Hacker News Reader

Comment by qz2 | Hacker News Reader

This smells of magic unicorn shit to me.

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”.

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-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

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_downl... [Appendix A]

> 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.

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

So, do you have a point, or are you just waving around BS hoping something will stick?

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.

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.

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...

Ionizer--probably unicorn shit.

The UV-C one? Probably real--and note it's the one labeled as "Verified by third parties". Moving air at some reasonable rate past a strong UV-C source really will sterilize it against a lot of stuff.

But isn't that boring old tech which is easily replicated in a DIY project, or copied by competitors? What makes it special?

Isn't a big ass fan just boring old tech which is easily replicated ...?

Just because something is easily replicated doesn't mean I want to spend the time doing it.

And, as a side note, I suspect you underestimate the engineering behind those fans. Making a large fan which doesn't vibrate or make annoying noise is non-trivial.

Ok, I agree, but a similar thing can be said about vacuum cleaners, coffeemakers, washing machines, ... you get the point.

Indeed, and there seems to be plenty of competition in those markets for quieter, more reliable vacuums and washers anyway. I'm not seeing how that changes the point though, unless I'm missing something.

The ionry is a normal Big Ass Fan is probably exactly what we need.

A big thing that moves air.

But people are to stupid to know that. The media (including HN) is too broken to deliver people simple messages.

So people can only listen to complex messages they don't fully understand, so it needs all the extra fluff to sell.

Circulating air is what got 20 or so people infected with covid because someone decided to sit in front of a ventilator at a cafe South Korea. The staff, all of whom wore masks didn't get infected.

https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/covid-19-outbrea...

Your link is the medias factoid about mask wearing. And this is the problem, no one is explaining first principals to you.

You are probably thinking of this factoid in China about air conditioners and this diagram, which is not what we are talking about at all. (The evidence is downward air is what you want)

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/how-restaurant-air-condit...

Fan blows to the ground and separates air from infectious constituents which stick to the ground like a ball of mud. Got it.

Although that is kinda close, I'd stop concentrating on the oga booga marketing you've picked up, like things sticking, and try and learn the science. Plenty of YouTube videos and HN articles have discussed it.

Get back to first principals.

I'm glad we agree.

Yes, the same as surgical theatres and semiconductor labs have positive air pressure. So I'd rather see an objective comparison of:

1. big ass fan on its own. 2. big ass fan with UV gubbins. 3. No fan 4. Someone else's fan

Reply on news.ycombinator.com