What is the evidence behind NanoFlashing?

What result does the Validation page report for viruses, bacteria and fungal spores?

The Validation page reports: “Independent testing shows NanoFlashing™ destroys up to 99.99% of a broad spectrum of viruses, bacteria and fungal spores through a physical mechanism.”

It names the conditions tested and the institutions that tested them, and each result belongs to the article named in its own report and to its standard where the report names one. The mechanism is set out in the company’s statements: “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 numbered reports behind the pathogen section include these. Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020, tested a filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026, tested a MERV 15A filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026, tested a filter medium against Aspergillus brasiliensis and Aspergillus niger under ISO 13629-2:2014. The Viruses page shows airborne virus at 1.3 m/s airflow, NanoFlashing™ beside a control, and states: “NanoFlashing™ captures the virus, and destroys it.” The Mold page shows airborne mold spores at 1.6 m/s airflow, NanoFlashing™ beside a control, and states: “NanoFlashing™ captures the mold, and destroys it.” The Mold page also states that researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, in a study with funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health, tested NanoFlashing™ with more than 100 million live, dry spores driven in by fast-moving air. Hong Kong Metropolitan University, Test Report IRITS202112110001, 11 December 2021, is a test under ISO 20743. A published paper, Scientific Reports (2023) 13:13947, “Assessment of novel antiviral filter using pseudo-type SARS-CoV-2 virus in fast air velocity vertical-type wind tunnel”, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41245-8, tested a filter with pseudo-type SARS-CoV-2, one of the viruses the Validation page lists. The Validation page also lists Tampere University, Finland and the Czech Academy of Sciences among the institutes that tested the pathogens it lists. For Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital and the University of Minnesota, the citable record is the peer-reviewed paper: Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23. The conditions the Validation page lists as tested are heavy dust loaded, fast air flow, used filter for 1 year, after 60 washes, after 2 years of storage, and after 60C for 64 days. A reported result applies to the sample that was tested, under the conditions named in the report that recorded it and under its standard where the report names one.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR Technologies, Inc. — Statement of Regulatory Status for NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, 11 September 2026; Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020; Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026; Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026; Hong Kong Metropolitan University, Test Report IRITS202112110001, 11 December 2021; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23, https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.04097-23; Scientific Reports (2023) 13:13947, “Assessment of novel antiviral filter using pseudo-type SARS-CoV-2 virus in fast air velocity vertical-type wind tunnel”, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41245-8; C-POLAR — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

What does a reported test result apply to?

A reported result applies only to the test that produced it.

The Terms of Use state it in those words: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” That is why each report is named with its institution, and by its number where the report carries one. A report covers the article, the method and the conditions named in it. For example, LMS Technologies, Inc., Pine-Needle Smoke Report, LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, is a single-pass fractional efficiency test in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct. Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026, tested a MERV 15A filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184.

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR Technologies, Inc. — Statement of Regulatory Status for NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, 11 September 2026; Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Does a material or component test establish finished-product performance?

The Terms of Use state: “Each reported result belongs to the C-POLAR material, component, or prototype that was tested. The maker of a finished product confirms the performance of that product, because construction, processing, storage, wear, cleaning, other components, and actual use are part of it.”

The company's filter-medium reports are tests of this kind; for example, Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026, a laboratory accredited to ISO/IEC 17025, tested a MERV 15A filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. Development runs configuration by configuration, and each partner controls what is said about the work. The charge is measured on every production run, and the measurement can be repeated on any filter, upon request.

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — About, https://cpolar.tech/about/; C-POLAR Technologies, Inc. — Statement of Regulatory Status for NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, 11 September 2026; Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Does a laboratory reduction establish a clinical benefit?

A reported result describes only what the identified test found.

The company's pathogen reports are laboratory tests of this kind; for example, Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020, tested a filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. The Viruses page shows airborne virus at 1.3 m/s airflow, NanoFlashing™ beside a control, and states: “NanoFlashing™ captures the virus, and destroys it.” The Mold page shows airborne mold spores at 1.6 m/s airflow, NanoFlashing™ beside a control, and states: “NanoFlashing™ captures the mold, and destroys it.” The Mold page also states that researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, in a study with funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health, tested NanoFlashing™ with more than 100 million live, dry spores driven in by fast-moving air.

