Re: DYSON vacuum

[Guest guest]

I just saw this post ... I disagree with Dana's comment of "GET a DYSON vacuum!! It makes all the difference". The only difference I have seen with this Brand is that particle counts in the residence were much higher after its use than they were prior to using the unit.

Using a particle counter, I have tested countless brands and models of vacuum cleaners for particle emissions and the DYSON (new unit) I tested was one of the worse vacuum cleaners I've tested.

Vacuum cleaner sales folks always emphasize the great suction power of a vacuum but don't mention anything about the dust leakage from the unit. Depending on particle size, that dust will float around indefinitely and/or get deposited back onto surfaces.

Invariably, I find that a "dust problem", as described by the homeowner, can be traced back to a poor quality vacuum cleaner. On the other hand, I've had clients who experienced noticeable allergy relief after purchasing a high quality sealed True-Hepa unit.

e

Indoor Environmental Testing Inc.

Springfield IL

Re: Questions on Black Water & Heat Treatment

BTW folks, GET a DYSON vacuum!! It makes all the difference. When proposing a Cleaning schedule for a homeowner, recommend this. I think in a few cleanings it would reduce your levels. The stuff it picks up looks like flour! I have been around my share of industrial vacuums, and the captured material in the DYSON looks very much like the stuff captured in a HEPA vac bag. I don't think this is a "silver bullet", but another tool...and a pretty cool toy! (IF a vacuum can be considered that?)

[Guest guest]

e,

Your post is right on target about some claims about various vacuum

cleaners.

Any chance you a have table for the various brands you have tested and

the particle counts? Before and during use.

Even if you don't mention the brands, it would give the group some

relative numbers to consider if they do testing.

BOb

[Guest guest]

Yes, I'd like to see this too - especially for affordable ones (under $100)

Consumables are important too, which is (I think) the reason people

buy 'bagless' vacumn cleaners.

Not surprisingly, I've had sales staff at stores tell me that the

manufacturers stop making the filters for a model not long after they

stop manufacturing it, driving customers to purchase new hardware when

their existing vaccumn still works fine, but they can't find filters

for it.

Another great feature would be the ability to attach a hose to the

'post filtered' exhaust to send it outdoors.. even (in my case,

semi)HEPA-filtered air still has a lot of reactivity for me..

*thank you*

[Guest guest]

e - Did you test the yellow Dyson or the purple Dyson? I suspect that you tested the yellow one that does not have the HEPA filter after the cyclone. Certainly the cyclone is best at removing the 10 micron and higher particles which is the dust that people see in their houses, and your particle counter I assume you were maybe counting at the 0.3 micron cut rate? My purple Dyson has done wonders for my allergies, and I have had other HEPA vacuums for years. Clearly its anecdotal or perhaps attribution bias, but I really thought my purple Dyson worked better than most.

I would be interested to see some of your data. I just sold my particle counter so I really can't confirm or refute with data.

B. Dotson, CIH, CSP San , CA

-----Original Message-----From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of e Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:40 PMTo: iequality Subject: Re: DYSON vacuum

I just saw this post ... I disagree with Dana's comment of "GET a DYSON vacuum!! It makes all the difference". The only difference I have seen with this Brand is that particle counts in the residence were much higher after its use than they were prior to using the unit.

Using a particle counter, I have tested countless brands and models of vacuum cleaners for particle emissions and the DYSON (new unit) I tested was one of the worse vacuum cleaners I've tested.

Vacuum cleaner sales folks always emphasize the great suction power of a vacuum but don't mention anything about the dust leakage from the unit. Depending on particle size, that dust will float around indefinitely and/or get deposited back onto surfaces.

Invariably, I find that a "dust problem", as described by the homeowner, can be traced back to a poor quality vacuum cleaner. On the other hand, I've had clients who experienced noticeable allergy relief after purchasing a high quality sealed True-Hepa unit.

e

Indoor Environmental Testing Inc.

Springfield IL

Re: Questions on Black Water & Heat Treatment

BTW folks, GET a DYSON vacuum!! It makes all the difference. When proposing a Cleaning schedule for a homeowner, recommend this. I think in a few cleanings it would reduce your levels. The stuff it picks up looks like flour! I have been around my share of industrial vacuums, and the captured material in the DYSON looks very much like the stuff captured in a HEPA vac bag. I don't think this is a "silver bullet", but another tool...and a pretty cool toy! (IF a vacuum can be considered that?)

[Guest guest]

No I haven't compiled my data into a table format, great idea ! This would

be tricky because new models come out as fast as they are discontinued, and

some of the measurements are only meaningful if compared with ambient

counts but I will start collecting the numbers so I can share with the list.

