How were the studies designed?

Does the evidence behind the percentage claim cover every product on which the claim appears?

Each record covers the article that was tested: the air filter’s records are tests on filters and filter media, and the Water, Textiles, Food packaging and Medical devices chapters describe Research Applications, not finished products currently available from C-POLAR.

A result belongs to the article that was tested.

The records named on the Validation page are on different articles. The Validation page states: “NanoFlashing™ maintains MERV 15A performance under ASHRAE testing, while Eurovent certifies the same filter at ISO ePM1 70%, with an A class energy rating.” It names Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011. Intertek Building & Construction, Report 105175501SAT-001 under UL 900, is on a panel filter, and Report 104974202SAT-001 on a bag filter. The company's label and its Statement of Classification describe a panel air filter for forced-air heating, ventilation and air-conditioning systems. A rating applies to the filter that was tested, not to every product that carries the technology. 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, 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 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 filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Each is a contact test on the medium against a control. 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: “Each reported result belongs to the C-POLAR material, component, or prototype that was tested. The maker of a finished product confirms the performance of that product, because construction, processing, storage, wear, cleaning, other components, and actual use are part of it.” They also state: “Use evidence, specifications, instructions, and warnings specific to the actual finished product and use.” A copy may be made available on our review of the request. 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, sections 3 and 4, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label; Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, section 1.2, issued by NF Technical Products Inc.; 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 6 October 2026.

Were capture and loss of biological activity measured separately, and how are their results distinguished?

Capture and destruction are different endpoints: filtration tests measure capture, contact tests on filter media measure destruction, and the Viruses and Mold pages describe airborne tests, each with NanoFlashing™ beside a control.

Capture is measured by a filtration standard. ASHRAE 52.2 and ISO 16890 measure what a filter takes out of the air, and they say nothing about what happens to what is captured; the Validation page states that those standards test electrostatic filters after their temporary charge is removed. In the numbered reports, destruction is measured on a submitted sample under a contact standard such as ISO 20743, whose activity value is a difference against a control. 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, 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 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 filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Each is a contact test on the medium against a control. 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 peer-reviewed paper, Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23, reports laboratory results on SARS-CoV-2 in contact with textile, on aerosolised bovine coronavirus passed through a test filter in a wind tunnel, and on bacterial viability on textiles; each result belongs to the article that was tested. The company's statement of the mechanism is that the filter is intended to destroy the viruses, bacteria and fungal spores it captures, on direct contact with the positive electric charge, by physical means, and only while the organism is captured by the positive electric charge.

A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/; Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, section 2.6, issued by NF Technical Products Inc.; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, 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; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

What comparison shows the contribution of the described property rather than the plain supporting material?

The comparison records the company cites each name their own control: LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, compared the filter with a control filter, and each contact test compares the medium with a control.

The Statement of Classification states at 2.5 that in single-pass laboratory testing the filter captured pine-needle smoke and ultrafine particles better than the control filter. LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, is the single-pass fractional efficiency test, in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct, that the Statement cites for it. Sung, Wu, So et al., Scientific Reports (2023) 13:13947, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41245-8, compared a C-POLAR test filter with a control filter without C-POLAR, against aerosolised pseudo-type SARS-CoV-2 in a vertical-type wind tunnel at a face velocity of 1.3 m/s. ISO 20743 is a contact test on fabric, and its activity value is a difference against a control; it is not an absolute count of anything and it is not an airborne result. 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, 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 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 filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Each contact test is a test on the medium against a control. 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 company does not restate how a control was chosen or handled. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, section 2.5, issued by NF Technical Products Inc.; LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025; Sung, Wu, So et al., Scientific Reports (2023) 13:13947, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41245-8; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, 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 — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

How were the tested organisms chosen, and what justifies the breadth of the resulting claim?

The company names every organism its testing covered, and it carries no result to an organism a test did not cover.

