Click here for more detailed table Beating the dust problem is not just a matter of having a powerful vacuum cleaner, but of having one that is both adaptable and easy to handle around the home. Although a manual carpet sweeper may be a suitable alternative for removing surface dust, most homes will also need a larger, electric machine. To maximise efficiency and reduce energy use, choose a model with good suction power and an effective filter. Buy our detailed Ethical Research Reports. See the findings behind companies’ ethical ratings, as featured in The Good Shopping Guide. Several different product sectors available covering hundreds of consumer brands. Vacuum cleaners are rated by manufacturers in terms of their wattage, a measure that only reveals the size of the motor. As the average vacuum cleaner wastes most of the electricity it uses in heat and noise, the power rating is not necessarily a helpful indication of its effectiveness. Only about a quarter of the power output of a vacuum cleaner is actual suction.

Electrolux makes a Smart Vac range with 450W of suction from 1,500W input, and this is high compared to most. Miele makes a model called Naturell with an energy-saving 800W motor. Manufacturers might be willing to disclose the suction power data upon request, but this information is not usually found on the label. There are plans to encourage producers to make more efficient machines by introducing voluntary labelling schemes. One organisation working on this is the Group for Efficient Appliances, a forum of representatives from national energy agencies and European governments. Most EU member states are involved, but in previous years the UK has not put forward a representative. Dyson’s bag-free machines arguably have less impact on the environment because they do not require paper and other resources for this consumable part, but there is disagreement about whether or not a collection bag interferes with the efficiency of the suction. Dyson asserts that because its machines have no bag their efficiency is constant.

Machines with bags do tend to drop in efficiency as the bag fills, reducing the amount of dust that is picked up. However, manufacturers such as Miele claim that this deficiency is outweighed by the advantages of a bag, which acts as an extra filter for dust particles and also prolongs the life of the motor. Some companies make vacuum cleaners with ‘high efficiency filters’ to minimise the re-emission of dust. These include Medivac (www.medivac.co.uk), a high scorer in the Ethical Company Organisation’s research, whose products are specially designed to offer health benefits to people with dust allergies and asthma. Many high efficiency cleaners have been approved by the British Allergy Foundation (BAF), who operate a system of inspection that includes doubleblind testing, ensuring the testers have no idea which product belongs to which manufacturer. It is often possible to buy a reconditioned machine second-hand, or to repair a broken one, rather than investing in a brand new cleaner.

Hand-held brushes are more efficient than they might appear, and simply require a little elbow grease, although they may not be suitable for households whose occupants suffer from dust allergies. Finally, there are always old-style carpet sweepers, which are manual, non-electric and work a treat. Check the ratings on the table below for the most ethical types of vacuum cleaner available, then search www.gooshing.co.uk for the best prices. interfilter vacuum cleaner bagsIt monitors 350 shops to find the cheapest place to buy your chosen brand.volta dolphin vacuum cleaner We have created ethical rankings for the following brands, based on the activities of the company group (see above tables): Medivac, Miele, Rowenta, Morphy Richards, Vax, AEG, Electrolux, Hoover, Nilfisk, Panasonic, Dyson, Philips, Hitachieurolab robot vacuum cleaner

Did you find this research helpful? Please consider donating, and keep this website free.Donation Amount: (Currency: GBP)Medivac Compact Vacuum Cleaner for Allergies "Lots of vacuum cleaners say they're good for allergies but the Medivac is the only one specifically made for households where there is asthma, eczema or dust allergies. If you or someone in the family has any of these problems you sign a form so you can buy the Medivac VAT-free. (You don't need a doctor's note). Our Medivac has lasted 10 years so far and is still very efficient. When it finally gives up the ghost we shall DEFINITELY get another" " All of my family are asthmatic and use of your cleaner has significantly reduced our symptoms" The vacuum cleaner doctors recommend for Asthma and Allergies clears and retains 99.3% of particles at 0.3 microns tough all steel construction The Compact is a smaller lightweight version of the Medivac Microfilter and is ideal for flats, smaller homes or for use on the upper floors.

The combined filtration of two filters in the Compact - the Tritex filter and the Microtex filter - retains 99.3% of particles as tiny as 0.3 microns. Self-sealing triple wall fleece dustbags add a third stage of filtration. Like the professional Medivac Microfilter model, the Compact has been classified as a Medical Device and is available free of VAT in the UK and all countries in the EU for adults and children who have a qualifying medical condition such as asthma, eczema or rhinitis. dust and mite allergen is retained and will not blow out during the lifetime of the machine no exposure to harmful allergens when emptying the machine powerful 580w motor is exceptionally quiet in use A' rate energy efficient supplied with a full range of tools further optional accessories available to complete any cleaning taskE ffective allergen avoidance carried out for a sufficiently long period may improve asthma control in sensitized individuals. Complete avoidance of dog allergens is all but impossible in areas with a high proportion of pet ownership, because the exposure may occur not only in homes with dogs, but also in homes without dogs and in public places (1, 2).

