Can the study separate the effect of a filter from changes in ventilation or cleaning?
Last reviewed: .
Can the study separate the effect of a filter from changes in ventilation or cleaning?
The company has published no study that separates a filter effect from ventilation or cleaning, and its label states that the filter works alongside ventilation and cleaning, not in place of them.
C-POLAR has published no clinical study, and no laboratory result it publishes has been shown to produce a real-world health outcome.
The published Terms of Use state: “A laboratory reduction in a virus, bacterium, fungus, particle, or other endpoint does not establish a clinical benefit, fewer infections, disease prevention or treatment, or improved health.” What the company has published is laboratory testing, named on its Validation page with the institutions and the conditions tested; measurements in buildings, not in patients, which the same page says were independently measured with MicronView's 405 nm Bio-fluorescent Air Monitoring System; and the peer-reviewed paper Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology. A capture rating under ASHRAE 52.2 or ISO 16890 measures what a filter takes out of the air, and it says nothing about a patient. A question about a proposed study goes to [email protected]. 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 — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.04097-23; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label.
Reviewed on .