On the Validation page the viruses are SARS-CoV-2, human coronavirus 229E, Coxsackievirus B6, bovine coronavirus, pseudo-type SARS-CoV-2, influenza A H3N2 and Phi6 bacteriophage; the bacteria are Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterococcus faecalis; the fungi are Aspergillus fumigatus, Aspergillus brasiliensis, Aspergillus niger and Candida albicans. The Air page adds: “The bacteria tested cover both groups EPA uses to define broad spectrum: Gram-positive (Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus faecalis) and Gram-negative (Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Escherichia coli).” Each organism belongs to the record that tested it. Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026, tested a 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 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, tested a MERV 15A filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. The peer-reviewed paper, Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23, is the record for the work of Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital and the University of Minnesota. The paper reports laboratory results on SARS-CoV-2 in contact with textile, on aerosolised bovine coronavirus passed through a test filter in a wind tunnel, and on bacterial viability on textiles; each result belongs to the article that was tested. Sung, Wu, So et al., Scientific Reports (2023) 13:13947, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41245-8, tested pseudo-type SARS-CoV-2, one of the viruses on the Validation page, and the paper gives its aim in its own words: “This study aimed to develop a method to assess simultaneously the filtration and removal efficiency of aerosolized pseudo-type SARS-CoV-2 using a vertical-type wind tunnel with relatively high face velocity (1.3 m/s).” It compared a C-POLAR test filter with a control filter without C-POLAR. Each is a laboratory test on the article it names, not a result for a finished filter in a building.

Why a particular organism was chosen is a matter for the report that tested it. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air, https://cpolar.tech/air/; Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026; Guangdong Detection Center of Microbiology, Report 2020FM20686R01E, 13 August 2020; Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23; Sung, Wu, So et al., Scientific Reports (2023) 13:13947, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41245-8; 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 6 October 2026.

Is evidence from a textile antibacterial method being extended to a different endpoint or product type?

ISO 20743 is a contact test on fabric, and its activity value is a difference against a control.

It is not an absolute count of anything destroyed, and it is not an airborne result. The textile and mask records under that standard are these. Hong Kong Metropolitan University (formerly The Open University of Hong Kong), Test Report IRITS2020007130001R3, 7 June 2021, tested a textile under BS EN ISO 20743:2013. Hong Kong Metropolitan University (formerly The Open University of Hong Kong), Test Report IRITS202203250001, 25 March 2022, tested a material under BS EN ISO 20743:2013. Hong Kong Metropolitan University (formerly The Open University of Hong Kong), Test Report 20220907001, 7 September 2022, tested a sample under BS EN ISO 20743:2013. The filter-medium record is this. Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026, tested a MERV 15A filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. 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. A result on one of those articles is not a result for another, and a contact result on fabric is not a capture result for a panel air filter in a duct.

Confidentiality obligations may apply to a given report. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; Hong Kong Metropolitan University, Test Report IRITS2020007130001R3, 7 June 2021; Hong Kong Metropolitan University, Test Report IRITS202203250001, 25 March 2022; Hong Kong Metropolitan University, Test Report 20220907001, 7 September 2022; Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026; C-POLAR — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Which sample identifiers establish that the submitted report concerns the marketed version of the material?

Each report describes the sample the laboratory received, and the company cites each report by the article it names.

A result belongs to the article that was tested.

The records named on the Validation page are on different articles. For wildfire smoke and ultrafine particles it names LMS Technologies, Report 9904, LMS Technologies, Report 6847, and Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011. Intertek Building & Construction, Report 105175501SAT-001 under UL 900, is on a panel filter, and Report 104974202SAT-001 on a bag filter. The company's label and its Statement of Classification describe a panel air filter for forced-air heating, ventilation and air-conditioning systems. A rating applies to the filter that was tested. 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 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 filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Each is a contact test on the medium against a control material. 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 company publishes no separate list of sample identifiers; each result belongs to the report that recorded it, and the Validation page names each report by institution and number.

The Terms of Use state: “Each reported result belongs to the C-POLAR material, component, or prototype that was tested. The maker of a finished product confirms the performance of that product, because construction, processing, storage, wear, cleaning, other components, and actual use are part of it.” They also state: “Use evidence, specifications, instructions, and warnings specific to the actual finished product and use.” A copy may be made available on our review of the request. Certificate No. 15.06.011 can be looked up at source in the Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, at https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; NanoFlashing™ Air Filter label; Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, section 1.2, issued by NF Technical Products Inc.; Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, Certificate No. 15.06.011, read 6 October 2026, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878; 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 6 October 2026.