In general, my experience has shown that Miele vacuums have consistently

low emissions. Will Spates, one of my instructors at the Bau-Biologie

Institute,

has measured vacuum emissions longer than I have and he said Miele comes out

on top, followed by Nilfisk, with particle counts at .5 micron being zero on

both.

Within the inexpensive category I ran into a few models with lower emissions

like a Hoover Supreme Windtunnel and a Eureka whirlwind litespeed (model

#5740A). Not zero emissions by any means but lower than some very expensive

ones that read 35,000 particles at .5 micron when the ambient air was around

2500 !

I do find the numbers useful when comparing ambient particle counts

with particle counts from the vacuum exhaust or simply comparing particle

counts BEFORE and AFTER vacuuming activity. This is a great tool to

educate the customer as it demonstrates how a vacuum can actually pollute

the air and be the cause of allergies. By the way I got interested in this

topic because for years I had to wear a N-95 mask or I would get a sinus

infection each time I vacuumed my house (vacuum was a Riccar). I switched to

a Bosch vacuum (Electro Duo) and not only I don't need the mask but I

noticed the dust

accumulation on the furniture diminished a great deal. My Bosch registers 5

particles

at .5 micron.

e

Indoor Environmental Testing Inc.

Springfield IL

Re: DYSON vacuum

>

> e,

>

> Your post is right on target about some claims about various vacuum

> cleaners.

>

> Any chance you a have table for the various brands you have tested and

> the particle counts? Before and during use.

>

> Even if you don't mention the brands, it would give the group some

> relative numbers to consider if they do testing.

>

> BOb

>

>

>

>

>

> FAIR USE NOTICE:

>

> This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always

been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such

material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental,

political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice

issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such

copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is

distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in

receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your

own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright

owner.

>

[Guest guest]

: The Dyson I tested was the purple one. The couple had just purchased the unit within the last few months.

Here are the particle counts for this unit (counts are per Liter of air):

.5 micron .7 micron 1 micron 2 micron 5 micron 10 micron

Dining Room 4426 1602 968 348 33 2

Dyson Exhaust 5645 3503 2666 1426 258 23

I don't know how consistent the emissions are from one unit to the next. I can only "speak" about the units that I have measured ...

There was a study done a few years back that was published in the Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association (Feb 1999). It was titled "Typical Household Vacuum Cleaners: The Collection Efficiency and Emissions Characteristics for Fine Particles", Lioy, PhD, Wainman and Jim Zhang PhD, Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute and Goldsmith, PhD, InterBasic Resources.

Not sure but I think Miele had some involvement with the study, maybe funded it ? They only tested 10 vacuums (Panasonic, Oreck XL, Royal, Kenmore, Phantom, Eureka Excalibur, 2 Hoover's, ElectraPure and Miele). The conclusion was that emissions of fine and ultra-fine particles from vacuum motors were high but could be controlled by using a "SEALED" system using a HEPA filter installed PAST the motor. It is my understanding that the better vacuums are now constructed that way and usually advertised as "sealed, True-Hepa" units.

e

Indoor Environmental Testing Inc

Springfield IL

Re: Questions on Black Water & Heat Treatment

BTW folks, GET a DYSON vacuum!! It makes all the difference. When proposing a Cleaning schedule for a homeowner, recommend this. I think in a few cleanings it would reduce your levels. The stuff it picks up looks like flour! I have been around my share of industrial vacuums, and the captured material in the DYSON looks very much like the stuff captured in a HEPA vac bag. I don't think this is a "silver bullet", but another tool...and a pretty cool toy! (IF a vacuum can be considered that?)

[Guest guest]

e:

Do you have any published data. I get asked by folks all the time and would love to see what you have.

If you haven't, I'd be happy to do the statistics and help you put it together - it needs to get out there. I've sen what Consumer Reports has at it isn't enough.

Tony

........................................................................... "Tony" Havics, CHMM, CIH, PEpH2, LLCPO Box 34140Indianapolis, IN 46234 cell90% of Risk Management is knowing where to place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%â„ This message is from pH2. This message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or distributed without this statement.

-----Original Message-----From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of e Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 7:40 PMTo: iequality Subject: Re: DYSON vacuum

I just saw this post ... I disagree with Dana's comment of "GET a DYSON vacuum!! It makes all the difference". The only difference I have seen with this Brand is that particle counts in the residence were much higher after its use than they were prior to using the unit.