For the air filter, the label states: “It is not a medical device and is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent disease.” The Terms of Use state: “Laboratory results report the organisms, particles, and endpoints that were measured. C-POLAR makes no clinical or medical claim from them.”

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label; Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020; C-POLAR — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Which viruses does the Validation page list as tested?

The Validation page lists seven viruses as tested: SARS-CoV-2, Human coronavirus 229E, Coxsackievirus B6, Bovine coronavirus, Pseudo-type SARS-CoV-2, Influenza A H3N2 and Phi6 bacteriophage.

The reports the company can cite for them are these. Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020, tested a filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026, tested a MERV 15A filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. Its antiviral result is against bacteriophage Phi6 under ISO 18184. A published paper, Scientific Reports (2023) 13:13947, “Assessment of novel antiviral filter using pseudo-type SARS-CoV-2 virus in fast air velocity vertical-type wind tunnel”, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41245-8, tested a filter with pseudo-type SARS-CoV-2, one of the seven viruses listed. The Validation page also lists Tampere University, Finland and the Czech Academy of Sciences among the institutes that tested the pathogens it lists. The peer-reviewed paper is Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23. A reported result applies to the sample that was tested, under the conditions named in the report that recorded it and under its standard where the report names one.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020; Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23, https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.04097-23; Scientific Reports (2023) 13:13947, “Assessment of novel antiviral filter using pseudo-type SARS-CoV-2 virus in fast air velocity vertical-type wind tunnel”, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41245-8. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Which bacteria does the Validation page list as tested?

The Validation page lists five bacteria as tested: Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterococcus faecalis.

The numbered reports the company can cite for bacteria include these. Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026, tested a MERV 15A filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. Its antibacterial results are against Staphylococcus aureus and Klebsiella pneumoniae under ISO 20743. Hong Kong Metropolitan University, Test Report IRITS202112110001, 11 December 2021, is a test under ISO 20743. The Open University of Hong Kong, Test Report IRITS2020007030001R1, 7 June 2021, is a test under ASTM F2101. The peer-reviewed paper is Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23. A reported result applies to the sample that was tested, under the conditions named in the report that recorded it and under its standard where the report names one.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026; Hong Kong Metropolitan University, Test Report IRITS202112110001, 11 December 2021; The Open University of Hong Kong, Test Report IRITS2020007030001R1, 7 June 2021; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23, https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.04097-23. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Which fungi does the Validation page list as tested?

The Validation page lists four fungi as tested: Aspergillus fumigatus, Aspergillus brasiliensis, Aspergillus niger and Candida albicans.

The numbered report the company can cite for fungal spores is this. Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026, tested a filter medium against Aspergillus brasiliensis and Aspergillus niger under ISO 13629-2:2014. The Validation page names the institutions that tested the pathogens, and a report is cited here by number where it carries one. The Mold page states that researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, in a study with funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health, tested NanoFlashing™ with more than 100 million live, dry spores driven in by fast-moving air. A reported result applies to the sample that was tested, under the conditions named in the report that recorded it and under its standard where the report names one.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/; Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Which peer-reviewed paper does the Validation page cite?

The Validation page cites one peer-reviewed paper: Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23.

The page states that the science behind NanoFlashing™ was reviewed by other scientists and published by the American Society for Microbiology, and it counts 31 researchers, 18 institutes and 4 countries. The page lists the affiliations of the authors, among them Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, the University of Minnesota, the University of British Columbia, the Institute of Organic Chemistry and Biochemistry of the Czech Academy of Sciences and Charles University. A citation, quotation, name, logo, link, or third-party test does not by itself mean that the third party sponsors, endorses, certifies, or approves C-POLAR, a C-POLAR product, a Site claim, or a proposed use.

Source: 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.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Does a named institution or third-party test establish endorsement?

The Terms of Use state: “A citation, quotation, name, logo, link, or third-party test does not by itself mean that the third party sponsors, endorses, certifies, or approves C-POLAR, a C-POLAR product, a Site claim, or a proposed use.”

