Did Harvard validate NanoFlashing?
Last reviewed: .
Did Harvard validate NanoFlashing?
Naming an institution records who carried out a test.
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. 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. 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. The work was also supported in part by the US National Institutes of Health, grant AI132638, to M.K.M., which NIH RePORTER lists as Prof. Mansour's grant at Massachusetts General Hospital; the grant is printed in the paper's manuscript rather than in the published acknowledgments. 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 20 September 2026.
Reviewed on .
Sources
- C-POLAR — Validation
- C-POLAR — Mold
- C-POLAR — Home
- C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 7
- Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology
- NIH RePORTER, project R01AI132638, read 20 September 2026