LITERATURE ON DFS TECHNOLOGY AND PURESHIELDTM

STUDY / REPORT TAB

Healthway DFS Technology vs HEPA A

Healthway DFS Technology vs UVGI B

Guangzhou Testing Center of Industrial Microbiology Test on the Efficiency of

Ultrafine in Capturing the H1N1 Virus C

University of Buffalo – Efficiency of the Ultrafine in Removal of Particulate

Matter D

National Research Council Canada – Testing Ozone Emissions from Air

Cleaners and Ionizers According to CSA Standard C22.2, No. 187 E

Building Energy and Environmental Systems Labroatory, Syracuse University -

Performance of Healthway DFS Air Cleaners for VOC, Ultrafine Particle
Removal, Measurement of Single-Pass Efficiency for Self-Contained Cleaners
and In-Room Burden Bio-Burden Reduction F

University of Buffalo – Efficiency of the Healthway 1200C and Healthway

20600-3 in Removing Particulate Matter from Smoking Incense G

National and Kapodistrian University of Athens Medical School (Department

of Microbiology) - Clinical efficiency of Healthway EMF Air Cleaner in hospital
wards with confirmed increased load of fungal spores H

Bioscience Laboratories, Inc - Evaluation of H1N1 virus activity on surfaces

treated with PureShield I

Results of Tests of PureShield vs Various Organisms and on Different Surfaces J

Certification from Cleveland Clinic Managed Sheikh Khalifa Medical City for
Services Provided by Pure Solutions International K

AIR INTELLIPURE INC

Unit 402 la O’ Centre, 1000 Arnaiz Avenue, Makati City 1223, Philippines
ask@airintellipure.com | +63 917 322 PURE (7879)
 SUMMARY OF LITERATURE ON DFS TECHNOLOGY AND PURESHIELDTM

DFS Technology compared to other Filtration Systems

A. Healthway DFS Technology vs HEPA

Compilation of industry established performance criteria, comparison between HEPA
filtration and Healthway’s advanced Disinfection Filtration System (DFS) (technology
found in all Intellipure and Healthway air purifiers).

How DFS compares to HEPA

• DFS enables 99.999999% system filtration efficiency down to 0.007 micron at
lower pressure drop of HEPA vs 99.97% at 0.3 micron of HEPA with pressure
drop. DFS meets or exceeds CDC for positive and negative pressure rooms at
efficiency hogher than one provided by HEPA
• DFS addresses the viral size ultrafine particles arrest efficiently where HEPA
does not
• DFS filters are highly energy efficient and result in extremely low bio burden
in cleanrooms. DFS filters are highly energy efficient and result in extremely
low bio burden in cleanrooms. Lower maintenance costs. DFS can last up to
3x longer life than conventional HEPAs due to lower pressure drop and pleats
per inch characteristics.
• Less filter replacement frequency compared to HEPA
• 50% Lower operating cost than typical AHU designed for a HealthCare
Application – Multi-stage Filtration
• For achieving ISO classes - DFS filters provide the necessary filtration. Only
blank ceiling diffusers are required. No terminals required for ISO Class 6 and
above. HEPA filtration system requires multiple HEPA ULPA system to achieve
ISO classes.

B. Healthway DFS Technology vs UVGI

Compilation of industry established performance criteria, comparison between
Ultraviolet (UV) and Ultraviolet Germicidal Irradiation (UVGI) and Healthway’s
advanced Disinfection Filtration System (DFS)

How DFS compares to UV and UVGI

• DFS enables 99.999999% system filtration efficiency down to 0.007 micron
and addresses viral size ultrafine particles arrest efficiently. UV and UVGI do
not address capturing particles including spores and viral size ultrafine
particle efficiently. UV and UVGI efficiency is only linked to intensity,
wavelength 254-270 nm and dose of exposure/time but not in reducing any
airborne particulates

AIR INTELLIPURE INC

Unit 402 la O’ Centre, 1000 Arnaiz Avenue, Makati City 1223, Philippines
ask@airintellipure.com | +63 917 322 PURE (7879)
 • DFS filters are highly energy efficient and result in extremely low bio burden
in cleanrooms. DFS filters are highly energy efficient and result in extremely
low bio burden in cleanrooms. Microbial inhibition works only if UV tube
intensity is maintained constantly and when system is equipped with filters
against UV. Destructive effects of UV can be reversed by photoreactivation
• DFS with the optional VOC Bank addresses Volatile Organic Compound (VOC)
Pollutants. UV and UVGI do not address any VOC pollutants.
• UV and UVGI have higher maintenance cost due to life cycle and loading
density
• DFS system does not impact HVAC material or building material integrity
while the high radiation of UV and UVGI may deteriorate exposed building
material
• DFS is safe to operate due to self-contained design. UV and UVGI pose higher
risk of exposure to UV radiation which may lead to skin burns and eye
damage.

EFFICIENCY TESTS ON THE AIR PURIFIERS

C. Guangzhou Testing Center of Industrial Microbiology

Date : 24 May 2018
Purifier Model : DFS Technology of Intellipure Ultrafine 468
Test : Effectivity in capturing H1N1 virus
Results : > 99.99% efficiency in capturing and killing the H1N1 virus

The H1N1 virus is smaller in size than the CoVid19 virus

D. University of Buffalo
Date : 10 November 2017
Purifier Model : Intellipure Ultrafine 468
Test : Removal efficiency of particulate matter
Results : Single pass removal efficiency of 99.9945% of particulate
matter .007 micrometers and larger over the course of three
tests.

E. National Research Council Canada

Date : 5 December 2016
Purifier Model : Intellipure Ultrafine 468
Test : Ozone Emissions from Air Cleaners and Ionizers According to
CSA Standard C22.2, No. 187
Results : CSA C22.2 No 187 Cl. 7.4 standard allows a maximum output
of 0.050 ppmv. The Intellipure Ultrafine 468 was found to
have a maximum chamber concentration of 0.002ppmv, and
an 8-hour TWA maximum ozone concentration of 0.000
ppmv.
F. Building Energy and Environmental Systems Labroatory, Syracuse University
Date : April 2014
Title : Performance of Healthway DFS Air Cleaners for VOC,
Ultrafine Particle Removal, Measurement of Single-Pass
Efficiency for Self-Contained Cleaners and In-Room Burden
Bio-Burden Reduction
Study Goals : Determine the removal efficiency of the DFS air cleaner for
mitigating the exposure of formaldehyde and toluene in an
environmental chamber, determine whether there are
measurable byproducts during the operation of the air
cleaner and estimate the impact of the ozone generation
during the operation of the air cleaner.

Results :
• The DFS air cleaner does work for formaldehyde and toluene abatement
• There was almost no generation of byproducts except for ozone.

• Simulation study showed that the air cleaner generates a certain level of
ozone in a residential house but the resulting ozone concentration level
indoors did not exceed the exposure limit in the associated standards at
all times. In addition, the level of ozone generated is low enough to be
covered by the deposition process due to building materials when an
actual building setup is considered.

G. University of Buffalo
Date : March 28, 2013
Purifier Model : Healthway 1200 SC and Healthway 20600-03
Test : Removal efficiency of particulate matter from a smoking
incense challenge
Results :

• The 12000SC unit removed particles exiting in its exhaust air to near-zero
counts for all particles greater than 2nm in average diameter, achieving a
99.99% rate of efficiency of removal of all particles.
• The portable Healthway 20600-03 unit produced exiting air 99.99% free of all
particulate matter greater than 2nm in diameter.

H. National and Kapodistrian University of Athens Medical School (Department of

Microbiology)
Date : September 16, 2008
Test : Clinical efficiency of Healthway EMF Air Cleaner in hospital
wards with confirmed increased load of fungal spores due to
construction works in the vicinity of the hospital and working
areas of clinical laboratory services.
 Results : The continuous 24 hour operation of the portable air
cleaning device Healthway EMF Air Cleaner, FDA Class II
Medical Device lowered significantly (p<0.001) the fungal
load of the indoor air in all the seven (7) tested sites. The
device’s output air flow was free of fungal spores

PURE WELLNESS

I. Bioscience Laboratories, Inc

Date : 25 November 2009

Test : Evaluation of H1N1 virus activity on surfaces treated with
PureShield
Results : PureShield reduced the infectivity of the H1N1 virus by
99.17% after Zero time exposure (immediately after drying)
and an average of >99.99% after a 30 minute exposure.