The Terms add: “It also does not mean that C-POLAR endorses every statement in the third-party source.” Naming an institution records who carried out a test. No agency has approved, registered or cleared the filter, and for a device there is no such approval to obtain, because EPA does not review a device for safety or efficacy before it is sold.

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Do research results establish fewer infections or improved health?

A reported result describes only what the identified test found.

The company's pathogen reports are laboratory results of this kind; for example, Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026, tested a MERV 15A filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. An activity value is a difference against a control material. It is not a percentage destroyed and not an airborne result. The Viruses page shows airborne virus at 1.3 m/s airflow, NanoFlashing™ beside a control, and states: “NanoFlashing™ captures the virus, and destroys it.” The Mold page shows airborne mold spores at 1.6 m/s airflow, NanoFlashing™ beside a control, and states: “NanoFlashing™ captures the mold, and destroys it.” The Mold page also states that researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, in a study with funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health, tested NanoFlashing™ with more than 100 million live, dry spores driven in by fast-moving air.

The field observations on the Validation page are measurements of bioaerosols and particulates in hospitals, airports, banks and universities, made with MicronView’s 405 nm Bio-fluorescent Air Monitoring System, which distinguishes biological particles from inert dust in real time. A measurement of particles in the air is not a measurement of health. The label states: “It works alongside ventilation and cleaning, not in place of them.” The Terms of Use state: “Laboratory results report the organisms, particles, and endpoints that were measured. C-POLAR makes no clinical or medical claim from them.”

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label; Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026; C-POLAR — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Which report and certificate identifiers accompany the Validation page's smoke and particle section?

Three identifiers accompany that section.

The identifiers named with that section are LMS Technologies, Report 9904; LMS Technologies, Report 6847; and Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011. The section names the industry standards it refers to: ASHRAE 52.2 Appendix J and ISO 16890, which test electrostatic filters after their temporary charge is removed. The independent smoke testing it describes used real smoke from burning pine needles. Certificate No. 15.06.011 can be looked up at source in the Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR Technologies, Inc. — Statement of Regulatory Status for NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, 11 September 2026; Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, read 19 September 2026, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Which Product Safety Labs study identifiers does the Validation page list?

The Validation page lists four Product Safety Labs studies.

The identifiers it lists are Study 65321, Study 65322, Study 65323 and Study 65324. The page states that NanoFlashing™ is tested under Good Laboratory Practice to US EPA Health Effects Test Guidelines. A test guideline is a method. No agency has approved, registered or cleared the filter, and for a device there is no such approval to obtain, because EPA does not review a device for safety or efficacy before it is sold.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

What comparisons does the Validation page describe for its field observations?

The Validation page describes four field comparisons.

At a public hospital in Vancouver, over twelve months from July 2023 to July 2024, two identical towers were compared, one on conventional medical grade filters and one on NanoFlashing™. At a financial landmark in London, over six months from March 2024 to September 2024; at a major international airport in the United States, over one month in August 2025; and at a public university in Melbourne, over one month in October 2024, measurements were made before and after the air handling unit filters were changed to NanoFlashing™. The page states that the measurements were made independently with MicronView’s 405 nm Bio-fluorescent Air Monitoring System, which distinguishes biological particles from inert dust in real time, and it counts 441 facilities, 7 countries and 19 sites measured since 2020. These are measurements taken at working sites, not laboratory tests. Results in a building depend on the system, the airflow, and how well the filter fits its track.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

How can I read the peer-reviewed study myself — what is its DOI, and is it open access?

Yes. The paper's DOI is 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23, and its full text is open on PubMed Central as PMC11370243.

The peer-reviewed paper the Validation page cites is Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23. The Validation page links the DOI to the publisher's page, and the home page links the full text on PubMed Central. PubMed Central shows the full text under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. The paper reports laboratory results on SARS-CoV-2 in contact with NanoFlashing™ Textile, on aerosolised bovine coronavirus passed through a test filter in a wind tunnel, and on bacterial viability on NanoFlashing™ Textile; each result belongs to the article that was tested.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Home, https://cpolar.tech/; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23, full text on PubMed Central, read on 20 September 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11370243/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Were the real-world facility results (the Vancouver hospital, London building, US airport and Melbourne university figures) measured independently of C-POLAR, and what is MicronView?