Were any deviations, failed runs or excluded results material to the reported conclusion?

What a report concludes is what that report states, and the company publishes no run-by-run account behind it.

The company does not restate a report's runs, deviations or exclusions on its pages.

The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and it lists what was tested and the conditions it was tested under. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Is the laboratory mechanism explanation supported directly or inferred from performance observations?

The charge the mechanism rests on is measured as surface charge density on every production run, and the account of how that charge acts is the company's published position.

The polarity is a positive electric charge at rest. It is measured as surface charge density, in nanocoulombs per square centimetre. The charge is measured on every production run, and the measurement can be repeated on any filter, upon request. NanoFlashing™ attracts negatively charged particles through electrostatic attraction. A capture standard is not a destruction standard: ASHRAE 52.2 and ISO 16890 measure what a filter takes out of the air, and they say nothing about what happens to what is captured.

The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and it lists what was tested and the conditions it was tested under. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, sections 2.2 and 2.3, issued by NF Technical Products Inc.; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Which full report, method, endpoint and conditions support the precise central percentage on the current label?

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. A capture standard is not a destruction standard: ASHRAE 52.2 and ISO 16890 measure what a filter takes out of the air, and they say nothing about what happens to what is captured.

The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” They also state: “Laboratory results report the organisms, particles, and endpoints that were measured. C-POLAR makes no clinical or medical claim from them.”

The organisms and the conditions the statement rests on are named on the Validation page, with the institutions that tested them. 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, 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 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 filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Each is a contact test on the medium against a control. 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.

Source: Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, section 2.6, issued by NF Technical Products Inc.; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, 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 — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Which limitations in the complete studies would materially change a reader's understanding of the headline performance statement?

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. A capture standard is not a destruction standard: ASHRAE 52.2 and ISO 16890 measure what a filter takes out of the air, and they say nothing about what happens to what is captured.

The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” They also state: “Laboratory results report the organisms, particles, and endpoints that were measured. C-POLAR makes no clinical or medical claim from them.”

The organisms and the conditions the statement rests on are named on the Validation page, with the institutions that tested them. The numbered reports on the pathogen testing of filter media are these. Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), a testing laboratory accredited according to ČSN EN ISO/IEC 17025:2018 by the Czech Accreditation Institute, Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, 3 July 2026, 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 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 filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Each is a contact test on the medium against a control. 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.

Source: Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, section 2.6, issued by NF Technical Products Inc.; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, 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 — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Was the main study question specified before data collection?

For the four studies run under Good Laboratory Practice the study question is fixed in writing before the work begins; for the other records the company does not publish how a study was planned.

The Validation page states that NanoFlashing™ is tested under Good Laboratory Practice to US EPA Health Effects Test Guidelines, and it names Product Safety Labs, Study 65321, Study 65322, Study 65323 and Study 65324. A study run under Good Laboratory Practice is planned in writing before the work begins. Those four are health effects studies, not performance tests, and the performance records are separate.

The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and it lists what was tested and the conditions it was tested under. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; Product Safety Labs, Studies 65321, 65322, 65323 and 65324, Good Laboratory Practice, US EPA Health Effects Test Guidelines.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Were samples selected randomly from the production population?

Each report describes the sample the laboratory received.

The company does not publish how samples were drawn for any record; the results the company publishes come from outside laboratories, and each report is issued by the laboratory that ran it.

The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and it lists what was tested and the conditions it was tested under.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air Filter: United States regulatory status, https://cpolar.tech/reference/us-regulatory-status/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Was the person reading the results unaware of sample identity?

Each report is issued under the name of the laboratory that ran it.

The company does not publish who read a result or what that person knew about the sample; the results the company publishes come from outside laboratories, and each report is issued by the laboratory that ran it.

The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and it lists what was tested and the conditions it was tested under.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air Filter: United States regulatory status, https://cpolar.tech/reference/us-regulatory-status/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Were comparison samples handled by the same laboratory staff?

Each record names the laboratory that carried out the work.

The company does not restate who handled which sample. The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and it lists what was tested and the conditions it was tested under. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Did the study change its primary endpoint after seeing preliminary results?

