Is the 99.99% claim believable for an air filter?

Is the 99.99% claim believable for an air filter?

The stated percentage is the Validation page's “up to 99.99%” for a broad spectrum of viruses, bacteria and fungal spores, given with the pathogens, conditions and institutes the page lists; the denominator, the comparison and the exposure conditions of each result are in the report that recorded it, for the article that report tested.

The Validation page states: “Independent testing shows NanoFlashing™ destroys up to 99.99% of a broad spectrum of viruses, bacteria and fungal spores through a physical mechanism.” Each result belongs to the article and the standard named in its own report. The company's statement of what the filter does to what it captures is a mechanism, and it carries its own limits. The Statement of Classification states it at 2.6: “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.” Intended, on direct contact, by physical means, and only while captured are the limits of that statement. The numbered reports on the pathogen testing of filter media are these. 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. The TZÚ report records antibacterial activity values of A = 6.4 against Staphylococcus aureus and A = 4.4 against Klebsiella pneumoniae under ISO 20743, absorption method, and an antiviral activity value of Mv = 3.30 against bacteriophage Phi6 under ISO 18184, for that MERV 15A filter medium. An activity value is a difference against an untreated control fabric. It is not a percentage destroyed and not an airborne result. Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020, tested a nonwoven filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014, and the report records a logarithm of antiviral activity of 4.34. ISO 18184 measures virus recovered from treated textile against an untreated control; it is a contact test on the medium, not an airborne or in-use result. 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. The IVAMI report records an antifungal activity value of 4.40 for each strain on that filter medium, by the plate-count absorption method under ISO 13629-2:2014, against an untreated control; it is a contact test on the medium, not an airborne or in-use 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.” A test on one article is not a result for another article. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, section 2.6, issued by NF Technical Products Inc.; Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026; Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020; Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026; C-POLAR — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.