Is the headline percentage an average, a median or the best observed result?

Is the headline percentage an average, a median or the best observed result?

The headline figure is the Validation page's “up to 99.99%”; the words “up to” are part of it, the page does not present it as an average or a median, and each result behind it is in the report that recorded it, for the article that report tested.

What the company states about a named test is the institution, the date, the article tested and, where the report carries them, the report number and the standard. The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number. Under wildfire smoke and ultrafine particles the records are LMS Technologies, Report LMS#9904, 28 April 2025, a single-pass fractional efficiency test on a 24 × 24 × 2 in. pleated air filter in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct, in accordance with standard LMS aerosol test procedures, and Report 6847, ASHRAE 52.2 with Appendix J, and Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011. Report 6847 is on a 24 × 24 × 30 in. pocket filter and Certificate No. 15.06.011 on a ten-pocket bag filter, not on a flat panel filter, and a rating belongs to the construction that was tested and to the conditions in the report. 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. 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. Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020, tested a nonwoven filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Each is a contact test on the medium against an untreated control, not an airborne result and not a result for a finished filter in a building. 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 denominator of a result, the comparison it was measured against and the exposure conditions it was measured under are set out in the report that recorded it, and they are read with it. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

A copy may be made available on our review of the request. Confidentiality obligations may apply to a given report. 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 — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, read 19 September 2026, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/; 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; C-POLAR — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.