Claims checked

Myth vs fact

Common purifier claims checked against BIS, WHO, EN 1822 and AHAM standards or against the underlying physics — each with a stated verdict, the grain of truth it rests on, and an explicit note on what the page does not establish.

Note

On method.Most claims in this category do not need an experiment — they are settled by a published limit, a test standard, or the physics of how a filter or a membrane works. Where that is what we did, the page says so. “Checked by our own testing” appears only where we have actually measured something, and it links to the protocol in the Purifier Lab so you can see whether that test has been run yet.

Purifier marketing in India runs on claims that are technically true and materially misleading. A TDS meter really does show a high number. A HEPA filter really is rated at 0.3 microns. Ozone really does occur naturally. Each of those facts is then attached to a conclusion it does not support, and the conclusion is what sells the product.

That structure is what makes these claims hard to argue with in a showroom, and it is why every page here is built the same way: state the claim as people state it, give the verdict, show the reasoning step by step, and then find the true thing underneath.

The last part matters more than it looks. Somebody repeating 'HEPA can't catch anything below 0.3 microns' has read a real specification and drawn a wrong inference from it. Telling them the number is fake would be false; telling them it is a minimum rather than a cutoff is both true and useful.

Claims checked

Frequently asked questions

How do you decide whether a claim is true?

Each page states its method: checked against a published standard, settled by the underlying physics, checked against published research, or checked by our own testing. Most claims in this category can be settled by reasoning from published facts, and where that is what we did, we say so rather than implying we ran an experiment.

Why don't you use ClaimReview structured data?

Because it is restricted to fact-checking organisations meeting Google's eligibility criteria, and a commercial publisher emitting it is misrepresenting its own status. These pages use Question/Answer markup instead, which is accurate and which the AI surfaces parse just as readily.

Why does every page have a 'what is true in the claim' section?

Because every durable myth has a grain of truth — that is why it survives. A page that treats a widely-held belief as simply stupid teaches nobody anything and reads as contempt. Finding the real fact underneath a wrong conclusion is usually the most useful thing on the page.

What is the most damaging purifier myth in India?

That a TDS meter tells you whether water is safe. It is the basis of most Indian purifier sales, and it is wrong in a specific and consequential way: arsenic, lead and every pathogen are invisible to the instrument. Households buy RO on the strength of it and remain exposed to things RO may or may not address.

Rulings describe the general case and each page states its own limits. If you can show a ruling is wrong, send the evidence — corrections are published with a dated note rather than made silently. Last reviewed 2026-08-08.

Not sure what you actually need? Ask us before you spend.

Tell us your city, your water source and your budget. For homes we will recommend the right technology — including telling you when a ₹3,000 purifier is genuinely enough. For offices, societies and factories, our team will size a system against your water report and send a specification-backed quotation.

Or email betterworkindia@gmail.com — attach a water analysis report and we can quote faster.