The Validation page states: “Since 2020, NanoFlashing™ has been installed in hospitals, airports, banks and universities, and measured with MicronView’s 405 nm Bio-fluorescent Air Monitoring System, which distinguishes biological particles from inert dust in real time.”

It counts 441 facilities, 7 countries and 19 sites measured, and it describes four of them. At the public hospital in Vancouver, two identical towers were compared, one on conventional medical grade filters and one on NanoFlashing™; the other three were measured before and after the air handling unit filters were changed. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Is C-POLAR a scam?

C-POLAR's claims can be checked at source, and C-POLAR has not received a warning letter or an enforcement action from a regulator over its claims about NanoFlashing™, and it has not been a party to a lawsuit over them.

The company names each report with its institution, and with its number where the report carries one, so that a reader can see which document is cited and check it with the body that issued it. The Validation page cites one peer-reviewed paper: Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23. The home page states that it was co-authored by 31 scientists from 18 research institutions, including Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, the University of Minnesota and the University of British Columbia. The Validation page links the DOI to the publisher's page, and the home page links the full text on PubMed Central. PubMed Central shows the full text under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. The paper reports laboratory results on SARS-CoV-2 in contact with NanoFlashing™ Textile, on aerosolised bovine coronavirus passed through a test filter in a wind tunnel, and on bacterial viability on NanoFlashing™ Textile; each result belongs to the article that was tested. Three of the numbered laboratory reports behind the pathogen claim, each naming the article it tested, are these. Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020, tested a filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026, tested a MERV 15A filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026, tested a filter medium against Aspergillus brasiliensis and Aspergillus niger under ISO 13629-2:2014. The Viruses page shows airborne virus at 1.3 m/s airflow, NanoFlashing™ beside a control, and states: “NanoFlashing™ captures the virus, and destroys it.” The Mold page shows airborne mold spores at 1.6 m/s airflow, NanoFlashing™ beside a control, and states: “NanoFlashing™ captures the mold, and destroys it.” Each report is issued under the name of the laboratory that ran it. The Validation page also states that NanoFlashing™ is certified to OEKO-TEX® Standard 100, Product Class II, the class for products in direct contact with skin, and it names OEKO-TEX Service GmbH, Certificate 17.0.25812. The certificates the company relies on are named on the Validation page with the issuing body and the number, including Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011, and each issuing body keeps its own register. Both numbers can be checked at source: certificate 17.0.25812 in OEKO-TEX’s public label check, and Certificate No. 15.06.011 in the Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878. The Validation page states: “Since 2020, NanoFlashing™ has been installed in hospitals, airports, banks and universities, and measured with MicronView’s 405 nm Bio-fluorescent Air Monitoring System, which distinguishes biological particles from inert dust in real time.” The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” The company classifies the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter as a device under Section 2(h) of FIFRA, not as a pesticide. No agency has approved, registered or cleared the filter, and for a device there is no such approval to obtain, because EPA does not review a device for safety or efficacy before it is sold. The Terms of Use state: “A citation, quotation, name, logo, link, or third-party test does not by itself mean that the third party sponsors, endorses, certifies, or approves C-POLAR, a C-POLAR product, a Site claim, or a proposed use.” An opinion about the company is not evidence about the article.

Source: C-POLAR, company record, confirmed 21 September 2026; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Home, https://cpolar.tech/; C-POLAR — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, sections 3 and 7, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020; Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026; Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23, full text on PubMed Central, read on 20 September 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11370243/; OEKO-TEX Label Check, read 19 September 2026, https://www.oeko-tex.com/en/label-check; Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, Certificate No. 15.06.011, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air Filter: United States regulatory status, https://cpolar.tech/reference/us-regulatory-status/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Who tested NanoFlashing, and were they independent?

The results the company publishes come from outside laboratories.