A 30-minute exposure of the epidemic strain of Influenza A

H1N1 demonstrated significant virucidal activity of cloth
treated with PureShield.

J. Results of Tests of PureShield vs Various Organisms and on Different Surfaces

Sample results:

Treated surfaces showed a >99.99% reduction of the following organisms:

• Staphylococcus Aureus MRSA Strain
• E Coli
• Clostridium Difficile
• Aspergillus niger

Treated shirts and pants showed a 99.99% reduction (4 log kill) in Staphylococcus
Aureus

K. Certification from Cleveland Clinic Managed Sheikh Khalifa Medical City

Pure Solutions Inc provided services to Sheikh Khalifa Medical City from Initial Indoor
Air Quality assessment and Indoor Air Quality and Infection Control Consultancy to
Treatment of room surfaces and cleaning and disinfection of FCUs and installation of
Healthway Air Purification Systems in critical areas to maintain microbial airborned
contaminants and particulates below the allowable limits.
A. HEALTHWAY DFS TECHNOLOGY VS HEPA
 HealthWay dfs Technology VS HEPA

Introduction and Background of HealthWay DFS Technology

The HealthWay DFS Air Purification System technology was originally developed through a
government grant focused on germ warfare. The professional line of air cleaning by
HealthWay is the only hybrid system to effectively address all three pollutant categories. It
has been proven to capture 99.99% of all particles as small as .007 micron in size which is
over 40 times smaller than the HEPA filtration standard. Our units are equipped with a gas
and odor filter, which eliminate most gases. The patented DFS technology removes 99.99%
of harmful viruses, mold, and bacteria passing through our system leaving nothing but fresh,
pure, healthy air. This technology is currently used in hospitals, medical clean rooms,
government buildings, and military applications.

This document compiles industry established performance criteria, comparison between

conventional HEPA filtration and the advanced Disinfection Filtration System DFS by
HealthWay. The below referenced scientific evidence and results of field studies also
highlights the side by side comparison between HEPA filtration system and the advanced
DFS in field applications such as in HealthCare, biotech cleanrooms and a pharmaceutical
cleanroom equipped with a Disinfecting Filtration System (DFS) that significantly reduces
airborne bioburden in cleanrooms. The DFS High Efficiency Particulate Air hybrid system
traps and kills bacteria and also improves the filtration performance of a filter media by two
to three orders of magnitude. In laboratory tests the DFS technology has been shown to kill
Staphylococcus epidermidis and Escherichia coli. These field test results support laboratory
testing and show that basically there is no airborne bioburden in both a Class 10 room, with
terminal HEPA in addition to the DFS, and in a Class 1000 room that utilizes only the DFS
without any terminal HEPA filters. In the case of an old laboratory converted to a cleanroom,
direct comparison of the DFS with respect to conventional HEPA fan filter units (FFUs) was
possible. The results showed that at the same flow rate the DFS resulted in significantly
lower bioburden as compared to the FFUs.

Laboratory Evaluation of the DFS

The DFS technology went through multiple third-party testings’ of its efficiency, filter
classification and effectiveness on a number of criteria pollutants. The tests were conducted
by independent research institutes including Syracuse University BEES Lab and University
of Buffalo IUCB. Additional filed studies in the area of clean room applications were
conducted by Jaisinghani et al.8 have demonstrated the bactericidal properties of the DFS
AKA “Electrically Enhanced Filtration EEF” under laboratory conditions. This study,
conducted at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, is summarized in this section.

Results and Discussion

The results are summarized in the Virginia Polytechnic Institute study. In the absence of any
voltage applied to the DFS unit (i.e., control tests), viable bacteria were recovered from one
square inch of filter in the range of 1 x 105 CFU to 2 x 106 CFU. Counts greater than about 3
x 106 CFU were too crowded to be accurately counted and were considered to be too
numerous to count. When high voltage was applied for four hours, the majority of the
bacteria were killed. The kill rate increased with increased voltage or with the first applied
field strength (applied voltage divided by the distance of the ionizer wires from the control
ground electrode), V/d1. At field strength (V/d1) of 4.2kV/cm, there was no growth after 24
hours of incubation. After 48 hours, there was either no growth or small (in size and in
number) colonies grown. These small colonies were identified as S. epidermidis, and were
identical in biochemical profile as the isolate used in the tests. It was concluded that four
hour sat 4.2 kV/cm (V/d1) did not completely kill the S.epidermidis. If the bacteria were not
all killed, some of them were damaged sufficiently so that no growth or very limited growth
could occur after 24 hours incubation. When the ionizing time was increased to seven hours,
over 99% of the bacteria (as compared to the control) were killed. When the applied field
strength, V/d1, was increased to 4.5 kV/cm or higher, no growth occurred on any of the filter
pieces except for one experiment. This exception may have occurred because the starting
dose of bacteria for this experiment was three times higher than for the control and up to 10
times higher than for any other experiment. Nonetheless, there were still three to four logs of
killing using an applied field strength, V/d1 of 4.5 kV/cm or higher, as compared to the
control experiments. It should be noted that, in practice, bacteria caught on the filter are held
within the ionizing field for an almost infinite amount of time, thus receiving an almost
infinite radiation dosage. Hence, in practice, the killing efficiency should be higher even at
lower field strengths. Similar results were obtained using E. coli in a previous study
conducted with the DFS AKA EEF at the University of Wisconsin.

Field Results in Cleanrooms

For summary of above described research & field results please see link below
http://www.ivtnetwork.com/sites/default/files/Cleaning-Validation-Volume-III.pdf

Efficiency and MERV Rating

The Efficiency of the DFS system is reported to be 99.999% @ 0.007 µm in comparison to

HEAP standards 99.97 @ 0.3 µm. Additional ASHRAE Standard 52.2-2012 Filter testing
and EN-1822-5 test ( Efficiency / MPPS / Resistance) of the commercial 2000 SC DFS at air
flow rate of 2000 CFM showed the filter exceeds the MERV 16 class.
 Performance Criteria HealthWay DFS FILTRATION SYSTEM HEPA FILTRATION SYSTEM
Filtration Efficiency Enable 99.999999 % system filtration efficiency down 99.97% @ 0.3 micron
to 0.007 micron – at lower pressure drop of HEPA doesn’t address viral size ultrafine
see table 1 particles efficiently
The technology addresses the viral size ultrafine Efficiency increases up to 99.97% but
particles arrest efficiently with pressure drop penalty
System filtration efficiency - double HEPA filtration
possible due to the lower pressure drop of the primary
DFS filters. This eliminates the need for ULPA or
better filters.
Microbial inhibition & DFS filters are highly energy efficient and result in
Bioburden extremely low bio burden in cleanrooms
They create high energy field that leads to
deactivating viable microbes such as bacteria, fungus NA
and viruses
Lower Bioburden of bacteria, viruses and fungus
Terminal cleanroom filters Protect terminal cleanroom filters
This is essential since HVAC systems can introduce Typical designs requires terminal HEPA
contamination, which can clog or damage terminal
filters. With DFS in Duct Filters, terminal filters
should never require replacement or maintenance.
Only the In Duct DFS filter needs replacement -
cleanroom not contaminated during filter change.
Maintenance Costs Lower Maintenance Costs Higher maintenance cost due to life cycle and
Can last up to three times longer life than loading density
conventional HEPA's due to lower pressure drop and
pleats per inch characteristics.
Energy Consumption Ultra Low Energy Consumption due to low pressure Higher energy Consumption due to higher
drop (see graph1) density and pressure drop over time
Unlike FFUs, they enable Flow-rate/Ceiling Coverage
independence - Higher performance at lower airflow
rates.

Achieving ISO classes The HealthWay DFS filters provide the necessary Multiple HEPA ULPA system required to
filtration for such applications. Only blank ceiling achieve ISO classes
 diffusers are required for these applications.
No terminals required for ISO Class 6 and above
Noise level Lower noise - due to high quality 3 phase efficient Higher noise level especially overtime
industrial motors - located away from the cleanroom loading
ceiling.

