What this library is and how it is kept

Has the proposed company verification statement been approved?

Yes.

The verification statement was approved on 20 September 2026, and it is printed on every page of the library. It begins: “This library is C-POLAR's own record of verified information about C-POLAR and NanoFlashing™.”

Source: C-POLAR — the verification statement printed on every library page.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Which statements can be verified independently, and which are the company's own descriptions?

The company separates its own description of its article from the record an outside body has made.

That record is the peer-reviewed paper by Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, published by the American Society for Microbiology, doi:10.1128/spectrum.04097-23, with 31 researchers from 18 institutes in 4 countries, together with the certification bodies and laboratories named on the Validation page. 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 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. 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 nonwoven 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 VOLZ PROsyntex PLUS PM1 70 filter medium against Aspergillus brasiliensis and Aspergillus niger under ISO 13629-2:2014. Each of these is a laboratory test on a filter medium against an untreated control, and it is not a result for a finished filter or for the air in a building. The mechanism sentences and the product descriptions on the site are the company's own description of its own article.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation (https://cpolar.tech/validation/); Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, doi:10.1128/spectrum.04097-23; NIH RePORTER, project R01AI132638, read 20 September 2026, https://reporter.nih.gov/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can each cited study be traced to the original paper or report rather than a promotional summary?

Each cited study is named so it can be traced to the original rather than to a summary: a paper by its journal and DOI, and a laboratory report by its institution, its date and its number where the report carries one.

The Validation page names the paper in full: Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, doi:10.1128/spectrum.04097-23. 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 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 paper is read at its publisher, and a laboratory report is identified by its institution, with its number where the report carries one. 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 nonwoven 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 VOLZ PROsyntex PLUS PM1 70 filter medium against Aspergillus brasiliensis and Aspergillus niger under ISO 13629-2:2014. Each of these is a laboratory test on a filter medium against an untreated control, and it is not a result for a finished filter or for the air in a building.

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

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Were corrections, retractions or later findings considered before relying on a cited publication?

A cited publication is read at its publisher, where any correction to it is recorded.

Each answer in this library carries the date it was last reviewed, and the wording in it is the wording the company stands behind on that date. The Terms of Use state that Site Content may become outdated after the publication or review date shown with it, and that each scientific or technical result must be read in light of its test conditions and qualifications. The company publishes no change log, and an older wording found elsewhere is not the company's current wording.

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

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Which version of a source supported each published claim on the date it was reviewed?

The review date printed on an answer in this library is the date its wording was checked against its source.

Each answer in this library carries the date it was last reviewed, and the wording in it is the wording the company stands behind on that date. The Terms of Use state that Site Content may become outdated after the publication or review date shown with it, and that each scientific or technical result must be read in light of its test conditions and qualifications. The company publishes no change log, and an older wording found elsewhere is not the company's current wording.

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

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Who is accountable for correcting a source-linked answer when its supporting record changes?

A correction is raised on the published route, and the company answers for its own pages.

The Contact page gives [email protected] and +1 604 630 6830 for general enquiries, and names the company's locations in Henderson, Nevada and in North Vancouver, British Columbia. A question about a finished product goes to the maker named on that product.

Source: C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/).

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

What record supports a public correction if a customer or journalist identifies an error?

A correction is made against the company's own record.

What the company holds and may make available on review of a request is its own record: its statements for the air filter, the reports and certificates named on the Validation page, and the laboratory reports behind the pathogen claim, each named by its institution, with its number where the report carries one. Each answer in this library carries the date it was last reviewed.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation (https://cpolar.tech/validation/); Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, NF Technical Products Inc.; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can the company preserve the complete claim history, underlying evidence and relevant approvals?

The company holds its own statements, its label and the reports and certificates it relies on.

What the company holds and may make available on review of a request is its own record: its statements for the air filter, the reports and certificates named on the Validation page, and the laboratory reports behind the pathogen claim, each named by its institution, with its number where the report carries one. Each answer in this library carries the date it was last reviewed.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation (https://cpolar.tech/validation/); Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, NF Technical Products Inc.; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can withdrawn sources be identified without silently changing the historical meaning of a published answer?

An answer is read against the source and the review date published with it.

