Ultraviolet C Light Technology Debate: Are First and Second Generation Equal?

Even though the germicidal effects of ultraviolet light were first discovered in 1877, currently in the health care industry, a debate of the efficacy of ultraviolet-C light (UV-C) technology continues. Also, with some investigators publishing studies showing it is safe and others not, the question comes down to which company’s technology works and what does not. Are the studies the companies are using their own, done by an independent research firm, or are the companies using competitors’ data? What generation of UV-C technology are the investigators using?

In the second of 2 segments of this exclusive Infection Control Today^® (ICT^®) interview with Gunner Lyslo, founder and CEO of Surfacide, continues the discussion on where the industry is going and what questions for health care facilities, schools, businesses, and others should ask when they are looking for UVC technology to keep their employees and visitors safe.

Although, UV-C has been proven to be effectual against SARS-CoV-2, some individuals still are hesitant to consider UV-C technology. Lyslo pushes back and says that second generation technology (like Surfacide) demonstrates that the technology is effective.

“It's an incredibly important technology [and] disinfection modality. And if used in an evidence-based way, with the proper indications for use, it will have a tremendous impact to the benefit of all those end users and all those individuals who are entering those spaces. [This is true] whether it would be a hospital, which hospitals are still first and foremost to [Surfacide], because that's where you're dealing with an immunocompromised patient population, as well as you're dealing with an environmental services team are frontline health care workers who have numerous workplace stresses.”

The first part of the interview with Lyslo is here.