Filter Replacement
Meeting requirements
Less filter replacement frequency
Filters replaced externally - less down time and total
protection of cleanroom processes and equipment
filtration systems meet or exceed CDC for positive
and negative pressure rooms at efficiency higher than
one provided by HEPA supply:99.9999% @0.007µm
More frequent filter replacement in
comparison to DFS
Meets CDC engineering specifications
for filtration efficiency (99.97% at 0.3
µm)

http://www.technovation.org/downloads/docs/A2C2%20_98biocidal.pdf

Graph 1:
 NOMINAL PD VS FLOW FT-102 ULTRA LOW PD DFS
HEPA

Table 1: DFS Bactericidal Test Summary using S. Epidermidis after 4 hours of air flow [Control= Conventional HEPA filter]

AVERAGE COLONIES

Filter #/sq. inch of filter % KILLED/ COMMENT

Control 1.00E+06 No Additional Growth

Control 1.02E+05 After 24 Hours

DFS 0.00E+00 100% KILLED

DFS 3.44E+02 99.93% KILLED
DFS 0.00E+00 100% KILLED
DFS 0.00E+00 Some Growth
DFS 0.00E+00 After 48 Hours

DFS 6.26E+03 98.75% KILLED

DFS 5.44E+02 99.9% KILLED
DFS 2.16E+02 99.95% KILLED
DFS 3.51E+03 99.3% KILLED
Table 2: Summary of Some Field Tests:
Airborne Bioburden in the Encelle Class 1,000 cleanroom

15 days 30days 45 days 60days

Design
Class 1,000 Cfu/ft3/ Cfu/ft3/ Cfu/ft3/ Cfu/ft3/ Cfu/ft3/ Cfu/ft3/ Cfu/ft3/ Cfu/ft3/
24hr.* 72hr* 24hr.* 72hr* 24hr.* 72hr* 24hr.* 72hr*
Device Testing 0.849 0.878 0 0 0 0 0 0
Coating 0 0.142 0.057 0.057 0 0 0 0
Formulations 0.538 0.566 0 0 0 0 0 0
Device 0.283 0.340 0.113 0.113 0 0 0 0
Manufacturing
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Refrigeration
Isolation 0.113 0.170 0.849 0.849 0 0 0 0
THE CLASS 1,000 ROOM HAS LOWER BIOBURDEN THAN A CLASS 100 ROOM!
Annual Cost
References:

http://www.technovation.org/downloads/docs/A2C2%20_98biocidal.pdf

http://www.technovation.org/performance.htm

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/03N0059/03N-0059-EC-23.htm

http://www.technovation.org/downloads.htm

http://www.technovation.org/eef.htm

http://www.technovation.org/performance.htm

http://www.technovation.org/tb_isolation-3d.htm
B. HEALTHWAY DFS TECHNOLOGY VS UVGI
 HealthWay DFS Technology VS UVGI

I. Introduction and Background of HealthWay DFS Technology

The HealthWay DFS Air Purification System technology was originally developed through a
government grant focused on germ warfare. The professional line of air cleaning by
HealthWay is the only hybrid system to effectively address all three pollutant categories. It
has been proven to capture 99.99% of all particles as small as .007 micron in size which is
over 40 times smaller than the HEPA filtration standard. Our units are equipped with a gas
and odor filter, which eliminate most gases. The patented DFS technology removes 99.99%
of harmful viruses, mold, and bacteria passing through our system leaving nothing but fresh,
pure, healthy air. This technology is currently used in hospitals, medical clean rooms,
government buildings, and military applications.

This document compiles industry established performance criteria, comparison between

conventional UVGI and the advanced Disinfection Filtration System DFS by HealthWay.
The below referenced scientific evidence and results of field studies also highlights the side
by side comparison between UVGI system and the advanced DFS in field applications such
as in HealthCare, biotech cleanrooms and a pharmaceutical cleanroom equipped with a
Disinfecting Filtration System (DFS) that significantly reduces airborne bioburden in
cleanrooms. The DFS High Efficiency Particulate Air hybrid system traps and kills bacteria
and also improves the filtration performance of a filter media by two to three orders of
magnitude. In laboratory tests the DFS technology has been shown to kill Staphylococcus
epidermidis and Escherichia coli. These field test results support laboratory testing and show
that basically there is no airborne bioburden in both a Class 10 room, with terminal HEPA in
addition to the DFS, and in a Class 1000 room that utilizes only the DFS without any
terminal HEPA filters. When compared to DFS UVGI is not considered a stand-alone
solution to air contamination problems but is an adjunct.

II. Laboratory Evaluation of the DFS

The DFS technology went through multiple third-party testings’ of its efficiency, filter
classification and effectiveness on a number of criteria pollutants. The tests were conducted
by independent research institutes including Syracuse University BEES Lab and University
of Buffalo IUCB. Additional filed studies in the area of clean room applications were
conducted by Jaisinghani et al.8 have demonstrated the bactericidal properties of the DFS
AKA “Electrically Enhanced Filtration EEF” under laboratory conditions. This study,
conducted at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, is summarized in this section.

III. Results and Discussion

The results are summarized in the Virginia Polytechnic Institute study. In the absence of any
voltage applied to the DFS unit (i.e., control tests), viable bacteria were recovered from one
square inch of filter in the range of 1 x 105 CFU to 2 x 106 CFU. Counts greater than about 3
x 106 CFU were too crowded to be accurately counted and were considered to be too
numerous to count. When high voltage was applied for four hours, the majority of the
bacteria were killed. The kill rate increased with increased voltage or with the first applied
field strength (applied voltage divided by the distance of the ionizer wires from the control
ground electrode), V/d1. At field strength (V/d1) of 4.2kV/cm, there was no growth after 24
hours of incubation. After 48 hours, there was either no growth or small (in size and in
number) colonies grown. These small colonies were identified as S. epidermidis, and were
identical in biochemical profile as the isolate used in the tests. It was concluded that four
hour sat 4.2 kV/cm (V/d1) did not completely kill the S.epidermidis. If the bacteria were not
all killed, some of them were damaged sufficiently so that no growth or very limited growth
could occur after 24 hours incubation. When the ionizing time was increased to seven hours,
over 99% of the bacteria (as compared to the control) were killed. When the applied field
strength, V/d1, was increased to 4.5 kV/cm or higher, no growth occurred on any of the filter
pieces except for one experiment. This exception may have occurred because the starting
dose of bacteria for this experiment was three times higher than for the control and up to 10
times higher than for any other experiment. Nonetheless, there were still three to four logs of
killing using an applied field strength, V/d1 of 4.5 kV/cm or higher, as compared to the
control experiments. It should be noted that, in practice, bacteria caught on the filter are held
within the ionizing field for an almost infinite amount of time, thus receiving an almost
infinite radiation dosage. Hence, in practice, the killing efficiency should be higher even at
lower field strengths. Similar results were obtained using E. coli in a previous study
conducted with the DFS “AKA” EEF at the University of Wisconsin.

IV. Field Results in Cleanrooms

For summary of above described research & field results please see link below
http://www.ivtnetwork.com/sites/default/files/Cleaning-Validation-Volume-III.pdf

V. Efficiency and MERV Rating

The Efficiency of the DFS system is reported to be 99.999% @ 0.007 µm in comparison to
HEAP standards 99.97 @ 0.3 µm. Additional ASHRAE Standard 52.2-2012 Filter testing
and EN-1822-5 test ( Efficiency / MPPS / Resistance) of the commercial 2000 SC DFS at air
flow rate of 2000 CFM showed the filter exceeds the MERV 16 class.

VI. UVGI Process Description

A UV disinfection system transfers electromagnetic energy from a mercury arc lamp to an
organism’s genetic material (DNA and RNA). When UV radiation penetrates the cell wall of
an organism, it destroys the cell’s ability to reproduce. The effectiveness of a UV disinfection
system depends on the characteristics of the airborne microorganism, the intensity of UV
radiation, the time the microorganisms are exposed to the radiation, and the reactor
configuration. For any one air filtration system design, disinfection success is directly related
to the concentration of colloidal and particulate constituents in the air stream.
 The main components of a UV disinfection system are mercury arc lamps, a reactor, and
ballasts. The source of UV radiation is either the low-pressure or medium-pressure mercury
arc lamp with low or high intensities. The optimum wavelength to effectively inactivate
microorganisms is in the range of 250 to 270 nm. The intensity of the radiation emitted by
the lamp dissipates as the distance from the lamp increases. Low-pressure lamps emit
essentially monochromatic light at a wavelength of 253.7 nm. Standard lengths of the low-
pressure lamps are 0.75 and 1.5 meters with diameters of 1.5 to 2.0 cm. The ideal lamp wall
temperature is between 95 and 122° F.

