NAD Finds Certain NanoSeptic Self-Cleaning Surface Claims are Supported; Recommends Modification of Others

For Immediate Release 

As support for its claims, the advertiser submitted six independent lab reports, describing testing of NanoSeptic surfaces for antimicrobial properties. It also pointed to its website FAQs and “Regulatory Notice and Public Disclaimer,” which, it argued, limit the messages conveyed in its advertising. The provided studies followed established, internationally accepted test protocols and produced results that showed bacteria and viruses do not grow, and in fact are reduced (i.e., cleaned), on NanoSeptic surfaces without the addition of other antimicrobial cleaning agents. NAD determined that these reports provide a reasonable basis for the advertiser’s website claims about the cleaning action of NanoSeptic surfaces, such as claims that they are “continuously self-cleaning,” “clean based on technology, not toxins,” “powered by light,” “working 24/7, the surface continually oxidizes organic contaminants,” and “unlike traditional disinfectants and cleaners, the NanoSeptic surface uses no poisons, heavy metals or chemicals, and nothing is released from the surface since the nano-crystals are molecularly bonded to the material.”   

However, regarding the claim, “turn dirty, high traffic public touchpoints into clean surfaces,” NAD recommended that it be discontinued or modified because the tests do not provide a reasonable basis for claims that the surfaces are “clean” (i.e., free of microbial contamination) when regularly used by consumers, versus “cleaner.”  

NAD further recommended that the advertiser modify claims on the products themselves (i.e. surfaces branded as “NanoSeptic Continously Self-Cleaning”) or other claims which are directed to consumers to avoid conveying the implied message that its surfaces are continuously “clean,” i.e., free of microbial contaminants due to the self-cleaning mechanism of the surface. NAD noted that, when describing the functionality of NanoSeptic surfaces to consumers, the advertiser should take care to ensure that they understand that a “continuously self-cleaning” surface is supplemental to other infection controls and that they should still take normal precautions when interacting with the surface. 

Finally, the advertiser stated that for reasons unrelated to this challenge and the efficacy of NanoSeptic products, it permanently discontinued the claim, “an oxidation reaction stronger than bleach.” Therefore, NAD did not review the claim on its merits.  

In its advertiser’s statement, NanoTouch Materials agreed to comply with NAD’s recommendations. Further, NanoTouch stated, “We very much appreciated the review and feedback from NAD on our advertising. We were pleased that NAD found many of our claims to be substantiated. NAD’s recommendations fit what we are trying to communicate about our continuously self-cleaning NanoSeptic surfaces. And it is important for customers to understand that, while NanoSeptic surfaces may be identifiably cleaner than other touch points, they still must be cleaned themselves of larger materials like dirt and are a complement but not a replacement to the infection control practices that are so important in the world today.”