Molekule Retracts Most of Its Advertising Claims

A few months ago, we published a report titled “This Advertising Watchdog Just Rejected Basically All of Molekule’s Air Purifier Claims.” Dyson, another maker of air purifiers, had challenged 26 of Molekule’s specific claims in a case before the National Advertising Division. Based on Molekule’s own evidence, NAD upheld all 26 challenges, and Molekule agreed to change some of its claims to comply with NAD’s findings. Among them, the company agreed to remove references to “independent testing” of the Molekule MH1 (also known as the Molekule Air) because the NAD investigation found that the research was done either at a lab where Molekule’s founder is a director or at a lab that the company sponsors; to remove all quantified claims about the Molekule MH1’s pollution-elimination abilities (such as “destroys 3.4 million MS2 viruses in 2 minutes”); and to remove all claims about the MH1’s ability to ease asthma and allergy symptoms because they were based on unscientific studies and testimony.

Molekule appealed many other findings.

That appeal is now complete—and almost all the original findings have been upheld. Molekule has agreed to comply with the appeal judgment. This means, in short, that the company no longer stands by many of the promises it had advertised to customers since the first retail MH1 unit shipped in early 2017.

The appeal was heard by the National Advertising Review Board, an 86-member group of ad-industry professionals. Per NARB protocol, the appellate panel consisted of an independent expert, an advertising professional, and three advertiser representatives. (Both NARB and NAD are Better Business Bureau National Programs. NARB is responsible for reviewing and ruling on NAD’s original judgments when an advertiser appeals them. Neither NAD’s nor NARB’s recommendations are legally binding, but advertisers generally agree to comply with them. A further appeal could go to the US Federal Trade Commission, whose rulings are legally binding; Molekule has signaled that it will not take that step.)

As a result of NARB’s ruling, and in addition to the claims Molekule had already rescinded, the company has agreed to comply with the following rulings:

• It will no longer use the word “eliminate” (let alone “completely eliminate,” as originally stated) when describing the MH1’s performance on allergens, bacteria, viruses, mold, and VOCs.
• It must specify that many of its claims refer not to the MH1 air purifier itself but only to the underlying PECO technology.
• It cannot claim that the MH1 completely replaces the air in a 600-square-foot room once every hour (and even that is far below the four air changes per hour we recommend).
• It can no longer make any claims about the MH1’s supposed superiority over HEPA air purifiers.
• It must stop claiming that HEPA filters breed bacteria and mold and release them back into the air, can’t capture viruses, and don’t trap particulates smaller than 0.3 microns—because none of that is true.

Perhaps most notably, in its final recommendation in the appeal report, NARB wrote that Molekule’s long-standing claim to be “‘Finally, an air purifier that actually works,’ is not supported and should be discontinued.”

Molekule agreed.

That claim and those affected by the rulings listed above no longer appear on Molekule’s site.

NARB reversed the original NAD decision on just two small points: Molekule is still allowed to say, vaguely, that the MH1 “can address bioaerosol and VOC pollution” and that its “revolutionary nanotechnology destroys pollutants at the molecular level.” Neither claim has ever been in dispute. What has been in dispute is how well it does those things, especially in real-world conditions. Most of Molekule’s testing, as revealed by its own evidence submitted to NAD, was done in tiny lab chambers using its PECO filters alone—not the MH1 purifier itself.

Asked to comment on the NARB ruling, a Molekule representative wrote, “We are pleased that our core technology claims were upheld in the process.” The representative did not address the NARB recommendations that went against Molekule.

The ruling closes one chapter of Molekule’s story. Others will open. For one, the company recently received FDA 510(k) clearance for a new purifier, the Molekule Air Pro RX, as a Class II medical device. We’ll follow that and other developments, including this potential lawsuit against the company for false advertising.

Our original judgment of the MH1 stands: It remains the worst air purifier we have ever tested.