VII. UVGI Air Disinfection

UVGI Air Disinfection systems are mainly grouped into four main types:

1. In-duct UV systems
2. Unitary UV systems
3. Upper-room systems (Passive)
4. UV barrier systems (Passive)

The upper-room and barrier system are passive disinfection systems that depend on local
room air currents while in-duct UV system is a one directional forced air system with
minimal dose exposure. These systems require the use of filters to control airborne
contamination, especially when it comes to spores. UVGI is not a stand-alone solution to air
contamination problems but is an adjunct when compared to the DFS system which is a
comprehensive, high efficiency three pollutant category hybrid air filtration system.

Some of the air stream disinfection challenges are limited to the exposure time which
depends on the airflow and dimensions of the ducts. The DFS filtration system unlike the air
stream system is designed to capture and constantly expose captured microbe throughout the
filter media to continuously deactivate and inhibit the microbial growth within the system
leaving the air passing through free from contaminants. While some evidence demonstrated
that UVGI is effective at reducing disease incidence comes mostly from upper-room UV
systems, other studies on the incidence of respiratory infections at a daycare center showed a
negligible reduction in illness (Dionne 1993).

VIII. Disadvantages of UV
• Low dosages may not effectively inactivate some viruses, spores, and cysts.
• Organisms can sometimes repair and reverse the destructive effects of UV through a
“repair mechanism,” known as photoreactivation, or in the absence of light known as
“dark repair.”
• A preventive maintenance program is costly and necessary to control fouling of tubes.
• UV disinfection is not as cost-effective in comparison with the DFS filtration system.
• There is no measurable residual to indicate the efficacy of UV disinfection.
• UV systems don’t work on capturing particulates from the air of any size
• UV passive systems doesn’t address contaminants outside the HVAC, Coils or in room air
 Performance Criteria
Filtration Efficiency
Microbial inhibition & Bioburden
Terminal cleanroom filters
Maintenance Costs
Achieving ISO classes
Impact on electrical wiring seals
and insulation material
Filter Replacement
VOC mitigation
Safety
HealthWay DFS FILTRATION SYSTEM
Enable 99.999999 % system filtration efficiency down to
0.007 micron – at lower pressure drop of HEPA see table 1
The technology addresses the viral size ultrafine particles
arrest efficiently
System filtration efficiency - double HEPA filtration
possible due to the lower pressure drop of the primary DFS
filters. This eliminates the need for UVGI or additional
terminal filters.
DFS filters are highly energy efficient and result in
extremely low bio burden in cleanrooms
They create high energy field that leads to deactivating
viable microbes such as bacteria, fungus and viruses
Lower Bioburden of bacteria, viruses and fungus
This is essential since HVAC systems can introduce
contamination, which can clog or damage terminal filters.
With DFS in Duct Filters, terminal filters should never
require replacement or maintenance.
Lower Maintenance Costs
DFS filters can last up to three times longer life than
conventional UVGI
The HealthWay DFS filters provide the necessary filtration
for such applications. Only blank ceiling diffusers are
required for these applications.
No terminals required for ISO Class 6 and above
DFS system doesn’t impact HVAC material or building
material integrity
Less filter replacement frequency
Filters replaced externally - less down time and total
protection of cleanroom processes and equipment
Addresses Volatile Organic Pollutants with its optional
VOC bank
Safe operation due to self-contained design
UV &UVGI
Doesn’t address capturing particles, including
spores and viral size ultrafine particles
efficiently
Efficiency is only linked to the intensity,
wavelength 254-270 nm and dose of
exposure/time but not in reducing any
airborne particulates which are known to
have adverse health effects including
respiratory and cardiovascular diseases
Works only if UV tube intensity is
maintained constantly and when system is
equipped with filters against UV
Destructive effects of UV can be reversed by
photoreactivation
It requires UV tube to be free from dust and
maintaining a high URV
NA
Typical designs requires terminal HEPA filters
Higher maintenance cost due to life cycle and
loading density
NA
Doesn’t apply to cleanroom particulate count
classes
High radiation may deteriorate exposed building
material
NA
Doesn’t address any VOC pollutants
Higher risk of exposure to UV radiation which
may lead to skin burns, eye damage
Table 1: DFS Bactericidal Test Summary using S. Epidermidis after 4 hours of air flow [Control= Conventional HEPA filter]

AVERAGE COLONIES

Filter #/sq. inch of filter % KILLED/ COMMENT

Control 1.00E+06 No Additional Growth

Control 1.02E+05 After 24 Hours

DFS 0.00E+00 100% KILLED

DFS 3.44E+02 99.93% KILLED
DFS 0.00E+00 100% KILLED
DFS 0.00E+00 Some Growth
DFS 0.00E+00 After 48 Hours

DFS 6.26E+03 98.75% KILLED

DFS 5.44E+02 99.9% KILLED
DFS 2.16E+02 99.95% KILLED
DFS 3.51E+03 99.3% KILLED
Table 2: Summary of Some Field Tests:
Airborne Bioburden in the Encelle Class 1,000 cleanroom

15 days 30days 45 days 60days

Design
Class 1,000 Cfu/ft3/ Cfu/ft3/ Cfu/ft3/ Cfu/ft3/ Cfu/ft3/ Cfu/ft3/ Cfu/ft3/ Cfu/ft3/
24hr.* 72hr* 24hr.* 72hr* 24hr.* 72hr* 24hr.* 72hr*
Device Testing 0.849 0.878 0 0 0 0 0 0
Coating 0 0.142 0.057 0.057 0 0 0 0
Formulations 0.538 0.566 0 0 0 0 0 0
Device 0.283 0.340 0.113 0.113 0 0 0 0
Manufacturing
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Refrigeration
Isolation 0.113 0.170 0.849 0.849 0 0 0 0
THE CLASS 1,000 ROOM HAS LOWER BIOBURDEN THAN A CLASS 100 ROOM!
C. GUANGZHOU TESTING CENTER OF INDUSTRIAL
MICROBIOLOGY TEST ON THE EFFICIENCY OF ULTRAFINE IN
CAPTURING THE H1N1 VIRUS
D. UNIVERSITY OF BUFFALO – EFFICIENCY OF THE
ULTRAFINE IN REMOVAL OF PARTICULATE MATTER
E. NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL CANADA – TESTING
OZONE EMISSIONS FROM AIR CLEANERS AND IONIZERS
ACCORDING TO CSA STANDARD C22.2, NO. 187
F. BUILDING ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS
LABROATORY, SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY - PERFORMANCE
OF HEALTHWAY DFS AIR CLEANERS FOR VOC, ULTRAFINE
PARTICLE REMOVAL, MEASUREMENT OF SINGLE-PASS
EFFICIENCY FOR SELF-CONTAINED CLEANERS AND IN-
ROOM BURDEN BIO-BURDEN REDUCTION
PERFORMANCE OF HEALTHWAY DFS AIR CLEANER FOR VOC, ULTRA-
FINE PARTICLE REMOVAL, MEASUREMENT OF SINGLE-PASS EFFICIENCY
FOR SELF-CONTAINED CLEANERS AND IN-ROOM BURDEN BIO-BURDEN
REDUCTION

Final Project Report for Task 1

Prepared for
HEALTHWAY INC.
Pulaski, NY

Prepared by
BUILDING ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS LABORATORY
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
263 Link Hall, Syracuse, NY 13244

KwangHoon Han, Ph.D,

Beverly Guo (Chemist),
Jianshun “Jensen“ S. Zhang, Ph.D (PI)

April, 2014
SU/BEESL Final Project Report for HealthWay Inc. (April, 2014) Page 1 of 2