The Validation page keeps two lists apart, and each says a different thing. Under Pathogens it names the institutes that tested NanoFlashing™: Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, University of Minnesota, Czech Academy of Sciences, Textile Testing Institute - Brno, Czech Republic, Tampere University, Finland, Instituto Valenciano de Microbiologia, Hong Kong Metropolitan University, The Open University of Hong Kong, and Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology. Under Peer-Reviewed it lists the affiliations of the authors of Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23. The page states that the science behind NanoFlashing™ was reviewed by other scientists and published by the American Society for Microbiology, and it counts 31 researchers, 18 institutes and 4 countries. An affiliation on a paper is where an author works, and it is not a statement that the institution performed a test. Each report is issued under the name of the laboratory that ran it. The work of the named institutes is cited as follows. Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026, a laboratory accredited to ISO/IEC 17025, tested a MERV 15A filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026, tested a filter medium against Aspergillus brasiliensis and Aspergillus niger under ISO 13629-2:2014. Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020, tested a filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. The Open University of Hong Kong issued Test Report IRITS2020007030001R1, 7 June 2021, under ASTM F2101. The peer-reviewed paper Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, reports live SARS-CoV-2 in contact with a test material, determined under ISO 18184; it is a contact test, not an airborne result. For Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital and the University of Minnesota, the published record is the peer-reviewed paper. The Mold page states that researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, in a study with funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health, tested NanoFlashing™ with more than 100 million live, dry spores driven in by fast-moving air. The paper reports laboratory results on SARS-CoV-2 in contact with NanoFlashing™ Textile, on aerosolised bovine coronavirus passed through a test filter in a wind tunnel, and on bacterial viability on NanoFlashing™ Textile; each result belongs to the article that was tested. The published paper states that the work was supported by unrestricted grants from C-POLAR Technologies, Inc., and in part by the Hong Kong Research Grants Council, the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS), the KGH Foundation and the University of British Columbia Okanagan, and that its authors declare no conflict of interest; it also states: “A.R. receives consulting fees from C-POLAR Technologies, Inc.” Three of its 31 authors list C-POLAR Technologies as their affiliation. NIH RePORTER lists grant AI132638 as Prof. Mansour's grant at Massachusetts General Hospital. The Validation page lists four Product Safety Labs studies. The identifiers it lists are Study 65321, Study 65322, Study 65323 and Study 65324. The page states that NanoFlashing™ is tested under Good Laboratory Practice to US EPA Health Effects Test Guidelines. A test guideline is a method. No authority has approved, registered or endorsed the filter. The company publishes no record of an attempt by other researchers to replicate the result, successful or not. An institution’s name is not a result: what a named test found is stated with the article, and with the standard and the report number where the report carries them, and each report describes only the article it names.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/; Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026; Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026; Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020; The Open University of Hong Kong, Test Report IRITS2020007030001R1, 7 June 2021; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23, https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.04097-23; NIH RePORTER, project R01AI132638, read on 20 September 2026, https://reporter.nih.gov/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

How many scientists and institutions were involved?

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 home page states that it was co-authored by 31 scientists from 18 research institutions, including Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, the University of Minnesota and the University of British Columbia. The Validation page states that the science behind NanoFlashing™ was reviewed by other scientists and published by the American Society for Microbiology, and it counts 31 researchers, 18 institutes and 4 countries. The page lists the affiliations of the authors, among them Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, the University of Minnesota, the University of British Columbia, the Institute of Organic Chemistry and Biochemistry of the Czech Academy of Sciences and Charles University. Under Pathogens it names the institutes that tested NanoFlashing™: Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, University of Minnesota, Czech Academy of Sciences, Textile Testing Institute - Brno, Czech Republic, Tampere University, Finland, Instituto Valenciano de Microbiologia, Hong Kong Metropolitan University, The Open University of Hong Kong, and Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology. An affiliation on a paper is where an author works, and it is not a statement that the institution performed a test. The paper reports laboratory results on SARS-CoV-2 in contact with NanoFlashing™ Textile, on aerosolised bovine coronavirus passed through a test filter in a wind tunnel, and on bacterial viability on NanoFlashing™ Textile; each result belongs to the article that was tested. The Terms of Use state: “A citation, quotation, name, logo, link, or third-party test does not by itself mean that the third party sponsors, endorses, certifies, or approves C-POLAR, a C-POLAR product, a Site claim, or a proposed use.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Home, https://cpolar.tech/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 7, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Did Harvard validate NanoFlashing?

