u know what im talking about

1/26/2006 11:02:05 AM

don't those create toxic levels of ozone?

1/26/2006 12:15:02 PM

they expensive as hell, that's all I know

1/26/2006 12:18:38 PM

I think they create toxic levels of worthless.

1/26/2006 12:19:10 PM

They have some with an "ozone guard" that is supposed to filter out the ozone before it sends the air out. I did some research on these cuz I wanted to buy one but the information is all over the map as far as how much they actually work...

1/26/2006 12:19:44 PM

Just get some self charging electrostatic filter for your home HVAC system.

1/26/2006 1:20:53 PM

I just got one, courtesy of my grandmother. I was worried because of the ozone, which everyone seems to think is so good for you!!! It even says in the manual under the FAQ "What is that fresh scent?" It's Ozone!

I fucking hate the smell of ozone.

But this one with the guard seems to work really well and doesn't smell even if I have it on full blast.

1/26/2006 2:18:12 PM

if no one has one for sell why are u fuckers even posting in my thread

1/26/2006 3:24:17 PM

my bad, I'll sell you mine for $200

1/26/2006 10:52:05 PM

Quote :

"In October 2003, Consumer Reports published an evaluation of various products that promised to clean indoor air, offering allergy relief and generally better breathing. The magazine (published by Consumers Union, a nonprofit that dates to 1936) had tested such devices before and found little to applaud but noted that they continued to enjoy "brisk sales" partly because of "concerns about allergies and indoor air contaminants, coupled with heightened worries over terrorism." The 2003 report was particularly tough on Sharper Image, "the champion of air-cleaner marketing," giving the lowest marks in categories like dust- and smoke-removal to its Ionic Breeze product, which the magazine called flat-out "ineffective." Sharper Image sued Consumers Union for defamation. This set the stage for an interesting examination of the relationship between consumers and brands at a time when that relationship is widely believed to be in flux. In 2004, a California judge dismissed the defamation suit, and early last year Sharper Image agreed to cover Consumers Union's legal costs. A few months later, Consumer Reports published a new look at "ionizing" air cleaners contending that some of these products not only do little to clean the air but also "can expose you to potentially harmful ozone levels." This time Sharper Image did not sue, but its C.E.O. called the report "irresponsible," and the company maintains that the Ionic Breeze has never emitted unsafe levels of ozone. Late in 2005, Consumer Reports came out with its latest round of tests, again slamming the latest Sharper Image Ionic Breeze model. "If you own one," the magazine advised, "try returning it for a refund.""

1/26/2006 11:06:14 PM

i also need to get one of these things...

1/27/2006 11:52:39 AM