What evidence distinguishes a material test from a claim that packaged food will keep longer?

What evidence distinguishes a material test from a claim that packaged food will keep longer?

The company makes no shelf-life claim for any food.

The one food comparison the company publishes is the Strawberry Test: three strawberries held at 26°C for thirteen days, one stored in a glass jar, one wrapped in polyester, and one wrapped in NanoFlashing™ Food Packaging. The film on the page labels the strawberry in a glass jar “Expired on Day 2”, the one in polyester “Expired on Day 3”, and the one wrapped in NanoFlashing™ Food Packaging “Expired on Day 12”. The Terms of Use state: “Images and descriptions may show concepts or prototypes. They are not specifications, instructions, validation reports, recommendations, warranties, offers, promises, or commitments.” The 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.” The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” The Terms of Use state that, as of their effective date, the Water, Textiles, Food packaging, and Medical devices chapters describe Research Applications, and that they do not describe finished products currently available from C-POLAR for those uses.

A test of a material shows what that test found on that material; a statement that packaged food will keep longer is a different claim, and the company has not made it.

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Food, https://cpolar.tech/food-packaging/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, sections 3 and 4, https://cpolar.tech/terms/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.