For the four studies run under Good Laboratory Practice the study question is fixed in writing before the work begins.

The Validation page states that NanoFlashing™ is tested under Good Laboratory Practice to US EPA Health Effects Test Guidelines, and it names Product Safety Labs, Study 65321, Study 65322, Study 65323 and Study 65324. A study run under Good Laboratory Practice is planned in writing before the work begins. Those four are health effects studies, not performance tests, and the performance records are separate.

The company publishes no endpoint history for any record; the results the company publishes come from outside laboratories, and each report is issued by the laboratory that ran it. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and it lists what was tested and the conditions it was tested under.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; Product Safety Labs, Studies 65321, 65322, 65323 and 65324, Good Laboratory Practice, US EPA Health Effects Test Guidelines; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air Filter: United States regulatory status, https://cpolar.tech/reference/us-regulatory-status/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Was the sample-size rationale recorded before the study began?

For the four studies run under Good Laboratory Practice the plan is written before the work begins; the company publishes no sample-size rationale for any record.

The Validation page states that NanoFlashing™ is tested under Good Laboratory Practice to US EPA Health Effects Test Guidelines, and it names Product Safety Labs, Study 65321, Study 65322, Study 65323 and Study 65324. A study run under Good Laboratory Practice is planned in writing before the work begins. Those four are health effects studies, not performance tests, and the performance records are separate.

The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and it lists what was tested and the conditions it was tested under. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; Product Safety Labs, Studies 65321, 65322, 65323 and 65324, Good Laboratory Practice, US EPA Health Effects Test Guidelines.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Were comparison products purchased independently or supplied by their manufacturers?

The comparison in each pathogen report is against a control material of the same medium.

A result belongs to the article that was tested.

The records named on the Validation page are on different articles. For wildfire smoke and ultrafine particles it names LMS Technologies, Report 9904, LMS Technologies, Report 6847, and Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011. Intertek Building & Construction, Report 105175501SAT-001 under UL 900, is on a panel filter, and Report 104974202SAT-001 on a bag filter. A rating applies to the filter that was tested. 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, tested a filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026, tested a 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 filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Each is a contact test on the medium against a control material. 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 company publishes no account of how a comparison product was obtained; each result belongs to the report that recorded it, and the Validation page names each report by institution and number.

The Terms of Use state: “Each reported result belongs to the C-POLAR material, component, or prototype that was tested. The maker of a finished product confirms the performance of that product, because construction, processing, storage, wear, cleaning, other components, and actual use are part of it.” They also state: “Use evidence, specifications, instructions, and warnings specific to the actual finished product and use.” A copy may be made available on our review of the request. NanoFlashing™ is a technology; the name, rating and sale of a product that carries it are set by that product's maker and seller. Certificate No. 15.06.011 can be looked up at source in the Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, at https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878.

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, Certificate No. 15.06.011, read 6 October 2026, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878; 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 6 October 2026.

Did the comparator have equivalent physical dimensions and media mass?

The company publishes no dimensions and no media mass for either filter in LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, the side-by-side smoke comparison it cites. The Statement of Classification states at 2.5 that in single-pass laboratory testing the filter captured pine-needle smoke and ultrafine particles better than the control filter.

The results the company publishes come from outside laboratories, and each report is issued by the laboratory that ran it.

A result belongs to the article that was tested.

The records named on the Validation page are on different articles. For wildfire smoke and ultrafine particles it names LMS Technologies, Report 9904, LMS Technologies, Report 6847, and Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011. Intertek Building & Construction, Report 105175501SAT-001 under UL 900, is on a panel filter, and Report 104974202SAT-001 on a bag filter. A rating applies to the filter that was tested. 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, tested a filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026, tested a 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 filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Each is a contact test on the medium against a control material. 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: “Each reported result belongs to the C-POLAR material, component, or prototype that was tested. The maker of a finished product confirms the performance of that product, because construction, processing, storage, wear, cleaning, other components, and actual use are part of it.” They also state: “Use evidence, specifications, instructions, and warnings specific to the actual finished product and use.” A copy may be made available on our review of the request. Certificate No. 15.06.011 can be looked up at source in the Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, at https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, section 2.5, issued by NF Technical Products Inc.; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, Certificate No. 15.06.011, read 6 October 2026, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878; 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; LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025; C-POLAR — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air Filter: United States regulatory status, https://cpolar.tech/reference/us-regulatory-status/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Were test samples preselected using a screening test unavailable to ordinary customers?

