Does a claim about a newly named variant rely on direct evidence or an extrapolation?
Last reviewed: .
Does a claim about a newly named variant rely on direct evidence or an extrapolation?
The company names the viruses tested, and a newly named variant that is not on that list was not among them.
The core science is peer-reviewed and published: Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, co-authored by 31 scientists from 18 research institutions. The company names the organisms that were tested. On the Validation page the viruses are SARS-CoV-2, human coronavirus 229E, Coxsackievirus B6, bovine coronavirus, pseudo-type SARS-CoV-2, influenza A H3N2 and Phi6 bacteriophage; the bacteria are Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterococcus faecalis; the fungi are Aspergillus fumigatus, Aspergillus brasiliensis, Aspergillus niger and Candida albicans. Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020, tested a nonwoven filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Tampere University, Department of Virology, report dated 1 April 2021, tested a treated material against human coronavirus 229E and Coxsackievirus B6. The filter is intended to destroy the viruses, bacteria and fungal spores it captures. It destroys them on direct contact with the positive electric charge, by physical means, and only while the organism is captured by the positive electric charge. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” The test article, the organism, the method, the control, the conditions, the contact time, the sample and the endpoint identified in a report are the limits of what that report shows. The paper reports laboratory results on SARS-CoV-2 in contact with treated textile, on aerosolised bovine coronavirus passed through a test filter in a wind tunnel, and on bacterial viability on treated textiles; each result belongs to the article that was tested.
Source: C-POLAR — Validation (https://cpolar.tech/validation/) and C-POLAR — Terms of Use (https://cpolar.tech/terms/); Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, NF Technical Products Inc.; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.04097-23; Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020, ISO 18184:2014; Tampere University, Department of Virology, report dated 1 April 2021. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.
Reviewed on .
Sources
- C-POLAR — Validation
- C-POLAR — Terms of Use
- Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, NF Technical Products Inc.
- Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology
- Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020, ISO 18184:2014
- Tampere University, Department of Virology, report dated 1 April 2021