Far-UVC is form of ultraviolet (UV) light in the 200nm to 230nm wavelength range. UVX's lamp emit a 222nm peak wavelength, which is the most researched and well-documented form of Far-UVC light.
Unlike conventional UV light that is harmful and carcinogenic, 222nm far-UVC light is safe for humans but deadly for pathogens. The technology has shown to make indoor air as safe as the outdoors while being 180,000-times safer than sunlight (See UVX's Science page for more).
This means that for the first time, businesses can continuously disinfect both air and surfaces throughout the day, without disrupting operations or additional labor.
Zener is the name of UVX’s first product, named after physicist Clarence Melvin Zener.
Inactivation rates depend on the technology, duration, distance, and type of pathogen.
As an example, UVX's technology can inactivate SARS-CoV-2 by 90%+ every 34 seconds at human head height (1.7 m) if installed on a 2.4 m high ceiling. This means that you can reduce a pathogen like SARS-CoV-2 by 90% every 34 seconds in a day, as opposed to every 4 hours (average time between scheduled cleaning sessions).
In partnership with UBC Medicine (Division of Infectious Diseases), we've done laboratory testing on various bacteria, viruses, and fungal strains. Contact us to get a better idea of efficacy for your facility.
254nm conventional UVC inactivates pathogens by damaging DNA/RNA in the nucleic acid of pathogens. On the other hand, 222nm Far-UVC not only damages the DNA/RNA in the nucleic acid, but it has an additional kill mechanism by breaking peptide bonds in the outer protein coating of single cell microbes and cells.
Pathogen protein absorbs 20 times more 222nm Far-UVC energy than 254nm UVC energy for the same number of photons. Thus, pathogen protein bonds are 20 times more likely to fail due to the energy absorption from 222nm light than 254nm. This dual kill mechanism of both pathogen DNA damage and protein shell damage greatly increases the effectiveness of 222nm Far-UVC compared to 254nm UVC and prevents microbes from photo-reactivation.
Yes, it does. However, initial assessments have shown that due to human error and neglected surfaces during manual disinfection, ceiling-mounted disinfection devices like UVX’s Zener can be more effective at surface disinfection.
The shadowing effect can also be effectively mitigated by strategic placement of Zener devices in a room. This way, devices will compensate for shadowing from one another. Shadowing is not a consideration for air disinfection.
Yes, UVX’s filtered 222nm Far-UVC technology has been proven to be safe both short-term and long-term, with research done at notable institutions for many years. Research was done using precise skin and eye models as well as tests on mice and humans with significantly higher doses than UVX’s maximum programmed dosage (up to 20 times higher). We have also verified safety in the field through pilot projects and clinical trials.
Far-UVC technology safety is also recognized by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). The ACGIH sets Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) and Biological Exposure Indices (BEIs) for various exposures. ACGIH TLVs and BEIs are used by regulators across the United States and Canada, including Canadian provincial and federal regulators.
Filtered 222nm Far-UVC’s safety and efficacy are not new, only its commercial applications are.
It’s the biophysics i.e. how the physics of the light interacts with the biology of the body.
Due to its strong absorbance in biological materials, filtered Far-UVC light cannot penetrate past the outer dead-cell layers of human skin or the outer tear film on the surface of the eye. As such, Far-UVC does not reach living human cells to have any short-term or long-term safety implications. As pathogens like bacteria and viruses are much smaller in dimension, the light is able to penetrate their cell nuclei and that retains the ultraviolet light's germicidal properties.
By contrast, conventional UV light can penetrate past the dead cells’ layer (stratum corneum) and into the living cells’ layer (stratum spinosum) to cause damage. The same is the case for the eye, where conventional UV penetrates past the cornea and into the aqueous humour.
Many conventional UV lamps have a peak wavelength of 254nm. UVX’s Far-UVC lamps use Krypton Chlorine (KrCl) gas which has a peak wavelength of 222nm.
Most light radiating devices emit a peak primary wavelength as well as other secondary wavelengths, referred to as spillage wavelengths. Similarly, while Far-UVC excimer lamps emit peak primary wavelengths of either 207nm or 222nm depending on the type of lamp, they can also emit secondary wavelengths below 200nm and above 230nm.
Far-UVC light in the 200nm to 230nm range is safe, but wavelengths below 200nm and above 230nm are not (230nm to ~350nm). It is therefore critical to use an optical filter to eliminate these harmful wavelengths and ensure safety. This is true despite spillage into the harmful UV spectrum being below Threshold Limit Values (TLVs), as shown in a study by Wood et al using an unfiltered 222nm Far-UVC handheld wand that resulted in skin damage. The importance of filtering 222nm Far-UVC was further proven by Bernard et al’s study that used Woods et al’s results to conclude that even power outputs as low as 3% in the harmful UV spectrum lead to DNA lesions; providing further evidence that filtered 222nm Far-UVC is safe but unfiltered 222nm Far-UVC is not.
All Far-UVC research on mice and humans to prove safety was done using optical filters, and therefore to replicate these safety results in real life, optical filters are necessary. UVX lamps use a proprietary filter to replicate research outcomes. In fact, recent tests on mice and humans were conducted using the same lamps and filters as UVX’s.
Regulatory agencies like the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) have set the dosage limit for various UV wavelengths, even the harmful ones.
For 222nm Far-UVC, ACGIH TLV for eye exposure is 160 mJ/cm2 per 8-hr exposure.
No, UVX's lamps have been verified by independent certification labs to not pose ozone gas risk. Testing was conducted against UL 867 and CSA C22.2 N. 187 standards, verifying that ozone emissions are significantly below OSHA and CARB limits.