However, very high exposure to Can f 1 in dog-allergic asthmatics who keep dogs in their homes may be an important determinant of the severity of their asthma, and every effort should be made to reduce this exposure. Intensive vacuum cleaning may remove dust from carpets, reducing the overall size of the allergen reservoir. However, vacuum cleaners with inadequate bags and exhaust filtration may actually produce an aerosol of allergen, and vacuuming with such cleaners may induce acute asthma in allergic patients. The benefits of intensive vacuum cleaning to allergic patients have never been conclusively established.The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of different types of vacuum cleaners in preventing the leakage of Can f 1 into the air. Thirteen domestic vacuum cleaners were tested. These comprised the following:seven new vacuum cleaners with double-thickness bags and integral high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters (Miele S444I, Nilfisk GM210, Nilfisk Allergy Vac, Electrolux Excellio, Electrolux Airstream, AEG Vampyr, and Medivac)one new cyclone vacuum cleaner with HEPA filter (Dyson Absolute Plus)five previously used household vacuum cleaners without integral HEPA filters.

For testing vacuum cleaners for leakage of dog allergen, we used methodology similar to that found to be very effective in testing the effect of vacuum cleaners on the concentration and particle size distribution of airborne cat allergen ( 3). Experiments were performed in a clean, airtight, experimental chamber with a volume of 8.25m3. For each test cycle, the walls of the chamber were cleaned with alcohol wipes. The air in the chamber was then cleaned for 30 min with a HEPA filtration unit, after which a baseline air sample was collected for 30 min with the high-volume pump (60 l/min high-volume dust samplers – Rotheroe-Mitchell, Greenford, UK). Each vacuum cleaner was loaded with dust containing 20 mg of Can f 1 outside the chamber, and then placed inside, switched on, and left running for 30 min. Air was sampled at the same time as described above. The test cycle was repeated for each vacuum cleaner in turn.The testing was repeated with the seven new vacuum cleaners with double-thickness bags and integral HEPA filters when they were 6 and 18 months old, during which time they had been in regular domestic use in homes.

Maintenance of the machines, such as changing the filters, was the responsibility of the users, all of whom were provided with spare bags and filters. Each machine was fitted with a new bag, but the HEPA filter was not changed for the repeat testing at 6 and 18 months. This was done to minimize the effect of variability in allergen content of the bag.After air sampling, each filter was cut into four pieces, and then placed into a syringe with 1 ml of 1% bovine serum albumin in phosphate-buffered saline with 0.1% Tween 20 (BSA PBS-T). After overnight extraction at 4°C, the extraction liquid was aspirated backward and forward several times through a three-way stop lock into a second syringe, and then transferred into a test tube and centrifuged at 3000 rpm for 30 min at 4°C. The supernatant was stored at −20°C.A monoclonal/polyclonal antibody ELISA, as previously described ( 2), was used to measure Can f 1. The samples were assayed neat and at two-, and fourfold dilutions. For concentrations lying off the linear portion of the standard curve, the assays were repeated at an appropriate dilution.

The assay was quantitated with doubling dilutions of dog allergen standard (UVA 94/02) from 500 IU/ml to 1 IU/ml Can f 1. The UVA 94/02 (10 000 IU Can f 1/ml) was substandardized against the WHO/IUIS International Reference Preparation of dog hair and dander (NIBSC 84/685), which contains 100 000 IU/ml Can f 1. One international unit is approximately 1 ng Can f 1 protein, and this value was used to calculate the results.Baseline levels of airborne Can f 1 in the experimental room between individual tests were all below the limit of detection (<0.8 ng Can f 1/m3). Airborne Can f 1 levels were below the detection limit for all eight new vacuum cleaners (seven with integral HEPA filters; one cyclone) and two out of five old vacuum cleaners. However, three old vacuum cleaners leaked Can f 1 (recorded levels 2.5, 1.8, and 1.3 ng Can f 1/m3). After 6 months of domestic use, none of the eight previously new vacuum cleaners were found to leak detectable levels of Can f 1. However, after 18 months of regular domestic use, one did leak Can f 1 (Electrolux Airstream), despite having the vacuum cleaner bag replaced (recorded level of airborne Can f 1 1.8 ng/m3).