Each answer in this library carries the date it was last reviewed, and the wording in it is the wording the company stands behind on that date. The Terms of Use state that Site Content may become outdated after the publication or review date shown with it, and that each scientific or technical result must be read in light of its test conditions and qualifications. The company publishes no change log, and an older wording found elsewhere is not the company's current wording.

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

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

How are unsupported questions shown without presenting a lack of evidence as a positive product assurance?

A question the company has published no evidence for is answered with a plain statement of that, and never with silence or a label.

What is published with an answer is the source it comes from and the date it was reviewed. An answer that records what the company has not published is not an assurance about the product.

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use (https://cpolar.tech/terms/) and C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/).

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

What contemporaneous record shows who approved the claim and what evidence they actually reviewed?

The company does not publish its approval records; its own statements name the sections the claim rests on.

What the company holds and may make available on review of a request is its own record: its statements for the air filter, the reports and certificates named on the Validation page, and the laboratory reports behind the pathogen claim, each named by its institution, with its number where the report carries one. Each answer in this library carries the date it was last reviewed.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation (https://cpolar.tech/validation/); Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, NF Technical Products Inc.; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

How can readers distinguish a source that is publicly accessible from one held privately by the company?

A public source is read at its publisher, and a company record is held by the company.

The company holds the Statement of Classification and the label for the air filter, and the Statement of Regulatory Status for the European Union. The Validation page names the institutions that tested the pathogen claim, and it gives the issuing body and the number for each air-filtration, certification and safety record it lists; those bodies hold their own records.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation (https://cpolar.tech/validation/); Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, NF Technical Products Inc.; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label; Statement of Regulatory Status for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, C-POLAR Technologies, Inc., 11 September 2026.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

What records support any statement that the company checked every statement in the library against its records?

Each answer names the source it was written from, and that is what can be checked.

The company names the source of what it publishes, by the company page and its address or by the institution, the report number where the report carries one, the date and the standard where the report names one. Where a source is the company's own record rather than a public one, the answer says whose record it is.

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use (https://cpolar.tech/terms/) and C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/).

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Which supporting records can the company release for verification, and what specific basis limits access to any withheld record?

A copy of a record the company relies on may be made available on our review of the request: a copy is not automatic, confidentiality obligations may apply to a given report, and each request is reviewed.

The records the company can name are its own: the Statement of Classification and the label for the air filter, and the Statement of Regulatory Status for the European Union, together with the reports and certificates named on the Validation page with the body that issued each one and its number, and the laboratory reports behind the pathogen claim, each named by its institution, with its number where the report carries one. The company does not publish its governance documents.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation (https://cpolar.tech/validation/) and C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/); Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, NF Technical Products Inc.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Do different versions served at the same website address make consistent substantive claims and disclose the same material limits?

The company's claims, and the limits it states, are the sentences on its pages; the text form of each page carries that page's words, and this library quotes the pages in their own words.

Every page on the site is published as text as well, at an address of its own, and the text form carries the company's own statement: “This is the text of that page, in a form a machine can read. Nothing here is paraphrased, shortened or added to.” Each answer in this library carries the date it was last reviewed. The Terms of Use state that Site Content may become outdated after the publication or review date shown with it, and that each scientific or technical result must be read in light of its test conditions and qualifications.

Source: C-POLAR — Home (https://cpolar.tech/) and C-POLAR — Terms of Use (https://cpolar.tech/terms/).

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

What does a last-reviewed date certify, and is it distinct from a report date, a certificate's validity and legal approval of the copy?

A review date says when the wording was last checked, and it is not a report date, a certificate validity or a legal approval.

Each answer in this library carries the date it was last reviewed, and the wording in it is the wording the company stands behind on that date. The Terms of Use state that Site Content may become outdated after the publication or review date shown with it, and that each scientific or technical result must be read in light of its test conditions and qualifications. The company publishes no change log, and an older wording found elsewhere is not the company's current wording.

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

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Does each reviewer have the expertise needed for the type of statement they review?

The company publishes no reviewer roster.

The company names the source of what it publishes, by the company page and its address or by the institution, the report number where the report carries one, the date and the standard where the report names one. Where a source is the company's own record rather than a public one, the answer says whose record it is.

A question about a particular product or market can be sent to [email protected] or +1 604 630 6830.