PERFORMANCE OF HEALTHWAY DFS AIR CLEANERS FOR VOC, MEASUREMENT OF

SINGLE-PASS EFFICIENCY FOR SELF-CONTAINED CLEANERS – TASK 1
Background: In order to collect reliable experimental data for demonstrating the performance of the HealthWay
DFS (Disinfecting Filtration System) Air Cleaner for VOC removal, especially under realistic environmental
conditions in buildings, well-controlled tests need to be carried out, which explore the potential of this technology
for building HVAC systems, especially for commercial and residential applications, with actual testing data as
evidence. The goal of the present project was accomplished via the following objectives:
1) Conduct an exploratory pilot study to determine the removal efficiency of the DFS air cleaner for
mitigating the exposure of formaldehyde (HCHO) and toluene in an environmental chamber under
standard test conditions (23°C and 50% RH).
2) Perform GC/MS analysis to determine whether there are measurable byproducts during the operation of the
air cleaner.
3) Estimate the impact of the ozone generation during the operation of the air cleaner.
Methods: The investigation in the present project consisted of the following specific tasks:
1) A full-scale environmental empty chamber system (16’×12’×10’ high) made of electro-polished stainless steel
was set up and used to measure the air cleaner’s performance in removing formaldehyde (Initial concentration
level: 100-150 ppb) and toluene (700-750 ppb) at a full-recirculation mode at 300 cfm, 73.4°F (23°C) and 50%
RH. The air cleaner itself was operated at 1201 cfm.
2) A decay test procedure was used (i.e., pull-down test), in which formaldehyde, toluene and a tracer gas (SF 6 )
were monitored by a multi-gas monitor (INNOVA 1412), PTR-MS and a formaldehyde analyzer (Interscan RM16-
2.00m) to determine the leakage level of the chamber system and the removal efficiency of the air cleaner
accordingly.
3) Duplicate sorbent tube samples were collected for each test before the injection of the target gases and at the end
of the decay test after the start of the air cleaner operation to indentify possible byproducts due to the air cleaner,
if any.
4) An ozone monitor (2B Technologies Model 202) was also deployed to measure any ozone generation and its
emission level during the operation of the air cleaner as a possible byproduct.
5) Extrapolate the results via simulation study in a residential house condition (i.e., 2,500 ft2, 8-ft height 2-story
house at the operational recirculation airflow rate of 1200 cfm on different climate locations).
Results: Experimental results from the systematic investigation of the present study showed that the HealthWay
DFS air cleaner was effective for formaldehyde removal (~25% single-pass removal efficiency with a CADR of 301
cfm) and even better for toluene removal (demonstrating ~45% single-pass removal efficiency with a CADR of 540
cfm). There was almost no byproduct observed during the operation of the air cleaner except for a low level of
ozone detected 3 hours after the cleaner operation. The ozone generation rate observed in an empty stainless steel
chamber under standard test conditions was 1.68 mg/h, reaching 20 ppb level of ozone at the end of 4-hour test with
3 hours of ozone deposition time on the surface of the empty chamber. If the removal effect of building materials on
ozone is considered generally occurring in an actual built environment, the exposure level of ozone will be further
lowered down due to the ongoing chemical reaction of ozone with other compounds in the ambient air and the
material surfaces. A summarizing performance table is presented below, and the detailed performance results can be
found in the appendix.
With the experimental measurements on the DFS’ removal performance and byproduct generation rate (ozone), a
simulation study method developed in the BEESL Lab. for this kind of investigation was applied to a 2,500 ft2 4-
bedroom residential house. A well-mixed and simplified model was assumed. Two cases were considered: 1)
Airflow rate of recirculation at 1,200 cfm with an 80% duty cycle (2.88 ACH) in Syracuse, NY (SYR); and 2)
Constant fan airflow rate of recirculation at 1,200 cfm (3.6 ACH) in Atlanta, GA (ATL). The following table shows
the simulation results at the steady state.

1
 SU/BEESL Final Project Report for HealthWay Inc. (April, 2014) Page 2 of 2

< Ozone >

Air Cleaner Properties Case House and Indoor Emission Properties
Qr Efficiency CADR R _O3 O3 _exh ACH _inf C OA S Cs _IA Chronic REL O3 _DFS
Case (cfm) (%) (cfm) (mg/h) (ppb) (1/h) (ppb) (mg/h) (ppb) (ppb)[2] (ppb)
1 – SYR 960 - - 1.68 48.21 0.25 76.0[3] 7.77 48.2 80 or 100 0.3
[4]
2 – ATL 1200 - - 4.51 0.25 21.0 7.77 4.5 80 or 100 0.3

< HCHO >

Qr Efficiency CADR R _O3 O3 _exh ACH _inf C OA [1] EF[5] Cs _IA Chronic REL
Case (ppb)[2]
(cfm) (%) (cfm) (mg/h) (ppb) (1/h) (ppb) (ug/m2h) (ppb)
1 – SYR 960 25 240 1.68 48.21 0.25 2.0 31.0 4.1 8
2 – ATL 1200 25 300 4.51 0.25 2.0 31.0 3.5 8

< Toluene >

Qr Efficiency CADR R _O3 O3 _exh ACH _inf C OA [1] EF[5] Cs _IA Chronic REL
Case (ppb)[2]
(cfm) (%) (cfm) (mg/h) (ppb) (1/h) (ppb) (ug/m2h) (ppb)
1 – SYR 960 45 432 1.68 48.21 0.25 0.27 25.8 0.8 80
2 – ATL 1200 45 540 4.51 0.25 0.27 25.8 0.6 80
* Qr represents the recirculation rate; CADR the clean air delivery rate; R the emission rate; O3 _exh the ozone conc. at the DFS air
cleaner exhaust; ACH the infiltration rate into the house; S the deposition rate of ozone due to building materials; Cs _IA the steady-
state indoor concentration of each target compound; EF the emission factor indoors of each target compound; O3 _DFS the
contribution of the air cleaner operation to the overall indoor ozone conc. level; and REL the recommended exposure limit.

Conclusions and Implications: The following conclusions can be drawn from the current investigation.
1) The DFS air cleaner does work for formaldehyde and toluene abatement (representative two pollutants, water-
soluble and water-insoluble) with a low level of ozone generation.
2) There was almost no generation of byproducts except for ozone.
3) The simulation study showed that the air cleaner generates a certain level of ozone in a residential house, but the
generation level is low enough to be covered and mitigated by the deposition process due to building materials when
an actual building setup is considered. The resulting ozone concentration level indoors did not exceed the exposure
limit in the associated standards at all times. In addition, the resulting indoor concentration levels of two pollutants
considered were below the required exposure limits under typical house-operating conditions.

_________________________________________
[1] Bennett, D., Apte, M., Wu, X., Trout, A., Faulkner, D., Maddalena, R. and Sullivan, D. (2011). "Indoor environmental quality and HVAC survey of small and
medium size commercial buildings." PIER Program Final Report CEC-500-2011-043, California Energy Commission.
[2] Han, K.H., Guo, B., Pei, J., Zhang, J.S., Adams, E. and Carver, R.M. (2012). "Energy-efficient reduction of indoor formaldehyde exposure by dynamic integration
of air-cleaning and ventilation." NYSERDA Final Report No. 12-18, NY State Energy Research and Development Authority.
[3] Ozone concentration outdoors for NYS, http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/54359.html.
[4] Ozone concentration outdoors for Atlanta, http://www.air.dnr.state.ga.us/tmp/today/amp_8hrO3.html.
[5] Rudd, A., Hodgson, A.T., Beal, D. and Chandra, S. (2008). "Volatile organic compound concentrations and emission rates in new Manufactured and Site-Built
Houses." Research Report-0803, Building Science Press.

2
 Building Energy and Environmental
Systems Laboratory

Determination of Performance
of HealthWay DFS Air Cleaning System for HCHO and Toluene
- Detailed Test Results -

Final Report Attachment for Task 1

April 15, 2014

AGENDA:
Welcome/Introductions – Prof. Jensen S. Zhang (PI)
Technical Presentation – KwangHoon Han and Beverly Guo
1. Testing Facilities & Schedule
2. Test Results for HCHO and toluene
3. Byproducts & Further Improvement Recommendations

1
 Purpose and Objectives of Healthway Project
Purpose
Determine the performance of HealthWay Air Cleaner for HCHO and toluene
removals, especially under the standard conditions in buildings.

Objectives
1. Conduct an exploratory pilot study to determine the removal rate of
formaldehyde and toluene in the empty IEQ chamber (at 50% RH).
2. Perform GC/MS analysis to determine if there is measurable production
of byproducts (PTR-MS analysis optional).