At no additional cost, UVX’s team will work with you to map your environment and optimize placement of UVX devices. As a rough approximate, for a 10ft ceiling, UVX disinfects about 500 square feet. Most customers are only installing units in common areas where risk of infection transmission tends to be higher.
Far-UVC is form of ultraviolet (UV) light in the 200nm to 230nm wavelength range. UVX's lamp emit a 222nm peak wavelength, which is the most researched and well-documented form of Far-UVC light.
Unlike conventional UV light that is harmful and carcinogenic, 222nm far-UVC light is safe for humans but deadly for pathogens. The technology has shown to make indoor air as safe as the outdoors while being 180,000-times safer than sunlight (See UVX's Science page for more).
This means that for the first time, businesses can continuously disinfect both air and surfaces throughout the day, without disrupting operations or additional labor.
Zener is the name of UVX’s first product, named after physicist Clarence Melvin Zener.
Inactivation rates depend on the technology, duration, distance, and type of pathogen.
As an example, UVX's technology can inactivate SARS-CoV-2 by 90%+ every 34 seconds at human head height (1.7 m) if installed on a 2.4 m high ceiling. This means that you can reduce a pathogen like SARS-CoV-2 by 90% every 34 seconds in a day, as opposed to every 4 hours (average time between scheduled cleaning sessions).
In partnership with UBC Medicine (Division of Infectious Diseases), we've done laboratory testing on various bacteria, viruses, and fungal strains. Contact us to get a better idea of efficacy for your facility.
254nm conventional UVC inactivates pathogens by damaging DNA/RNA in the nucleic acid of pathogens. On the other hand, 222nm Far-UVC not only damages the DNA/RNA in the nucleic acid, but it has an additional kill mechanism by breaking peptide bonds in the outer protein coating of single cell microbes and cells.
Pathogen protein absorbs 20 times more 222nm Far-UVC energy than 254nm UVC energy for the same number of photons. Thus, pathogen protein bonds are 20 times more likely to fail due to the energy absorption from 222nm light than 254nm. This dual kill mechanism of both pathogen DNA damage and protein shell damage greatly increases the effectiveness of 222nm Far-UVC compared to 254nm UVC and prevents microbes from photo-reactivation.
Yes, it does. However, initial assessments have shown that due to human error and neglected surfaces during manual disinfection, ceiling-mounted disinfection devices like UVX’s Zener can be more effective at surface disinfection.
The shadowing effect can also be effectively mitigated by strategic placement of Zener devices in a room. This way, devices will compensate for shadowing from one another. Shadowing is not a consideration for air disinfection.
Yes, UVX’s filtered 222nm Far-UVC technology has been proven to be safe both short-term and long-term, with research done at notable institutions for many years. Research was done using precise skin and eye models as well as tests on mice and humans with significantly higher doses than UVX’s maximum programmed dosage (up to 20 times higher). We have also verified safety in the field through pilot projects and clinical trials.
Far-UVC technology safety is also recognized by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). The ACGIH sets Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) and Biological Exposure Indices (BEIs) for various exposures. ACGIH TLVs and BEIs are used by regulators across the United States and Canada, including Canadian provincial and federal regulators.
Filtered 222nm Far-UVC’s safety and efficacy are not new, only its commercial applications are.
It’s the biophysics i.e. how the physics of the light interacts with the biology of the body.
Due to its strong absorbance in biological materials, filtered Far-UVC light cannot penetrate past the outer dead-cell layers of human skin or the outer tear film on the surface of the eye. As such, Far-UVC does not reach living human cells to have any short-term or long-term safety implications. As pathogens like bacteria and viruses are much smaller in dimension, the light is able to penetrate their cell nuclei and that retains the ultraviolet light's germicidal properties.
By contrast, conventional UV light can penetrate past the dead cells’ layer (stratum corneum) and into the living cells’ layer (stratum spinosum) to cause damage. The same is the case for the eye, where conventional UV penetrates past the cornea and into the aqueous humour.
Many conventional UV lamps have a peak wavelength of 254nm. UVX’s Far-UVC lamps use Krypton Chlorine (KrCl) gas which has a peak wavelength of 222nm.
Most light radiating devices emit a peak primary wavelength as well as other secondary wavelengths, referred to as spillage wavelengths. Similarly, while Far-UVC excimer lamps emit peak primary wavelengths of either 207nm or 222nm depending on the type of lamp, they can also emit secondary wavelengths below 200nm and above 230nm.
Far-UVC light in the 200nm to 230nm range is safe, but wavelengths below 200nm and above 230nm are not (230nm to ~350nm). It is therefore critical to use an optical filter to eliminate these harmful wavelengths and ensure safety. This is true despite spillage into the harmful UV spectrum being below Threshold Limit Values (TLVs), as shown in a study by Wood et al using an unfiltered 222nm Far-UVC handheld wand that resulted in skin damage. The importance of filtering 222nm Far-UVC was further proven by Bernard et al’s study that used Woods et al’s results to conclude that even power outputs as low as 3% in the harmful UV spectrum lead to DNA lesions; providing further evidence that filtered 222nm Far-UVC is safe but unfiltered 222nm Far-UVC is not.
All Far-UVC research on mice and humans to prove safety was done using optical filters, and therefore to replicate these safety results in real life, optical filters are necessary. UVX lamps use a proprietary filter to replicate research outcomes. In fact, recent tests on mice and humans were conducted using the same lamps and filters as UVX’s.
Regulatory agencies like the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) have set the dosage limit for various UV wavelengths, even the harmful ones.
For 222nm Far-UVC, ACGIH TLV for eye exposure is 160 mJ/cm2 per 8-hr exposure.
No, UVX's lamps have been verified by independent certification labs to not pose ozone gas risk. Testing was conducted against UL 867 and CSA C22.2 N. 187 standards, verifying that ozone emissions are significantly below OSHA and CARB limits.