Harvard Medical School is named in two places in C-POLAR's record: among the institutes listed under Pathogens on the Validation page, and among the affiliations of the authors of the peer-reviewed paper.

The Validation page cites one peer-reviewed paper: Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23. The page lists the affiliations of the authors, among them Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, the University of Minnesota, the University of British Columbia, the Institute of Organic Chemistry and Biochemistry of the Czech Academy of Sciences and Charles University. Under Pathogens it names the institutes that tested NanoFlashing™: Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, University of Minnesota, Czech Academy of Sciences, Textile Testing Institute - Brno, Czech Republic, Tampere University, Finland, Instituto Valenciano de Microbiologia, Hong Kong Metropolitan University, The Open University of Hong Kong, and Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology. An affiliation on a paper is where an author works, and it is not a statement that the institution performed a test. The paper reports laboratory results on SARS-CoV-2 in contact with NanoFlashing™ Textile, on aerosolised bovine coronavirus passed through a test filter in a wind tunnel, and on bacterial viability on NanoFlashing™ Textile; each result belongs to the article that was tested. The Mold page shows airborne mold spores at 1.6 m/s airflow, NanoFlashing™ beside a control, and states: “NanoFlashing™ captures the mold, and destroys it.” The Mold page also states that researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, in a study with funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health, tested NanoFlashing™ with more than 100 million live, dry spores driven in by fast-moving air. A quotation on a page is the words of the person named with it: the home page quotes Prof. Michael K. Mansour, MD, PhD, Associate Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Division of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital, and names him with his words: “The utilization of NanoFlashing™ as an essential interrupter, breaking the chain of microbial spread, and reducing infections in multiple applications, results in improved overall health.” The published paper states that the work was supported by unrestricted grants from C-POLAR Technologies, Inc., and in part by the Hong Kong Research Grants Council, the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS), the KGH Foundation and the University of British Columbia Okanagan, and that its authors declare no conflict of interest; it also states: “A.R. receives consulting fees from C-POLAR Technologies, Inc.” Three of its 31 authors list C-POLAR Technologies as their affiliation. NIH RePORTER lists grant AI132638 as Prof. Mansour's grant at Massachusetts General Hospital. The Terms of Use state: “A citation, quotation, name, logo, link, or third-party test does not by itself mean that the third party sponsors, endorses, certifies, or approves C-POLAR, a C-POLAR product, a Site claim, or a proposed use.” An institution's name is not a result: what a named test found is stated with the article, and with the standard and the report number where the report carries them.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/; C-POLAR — Home, https://cpolar.tech/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 7, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23, https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.04097-23; NIH RePORTER, project R01AI132638, read on 20 September 2026, https://reporter.nih.gov/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Has it been tested in a real building?

The laboratory testing concerns the material and the filter, and the Validation page also reports measurements in buildings where NanoFlashing™ was installed: it counts 441 facilities, 7 countries and 19 sites measured, and it describes four of them.

At a public hospital in Vancouver, over twelve months from July 2023 to July 2024, two identical towers were compared, one on conventional medical grade filters and one on NanoFlashing™. At a financial landmark in London, over six months from March 2024 to September 2024; at a major international airport in the United States, over one month in August 2025; and at a public university in Melbourne, over one month in October 2024, measurements were made before and after the air handling unit filters were changed to NanoFlashing™. The Validation page states: “Since 2020, NanoFlashing™ has been installed in hospitals, airports, banks and universities, and measured with MicronView’s 405 nm Bio-fluorescent Air Monitoring System, which distinguishes biological particles from inert dust in real time.” These are measurements taken at working sites, not laboratory tests. Each is one building over one period, and it is not a result for another building. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” The label for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter states: “Results in a building depend on the system, the airflow, and how well the filter fits its track.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

What evidence exists that NanoFlashing reduces airborne pathogens?