3. Observe any issues of the air cleaning system for further improvement.

2
Testing Facilities

Downstream

O3 & SF6

Upstream

300.0

Injection
IEQ Chamber Setting for the Full-scale Testing

4
Testing Schedule
Conc.
* Challenge gas conc. levels:
100-150 ppb (HCHO), ~700 ppb (Toluene)

2nd GC/MS
1st
GC/MS sampling
sampling

1-hr 0 2-hr Time

static period dynamic period
Injection & generation
(SF6, HCHO & Toluene) Turn “ON” the cleaner
Start all measurements
~3-hr stabilization

36-hr chamber cleaning w/ 4 ACH

5
 Testing Conditions

Flow
Test # Test RH Temp. Initial Conc. Removal Efficiency (%)
Rate N.B.
(ID) D-day (%) (˚F/˚C) (ppb) - During 2-hour pull-down
(cfm)
73.4 25.1 → 2.2 → 0.8 → 0.4 1st empty chamber test,
1 (E50_F) D-1 300 50 143.5 (End conc.: <20 ppb, 1/8.15 N/A) w/ 143.5 ppb HCHO
/23.0
45.0 → 6.9 → 2.6 → 1.9 2nd empty chamber test,
2 (E50_T) D-3 300 50 73.4 743.0 (Cend: <1 ppb, 1/895 44.9%) w/ ~743 ppb toluene

3 (E50) D-4 300 50 73.4 N/A N/A w/o AC package

* For all tests, σQ = ±4 cfm; σRH = ±1.4%; σT = ±1.0˚F.

6
 Test 1_Emp. 50% for HCHO: Trends of HCHO and SF6
200 HCHO
SF6

SF6 Concentration (ppm)

180 1.80
HCHO Concentration (ppb)

160 1.60

140 1.40

120 1.20

100 1.00

80

60

40 160
Measured
LSE Fitted

HCHO Concentration (ppb)

20
140
0
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Elapsed Time (hour) 120

100

80

60

40
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14
Fitting Time (hour)
 Test 2_Emp. 50% for Tol: Trends of Toluene and SF6
900
Toluene
800 SF6 1.60

SF6 Concentration (ppm)

Toluene Concentration (ppb)

700 1.40

600 1.20

500 1.00

400 0.80

300

200
900
Measured
100 800 LSE Fitted

Toluene Conc. (ppb)

0 700
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Elapsed Time (hour) 600

500

400

300

200

100

0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
Fitting Time (hour)
 Ozone Generation – from Tests 1-3
160 120

Test 1 - HCHO Test 2 - Toluene

Ozone Concentration (ppb)

Ozone Concentration (ppb)

140
100

120
80
100

80 60

60 40

40
20
20

0
0

-20 -20
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Elapsed Time (hour) Elapsed Time (hour)
Test 3 – w/o AC Another Example
100 250
Ozone Concentration (ppb)

80
Ozone Concentration (ppb) 200

60 150

40 100

20 50

0 0

-20 -50 9
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Elapsed Time (hour) Elapsed Time (hour)
Environmental Changes due to the air cleaner

Test 1 - HCHO
80
RH (%)
75 T (dF)
RH & Temperature (% & dF)
70

65

60

55

50

45

40

35
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Elapsed Time (hour)

10
GC/MS Analysis Results - Empty chamber

GC/MS Background End of test, Average Conc.

Sample ID Test Conditions TVOC Conc. TVOC Conc. (ug/m3) of
(6-L volume ea.) (ug/m3) (ug/m3) duplicates

E065813, Bk1 Empty chamber at 50% RH;, 16.76

Init.: 16.26
A84838, Bk2 Formaldehyde (143.5 ppb) 15.75
Test 1 A98429, End1 with Formaldehyde Filter; 7.46
Air Cleaner airflow rate: End: 6.49
E066758, End2 1201 cfm. 5.52

A99478, Bk1 Empty chamber at 50% RH; 17.62

Init.: 16.88
E056737, Bk2 Toluene (743 ppb) 16.14
Test 2 A99503, End1 with Toluene Filter; 4.39
Air Cleaner airflow rate: End: 4.58
E068303, End2 1201 cfm. 4.77

Notes:
1. Quantification based on toluene standard, and the linearity was 0.9975;
2. The duplicate samples' average RSD% was 9.39%; and
3. Overall VOC concentrations were significantly reduced after the activation of the air
cleaner in the empty IEQ full-scale chamber.
 DFS Performance in the empty IEQ chamber

Flow
Test # Test RH Temp. Initial Conc. Removal Efficiency (%)
Rate N.B.
(ID) D-day (%) (˚F/˚C) (ppb) - During 2-hour pull-down
(cfm)
25.1 → 2.2 → 0.8 → 0.4
73.4 1st empty chamber test,
1 (E50_F) D-1 300 50 143.5 (End conc.: <20 ppb, 1/8.15 N/A;
w/ 143.5 ppb HCHO
/23.0 CADR: 301.45 cfm)
45.0 → 6.9 → 2.6 → 1.9
2nd empty chamber test,
2 (E50_T) D-3 300 50 73.4 743.0 (Cend: <1 ppb, 1/895 44.9%;
w/ ~743 ppb toluene
CADR: 540.45 cfm)

3 (E50) D-4 300 50 73.4 N/A N/A w/o AC package

* For all tests, σQ = ±4 cfm; σRH = ±1.4%; σT = ±1.0˚F.

Observations:
1) Effective for HCHO (25% removal efficiency), and far effective for toluene (45%);
2) With the operation of 1201 cfm, the ¼ conc. reaching time was <20-min for both cases;
3) Byproducts: Ozone only;
4) Ozone generation rate is quite low compared to other similar-tech air cleaning devices; and
5) Further improvements: AC debris treatment, heat generation, and dehumidifying effect.
Qr=300±4 cfm, T=73.4±1.0˚F, RH =50±1.4%

12
G. UNIVERSITY OF BUFFALO – EFFICIENCY OF THE
HEALTHWAY 1200C AND HEALTHWAY 20600-3 IN
REMOVING PARTICULATE MATTER FROM SMOKING
INCENSE
H. NATIONAL AND KAPODISTRIAN UNIVERSITY OF
ATHENS MEDICAL SCHOOL (DEPARTMENT OF
MICROBIOLOGY) - CLINICAL EFFICIENCY OF HEALTHWAY
EMF AIR CLEANER IN HOSPITAL WARDS WITH
CONFIRMED INCREASED LOAD OF FUNGAL SPORES
 9ATIO9AL A9D KAPODISTRIA9 MEDICAL SCHOOL
Department of Microbiology
U9IVERSITY OF ATHE9S Head: Prof. A. Z. Tsakris
Mikras Asias 75, Goudi
Athens 115 27
URL: http://www.uoa.gr

Aristea Velegraki, PhD, cBiol, MIBiol

Asst. Professor in Mycology

Vice President International Society for Human and
Animal Mycology (ISHAM)

Τel: +30 210 7462146

Fax: +30 210 7462147
Email: aveleg@med.uoa.gr
www.isham.org
16/09/08

To
Mr Y. Arvanitis
General Manager
Health – Technology Ltd
Lavriou Avn 89
Glyka Nera
Attica 153 54,
Tel.: +30210 76 00 440.

RE: Evaluation of the Healthway® EMF Air Cleane in field conditions

According to your request dated 19/7/2008 and directed to the Mycology Laboratory of the
University of Athens, the efficiency of the Healthway® EMF Air Cleaner air cleansing device
was tested. The evaluation was conducted in field conditions1 to check the clinical efficiency of
the device, since it has been already successfully evaluated in indoor controlled-environment The
device is FDA-approved by virtue of its results in withholding airborne bacteria Serratia
marcescens), enteroviruses, airborne viruses (Coxsackie, Echoviruses, Adenoviruses), and spores
of Penicillium funiculosum (ATCC 11797) [iri-environmentalsolutions.com]

Field test conditions

The current study was intended as complementary to the ones already conducted, in order to test
the Healthway® EMF Air Cleaner in realistic conditions of increased airborne fungal spore
load during the months of July and August 2008. The increased outdoors temperature (average
300C), relative humidity (av. 48%) and the strong wind factor during testing were actually
furthering the quantity and the range of the airborne spores reaching indoor areas through
malfunctioning air-conditioning system (wards) and open windows for approximately 2 h during
midday in the clinical laboratory service rooms. Thus, the test was practically conducted in
harsher conditions than the ones simulated in previous tests.

