Ann: Next Science granted its first acne-related patent, page-21

I'm here to clarify a common misconception on patents. The claims made in a patent, such as working against viruses, mean absolutely nothing when it comes to the actual efficacy or applications, although they are often presented this way by NXS and others. This is why people hold patents for flying saucers and other crazy things that are impossible and will never work. The job of a patent attorney is to describe your technology as novel enough for the patent to be granted (i.e. composition of matter with X of this, Y of this, Z of this) and claims of efficacy that are broad as possible so that when you get around to working out what your invention does, that application is covered by your patent. There is no testing and no verification that the patent or composition described has any efficacy whatsoever.

They might be spot on with what they're suggesting but the dazzling technical descriptions in the patent above is the untested theory of NXS as to how they believe their invention may work. They're not required to submit any results demonstrating these mechanisms or efficacy.

As an aside, the vast majority of viruses are easily inactivated by most disinfectants (certainly more easily than bacteria and biofilm) so this claim is probably true in any case but it's unlikely to be a unique advantage.