chamber when reporting by-products.
7) Do not use a continuous emission source. For example, they use a single spray of pollution and stop during the test to exaggerate the effects.
8) Mislead by using a reputable lab and pseudo scientists to report the data of ill-designed experiments.
9) When branding their product, they make sure to add new fancy technologies. Bonus if they add words like “magic” “competing with Denver mountains” etc.
9) When branding their product, they make sure to add new fancy technologies. Bonus if they add words like “magic” “competing with Denver mountains” etc.