1
Includes haematology/oncology hospital wards with confirmed increased load of fungal spores due to construction
works in the vicinity of the hospital and working areas of clinical laboratory services.
1
Mycology Laboratory
UOA
Κ.Α. 70/4/5905 & Κ.Α. 70/3/6915
Methods
A total of 4 independent samples of one cubic meter air were obtained by the «Air sampler RCS
Biotest» in every inspected room, at different times during the day were carried out for
quantitative counts and qualitative assessment of the fungal load. The inspected rooms included
hospital wards of the National Health Care System and clinical laboratory services rooms in two
healthcare institutions. Sampling was conducted during the day before the operation of the clean
air system.
Re-sampling of the same sites was conducted after 24 h operation of the Healthway® EMF Air
Cleaner under operation of the central air-conditioning system and with closed windows in the
clinical laboratory services rooms and medical staff office (Table 1).
Results
The fungal load in the indoor areas sampled were over the recommended limits (Table 1)
established by the recently revised WHO criteria (Table 2).
The fungal load per cubic meter of indoor air after 24 h continuous operation of the device was
considerably reduced (Table 3, Fig 2A & 2B)
.
Table 1. Fungal load per cubic meter of indoor air before operating the device.

Indoor area (m2) Quantitative results* Qualittive results*

Aspergillus flavus, Fusarium sp., Ulocladium
1. Ward 1 (14 m2) 825cfu/m3 s sp.,
A. flavus, A. fumigatus, A. flavus,
, Syncephalastrum racemosum Penicillium sp.

2. Hospital corridor (40 m2) 25 cfu/ m3 Alternaria tenuissima

Aspergillus niger, Aspergillus ochraceus
3. Ward 2 (12 m2) 3 cfu/ m3 A. niger, Alternaria sp., Cladosporium sp.

4. Clinical Laboratory 125 cfu/ m3 A. fumigatus, Aureobasidium pullulans,

r Services room 1 (80 m2) Cryptococcus albidus
50 cfu/ m3 A. fumigatus, Phoma sp.
2
5. Ward 4 (20 m ) A. flavus, A. ochraceus, Cryptococcus vishniacii,

A. fumigatus,
Clinical Laboratory 2 A. flavus,
6. Services room (54 m2) 597 cfu/ m3 S. racemosum
A. flavus
Phoma sp.

S.racemosum, Penicillium spp. A. niger,

7. Medical staff common 688 cfu/ m3 A Alternaria sp., A. tenuíssima,
Room (40 m2) A. fumigatus A. fumigatus, Aspergillus parasiticus,
A Alternaria alternata

*Quantitative and qualitative counts of allergenic, potentially pathogenic and toxinogenic fungi of public health
importance.

2
Mycology Laboratory
UOA
Κ.Α. 70/4/5905 & Κ.Α. 70/3/6915
Table 2. World Health Organization air quality evaluation criteria (WHO 1990, 1999)

Results Limits

Presence of (eg A. fumigatus) or mycotoxinogenic fungi (eg Penicillium, Not Acceptable

Fusarium spp., A. flavus)

Presence of a single fungal species, except Cladosporium & Alternaria Acceptable <50 cfu/m3

Multiple fungal species Acceptable<150 cfu/ m3

Multiple fungal species including Ascomycetes, Zygomycetes, yeasts etc Acceptable<500 cfu/ m3
(eg Syncephalastrum, Ulocladium, A. parasiticus).

Table 3. Results after 24h continuous operation of the air-cleansing device in rooms 1-7 (Table
1).

3
Total cfu/ m in
each indoor site Qualitative results
(1-7)
Cryptococcus albidus
0-2 Cryptococcus amylolentus
Phoma sp.
Alternaria spp.
Penicillium spp.

After the 24h continuous operation of the air cleansing device in the inspected rooms the fungal
load was qualitatively and quantitatively reduced to acceptable levels (Diag. 1)

3
Mycology Laboratory
UOA
Κ.Α. 70/4/5905 & Κ.Α. 70/3/6915
Fig 1. Bar-chart depicting the number of CFUs isolated before and after the 24h continuous
operation of the device

Α Β

Fig 2. Indicative results for “before (Α) and after (B)” the 24 h operation of the Healthway®
EMF Air Cleaner at the same sampling spot.

4
Mycology Laboratory
UOA
Κ.Α. 70/4/5905 & Κ.Α. 70/3/6915
Conclusion

The continuous 24 h operation of the portable air cleansing device Healthway® EMF Air
Cleaner, FDA class II Medical Device lowered significantly (p<0,001) the fungal load of the
indoor air in all tested sites. The device’s output air flow was free of fungal spores.

