Are Ionized Water Spray Bottles Really Effective for Cleaning?

  • Thread starter Thread starter drpizza
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Spray Water
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the effectiveness of ionized water spray bottles for cleaning, specifically examining the claims made by manufacturers regarding their ability to transform tap water into a superior cleaning agent through ionization. The scope includes skepticism about the scientific validity of these claims and the implications for their use in professional settings.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants describe the process by which ionized water is claimed to be produced, including the use of electrical charges and ion exchange membranes, suggesting it creates a cleaning agent that attracts dirt and bacteria.
  • Others argue against the claims, stating that the concept of "nano-bubbles" in water is scientifically unfounded and that increasing oxygen content without chemical alteration is not feasible.
  • A participant expresses a need for resources to demonstrate the lack of validity in the claims, indicating a desire to challenge the financial investment in these products within their workplace.
  • Concerns are raised about the lack of scientific backing for the manufacturers' claims, including the absence of publication in reputable journals and the inability to achieve repeatable results in studies.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the validity of the claims made by manufacturers of ionized water spray bottles, with some expressing skepticism and others defending the potential effectiveness based on the described processes. No consensus is reached regarding the efficacy of these products.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of empirical evidence supporting the claims made by manufacturers, as well as the dependence on specific definitions of terms like "ionized water" and "nano-bubbles." The discussion does not resolve the scientific validity of the claims or the effectiveness of the products.

drpizza
Messages
286
Reaction score
0
"Ionized water spray bottles"

I'm not sure if anyone has seen these products. But, there are several different products out there - you put plain tap water into a spray bottle that has a battery & some "fancy looking" electronic equipment inside, include little LED lights that apparently flash for dramatic effect so the user knows that something amazing is happening.

The claims:
Enter the Activeion ionator – it’s a cleaning product that transforms humble tap water into a super-powered, germ-destroying, dirt-removing dynamo – with absolutely no chemicals. That’s good news for your family, your pets and the environment.
How does a unit use plain tap water and create a powerful cleaning agent? It converts tap water into ionized water. Ionized water is a powerful cleaning product that has been used for a long time in four-star restaurants, food processing plants, and large hotels. The ionater products have simply been scaled down for domestic and semi-industrial use. They use a water cell to apply a slight electrical charge to tap water. The charged water then passes through an ion exchange membrane which creates an oxygen-rich mix of positive and negative nano-bubbles. That ionized water is capable of attracting dirt and bacteria and when sprayed carries a low-level electric field to the surface where the germs may be living. The manufacturer says this low-level electric field ruptures and kills germs which can then be easily wiped away – without leaving any chemical residue.

Am I being too skeptical in not believing a bit of this? Just plain water is often sufficient for cleaning surfaces. Is there anything believable about these claims that turns plain water into something better than plain water using... water as an ingredient?
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
Just ignore those claims, they are wrong. There are no "nano-bubbles" in water, and you cannot increase the fraction of oxygen without adding oxygen (or removing hydrogen, which is tricky). There is no point in additional oxygen anyway.

Ion exchangers have a real effect, but they remove one type of ions and replace them with another type of ions - they change the chemical structure.
 
I should probably give the motivation for my question - how to I explain to a department where I work that the 1000's of dollars they're spending on these spray bottles is completely wasted - the claims are bogus. But, I never assume I know everything - I could be wrong (shhhh, don't tell my wife; as far as she knows, I'm never wrong), but I'd love to find a resource that demonstrates that these claims are bogus, or some sort of specific factual argument that really demonstrates it.
 
- The manufacturer fails to give a reasonable scientific explanation for the claims.
- The manufacturer was not able to publish those claims in a reasonable journal, or patent them
- Actually, no manufacturer was able to get repeatable results for similar claims.

There are too many quacks out there to test every possible product, but there are many studies of similar claims, all with a negative result.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
21K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
43
Views
21K
Replies
2
Views
28K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
9K
Replies
6
Views
2K