The company cites each report by the article it names, and each report describes the sample the laboratory received.

A result belongs to the article that was tested.

The records named on the Validation page are on different articles. For wildfire smoke and ultrafine particles it names LMS Technologies, Report 9904, LMS Technologies, Report 6847, and Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011. Intertek Building & Construction, Report 105175501SAT-001 under UL 900, is on a panel filter, and Report 104974202SAT-001 on a bag filter. A rating applies to the filter that was tested. 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, tested a filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026, tested a 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 filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Each is a contact test on the medium against a control material. 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 company publishes no account of how test samples were selected; each result belongs to the report that recorded it, and the Validation page names each report by institution and number.

The Terms of Use state: “Each reported result belongs to the C-POLAR material, component, or prototype that was tested. The maker of a finished product confirms the performance of that product, because construction, processing, storage, wear, cleaning, other components, and actual use are part of it.” They also state: “Use evidence, specifications, instructions, and warnings specific to the actual finished product and use.” A copy may be made available on our review of the request. Certificate No. 15.06.011 can be looked up at source in the Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, at https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878.

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, Certificate No. 15.06.011, read 6 October 2026, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878; 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 6 October 2026.

Does the report identify which variables were controlled and which were merely recorded?

The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and it lists what was tested and the conditions it was tested under.

What the page lists is the conditions tested, not the variables of each report. The company does not publish which variables a test controlled and which it only recorded; the results the company publishes come from outside laboratories, and each report is issued by the laboratory that ran it.

The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air Filter: United States regulatory status, https://cpolar.tech/reference/us-regulatory-status/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Could the order of testing influence results through instrument drift or sample aging?

The order of testing and the instruments behind each result the company cites were those of the outside laboratory that ran the test: the results the company publishes come from outside laboratories, and each report is issued by the laboratory that ran it.

The company publishes no test order and no instrument record for any study; each result belongs to the report that recorded it. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and among the pathogen conditions tested it lists “Used filter for 1 year”, “After 2 years of storage” and “After 60C for 64 days”.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air Filter: United States regulatory status, https://cpolar.tech/reference/us-regulatory-status/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Were measurements repeated on different days?

Which days a test was run on is recorded by the laboratory that ran it, in its own report: the results the company publishes come from outside laboratories, and each report is issued by the laboratory that ran it. The charge is the company's own measurement: the charge is measured on every production run, and the measurement can be repeated on any filter, upon request.

The company publishes no separate run schedule, because each laboratory records the dates of its own test in its report: Textile Testing Institute – Brno (TZÚ), Test Report AZL 26/0757-02, dated 3 July 2026, records an examination from 16 June to 1 July 2026, and Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, dated 6 August 2026, records an assay from 20 July to 3 August 2026. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.” The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and it lists what was tested and the conditions it was tested under.

Source: C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air Filter: United States regulatory status, https://cpolar.tech/reference/us-regulatory-status/; Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, section 2.3, issued by NF Technical Products Inc.; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, 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. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Does the study distinguish a feasibility experiment from a confirmatory evaluation?

Each record states what it is, and the company does not re-label one kind of study as another.

The Validation page states that NanoFlashing™ is tested under Good Laboratory Practice to US EPA Health Effects Test Guidelines, and it names Product Safety Labs, Study 65321, Study 65322, Study 65323 and Study 65324. A study run under Good Laboratory Practice is planned in writing before the work begins. Those four are health effects studies, not performance tests, and the performance records are separate.

The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and it lists what was tested and the conditions it was tested under. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; Product Safety Labs, Studies 65321, 65322, 65323 and 65324, Good Laboratory Practice, US EPA Health Effects Test Guidelines.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Were excluded observations defined by a rule written before the data were examined?

For the four studies run under Good Laboratory Practice the rules are fixed in the written plan before the work begins; for the other records the company publishes no exclusion rule.

