Why does one description say 99.99% while another says up to 99.99%?

Why does one description say 99.99% while another says up to 99.99%?

On the company's current pages the figure is always given with the words “up to” in front of it, and those words are part of the statement.

The home page, the Validation, NanoFlashing, Air, Water, Textile, Food and Medical pages, and the pages on viruses, bacteria and fungal spores each carry it that way, each at its own address. A version that drops “up to” states more than the company publishes.

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. 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 The Terms of Use state that Site Content may become outdated after the publication or review date shown with it, and that each scientific or technical result must be read in light of its test conditions and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 — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™, https://cpolar.tech/nanoflashing/; Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, section 2.6, issued by NF Technical Products Inc.; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 13, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; 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 — NanoFlashing™ Air, https://cpolar.tech/air/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Water, https://cpolar.tech/water/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Textile, https://cpolar.tech/textile/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Food, https://cpolar.tech/food-packaging/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Medical, https://cpolar.tech/medical/; C-POLAR — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/; C-POLAR — Home, https://cpolar.tech/; C-POLAR — Bacteria, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/bacteria/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.