Capture and destruction are different endpoints: filtration tests measure capture, contact tests on filter media measure destruction, and the Viruses and Mold pages describe airborne tests, each with NanoFlashing™ beside a control.

The Viruses page shows airborne virus at 1.3 m/s airflow, NanoFlashing™ beside a control, and states: “NanoFlashing™ captures the virus, and destroys it.” The Mold page shows airborne mold spores at 1.6 m/s airflow, NanoFlashing™ beside a control, and states: “NanoFlashing™ captures the mold, and destroys it.” The Mold page also states that researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, in a study with funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health, tested NanoFlashing™ with more than 100 million live, dry spores driven in by fast-moving air. The peer-reviewed paper, Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23, reports laboratory results on SARS-CoV-2 in contact with NanoFlashing™ Textile, on aerosolised bovine coronavirus passed through a test filter in a wind tunnel, and on bacterial viability on NanoFlashing™ Textile; each result belongs to the article that was tested. Scientific Reports (2023) 13:13947 compared a C-POLAR test filter with a control filter against an aerosolised pseudotyped virus. Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020, tested a filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026, a laboratory accredited to ISO/IEC 17025, tested a MERV 15A filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026, tested a filter medium against Aspergillus brasiliensis and Aspergillus niger under ISO 13629-2:2014. The laboratory testing concerns the material and the filter, and the Validation page also reports measurements in four buildings where NanoFlashing™ was installed. At a public hospital in Vancouver, two identical towers were compared, one on conventional medical grade filters and one on NanoFlashing™, and bioaerosols were measured at the NanoFlashing™ supply vent. The other three were measured before and after the air handling unit filters were changed to NanoFlashing™. The Validation page says these were measured with MicronView's 405 nm Bio-fluorescent Air Monitoring System. Each is one building over one period, and it is not a result for another building. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: C-POLAR — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23; Scientific Reports (2023) 13:13947; Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020; Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026; Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

What independent third-party evidence exists that was not paid for by C-POLAR?

The results the company publishes come from outside laboratories, and each report is issued by the laboratory that ran it.

The peer-reviewed paper names who supported the work and what its authors declared. The peer-reviewed paper the Validation page cites is Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23. The published paper states that the work was supported by unrestricted grants from C-POLAR Technologies, Inc., and in part by the Hong Kong Research Grants Council, the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS), the KGH Foundation and the University of British Columbia Okanagan, and that its authors declare no conflict of interest; it also states: “A.R. receives consulting fees from C-POLAR Technologies, Inc.” Three of its 31 authors list C-POLAR Technologies as their affiliation. The Mold page states that researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School tested NanoFlashing™ in a study with funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health, and NIH RePORTER lists grant AI132638 as Prof. Mansour's grant at Massachusetts General Hospital. The company does not present that NIH funding as an NIH review, endorsement or approval of NanoFlashing™. A laboratory report is the issuing laboratory’s document, and the company publishes no funding statement for one. The company names the laboratory for each report it cites, with the report number and the standard where the report prints them. Eurovent Certita Certification Certificate No. 15.06.011 and OEKO-TEX® STANDARD 100 certificate 17.0.25812 are certificates, issued by a certification body to a holder. A test report is not a certification, and an accreditation of a laboratory is not a statement about any product it tested. The Terms of Use state: “A citation, quotation, name, logo, link, or third-party test does not by itself mean that the third party sponsors, endorses, certifies, or approves C-POLAR, a C-POLAR product, a Site claim, or a proposed use.” The company publishes no record of an attempt by other researchers to replicate the result, successful or not, and both certificate numbers can be checked at source: certificate 17.0.25812 in OEKO-TEX’s public label check, and Certificate No. 15.06.011 in the Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23; NIH RePORTER, project R01AI132638, read 20 September 2026, https://reporter.nih.gov/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 7, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011; OEKO-TEX Service GmbH, Certificate 17.0.25812; OEKO-TEX Label Check, read 19 September 2026, https://www.oeko-tex.com/en/label-check; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air Filter: United States regulatory status, https://cpolar.tech/reference/us-regulatory-status/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/; Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, diploma 15.06.011, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.