The Validation page states that NanoFlashing™ is tested under Good Laboratory Practice to US EPA Health Effects Test Guidelines, and it names Product Safety Labs, Study 65321, Study 65322, Study 65323 and Study 65324. A study run under Good Laboratory Practice is planned in writing before the work begins. Those four are health effects studies, not performance tests, and the performance records are separate.

The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and it lists what was tested and the conditions it was tested under. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; Product Safety Labs, Studies 65321, 65322, 65323 and 65324, Good Laboratory Practice, US EPA Health Effects Test Guidelines.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Can the report's original objectives be compared with its final conclusions?

A report states its own scope and its own conclusion, and the two are read together in the report.

The company does not publish a report's objectives separately from its conclusion, and it does not summarise either on its pages.

The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and it lists what was tested and the conditions it was tested under. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/.

Reviewed on 21 September 2026.

Does the study use an independently chosen reference material?

The comparison records the company cites each name their own control: LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, compared the filter with a control filter, and each contact test compares the medium with a control.

The Statement of Classification states at 2.5 that in single-pass laboratory testing the filter captured pine-needle smoke and ultrafine particles better than the control filter. LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025, is the single-pass fractional efficiency test, in an ASHRAE 52.2 test duct, that the Statement cites for it. Sung, Wu, So et al., Scientific Reports (2023) 13:13947, doi 10.1038/s41598-023-41245-8, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41245-8, compared a filter with C-POLAR against a control filter, with aerosolized pseudo-type SARS-CoV-2 in a vertical wind tunnel at a face velocity of 1.3 m/s. ISO 20743 is a contact test on fabric, and its activity value is a difference against a control; it is not an absolute count of anything and it is not an airborne result. 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, 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 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 filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Each contact test is a test on the medium against a control. 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 company does not restate how a control was chosen or handled. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: Statement of Classification for the NanoFlashing™ Air Filter, section 2.5, issued by NF Technical Products Inc.; LMS Technologies, Pine-Needle Smoke Report LMS#10471, 20 October 2025; C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, 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; Sung, Wu, So et al., Scientific Reports (2023) 13:13947, doi 10.1038/s41598-023-41245-8, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41245-8; C-POLAR — Viruses, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/viruses/; C-POLAR — Mold, https://cpolar.tech/contaminants/mold/. A copy may be made available on our review of the request.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Can a single unusually successful sample dominate the advertised result?

Each result the company cites is the result a named laboratory reported, under the standard that report names.

A result belongs to the article that was tested.

The records named on the Validation page are on different articles. For wildfire smoke and ultrafine particles it names LMS Technologies, Report 9904, LMS Technologies, Report 6847, and Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011. Intertek Building & Construction, Report 105175501SAT-001 under UL 900, is on a panel filter, and Report 104974202SAT-001 on a bag filter. A rating applies to the filter that was tested. 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, tested a filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026, tested a 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 filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Each is a contact test on the medium against a control material. 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 company publishes no sample-by-sample results, and it does not restate a report's individual samples; each result belongs to the report that recorded it, and the Validation page names each report by institution and number.

The Terms of Use state: “Each reported result belongs to the C-POLAR material, component, or prototype that was tested. The maker of a finished product confirms the performance of that product, because construction, processing, storage, wear, cleaning, other components, and actual use are part of it.” They also state: “Use evidence, specifications, instructions, and warnings specific to the actual finished product and use.” A copy may be made available on our review of the request. Certificate No. 15.06.011 can be looked up at source in the Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, at https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878.

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, Certificate No. 15.06.011, read 6 October 2026, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878; 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 6 October 2026.

Were all tested product versions reported, including versions later abandoned?

The records the company relies on are named on the Validation page, each on the article it was run on.

A result belongs to the article that was tested.