Using a particle counter, I have tested countless brands and models of vacuum cleaners for particle emissions and the DYSON (new unit) I tested was one of the worse vacuum cleaners I've tested.

Vacuum cleaner sales folks always emphasize the great suction power of a vacuum but don't mention anything about the dust leakage from the unit. Depending on particle size, that dust will float around indefinitely and/or get deposited back onto surfaces.

Invariably, I find that a "dust problem", as described by the homeowner, can be traced back to a poor quality vacuum cleaner. On the other hand, I've had clients who experienced noticeable allergy relief after purchasing a high quality sealed True-Hepa unit.

e

Indoor Environmental Testing Inc.

Springfield IL

Re: Questions on Black Water & Heat Treatment

BTW folks, GET a DYSON vacuum!! It makes all the difference. When proposing a Cleaning schedule for a homeowner, recommend this. I think in a few cleanings it would reduce your levels. The stuff it picks up looks like flour! I have been around my share of industrial vacuums, and the captured material in the DYSON looks very much like the stuff captured in a HEPA vac bag. I don't think this is a "silver bullet", but another tool...and a pretty cool toy! (IF a vacuum can be considered that?)

[Guest guest]

Ok, you guys are not thinking

outside the box on this subject. Proper IAQ is not achieved by one

single thing. Vacuums will cause a temporary increase in particle

counts because the reasons stated, agitation of surface dust and

by-passing of the vacuum filter. Central systems will eliminate the

filter by-passing problem, IF it is designed and installed

properly. If that is not what a person has, then that is why he or

she should have an effective HVAC filter system and run the unit's fan

during and after vacuuming to remove those stray particles.

BTW, my Miele Blue Moon canister vac does have a HEPA filter for the

exhaust air. However, their bag design is excellent because I don't

usually see much if any dust inside the bag chamber or on the HEPA

exhaust filter. Still, we, as professionals must be cautious when

quoting data or using such data to make conclusion about certain vacuum

effectiveness. Test results depend highly on many factors, such as

the vacuuming method, type of dust, dust load or concentration, dust

distribution, surface type, etc. And, these factors are just for

standardizing the vacuuming method. They don't even include the

characteristics of the vacuum itself. To get an idea of how complex

the subject can be, I counted something like 32 ASTM vacuum-related

standards. The standard closest to one which can be used to

evaluate dust collection characteristics of vacuums (F1977-074 Standard

Test Method for Determining Initial, Fractional, Filtration Efficiency Of

a Vacuum Cleaner System) is for a stationary test. Other tests are

for determining the vacuuming effectiveness of surfaces. I know of

any universally accepted standard for assessing vacuum system particle

emissions in actual use. Please note my wording in case anyone is

going to mention that light-weight test Consumer's Union does.

And , your statement, " I believe vacuums are the

root cause of so much childhood asthma " , seems a bit

over-stated and unfounded, particularly when much research has shown a

relationship between outdoor pollution levels and increase in asthma

rates. This subject is simply too complex to lay blame at one

particular cause. Asthma is known to have many different causes,

although not all have been identified. Asthmatics generally have

many different triggers; but asthma is basically triggered by anything

that irritates the bronchi, causing them to spasm. Even though

asthma is known to be due to both allergenic and non-allergenic sources,

those with allergenic asthma can have their asthma triggered by

non-allergenic sources. Many books have been written on asthma and

in no way am I going to even attempt to summarize them here. Let's

just say asthma is far too complex a thing to make statements like the

one you made.

Matt Klein

[Guest guest]

Statements (respond if I'm off base here):

will cause a temporary increase in particle counts because the reasons stated, agitation of surface dust and by-passing of the vacuum filter....

If that is not what a person has, then that is why he or she should have an effective HVAC filter system and run the unit's fan during and after vacuuming to remove those stray particles.

And , your statement, "I believe vacuums are the root cause of so much childhood asthma", seems a bit over-stated and unfounded, particularly when much research has shown a relationship between outdoor pollution levels and increase in asthma rates

Yes and No on controlling these "temporary" higher counts.

For long term averaging of particles you may be right; these have been linked to increased morbidity and especially costs as indicated by hospital entries.

However, both a) sensitization induction and asthmatic and sensitization elicitation responses are due mostly to (best knowledge at this time) short term peak exposures - either immunologic or irritant based. Thus both "temporary" and long-term particles counts should be considered.

In addition, general particle reduction inside a house will reduce opportunity for other aerosolization (say be walking over a carpet).