The Investigator

A. Velegraki

5
Mycology Laboratory
UOA
Κ.Α. 70/4/5905 & Κ.Α. 70/3/6915
I. BIOSCIENCE LABORATORIES, INC - EVALUATION OF
H1N1 VIRUS ACTIVITY ON SURFACES TREATED WITH
PURESHIELD
J. RESULTS OF TESTS OF PURESHIELD VS VARIOUS
ORGANISMS AND ON DIFFERENT SURFACES
DATE NAME LABORATORY TEST METHOD REPORT # PRODUCT TESTED ORGANISM TESTED RESULTS
-Architex Rx8001 (100% Treatment of the three fabrics with PureShield was effective in
Sporometrics Inc Trevira) + PureShield reducing the bacterial concentrations of three medically
219 Dufferin St #20c -Maharam 511459 004 Breeze relevant pathogenic microorganisms when compared to
Toronto, ON M6K 1Y9 (100% Polyester) + PureShield Staphylococcus aureus untreated organisms. The antimicrobial activity was consistent
Canada -CS Isolation Curtain, Royal Blue Enterococcus 1, 3 and 6 weeks after application.
11/8/2018 PureShield Testing on CS Medical Curtains Ph: 416-516-1660 ASTM E2149 31212 (100% Polypropylene) PureShield Pseudomonas aeruginosa The PureShield Exhaust treated (1%) microfiber cloth washed
24 hours had a Kill rate of 99.99% which is “Excellent”
Sanders Laboratories Antimicrobial Activity of 4.00 in the 4 hour shaker test against
1050 Endeavor Court L420 Exhaust treated (4%) Staphylococccus aureus. he L420 Exhaust treated (4%)
9/13/2018 PureShield vs. S.Aureus on Umf Nokomis, FL 34275 PureShield Exhaust treated (1%) microfiber cloth had a Kill rate of 98.93% in the 4 hour shaker
Microfiber cloth Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149 - 2013 1809363 Washed 24 hours Staphylococcus Aureus (ATCC #6538) test against Staphylococcus aureus.
Sanders Laboratories The PureShield Exhaust treated (1%) microfiber cloth washed
1050 Endeavor Court L420 Exhaust treated (4%) 24 hours had a Kill rate of 99.89% which is “Good”
9/13/2018 PureShield vs. E.Coli on Umf Nokomis, FL 34275 PureShield treated (1%) Washed 24 Antimicrobial Activity of 2.95 in the 4 hour shaker test against
Microfiber Cloth Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149 - 2013 1809364 hours Escherichia Coli (ATCC #25922) Escherichia coli.
Sanders Laboratories
1050 Endeavor Court Three out of three treated materials registered a 4
8/24/2018 PureShield vs. S.Aureus on Paris Linens Nokomis, FL 34275 PureShield (5%) & log reduction or higher post 24 hours against Staph
Bed sheets, towels & microfiber sheet Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149-2001 1808955 L-420 Laundry Treatment Staphyloccus Aureus (ATCC #6538) on PureShield and L420 treated textiles.
Sanders Laboratories
1050 Endeavor Court Four out of five treated materials registered a 3 log reduction
8/24/2018 PureShield vs. E.Coli on Paris Linens Nokomis, FL 34275 PureShield (5%) & post 24 hours against E.Coli on PureShield and L420 treated
Bed sheets, towels & microfiber sheet Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149-2001 1808809 L-420 Laundry Treatment E.Coli (ATCC #25922) textiles.
Fungus type:
a. Aspergillus flavus
E.Labs b. Aspergillus versicolor
4/30/2018 Antifungal Testing on PureShield 5150 Lad Land Dr. c. Penicillium funiculosum
Fredericksburg, VA 22407 MIL-STD-8106 d. Chaetomium globosum The PureShield reated metal showed no fungal or
treated Metal mold growth during the 30 day test
Phone: (540) 834-0372 Method 508.6 6628 PureShield (5%) e. Aspergillus niger
Sanders Laboratories
1050 Endeavor Court The unwashed, PureShield treated floor tiles showed
Nokomis, FL 34275 >99.999% (>5 log) reduction in Salmonella after 24
3/19/2018 PureShield vs. Salmonella on Tile Flooring Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149-2001 1803-464 PureShield (.05%) Salmonella (ATTC #14028) hours.
Sanders Laboratories
1050 Endeavor Court The unwashed, PureShield treated separation curtains
1/20/2018 PureShield vs. C.Diff on Hospital Nokomis, FL 34275 Vegetative Clostridium produced >99.98% (>3 log) reduction in C.Diff after 24
Separation Curtains Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149-2001 1801639 PureShield Difficile (ATTC #BAA-1870) hours.
Sanders Laboratories
1050 Endeavor Court The unwashed PureShield treated separation curtains
1/8/2018 PureShield vs. Staph on Hospital Nokomis, FL 34275 Staphylococcus Aureus showed >99.999% (5 log) reduction in S.Aureus after 24
Separation Curtains Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149-2001 1801095 PureShield MRSA strain (ATTC #6538) hours.
Sanders Laboratories
1050 Endeavor Court Both the washed and unwashed PureShield treated turf
Nokomis, FL 34275 samples showed >99.9% reduction (>3 log kill) against
10/23/2017 PureShield vs. Staph on Turf Material Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149 11101-288 PureShield Staphyloccus Aureus (ATCC #700699) S.Aureus after 4 and 24 hours.
The PureShield treated plastic cosmetic compact
samples showed the following results after 90 days:
99.97% (3 log) reduction in E.Coli
E.Coli (MTCC 41) 99.98% (3 log) reduction in S.Aureus
Staphylococcus Aureus (MTCC 96) 99.99% (4 log) reduction in Salmonella
Spectro Analytical Labs Salmonella (MTCC 1251) 99.96% (4 log) reduction in C.Perfringens 99.99% (4
E-41, Okhla Indl. Area. Ph-II Clostridium Perfringens (MTCC 450) log) reduction in Aspergillus Niger 99.99% (4 log)
New Delhi, India 110020 Aspergillus Niger (MTCC-282) reduction in Candida Albicans 99.99% (4 log)
3/17/2017 PureShield Testing on Plastic Ph: 91-11-40522000 Candida Albicans (MTCC-183) reduction in S.Cerevisiae
Cosmetic Cases care@spectro.in ASTM E2149-10 16112407-1 PureShield Saccharomyces Cerevisiae (MTCC-2569)
Sanders Laboratories
1050 Endeavor Court The unwashed, PureShield treated towels showed a
Nokomis, FL 34275 99.99% log reduction (4 log reduction) in bacteria after
2/27/2016 PureShield vs. Cat Urine on Towels Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149-2001 1602-867 PureShield Bacteria derived from Cat Urine 4 and 24 hours.
Sanders Laboratories The PureShield cured Polyethylene, Polyvinyl Chloride
1050 Endeavor Court and Metal samples each showed >99.0-99.9% reduction
9/5/2015 PureShield vs. Staph on Rigid Nokomis, FL 34275 (>2-3 log reduction) in S.Aureus after 24 hours.
Plastics & Metals Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149-2001 1101-3048 PureShield Staphylococcus Aureus MRSA (ATTC #33591)
Nelson Laboratories
6280 S. Redwood Rd.
Salt Lake City, UT 84123 STP0032 Rev 09 PureShield passed the cytotoxicity test proving it
9/2/2015 PureShield Cytotoxic Testing Ph: 801-290-7500 MEM Elution Test 842047 PureShield Mammel cells causes no harm to mammel cells.
Sanders Laboratories The unwashed, PureShield treated lab coat and scrubs
1050 Endeavor Court showed excellent resistance to S.Aureus with a
8/13/2015 PureShield vs. Staph on Lab Coats Nokomis, FL 34275 >99.999% reduction in bacteria (>5 log reduction)
& Scrubs Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149-2001 1101-3028 PureShield Staphylococcus Aureus MRSA (ATCC #33591) after 24 hours.

1
DATE NAME LABORATORY TEST METHOD REPORT # PRODUCT TESTED ORGANISM TESTED RESULTS
GAP EnviroMicrobial Services
1020 Hargrieve Rd. The treated plastic bed rails showed a >99.99933%
London, Ontario, CA N6E1P5 Staphylococcus Aureus MRSA (ATCC #33591) reduction in S.Aureus (>5 log reduction), >99.99954%
12/19/2014 PureShield Testing on Plasti Hospital Ph: 519-681-0571 E.Coli (ATCC #25922) reduction in E.Coli (>5 log reduction) and >99.99519%
ed il info@gaplab.com ISO 22196 A11149 PureShield Enterococcus faecalis (ATCC #700802) reduction in E.Faecalis (>4 log reduction).
Sanders Laboratories
1050 Endeavor Court The treated plastic cases showed >99.9% reduction (>3
Nokomis, FL 34275 log reduction) in Staph/MRSA strain of bacteria on the
5/11/2013 PureShield vs.Staph on Plastic Cases Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149-2001 1101-1535 PureShield Staphylococcus Aureus MRSA Strain (ATCC #700699) plastic cases after 4 and 24 hours.
Sanders Laboratories
1050 Endeavor Court Showed a 99.9% reduction (3 log reduction) in C.Diff
Nokomis, FL 34275 spores after 1 minute and 3 minutes. Thus, PureShield
11/15/2012 PureShield vs. C.Diff Spores Ph: 941-488-8103 N/A 1101-938 and 974 PureShield Clostridium Difficile (ATCC #9689) is effective at killing C.Diff spores.
Sanders Laboratories
1050 Endeavor Court
8/18/2012 PureShield vs. Aspergillus niger Nokomis, FL 34275 The treated sample showed excellent reduction in
(Mold) on filters Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149 - 2001 1101-868 PureShield Aspergillus niger ATCC 9642 viable mold spore count at 4 hours and at 24 hours.
PolyFusion Laboratory
2201 N. Wayne St.
Angola, Indiana 46703 The treated plastic films showed a 99.999% reduction (>5
1/30/2012 PureShield vs. E.Coli on Plastic Flms Ph: 260-624-7659 ASTM E2149-10 13012 PureShield E.Coli (ATCC #25922) log reduction) in E.Coli after 1 hour.
Sanders Laboratories
1050 Endeavor Court The treated white fabric samples showed excellent
Nokomis, FL 34275 antimicrobial activity with >99.9% reduction (>3 log kill) in
1/26/2012 PureShield vs. Staph on White Fabric Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149-2001 1101-563 PureShield Staphylococcus Aureus (ATCC #6538) Staph after 4 and 24 hours.
Sanders Laboratories
1050 Endeavor Court The treated concrete samples
Nokomis, FL 34275 showed excellent antimicrobial activity with >99.9%
7/22/2011 PureShield vs. Staph on Concrete Flooring Ph: 941-488-8103 ASTM E2149-2001 1101-291 PureShield Staphylococcus Aureus (ATCC #700699) reduction (>3 log kill) in Staph after 4 and 24 hours.
Glades Crop Care, Inc
949 Turner Quay It was provent that PureShield does not cause a
Jupiter, FL 33458 phototoxic response or crop injury when applied to
5/2011 PureShield Testing on Ornamental Flowers Ph: 561-746-3740 Phytotoxicity Screening 11-02 PureShield Crop tolerance foliage or open blooms.
Precision Testing Lab
313 Hill Ave.
Nashville, TN 37210 The treated shirts and pants showed a 99.99%
11/19/2009 Bob Barker 100 Wash Test Ph: 615-254-3401 ASTM E2149 85479 PureShield Staphylococcus Aureus (ATCC #6538) reduction (4 log kill) in Staph after 100 washings.

2
K. CERTIFICATION FROM CLEVELAND CLINIC MANAGED
SHEIKH KHALIFA MEDICAL CITY FOR SERVICES PROVIDED
BY PURE SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL