In my view, the BBB has become an extortion agency. A business can essentially commit serial murder and maintain an A+, so long as they pay their dues. There are many reputable and fine businesses with low BBB ratings, simply because they refuse to pay for accreditation. An A+ from the BBB, should in my opinion, be a stigma as easily as a credential. It is not always so, but it is a problem.
I'll go as far as to agree with commenter PragmaticPulp, but not entirely that the integrity of the BBB is unrelated here.
Edited to add:
I have had extensive interaction with the BBB regarding real, genuine product safety issues, which encompassed misleading advertising and due to the indifference of the BBB, led to an FTC report and more.
Please read the article. This concerns NAD, a division of BBB that arbitrates trade disputes before they go to the FTC. It has nothing to do with the accreditation sales teams.
>Highlights include Molekule’s position that its claims weren’t referring to the Molekule purifier itself—weren’t referring to the product it was selling—but rather were referring only to the underlying PECO “and other” technology. In fact, Molekule based many of its claims on tests of prototypes, or of the PECO filter alone
Seems like we have a mini-theranos on our hands. To make claims in your sales material about you PECO technology filtering VOCs then claim you weren't talking about the product itself is beyond scummy.
I expect a lot of people will focus on the problematic BBB in the comments here, but it's important to focus on the core problem:
Molekule's marketing claims have been debunked from the start. Their massive social media advertising campaigns have fed a lot of misinformation to a lot of people since their launch. It's amazing how many people I know who confidently recommend Molekule air filters as superior technology based on nothing more than having seen their Instagram ads. Molekule has secured media puff pieces from several influential media outlets as well as several print publications, none of whom seem to have done the slightest amount of testing to verify their claims.
Both Wirecutter and Consumer Reports actually tested the Molekule and found the performance to be abysmal. Wirecutter went so far as to declare it the worst air purifier they've ever tested: https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-air-purifier/#molekul...
The product just plain does not work, and their marketing material appears to be pure lies. I hope they see some consequences for this.
Perhaps the worst part is that the underlying PECO technology is potentially promising as an adjunct to a traditional HEPA filter. Instead, the Molekule company has gone all-in in their anti-HEPA marketing strategy, creating a false dichotomy for marketing hype instead of trying to create an evolution of the standard HEPA filter.
In general, you can't "purify air" without passing all the air in the room through a filter every "n" minutes, and maintaining some sort of barrier for outside air, like a pressurized room so air won't flow in naturally. Any little filter that you can stand in the corner can't do much to clean the air in the room. It may remove some large items like pet dander. A good filter in an HVAC system may do a little bit, but those are mainly to protect the HVAC system from gunk.
This has always been a fertile area for scams, like the air filter that caused the demise of the Sharper Image, once it was established that it caused dangerous ozone levels.
I think you’re taking the term “purify” too literally. These are just filters meant to reduce the concentrations of dust and other particulates. Nobody is expecting to create like, a microprocessor clean room with these.
That has nothing to do with what you claimed in the grandparent post and what this person was replying to. You said you can't 'purify' air with a small off the shelf air filter and many people gave you examples to the contrary.
I live in a city block with nut trees and a dog. The pollen, dander and pollen+diesel soot from the main road sucks and creates a mess. Running one of these machines in our front room makes a noticeable difference during peak pollen and shedding seasons.
There are plenty of good products out there that are basically a fan with a HEPA filter and an activated charcoal filter. Even at fairly low airflow it does continously filter the entire room air, and can radically reduce particle counts within half an hour.
Not the OP, but I have bought a Sensirion particulates sensor which I have used to measure the number of particles coming out of two air purifiers. It showed all 0 in the case of one purifier and very low values compared to ambient in the case of the other.
Even a box fan and 2 Merv-13 furnace filters glued to it in a V-shape will perform FAR better than 99% of non-HEPA consumer purifiers out there, for a fraction of the price.
yes, a few years ago, i bought a blueair 211+, which has a hepa and activated charcoal filter, and felt a noticeable improvement in my coughing and sneezing right away (and since then).
the 211+ performed the best on wirecutter's own tests, but wasn't the top recommendation for what seemed like arbitrary reasons. you change the filter twice a year for about $100 in yearly costs.
i hvae some air leakage around doors and windows (old building), but it's not enough to overwhelm the 211+ (as noted by my air quality sensor). in fact, i'm ok with some external air exchange, because CO2 levels can otherwise get unacceptably high overnight.
they do explain quite well why they picked what they did, and the blueair 211+ is their upgrade pick for bigger rooms. at least they publish their test methodology and results, so you you can make up your own mind based on the data.
good to hear it's made such a difference for you. i've never considered getting an air purifier, but living in a city, maybe i should.
sorry, i should have added that the review snub was a few years ago when i was researching my purchase options. but yes, they have since added the 211+ as an "also great" recommendation.
i think the main (dubious) issue before was that they doubted the longevity of the high air purification levels they saw and so didn't want to give it a recommendation at the time.
> because CO2 levels can otherwise get unacceptably high overnight
I got a CO2 sensor recently, and I'm surprised how much of a difference small changes can make. One of my rooms was hitting 1600-1800ppm overnight (which as I understand it is not a problem per se but not great) with the door open about 2in/5cm - leaving the internal door open an extra 6in/15cm or so means it rarely goes above about 700ppm (generally hovers around 600).
I'm also surprised at how quickly it'll go up - that same room will go from 800ppm to 1600ppm with the door shut in well under an hour.
Sure! You can filter large particles out of the air with a fan and a few square feet of filter in a closed room. But Molekule said it "purified" air -- including viruses -- and hinted that it destroyed them instead of merely capturing them.
> "Sterilization" is often misquoted as being achievable. While it is theoretically possible in a controlled environment, it is very difficult to prove and the term "disinfection" is generally used by companies offering this service as to avoid legal reprimand. Specialist companies will often advertise a certain log reduction, e.g., 6-log reduction or 99.9999% effective, instead of sterilization.
> Any little filter that you can stand in the corner can't do much to clean the air in the room. It may remove some large items like pet dander.
A consumer-grade HEPA air purifier (DIY or < $200 on Amazon) against a wall in your bedroom will commonly cut PM 2.5 concentrations by 10x in a few hours if you keep your windows and doors closed.
Source: I own a PM 2.5 counter and have operated air purifiers in China smog and California wildfires. There's also plenty of evidence out there.
What I find interesting about InstaAds is that whatever product you find advertised is likely garbage... whether it is or isn’t you can find it (at the same or higher quality) for 50% off by searching eBay/Alibaba. It’s almost a joke now. Maybe I should make a meme and post it to the Gram.
My favorite is a fancy "plug strip" that is comprised of a metal junction box and a couple of standard outlets. Sure, the junction box is painted, and the cord is braided, but they're selling it for ~$100.
Close. Though this one at least looks somewhat custom-manufactured (that's not a standard junction box, nor are those standard outlets). If you have to consider a payment plan for a plug strip, you might want to question your priorities...
I've noticed this as well! I think there are tons of dropship companies that are run by a single person looking to make a quick buck selling rebranded low quality alibaba products. It's endless on my instagram, and I now ignore every single one of them because I know that it's essentially nothing more than spam.
My gf ordered a few things that took AGES to arrive (probably because its shipping straight from China), with 0 customer support (primarily because it's likely run by a single person that couldn't care less about the actual customer who probably subscribes to /r/entrepreneur or /r/juststart). And the final product was as you put it, garbage.
Maybe, but often they may be shipping single units from China mail via boat, which take about a 4-6 weeks to arrive (from order placement to arrival at your door.)
Does anyone know the appeal that "As Seen on TV" was supposed to have? A lot of products are being advertised on TV (anything from clothing brands to cars to health insurance) and don't use that fact as a selling point. Why was the fact that it's "seen on TV" used as the only differentiating marker on the product?
I think it's mostly marketing at this point, but for awhile it used to differential products that were previously only available through mail-order. I remember in the 90's there was an "As Seen on TV" store in the Mall of America that only offered such products. See the Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/As_seen_on_TV
I imagine it's just to assure the consumer that "this is likely that very product you saw cut the skin off a grape in that infomercial that impressed you."
Not exactly true. Some stuff of the stuff isn’t bad. I have bought Vuori shorts, Marine Layer shirts and a Cotopaxi jacket which I would rank higher than incumbent brands in terms of quality and value. Discover of these products I made though Instagram advertisements.
There’s complete garbage like supplements on there. Just do your research and make sure the brand has a decent refund policy.
This is one of my problems regarding advertising. Turns out for most good products you'd either already have them or would hear about them from word of mouth or by searching online, so they don't need significant advertising anymore. Which means the only ads left go to garbage products.
> Molekule air filters as superior technology based on nothing more than having seen their Instagram ads.
Is this any different than people buying any luxury product based on marketing? Look at any designer clothing item. It's all based on (close to 100%) what people feel as a result of marketing and branding. The actual product sure is sometimes higher quality and better but not to the extent that it costs.
Take a women's pocketbook for $5000 (Gucci). It's a pocketbook. Woman buys it because of marketing and image. Same here I say (Tesla is another example and note that Bill Gates still buys Porsche because that was the car in the era he was raised in).
Their marketing claims are complete lies about the effectiveness of their product for the purpose of filtering air. People shopping for air purifiers/filters are often enough doing so because they have health problems such as allergies. Not because they want a buzzing cylinder to sit in the middle of their room as some piece of art.
Not the same thing. People buying luxury clothing or accessories are basically buying into the fashion and/or status symbol. Whereas people buying high end air filters are probably expecting functionally better air filters.
The actual product sure is sometimes higher quality and better but not to the extent that it costs.
In many cases, people pay the extra because, yes, it's only fifty percent better and costs ten times as much, but there are no products that are fifty percent better and only cost fifty percent more. If you want fifty percent better, you will have to pay ten times as much. If you can afford it and you don't want the lesser quality product, this is realistically your only option.
Price often doesn't scale linearly. Neither do, say, academic grades. The difference between an A and a B is often more work than the difference between a B and a C.
Sounds like a good business opportunity. In general many brands are involved multiple price point markets. Eg: a liqour company sells a high quality expensive bottle and also remarkets under a different name to say Costco for example. Sometimes it's a very similar product, sometimes they don't want to associate thier name with a worse product though they are owned by the same company
And sometimes it may very well be the same product. Expensive alcohol, clothes, handbags, etc. are very often bought as status symbols - i.e. as evidence you can afford to burn all that money on what's at best an incremental improvement over the mid tier.
Still, that's something entirely different than straight up lying about the objective qualities of your product. Especially medically-relevant ones.
In all seriousness, for that coronavirus mention, I'd like to see someone jailed.
I don't really approve of that. I know it goes on, but I'm not giving my seal of approval to that.
It's just a pet peeve of mine that dressing well is often mocked as frivolous. It often has a gendered component to it, like women are silly creatures.
I knew a professional couple that both worked at the same place in different departments. She talked about going shopping and both of them spending hundreds of dollars on office clothes over the weekend.
The following Monday, she got teased at work for wearing a new outfit. No one said one word to her husband about his new office attire, though he had spent at least as much as her.
My annoyance about how socially acceptable it is to act like nice clothes are merely stupid status symbols is in no way intended to justify deceptive marketing, especially for medical stuff.
The difference is that Gucci doesn't claim that their pocketbooks will protect you from Coronavirus.
People paying for a Gucci know what they're getting: a pocketbook that conveys a particular fashion, status, and personal brand. People buying Molekule air filters don't know what they're getting.
If Mlekule air filters could be picked up at $5 at your local 7-11, this would still be predatory false advertising. The price doesn't matter.
Designer clothing and pocketbooks still succeed at being clothing and pocketbooks respectively. It sounds like this air filter doesn't actually achieve the goal of being an air filter. (Also the entire point of designer clothing is to look pretty, and everyone accepts that so it seems like a poor example).
Molekule claimed at the time that its “scientifically-proven nanotechnology outperforms HEPA filters in every category of pollutant.”
Our tests proved otherwise. The Molekule turned in the worst performance on particulates of any purifier, of any size, of any price, that we have tested in the seven years that we have been producing this guide.
Not long after we published our findings, that statement was removed from the Molekule website.
Guide author Tim Heffernan asked Molekule CEO Dilip Goswami why. He answered, “the point about ‘in all categories’ is that we see a device that outperforms across all of the categories. Right? So we’re not trying to say that individually, on any particular metric, we would be number one. Right? What we’re saying is, when you look across all the categories, we outperform HEPA. Right? And that’s what we’re attempting to convey with that. And so—it’s fair to say that we needed to re-examine some of the language to make sure that it’s saying what we’re intending to say.”
###
This seems like it rises to the level of criminally false?
To be honest, as human beings we've evolved over millions of years to be able to handle all of this stuff.
If you are immuno-compromised or otherwise in poor health, then maybe these are worth something, but I highly doubt it. The volume of air they "purify" versus a given room is nothing.
Imagine visualizing the air around you in a room that you are breathing, do you think a small device in the corner with a HEPA filter is going to solve anything?
Ha! I totally agree with you. I never take any meds. Not even aspirin or ibuprofen. My immune system is very strong - what we should be doing is gut biome transplants - not hepa and hand sanitizer crap.
> To be honest, as human beings we've evolved over millions of years to be able to handle all of this stuff.
I don't think ever before in human history there have been as many particulates in the air as they are now (except when a volcano erupted, until the ash settled).
Additionally, "handling all this stuff" doesn't come for free: I don't have them on hand, but in the previous HN discussions about pollution there have been several papers linked on the effects of pollution on cognitive ability and health in general.
It is nobody's job to prove you wrong or right – it is a discussion, everybody is free to act as they please within the bounds of the law.
Based on the tone of your remarks it doesn't appear to me that you desire a discussion, rather a confrontation, so I will refrain from spending more time on this matter.
As an Aussie an air purifier saved me from the bushfire smoke and the subsequent dust that was relentless for months. I tried for about a week without one, and nearly ended in hospital multiple times. The air purifier made a safe little haven that was the only place I could breathe without discomfort. After 1.5 months I needed to change the filter as it began to spew out dust and smoke because it was all clogged up. (It was supposed to last 12 months in average conditions)
On the worst days when you couldn't see more than short distances, and the filter was running flat out, I found that a ceiling fan helped circulate the air so that 2 rooms (about 25 sqm) were regularly filtered and clean.
> As an Aussie an air purifier saved me from the bushfire smoke and the subsequent dust that was relentless for months.
It "saved you"? So you honestly thought you'd die if not for an air purifier?
Check out how much of a % of actual air move through your air purifier, unless you were truly scared for your life and were locked in a small closet with the purifier, I highly doubt this saved your life.
Being reductive, hyperbolic and dismissive is in no way being realistic.
I never stated I'd die. I never stated I was fearful. It saved me from being subject to outside conditions that caused significant effects in my lungs and subsequent cognitive ability (hn is not where I reveal health issues in depth). My environment was significantly cleaner than any commercial air con. The month leading up to my purchase, I was increasingly forced indoors, where air con made a tiny difference (but not much). In those early days the air stank and was just very hazy. People with healthy lungs had no problem during that period. I wore carbon n95 masks everywhere (they're classed p2 here) outside.
As to the machine, it was supposedly rated for up to 70sqm which I highly doubt, which is why I also used a ceiling fan. It also has an air quality readout to ensure I was not self deceiving. I know enough about fans, filtration and flow rates to not be deceived by marketing hyperbole.
These sort of devices pray on fears. I understand your knowledge of the space but you can put me in the same room minus the air filtration device, and I'd wager I would be fine. And I have an auto-immune disorder that wreaks havoc.
The thing that’s always fascinated me about fantasies of using lie detectors to protect consumers or citizens from liars is that the most convincing liars have lied to themselves first.
They fully believe their own bullshit. By any objective measure they aren’t lying. They’re dogmatic and steadfastly wrong. You know, idiots.
I work for a municipal government in an area where wildfires hit. During the emergency our city’s fire department gave city hall a molekule air filter to run in the office. Knowing our typical budget I can only assume these were sent to us free by molekule, and I did not notice any improvement in air quality, likely as the technology is more for voc’s than large air particles. Felt super shady to me
Once Again the FTC is proving to be useless in the one area where there should be actually providing consumer protections
Truth in Advertisement.
It is takes a Corrupt organization like the BBB is "expose" this bad company (meaning they simply did not pay the BBB enough money) then really the "core" of the problem is not with Molekule at all, but with a system that allows companies like Molekule to exist with little to no liability.
There should be a way to actually economically harm these companies that make these false claims, but instead it is up to the FTC to "regulate" their advertisements and clearly they (the FTC) do not actually do anything
If you’re looking for an air purifier, the Honeywell HPA300 ($200) is more than enough four our three bedroom house (despite the 465sq ft rating).
I want to be able to recommend the Bissell Air400, as it is quieter, has a built in PM 2.5 meter, auto adjusts to pollutants, and the filter works at least as well.
Unfortunately, it randomly turns itself off. This seems to be a design flaw, as many other people report the same thing. Also, it doesn’t seem to use a PID control loop to set fan speed, so the automatic speed controller sets itself far too low for our house. On the bright side, it is frequently on sale for 50%+ off, since it has a terrible reputation.
In practice, I leave the honeywell on, and use the bissell if there’s a problem (cooking smoke, allergies, wildfires, etc). In tandem, the two are able to lower PM 2.5 by over 90%, which is more than enough for fire season.
Edit: In hindsight, I would have bought the HPA 300, and a standalone sensor like the ones from purple air.
The BBB's NAD program didn't conduct these tests this because of ordinary people questioning the claims, it's doing it because another business demanded it (and paid for it).
When it comes to dealing with consumer complaints, the BBB's goal is to make its members look good and keep them out of civil lawsuits, regulatory investigations, and media reports. They want to minimize damage to paying members, and will do things like removing bad reviews from its websites (this personally happened to me).
Hey I am all for the industry voluntarily policing itself. Reading further into the article reveals that is action is warranted but not followed up on that NAD will refer the issue to the FTC who has the force of law behind it if they find in agreement with the assessment.
Consumer Reports also ended up with "avoid" rating for Molekule. Most of their reviews are behind the paywall, but they did publish a blog post and gave the company a platform to object
So annoyed I bought one of these based on testimonials from people I trust (podcasters with allergies). I haven’t seen a significant improvement over a regular HEPA filter.
At least it looks cool and has a HEPA filter at the base. It just doesn’t move that much air.
Be aware that according to the original Wirecutter tests on low mode it's significantly worse than doing nothing (filters ~6% of smoke particles vs ~15% that would have settled out if the fan inside wasn't disturbing the air), and it's significantly worse than $100 filters on high mode (filtering ~60% vs ~90% of smoke particles)
Podcasters are always paid for these product reviews. This is out of the playbook for all DTC companies. I'd recommend and support consumer reports. If you're not paying for a review, more than likely it's paid for by a company.
Even review sites that look like they are ad supported and independent are controlled by these D2C brands. Eg: Casper owns Sleepopolis.
Same here. I even did my research, but in retrospect it turns out a lot of their TrustPilot reviews are obvious fakes. I'm now trying to return it but I'm being ignored by customer service. Time to get a chargeback I guess. Any other avenues to get a refund?
What a bunch of charlatans. It must be pretty heartbreaking working for a company like this.
Edit: btw, the offgassing is bad enough that I wouldn't use this anywhere where people breathe the air. Who knows what this weird offgassing contains. Who ever heard of an air filter that does offgassing?
I’ve been seeing ads by Molekule and their cofounder attacking a review by Wirecutter, arguing Wirecutter lacked the technical adequacy to review the product
Yeah here’s the best idea: let’s fetishize more bespoke gadgets as a localized band aid and avoid discussing why people feel like they need these things in the first place.
Bravo, humanity. You’re so against collective sacrifice of extreme consumerism, you’ll consume yourself into environmental collapse.
"And the unit’s always-on blue glow—which indicates when its primary PECO filter is in operation—can disrupt sleep. (You can’t physically block the glow with a coin or tape, because doing so would block the Molekule’s delivery of air.)"
I'm not sure when this trend of putting blue lights on devices meant to be put in a bedroom started, or when it will end, but for me, this could be the best filter on the market (it's not) and I would still not purchase it based on the blue light.
I have a Winix Air Purifier I bought from Costco in my bedroom and while it has blue lights, they auto-shutoff in a darkened room. There is one blue indicator on the faceplate that stays on, but I remedied that with a piece of eletrical tape.
I’ve changed out the super high intensity blue LEDs on my computers for amber 30 MCD ones. I don’t sleep in the room with them, but if I have someone crash on my couch they don’t have search lights blinking at them all night.
They’re plenty bright to see in daylight, and personally I like the retro charm.
I always thought that the Internet with its „collective wisdom“ would make it more difficult to sell snake oil to unwary consumer, but now I think the opposite is true.
It’s crazy how many pseudo-scientific gadgets are hyped up by social media these days. Here in Germany we have startups like “Mitte” that wants to sell “personalized water” produced using smart purifiers and some rather sketchy marketing (https://mitte.co). They were really successful on Kickstarter (where else) but seem to be in financial trouble now. Maybe that’s not surprising since Germany (like many European countries) has really good drinking water, so apart from making the water softer by removing calcium carbonate (which is also only a problem in some regions) there’s really not much you can do to improve a basic product like water.
I wonder what’s next after air and water though...
I don't think it is fair to use kickstarter as a basis. Information is much easier to attain with the internet. The issue with kickstarter is people buy into the hype without anyone having an actual product to test. Most people know they are taking a risk and funding a potential idea rather than an actual product.
To me this looks almost criminal but I don't know advertising laws in the US. In my country you can't claim you are best in something without substantial evidence to back it up. Most just write "one of the best" to avoid having to prove it although that statement in itself has to have some evidence backing it.
In any case I have a general rule. If you need to advertise your product it sucks. If you have a quality product you will sell based on word of mouth of early adopters. The first example that comes to mind is Tesla which spends zero on marketing.
So for me, if I'm looking to buy a certain item and I see an ad for something in that category it will be the last manufacturer that I consider. This isn't always true but so far this rule of thumb has held up for me pretty well.
"Marketing, promotional and advertising costs are expensed as incurred and are included as an element of selling, general and administrative expense in the consolidated statement of operations. We incurred marketing, promotional and advertising costs of $70.0 million, $66.5 million and $48.0 million in the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively."
Well it's still comparatively low. I've yet to see a Tesla ad on TV, news papers or billboards and they still sell like hot cakes in my country.
If we count the full 70 million for tesla spend in marketing against an annual average of about 6 billion for Vw, Tesla comes out at $140/car and Vw comes out at $600/car or about 4 times as much pr car.
The main point I was trying to make was that for me ads are a negative towards a brand not a positive as I will suspect the quality of the product if they have to advertise.
USA has a broad federal law prohibiting "unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce." (Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC Act) (15 USC §45))
In the US you can basically lie about anything and it's fine. If it's a relative statement, no one can disprove it. If it's an absolute statement, then it's on the consumer to know that it was supposed to be hyperbole or whatever and not an actual statement of fact.
Even numerical specifications can be blatantly fraudulent and it's still fine - eg "6.0 horsepower shop vacuum". A standard wall outlet cannot supply more than 2HP, but manufacturers have devised this outlandish "test procedure" that produces the bogus number. Still, zero prior restraint. The best enforcement we can hope for is a class action lawsuit in a decade where everyone will get a coupon for five dollars off a new shop vac, and the industry will move on to a new fraudulent measure.
They had to stop putting the "price after savings" on their web pages in Norway long time ago, it just wasn't compatible with our laws. They also had to pay back money to buyers due to having the combined power of the motors on their web page and not what the battery actually could put out.
I wouldn't count a product web page advertisement but I guess definitions vary.
In any case they spend close to nothing if anything on regular ads and sell a ton of cars (at least here in Norway).
And one of Tesla's core marketing claims - that their vehicles are equipped with 'the hardware needed for full self driving capability' certainly isn't any more honest than Molekule's claims about the efficacy of their filters.
I somehow missed that this air filter exists, but taking an existing, boring product category (air filters, mattresses, razors, toothbrushes, edit: cigarettes), giving it a design makeover, and following through with marketing on social media and podcasts, seems to be a path straight to the wallets of millennials.
Make one yourself one with a box fan by taping a cheap hepa filter from home depot taped to the back. It will outperform everything in this market, only it will look a little ugly.
> "Developed over two decades by research scientists, PECO is an innovative technology that utilizes free radicals—the same radicals used to destroy cancer cells—to break down pollutants at a molecular level, including VOCs, bacteria, mold, viruses, and allergens. By using nanotechnology, PECO is able to destroy pollutants 1000 times smaller than what traditional HEPA technology was designed to trap."
Basically they may be using "PECO" filters, but there's no guarantee a little fan in a cylinder blowing though a PECO filter in the corner of your room will actually significantly clean the air. And they hint that it cures cancer!
It's not just Molekule, consumer air quality products in general are full of dubious junk.
This study [0] fairly comprehensively compared the Foobot air quality monitor to a research-grade sensor setup and found that it severely underestimated the temperature (one of the easiest things to get right in my experience), underestimated tVOC, had low correlation on its CO2 output (i.e. the CO2 output was pure garbage) and overestimated PM2.5.
I wish this was unique to Foobot.
The problem seems to be that these companies take a bunch of cheap, low-quality sensors (e.g. using inferred CO2 rather than an NDIR sensor or saving cost by not properly calibrating the sensors), put them in a premium-looking (and priced) package and market them as if they were premium products, because consumers won't know any better.
The worst part is that high-quality sensors really aren't that expensive. A bundle of Sensirion tVOC, CO2, RH/T and particulate sensors can be had for under $200 and with proper calibration they work great. Hook them to an ESP32 or something and put them in a case and you've basically got a Foobot.
While I am not defending Molekule, both the BBB and Consumer Reports act based upon money generated from competitive companies. They are not unbiased, and have found to be biased on multiple occasions.
Instagram is full of this bullshit. I routinely get dog food ads that advertise that their dog food has "vegetables" in it. Why the fuck would a carnivore need "vegetables"?
134 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 203 ms ] threadEdited to add: I have had extensive interaction with the BBB regarding real, genuine product safety issues, which encompassed misleading advertising and due to the indifference of the BBB, led to an FTC report and more.
Information on NAD here: https://bbbprograms.org/programs/nad/nad-contact-us
Seems like we have a mini-theranos on our hands. To make claims in your sales material about you PECO technology filtering VOCs then claim you weren't talking about the product itself is beyond scummy.
Molekule's marketing claims have been debunked from the start. Their massive social media advertising campaigns have fed a lot of misinformation to a lot of people since their launch. It's amazing how many people I know who confidently recommend Molekule air filters as superior technology based on nothing more than having seen their Instagram ads. Molekule has secured media puff pieces from several influential media outlets as well as several print publications, none of whom seem to have done the slightest amount of testing to verify their claims.
Both Wirecutter and Consumer Reports actually tested the Molekule and found the performance to be abysmal. Wirecutter went so far as to declare it the worst air purifier they've ever tested: https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-air-purifier/#molekul...
The product just plain does not work, and their marketing material appears to be pure lies. I hope they see some consequences for this.
Perhaps the worst part is that the underlying PECO technology is potentially promising as an adjunct to a traditional HEPA filter. Instead, the Molekule company has gone all-in in their anti-HEPA marketing strategy, creating a false dichotomy for marketing hype instead of trying to create an evolution of the standard HEPA filter.
This has always been a fertile area for scams, like the air filter that caused the demise of the Sharper Image, once it was established that it caused dangerous ozone levels.
I live in a city block with nut trees and a dog. The pollen, dander and pollen+diesel soot from the main road sucks and creates a mess. Running one of these machines in our front room makes a noticeable difference during peak pollen and shedding seasons.
Here's what it shows in my bedroom:
the 211+ performed the best on wirecutter's own tests, but wasn't the top recommendation for what seemed like arbitrary reasons. you change the filter twice a year for about $100 in yearly costs.
i hvae some air leakage around doors and windows (old building), but it's not enough to overwhelm the 211+ (as noted by my air quality sensor). in fact, i'm ok with some external air exchange, because CO2 levels can otherwise get unacceptably high overnight.
good to hear it's made such a difference for you. i've never considered getting an air purifier, but living in a city, maybe i should.
i think the main (dubious) issue before was that they doubted the longevity of the high air purification levels they saw and so didn't want to give it a recommendation at the time.
I got a CO2 sensor recently, and I'm surprised how much of a difference small changes can make. One of my rooms was hitting 1600-1800ppm overnight (which as I understand it is not a problem per se but not great) with the door open about 2in/5cm - leaving the internal door open an extra 6in/15cm or so means it rarely goes above about 700ppm (generally hovers around 600).
I'm also surprised at how quickly it'll go up - that same room will go from 800ppm to 1600ppm with the door shut in well under an hour.
[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HEPA [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet_germicidal_irradia...
> "Sterilization" is often misquoted as being achievable. While it is theoretically possible in a controlled environment, it is very difficult to prove and the term "disinfection" is generally used by companies offering this service as to avoid legal reprimand. Specialist companies will often advertise a certain log reduction, e.g., 6-log reduction or 99.9999% effective, instead of sterilization.
A consumer-grade HEPA air purifier (DIY or < $200 on Amazon) against a wall in your bedroom will commonly cut PM 2.5 concentrations by 10x in a few hours if you keep your windows and doors closed.
Source: I own a PM 2.5 counter and have operated air purifiers in China smog and California wildfires. There's also plenty of evidence out there.
https://www.shinola.com/power-supply-5-port-usb.html - $185 power supply
My gf ordered a few things that took AGES to arrive (probably because its shipping straight from China), with 0 customer support (primarily because it's likely run by a single person that couldn't care less about the actual customer who probably subscribes to /r/entrepreneur or /r/juststart). And the final product was as you put it, garbage.
Probably they waited until they had enough orders to fill a container (or a single pallet in someone else's container!) to save money.
https://www.westfield.com/oakridge/stores/all-stores/as-seen...
If you see something on TV, then overhear people talking about it on the street, then see it on FB, you're much more likely to buy it.
Even though each signal is weak and unreliable (and even together they still probably don't mean much) the connection in your brain is more robust.
There’s complete garbage like supplements on there. Just do your research and make sure the brand has a decent refund policy.
Reminds me of an overpriced tech company that claim security but continuously gets their devices hacked.
Is this any different than people buying any luxury product based on marketing? Look at any designer clothing item. It's all based on (close to 100%) what people feel as a result of marketing and branding. The actual product sure is sometimes higher quality and better but not to the extent that it costs.
Take a women's pocketbook for $5000 (Gucci). It's a pocketbook. Woman buys it because of marketing and image. Same here I say (Tesla is another example and note that Bill Gates still buys Porsche because that was the car in the era he was raised in).
OK, but if the $5,000 pocketbook secretly incinerated anything you put in it, you'd probably get some frustrated customers.
A Gucci pocketbook may be overpriced, but you're at least getting something that works.
is it weird that i kind of want to build this?
In many cases, people pay the extra because, yes, it's only fifty percent better and costs ten times as much, but there are no products that are fifty percent better and only cost fifty percent more. If you want fifty percent better, you will have to pay ten times as much. If you can afford it and you don't want the lesser quality product, this is realistically your only option.
Price often doesn't scale linearly. Neither do, say, academic grades. The difference between an A and a B is often more work than the difference between a B and a C.
Still, that's something entirely different than straight up lying about the objective qualities of your product. Especially medically-relevant ones.
In all seriousness, for that coronavirus mention, I'd like to see someone jailed.
It's just a pet peeve of mine that dressing well is often mocked as frivolous. It often has a gendered component to it, like women are silly creatures.
I knew a professional couple that both worked at the same place in different departments. She talked about going shopping and both of them spending hundreds of dollars on office clothes over the weekend.
The following Monday, she got teased at work for wearing a new outfit. No one said one word to her husband about his new office attire, though he had spent at least as much as her.
My annoyance about how socially acceptable it is to act like nice clothes are merely stupid status symbols is in no way intended to justify deceptive marketing, especially for medical stuff.
People paying for a Gucci know what they're getting: a pocketbook that conveys a particular fashion, status, and personal brand. People buying Molekule air filters don't know what they're getting.
If Mlekule air filters could be picked up at $5 at your local 7-11, this would still be predatory false advertising. The price doesn't matter.
###
Molekule claimed at the time that its “scientifically-proven nanotechnology outperforms HEPA filters in every category of pollutant.”
Our tests proved otherwise. The Molekule turned in the worst performance on particulates of any purifier, of any size, of any price, that we have tested in the seven years that we have been producing this guide.
Not long after we published our findings, that statement was removed from the Molekule website.
Guide author Tim Heffernan asked Molekule CEO Dilip Goswami why. He answered, “the point about ‘in all categories’ is that we see a device that outperforms across all of the categories. Right? So we’re not trying to say that individually, on any particular metric, we would be number one. Right? What we’re saying is, when you look across all the categories, we outperform HEPA. Right? And that’s what we’re attempting to convey with that. And so—it’s fair to say that we needed to re-examine some of the language to make sure that it’s saying what we’re intending to say.”
###
This seems like it rises to the level of criminally false?
If you are immuno-compromised or otherwise in poor health, then maybe these are worth something, but I highly doubt it. The volume of air they "purify" versus a given room is nothing.
Imagine visualizing the air around you in a room that you are breathing, do you think a small device in the corner with a HEPA filter is going to solve anything?
It's all smoke and mirrors.
I don't think ever before in human history there have been as many particulates in the air as they are now (except when a volcano erupted, until the ash settled).
Additionally, "handling all this stuff" doesn't come for free: I don't have them on hand, but in the previous HN discussions about pollution there have been several papers linked on the effects of pollution on cognitive ability and health in general.
How is your HEPA filter in the corner going to handle that? Not well, at all.
I have a comment from someone saying they were saved from brush fire smoke, yet no indication they'd have been harmed without the air purifier.
This is exactly what the article is talking about, wanting to believe in something that is scientifically unproven.
Based on the tone of your remarks it doesn't appear to me that you desire a discussion, rather a confrontation, so I will refrain from spending more time on this matter.
You are free to choose what you believe :)
Untrue, I actually own this device.
As an Aussie an air purifier saved me from the bushfire smoke and the subsequent dust that was relentless for months. I tried for about a week without one, and nearly ended in hospital multiple times. The air purifier made a safe little haven that was the only place I could breathe without discomfort. After 1.5 months I needed to change the filter as it began to spew out dust and smoke because it was all clogged up. (It was supposed to last 12 months in average conditions)
On the worst days when you couldn't see more than short distances, and the filter was running flat out, I found that a ceiling fan helped circulate the air so that 2 rooms (about 25 sqm) were regularly filtered and clean.
It "saved you"? So you honestly thought you'd die if not for an air purifier?
Check out how much of a % of actual air move through your air purifier, unless you were truly scared for your life and were locked in a small closet with the purifier, I highly doubt this saved your life.
I'm not being hyperbolic, I'm being realistic.
I never stated I'd die. I never stated I was fearful. It saved me from being subject to outside conditions that caused significant effects in my lungs and subsequent cognitive ability (hn is not where I reveal health issues in depth). My environment was significantly cleaner than any commercial air con. The month leading up to my purchase, I was increasingly forced indoors, where air con made a tiny difference (but not much). In those early days the air stank and was just very hazy. People with healthy lungs had no problem during that period. I wore carbon n95 masks everywhere (they're classed p2 here) outside.
As to the machine, it was supposedly rated for up to 70sqm which I highly doubt, which is why I also used a ceiling fan. It also has an air quality readout to ensure I was not self deceiving. I know enough about fans, filtration and flow rates to not be deceived by marketing hyperbole.
Then why the comment that it "saved you"?
These sort of devices pray on fears. I understand your knowledge of the space but you can put me in the same room minus the air filtration device, and I'd wager I would be fine. And I have an auto-immune disorder that wreaks havoc.
They fully believe their own bullshit. By any objective measure they aren’t lying. They’re dogmatic and steadfastly wrong. You know, idiots.
Truth in Advertisement.
It is takes a Corrupt organization like the BBB is "expose" this bad company (meaning they simply did not pay the BBB enough money) then really the "core" of the problem is not with Molekule at all, but with a system that allows companies like Molekule to exist with little to no liability.
There should be a way to actually economically harm these companies that make these false claims, but instead it is up to the FTC to "regulate" their advertisements and clearly they (the FTC) do not actually do anything
I want to be able to recommend the Bissell Air400, as it is quieter, has a built in PM 2.5 meter, auto adjusts to pollutants, and the filter works at least as well.
Unfortunately, it randomly turns itself off. This seems to be a design flaw, as many other people report the same thing. Also, it doesn’t seem to use a PID control loop to set fan speed, so the automatic speed controller sets itself far too low for our house. On the bright side, it is frequently on sale for 50%+ off, since it has a terrible reputation.
In practice, I leave the honeywell on, and use the bissell if there’s a problem (cooking smoke, allergies, wildfires, etc). In tandem, the two are able to lower PM 2.5 by over 90%, which is more than enough for fire season.
Edit: In hindsight, I would have bought the HPA 300, and a standalone sensor like the ones from purple air.
When it comes to dealing with consumer complaints, the BBB's goal is to make its members look good and keep them out of civil lawsuits, regulatory investigations, and media reports. They want to minimize damage to paying members, and will do things like removing bad reviews from its websites (this personally happened to me).
If you have some time check out the CNN report into the BBB (especially "These companies got A+ ratings?"): https://money.cnn.com/news/companies/bbb-ratings/
https://www.consumerreports.org/air-purifiers/molekule-air-p...
They still ended up including Molekule in their list of 3 worst https://www.consumerreports.org/air-purifiers/best-air-purif...
At least it looks cool and has a HEPA filter at the base. It just doesn’t move that much air.
Even review sites that look like they are ad supported and independent are controlled by these D2C brands. Eg: Casper owns Sleepopolis.
https://www.vox.com/2017/9/23/13153814/casper-sleepopolis-la...
What a bunch of charlatans. It must be pretty heartbreaking working for a company like this.
https://www.trustpilot.com/review/www.molekule.com
Edit: btw, the offgassing is bad enough that I wouldn't use this anywhere where people breathe the air. Who knows what this weird offgassing contains. Who ever heard of an air filter that does offgassing?
https://youtube.com/watch?v=sAuZok410V4
I used these for years before realizing I had fallen for their shuck and jive.
Backstory: https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/big-berkey-water-filter-sy...
I would love if this led to some serious legal consequences. This is creating danger to the public.
Bravo, humanity. You’re so against collective sacrifice of extreme consumerism, you’ll consume yourself into environmental collapse.
Dumbest species on the planet.
I'm not sure when this trend of putting blue lights on devices meant to be put in a bedroom started, or when it will end, but for me, this could be the best filter on the market (it's not) and I would still not purchase it based on the blue light.
I have a Winix Air Purifier I bought from Costco in my bedroom and while it has blue lights, they auto-shutoff in a darkened room. There is one blue indicator on the faceplate that stays on, but I remedied that with a piece of eletrical tape.
Running them so obnoxiously bright as well. I once bought a USB plug I could almost read by, it was ridiculous.
They’re plenty bright to see in daylight, and personally I like the retro charm.
It’s crazy how many pseudo-scientific gadgets are hyped up by social media these days. Here in Germany we have startups like “Mitte” that wants to sell “personalized water” produced using smart purifiers and some rather sketchy marketing (https://mitte.co). They were really successful on Kickstarter (where else) but seem to be in financial trouble now. Maybe that’s not surprising since Germany (like many European countries) has really good drinking water, so apart from making the water softer by removing calcium carbonate (which is also only a problem in some regions) there’s really not much you can do to improve a basic product like water.
I wonder what’s next after air and water though...
Check out the Fyre Festival documentaries
In any case I have a general rule. If you need to advertise your product it sucks. If you have a quality product you will sell based on word of mouth of early adopters. The first example that comes to mind is Tesla which spends zero on marketing.
So for me, if I'm looking to buy a certain item and I see an ad for something in that category it will be the last manufacturer that I consider. This isn't always true but so far this rule of thumb has held up for me pretty well.
https://ir.tesla.com/node/19496/html
"Marketing, promotional and advertising costs are expensed as incurred and are included as an element of selling, general and administrative expense in the consolidated statement of operations. We incurred marketing, promotional and advertising costs of $70.0 million, $66.5 million and $48.0 million in the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively."
I suspect most of this cost is banners and such in their stores and video production for their youtube channel. Maybe they also count reveal event.
In any case it pales in comparison to let's say Wv who spends between 5 and 6 billion each year [1].
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/286537/volkswagen-advert...
If we count the full 70 million for tesla spend in marketing against an annual average of about 6 billion for Vw, Tesla comes out at $140/car and Vw comes out at $600/car or about 4 times as much pr car.
The main point I was trying to make was that for me ads are a negative towards a brand not a positive as I will suspect the quality of the product if they have to advertise.
This appears to be in violation
Even numerical specifications can be blatantly fraudulent and it's still fine - eg "6.0 horsepower shop vacuum". A standard wall outlet cannot supply more than 2HP, but manufacturers have devised this outlandish "test procedure" that produces the bogus number. Still, zero prior restraint. The best enforcement we can hope for is a class action lawsuit in a decade where everyone will get a coupon for five dollars off a new shop vac, and the industry will move on to a new fraudulent measure.
I wouldn't count a product web page advertisement but I guess definitions vary.
In any case they spend close to nothing if anything on regular ads and sell a ton of cars (at least here in Norway).
They're not ultra expensive but they're not super cheap either, and it feels a bit like a first world problem.
The rest depends on your sensitivity to decreases in air quality. Regularly changing a filter in your central AC/heating system is probably enough.
(Source: https://molekule.com/technology )
> "Developed over two decades by research scientists, PECO is an innovative technology that utilizes free radicals—the same radicals used to destroy cancer cells—to break down pollutants at a molecular level, including VOCs, bacteria, mold, viruses, and allergens. By using nanotechnology, PECO is able to destroy pollutants 1000 times smaller than what traditional HEPA technology was designed to trap."
Basically they may be using "PECO" filters, but there's no guarantee a little fan in a cylinder blowing though a PECO filter in the corner of your room will actually significantly clean the air. And they hint that it cures cancer!
This study [0] fairly comprehensively compared the Foobot air quality monitor to a research-grade sensor setup and found that it severely underestimated the temperature (one of the easiest things to get right in my experience), underestimated tVOC, had low correlation on its CO2 output (i.e. the CO2 output was pure garbage) and overestimated PM2.5.
I wish this was unique to Foobot.
The problem seems to be that these companies take a bunch of cheap, low-quality sensors (e.g. using inferred CO2 rather than an NDIR sensor or saving cost by not properly calibrating the sensors), put them in a premium-looking (and priced) package and market them as if they were premium products, because consumers won't know any better.
The worst part is that high-quality sensors really aren't that expensive. A bundle of Sensirion tVOC, CO2, RH/T and particulate sensors can be had for under $200 and with proper calibration they work great. Hook them to an ESP32 or something and put them in a case and you've basically got a Foobot.
[0]: https://www.j-sens-sens-syst.net/7/373/2018/