Anixter is touting 'protection' against germs in a time when people are significantly disrupted by a virus.
But Anixter doesn't disclaim or mention at all the one virus people have top-of-mind and want protection against is not at all impacted by anti-microbial products.
Though to your point, I clarified the last statement:
However, during this global pandemic, Anixter's promotion causes confusion. Promoting protective coatings that do not protect against Coronavirus (and failing to mention that) creates a false sense of safety.
I would agree the timing and way Anixter is promoting this is dubious at best. I usually try to give the benefit of the doubt and might normally say this was a person in promotions misunderstanding of antimicrobial as a catch all in all cases.
However, this would not be the first time Anixter would be stretching the truth.
"I would agree the timing and way Anixter is promoting this is dubious at best."
I think this goes beyond dubious (so I agree with you) and falls smack in the middle of insidious.
Their wording seems clearly and specifically designed to dance along the line of truth vs untruth. Wordsmiths are valuable to any marketing department... but they should not imagine that the words they craft can not be seen as what they are by knowledgeable industry people.
The insidious part is that they also know this - and are trying to spin their words to convince un-knowledgeable people... without using words that are specifically stating that their stuff helps against COVID_19.
Studies on the antiviral action of Ag NPs are far behind those targeting microbicidal properties, and the mechanism of antiviral action is still not well understood. A viral infection is established when the nucleic acids of the virus are introduced into the host cell and then replicated. Ag NPs possibly act on the surface of the virus and physically inhibit the contact with host cells. Previous studies have demonstrated that the size of the Ag NPs is essential for the manifestation of antiviral effects, similar to the observations in bacteria.
So people should not use the door for ~40 - 120 minutes after the last person touches it (depending on the alloy of the handle) to avoid being infected?
no, depending on the alloy, it could be as little a 2.5 minutes (the study said <=40, not ~40 ).. also, it starts killing the virus right away. compare with stainless steel:
as the study notes:
In this new study, human coronavirus 229E was rapidly inactivated on a range of copper alloys (within a few minutes for simulated fingertip contamination) and Cu/Zn brasses were very effective at lower copper concentration. Exposure to copper destroyed the viral genomes and irreversibly affected virus morphology, including disintegration of envelope and dispersal of surface spikes. Cu(I) and Cu(II) moieties were responsible for the inactivation, which was enhanced by reactive oxygen species generation on alloy surfaces, resulting in even faster inactivation than was seen with nonenveloped viruses on copper. Consequently, copper alloy surfaces could be employed in communal areas and at any mass gatherings to help reduce transmission of respiratory viruses from contaminated surfaces and protect the public health.
you also stated:
Considering this is not the expectation of anyone, nor the manufacturer, these coatings/material aren't effective in the expected way.
tell me what your expectation is regarding antimicrobal surfaces on microbes.