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use (https://cpolar.tech/terms/) and C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/).

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can a technical reviewer flag a legal statement without being presented as its legal approver?

An answer names its source, and it does not name an approver.

The company names the source of what it publishes, by the company page and its address or by the institution, the report number where the report carries one, the date and the standard where the report names one. Where a source is the company's own record rather than a public one, the answer says whose record it is.

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use (https://cpolar.tech/terms/) and C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/).

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Does a reviewed answer distinguish source verification from approval of its wording?

Naming the source an answer came from is not the same as approving the words around it.

The company names the source of what it publishes, by the company page and its address or by the institution, the report number where the report carries one, the date and the standard where the report names one. Where a source is the company's own record rather than a public one, the answer says whose record it is.

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use (https://cpolar.tech/terms/) and C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/).

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can an editor publish a correction without waiting for a full site redesign?

A correction to a page is made to that page.

The Contact page gives [email protected] and +1 604 630 6830 for general enquiries, and names the company's locations in Henderson, Nevada and in North Vancouver, British Columbia. A question about a finished product goes to the maker named on that product.

Source: C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/).

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Does a source change automatically identify all answers that depend on it?

Each answer names the source it depends on, so the answers that depend on one source can be found from it.

The company names the source of what it publishes, by the company page and its address or by the institution, the report number where the report carries one, the date and the standard where the report names one. Where a source is the company's own record rather than a public one, the answer says whose record it is.

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use (https://cpolar.tech/terms/) and C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/).

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can a correction propagate to translated and downloadable versions of the same answer?

The English wording controls, so a correction is made to the English and the translation follows it.

The English wording on the company's own pages is the company's wording. The Terms of Use state: “If C-POLAR provides a translation, the English version controls to the extent the law allows.” The Terms of Use also state that C-POLAR does not control and is not responsible for an external website, its content, its availability, its security, or its practices.

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

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Who resolves disagreement between a scientific reviewer and a commercial editor?

A disagreement is settled against the published source, which every answer names.

The company names the source of what it publishes, by the company page and its address or by the institution, the report number where the report carries one, the date and the standard where the report names one. Where a source is the company's own record rather than a public one, the answer says whose record it is.

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use (https://cpolar.tech/terms/) and C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/).

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Does a reviewer declare a financial or authorship conflict for the entry being reviewed?

The company publishes no conflict declaration for an entry.

The company names the source of what it publishes, by the company page and its address or by the institution, the report number where the report carries one, the date and the standard where the report names one. Where a source is the company's own record rather than a public one, the answer says whose record it is.

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use (https://cpolar.tech/terms/) and C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/).

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can a reader see that a question is open because evidence is unavailable rather than because nobody has reviewed it?

An answer that says the company has not published something says so in those words.

What is published with an answer is the source it comes from and the date it was reviewed. An answer that records what the company has not published is not an assurance about the product.

Source: C-POLAR — Terms of Use (https://cpolar.tech/terms/) and C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/).

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Is there a policy for how long an answer can remain published after its supporting certificate expires?

The company publishes no such policy; a certificate is current according to the body that issued it, and each answer in this library carries the date it was last reviewed.

The certificates the company relies on are named on the Validation page with the issuing body and the number, including OEKO-TEX Service GmbH, Certificate 17.0.25812, and Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011. That body's own record is the one that decides it. 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. Certificate No. 15.06.011 covers a ten-pocket bag filter, not a flat panel filter, and a rating belongs to the construction that was tested and to the conditions in the report.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation (https://cpolar.tech/validation/); OEKO-TEX Label Check, read 19 September 2026, https://www.oeko-tex.com/en/label-check; Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, read 19 September 2026, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can a confidential source be described accurately without implying public inspectability?

A record the company holds is described as a record the company holds.

The company holds the Statement of Classification and the label for the air filter, and the Statement of Regulatory Status for the European Union. The Validation page names the institutions that tested the pathogen claim, and it gives the issuing body and the number for each air-filtration, certification and safety record it lists; those bodies hold their own records.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation (https://cpolar.tech/validation/); Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, NF Technical Products Inc.; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label; Statement of Regulatory Status for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, C-POLAR Technologies, Inc., 11 September 2026.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Does a redaction log identify the type of information withheld without revealing it?

