Is it from this website ? (the link which I've shared below ) It looks like a relatively new technology . I am sure you can expect steeper prices once this air purifier gains popularity in the market . Because there is no way something like this with a far superior design and capable of capturing 0.1 micron (implying even flu causing virus can be effectively captured by these purifiers) . I also took a look at the test certificates ..the filter design is patented as well .Easily a good sell ..expect steeper prices in the coming months . Here is a link that might be useful: Clair Purifier

Competitors of Ecoquest have long exaggerated the "ozone" in ecoquest purifiers as a means of distracting customers from knowing how good they are. If they were dangerous would they be in the Space Station, or the Ground Zero Museum, or the building that houses the Liberty Bell, just to name a few places? Because of the concern, EcoQuest has done extensive studies in ozone, including a study made by Kansas State University. In the article "Understanding Ozone" they quote ["In 2000, a study supported by the California Air Resources Board (under the auspices of the Long-Term Exposure Health Effects Research Program) regarding the effects of Air Pollution on children's lung function growth determined that "ozone did not play a major role in the pollution's effects on children's lungs. Instead, the offenders were nitrogen dioxide, microscopic particles known as particulate matter, and acid vapors. All come directly or indirectly from the burning of fossil fuels (the exhaust from a car or truck, for example), as well as from emissions from industrial plants and other sources." The studies lead author was W. James Gauderman, Ph.D., USC assistant professor of preventive medicine. Many experts have singled out ozone for criticism for fifty years because ozone is so easy to measure and is an easy "escape goat" that takes the focus off of the real problem that caused the smog to begin with! Rather than being an "original constituent" of smog, ozone simply appears as nature's response to combat the higher concentrations of the other chemicals in static atmospheric conditions. A proper beneficial setting for home ozone air purifiers units would produce an indoor ozone level of .02 to .04 parts per million-well below what some governments have established as a safe level (up to .05 ppm). Criticisms in many articles cite much higher concentrations and the interesting thing is they never even mention what the safe limit is. Doing so would remove the controversy of their articles. Controversy is what sells and that is why ozone critics love to feature ozone as a "bad guy"! In a nut shell, good news is no news and that is why you generally will never hear news reporters promoting it as a good thing! The greatest opportunity that many reporters are missing is the fact that the real controversy would be in revealing the "truth" to the public about why many agencies unethically downplay ozone. Approaching the controversy from this angle would allow reporters to still have their "controversial edge" and most importantly at the same time maintain their integrity. Hopefully in time as more and more people become educated on the importance and benefits of ozone, reporters will recognize that the "truth angle" is their biggest market and their true wild card! Many customers of ozone type air purifiers have used them safely in their homes for over twenty years, and more. Some have had babies that are now teenagers. Those children have breathed "ozone purified air" every day of their life and have reaped the positive benefits of doing so-with no negative effects! The bottom line is this... At the end of the day the truth will still be there. Any reporter, politician or agency that deliberately denies or holds back the truth (both sides of the story) about ozone or any other helpful life-changing substance, product or information for their own gain, will ultimately be exposed in the end! "] Always do your research and get the facts straight. Here is a link that might be useful: Understanding Ozone

Well, the stove is a fixture in the room...set on an elevated brick hearth. My only other option 'someday' is to switch it to gas. That would be costly since I do not have a gas hook -up and would need a tank, a line run to the house,and a new stove. It a very nice stove - a Vermont Castings - and is designed to be an attractive piece...it is nice and I love the heat, I just dont like the dust. It is actually the spent ashes that make the dust. I figure a good filtering system would go a long way before replacing the stove and wouldn't hurt to have even if the stove was not operational (like summer) I have mostly hardwood floors and where there is carpet I shampoo them twice a year. Chisue, yes you're right it has to be bad for my lungs (my cats too)....if it is leaving a fine dust hours after I clean...well I have to be breathing it. I just want to eliminate as much as I can without taking a second mortgage or resorting to 100% electric heat (which is ridiculous $$$) The link is my stove...the builder of my house put on his site years ago Thanks again for any and all advice for the air filters! Here is a link that might be useful: this is it...

We have them in both our bedrooms. No particular issues with air quality (except for having a dog). I wouldn't think anything of it, as others have said. Ditto for a humidifier in a child's room. Only thing I would think twice about would be a dehumidifier in a basement or other prone-to-moisture space, if seller had not disclosed any moisture issues.