Tony

........................................................................... "Tony" Havics, CHMM, CIH, PEpH2, LLCPO Box 34140Indianapolis, IN 46234 cell90% of Risk Management is knowing where to place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%â„ This message is from pH2. This message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or distributed without this statement.

-----Original Message-----From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Matt KleinSent: Monday, March 27, 2006 12:17 PMTo: iequality Subject: RE: DYSON vacuumOk, you guys are not thinking outside the box on this subject. Proper IAQ is not achieved by one single thing. Vacuums will cause a temporary increase in particle counts because the reasons stated, agitation of surface dust and by-passing of the vacuum filter. Central systems will eliminate the filter by-passing problem, IF it is designed and installed properly. If that is not what a person has, then that is why he or she should have an effective HVAC filter system and run the unit's fan during and after vacuuming to remove those stray particles. BTW, my Miele Blue Moon canister vac does have a HEPA filter for the exhaust air. However, their bag design is excellent because I don't usually see much if any dust inside the bag chamber or on the HEPA exhaust filter. Still, we, as professionals must be cautious when quoting data or using such data to make conclusion about certain vacuum effectiveness. Test results depend highly on many factors, such as the vacuuming method, type of dust, dust load or concentration, dust distribution, surface type, etc. And, these factors are just for standardizing the vacuuming method. They don't even include the characteristics of the vacuum itself. To get an idea of how complex the subject can be, I counted something like 32 ASTM vacuum-related standards. The standard closest to one which can be used to evaluate dust collection characteristics of vacuums (F1977-074 Standard Test Method for Determining Initial, Fractional, Filtration Efficiency Of a Vacuum Cleaner System) is for a stationary test. Other tests are for determining the vacuuming effectiveness of surfaces. I know of any universally accepted standard for assessing vacuum system particle emissions in actual use. Please note my wording in case anyone is going to mention that light-weight test Consumer's Union does.And , your statement, "I believe vacuums are the root cause of so much childhood asthma", seems a bit over-stated and unfounded, particularly when much research has shown a relationship between outdoor pollution levels and increase in asthma rates. This subject is simply too complex to lay blame at one particular cause. Asthma is known to have many different causes, although not all have been identified. Asthmatics generally have many different triggers; but asthma is basically triggered by anything that irritates the bronchi, causing them to spasm. Even though asthma is known to be due to both allergenic and non-allergenic sources, those with allergenic asthma can have their asthma triggered by non-allergenic sources. Many books have been written on asthma and in no way am I going to even attempt to summarize them here. Let's just say asthma is far too complex a thing to make statements like the one you made.Matt Klein

[Guest guest]

However, both a) sensitization induction and asthmatic and

sensitization elicitation responses are due mostly to (best knowledge at

this time) short term peak exposures - either immunologic or irritant

based. Thus both " temporary " and long-term particles

counts should be considered.

I cannot totally agree of disagree with your statement here Tony. I

think the matter might be one of semantics though. As an asthmatic,

I know that I can get an attack due to a periodic increase rise in some

respiratory irritants. However, when outdoor contaminant, either

pollution or particular pollen, concentrations are high, I will have

problems. I would not call these short term peak exposures.

Others might depending on the time scale being used.

Nonetheless, I find all statements about exposure versus asthma

occurrence to be suspect, particularly when allergenic asthma is being

discussed. Asthma attacks due to some types of allergic, such as

Type IV, reactions can occur as much as two days later, depending on the

rapidity of the immune reaction. Therefore, trying to assess

reaction time versus exposure can be skewed. In which case, the

wrong source could be blamed for the reaction. I had one client in

particular who was very good at developing a reaction two days after

being exposed to mold, for which he had shown a tested allergic

response. He was almost like clockwork. In his case, he

usually ended up having an asthma attack at home, where he did not have a

mold problem, instead of at work where he was periodically exposed.

How did we find out? He was tested for exposure to various molds

while he was on several days of sick leave away from work. He then

proceeded to have an asthma attack two days after testing, corresponding

to the cycle of his work exposure/asthma attack cycle.

In no way can I disagree with your final statement. The goal is

always to reduce the exposure, no matter how long it occurs or its

concentration.

******************************************************

If what is written looks too stupid to be written by me, I disclaim

it. On

the other hand, if it is brilliant, then I have no one to blame but

myself.

Otherwise, whether you choose to accept my opinion is up to you.

******************************************************

K. Klein, PE ME, MBA

Indoor Air Quality Solutions, Inc.

2523 SR 133

Bethel, OH 45106-0007

VOICE:

FAX: (with notice)

E-mail: mkklein68@...

*******************************************************

Wouldn't it be nice if common sense were really common?