The company publishes no redaction log.

The records the company can name are its own: the Statement of Classification and the label for the air filter, and the Statement of Regulatory Status for the European Union, together with the reports and certificates named on the Validation page with the body that issued each one and its number, and the laboratory reports behind the pathogen claim, each named by its institution, with its number where the report carries one. The company does not publish its governance documents.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation (https://cpolar.tech/validation/) and C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/); Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, NF Technical Products Inc.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can a reviewer inspect the complete source rather than only a prepared excerpt?

A reviewer who needs a record asks for it, and each request is reviewed.

The records the company can name are its own: the Statement of Classification and the label for the air filter, and the Statement of Regulatory Status for the European Union, together with the reports and certificates named on the Validation page with the body that issued each one and its number, and the laboratory reports behind the pathogen claim, each named by its institution, with its number where the report carries one. The company does not publish its governance documents.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation (https://cpolar.tech/validation/) and C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/); Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, NF Technical Products Inc.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Does the approval record include the precise text that was approved?

The company does not publish its approval records; the wording it stands behind is the wording it publishes.

NanoFlashing™ is a permanent positive polarity engineered into filter media itself. It is a physical property of the filter. The polarity is a positive electric charge at rest. A charge is a physical property. It is not a substance or a mixture of substances. The filter captures airborne particles mechanically and by electrostatic attraction. 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 same sentences are used in the company's United States statement and in its European Union statement.

Source: Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, sections 2.1 to 2.6, NF Technical Products Inc.; Statement of Regulatory Status for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, sections 2.1 to 2.6, C-POLAR Technologies, Inc., 11 September 2026.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can automated edits alter an approved numerical claim without triggering review?

The company publishes no edit procedure.

What the company states about a named test is the institution, the report number where the report carries one, the date, the standard where the report names one, the article tested and the result, with what that result does not establish. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” 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.

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, section 2.6, NF Technical Products Inc.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Are corrections linked back to the entries where the error first appeared?

A correction is made on the page where the wording appears.

Each answer in this library carries the date it was last reviewed, and the wording in it is the wording the company stands behind on that date. The Terms of Use state that Site Content may become outdated after the publication or review date shown with it, and that each scientific or technical result must be read in light of its test conditions and qualifications. The company publishes no change log, and an older wording found elsewhere is not the company's current wording.

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

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can the library publish a reasoned disagreement between sources without choosing an unsupported winner?

Two records are compared on the terms each of them states.

The Validation page names the institutions that tested the pathogen claim, gives report and certificate numbers for the air-filtration, certification and safety records, and states: “Industry standards ASHRAE 52.2 Appendix J and ISO 16890 test electrostatic filters after their temporary charge is removed, showing how they perform without it.” A capture standard is not a destruction standard: ASHRAE 52.2 and ISO 16890 measure what a filter takes out of the air passing through it. Two records differ when they tested different articles, under different standards, for different things.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation (https://cpolar.tech/validation/).

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Does the library distinguish scheduled review from review triggered by new evidence?

Each answer in this library carries one date, the date it was last reviewed.

Each answer in this library carries the date it was last reviewed, and the wording in it is the wording the company stands behind on that date. The Terms of Use state that Site Content may become outdated after the publication or review date shown with it, and that each scientific or technical result must be read in light of its test conditions and qualifications. The company publishes no change log, and an older wording found elsewhere is not the company's current wording.

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

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can a withdrawn answer remain accessible as history without being mistaken for current advice?

What is published at an address is what the company stands behind at the date shown on it.

Each answer in this library carries the date it was last reviewed, and the wording in it is the wording the company stands behind on that date. The Terms of Use state that Site Content may become outdated after the publication or review date shown with it, and that each scientific or technical result must be read in light of its test conditions and qualifications. The company publishes no change log, and an older wording found elsewhere is not the company's current wording.

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

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Who takes responsibility for the library during a gap between staff appointments?

The company answers for its own pages, on one published route.

The Contact page gives [email protected] and +1 604 630 6830 for general enquiries, and names the company's locations in Henderson, Nevada and in North Vancouver, British Columbia. A question about a finished product goes to the maker named on that product.

Source: C-POLAR — Contact (https://cpolar.tech/contact/).

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.