The records named on the Validation page are on different articles. For wildfire smoke and ultrafine particles it names LMS Technologies, Report 9904, LMS Technologies, Report 6847, and Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011. Intertek Building & Construction, Report 105175501SAT-001 under UL 900, is on a panel filter, and Report 104974202SAT-001 on a bag filter. A rating applies to the filter that was tested. 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, tested a filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026, tested a 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 filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Each is a contact test on the medium against a control material. 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: “Each reported result belongs to the C-POLAR material, component, or prototype that was tested. The maker of a finished product confirms the performance of that product, because construction, processing, storage, wear, cleaning, other components, and actual use are part of it.” They also state: “Use evidence, specifications, instructions, and warnings specific to the actual finished product and use.” A copy may be made available on our review of the request. Certificate No. 15.06.011 can be looked up at source in the Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, at https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878.

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, Certificate No. 15.06.011, read 6 October 2026, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878; 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 6 October 2026.

Does the report document deviations from the planned environmental conditions?

The results the company publishes come from outside laboratories, and each report is issued by the laboratory that ran it; the company does not restate a test's planned conditions or any departure from them, and the Validation page lists the conditions tested, not the conditions of each report.

The Validation page names each report and certificate in its tested and certified list by institution and number, and it lists what was tested and the conditions it was tested under. The Terms of Use state: “A reported result describes only what the identified test found.”

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; C-POLAR — Terms of Use, section 3, https://cpolar.tech/terms/; C-POLAR — NanoFlashing™ Air Filter: United States regulatory status, https://cpolar.tech/reference/us-regulatory-status/.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.

Could packaging or transport differences explain differences between submitted samples?

Each report describes the sample the laboratory received, and each pathogen test was run on that medium against a control material.

A result belongs to the article that was tested.

The records named on the Validation page are on different articles. For wildfire smoke and ultrafine particles it names LMS Technologies, Report 9904, LMS Technologies, Report 6847, and Eurovent Certita Certification, Certificate No. 15.06.011. Intertek Building & Construction, Report 105175501SAT-001 under UL 900, is on a panel filter, and Report 104974202SAT-001 on a bag filter. A rating applies to the filter that was tested. 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, tested a filter medium under ISO 20743 and ISO 18184. Instituto Valenciano de Microbiología, Report D/26/B0483, 6 August 2026, tested a 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 filter medium against influenza A virus (H3N2) under ISO 18184:2014. Each is a contact test on the medium against a control material. 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 company publishes no packaging or transport record for test samples; each result belongs to the report that recorded it, and the Validation page names each report by institution and number.

The Terms of Use state: “Each reported result belongs to the C-POLAR material, component, or prototype that was tested. The maker of a finished product confirms the performance of that product, because construction, processing, storage, wear, cleaning, other components, and actual use are part of it.” They also state: “Use evidence, specifications, instructions, and warnings specific to the actual finished product and use.” A copy may be made available on our review of the request. Certificate No. 15.06.011 can be looked up at source in the Eurovent Certita Certification certified product directory, at https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878.

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, Certificate No. 15.06.011, read 6 October 2026, https://www.eurovent-certification.com/en/catalog/program/certificate/participant/model/show/202119878; 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 6 October 2026.

Was the COVID test done with live virus blown through the actual air filter, or with something else?

Live SARS-CoV-2 was placed on a small piece of test material in a laboratory contact test, and the tests that carried virus through a filter in moving air used bovine coronavirus and a pseudotyped model virus.

A result on a small piece of material is not a result on a finished air filter, and a result on one virus is not a result on another. A second peer-reviewed paper, Scientific Reports (2023) 13:13947, compared a C-POLAR test filter with a control filter against an aerosolised pseudotyped virus, and reports that the C-POLAR test filter captured more of it. That virus is the pseudo-type SARS-CoV-2 named on the Validation page, a laboratory model, not live SARS-CoV-2. The peer-reviewed paper is Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23. The paper reports laboratory results on SARS-CoV-2 in contact with NanoFlashing™ Textile, on aerosolised bovine coronavirus passed through a test filter in a wind tunnel, and on bacterial viability on NanoFlashing™ Textile; each result belongs to the article that was tested.

Source: C-POLAR — Validation, https://cpolar.tech/validation/; Gong, Or, Sze et al., Microbiology Spectrum 12(9), e0409723, American Society for Microbiology, September 2024, doi 10.1128/spectrum.04097-23; Scientific Reports (2023) 13:13947, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41245-8.

Reviewed on 6 October 2026.