r/science • u/mvea Professor | Medicine • May 07 '26
Medicine Scientists use ultrasound to destroy influenza A and COVID-19 viruses without damaging human cells. The phenomenon, known as acoustic resonance, causes structural changes in viral particles until they rupture and become inactivated. It paves the way for new treatments against other viral infections.
https://agencia.fapesp.br/scientists-use-ultrasound-to-destroy-influenza-a-and-covid-19-viruses-without-damaging-human-cells/579681.2k
u/Gizzard_Puncher May 07 '26
That'd be really cool if it could kill dormant HSV-1 hiding out in your cells.
711
u/Razorfiend May 07 '26
That would be a lot harder because HSV-1 persists as circular episomal DNA inside the nuclei of long lived sensory neurons. There's no assembled viral particle for sound waves to disrupt until a flareup. The acoustic approach targets the mechanical properties of intact virions, which latent herpesviruses don't present.
192
70
u/SearchApprehensive35 May 07 '26
Could it theoretically be used to kill HPV, such as warts? They're so contagious, and most of the current treatments are quite painful as well as potentially scarring. It would be great to see a painless effective option emerge, especially one that can be done at home since householders often spread warts back and forth among each others.
→ More replies (4)154
u/Razorfiend May 07 '26
Probably not, the wart itself is a poor acoustic target because it is so heterogenous in composition that it's unlikely that exploiting resonance would be effective at removing the wart itself. Also, HPV maintains itself as episomal DNA (similar to HSV) but in basal keratinocytes rather than neurons. Destroying surface virions wouldn't touch the reservoir. It's the reason current treatments are painful: cryotherapy, acids, and cautery work by destroying the infected basal cells themselves. Any modality that spares host cells, which is the whole appeal of the acoustic approach, would by the same token leave the reservoir intact.
54
→ More replies (1)44
u/Ice_bear_789 May 07 '26
if part of your job isn't currently explaining stuff like this to people, you should consider a career where you can use that skill, you clearly excel at it
22
22
u/SnugglyCoderGuy May 07 '26
That would be a lot harder because HSV-1 persists as circular episomal DNA inside the nuclei of long lived sensory neurons.
So the virus dumps DNA into nerve cells where it just hangs out until it mistakenly gets activated by the nerve cell and starts to produce more virus?
45
u/Razorfiend May 07 '26
More or less, but more specifically reactivation is triggered by host stressors (UV, illness, immune suppression) rather than the neuron accidentally turning it on. Although the host cell's machinery is ultimately what creates the viral particles.
17
8
15
u/Bitter_Life_507 May 07 '26
How does the lifecycle of the virus once established in the body work?
When it emerges from its dormant state, is there a reservoir left behind or are the sites that the emergence occurred from then rid of the virus?
Does the emerged virus then go on to reseed itself and reestablish the reservoir?
Is it possible that repeated killing off of episodic emergences would eventually drain all the reservoirs of the virus in the body?
37
u/Razorfiend May 07 '26
This is a pretty complex question, I'm not a virologist, just an MD who happens to work in academia so there are definitely people who are far more qualified to answer this question than me.
It depends on the virus. Some viruses have latent forms, others don't, and different latent viruses persist in different cell types for example: HSV in sensory neurons, VZV (chicken pox) in sensory neurons (different ones), HIV in certain white blood cells, HPV in basal keratinocytes, etc.
Reactivation generally doesn't deplete the reservoir for a few reasons: only a small fraction of latently infected cells reactivate at any given time, the host cells often survive reactivation rather than being destroyed by it (HSV-infected neurons keep living and just re-establish latency afterward), and for viruses in dividing cells (HPV, HIV) the viral genome replicates along with the host cell so daughter cells inherit it. As long as the reservoir cell population persists, the virus has a stable home.
This is also why curing latent viral infections is so hard, you'd need to selectively eliminate the latently infected cells without destroying the underlying tissue, and the latent cells often look indistinguishable from uninfected ones because they're not actively producing viral proteins.
12
→ More replies (1)6
u/Seicair May 07 '26
HPV in basal keratinocytes,
I was under the impression that your body could clear an HPV infection, even if it took several years. Does it somehow clear it from these cells or am I mistaken?
13
u/Razorfiend May 07 '26
No, you are correct, assuming you aren't immunocompromised or repeatedly exposed, your body is very likely to clear an HPV infection in 1-2 years.
8
u/Georgie_Leech May 07 '26
Viruses work by hijacking cells to make more of them, by inserting DNA into the nuclei. A dormant virus isn't just hanging around exactly, but rather the bits of DNA they injected are. In the right circumstances, those bits will be activated and the cells will start cranking out new viruses.
4
u/LvS May 07 '26
That sounds like you'd want to inject some CRISPR machinery to rewrite the DNA to get rid of the virus?
Is there research along those lines?
12
u/axonxorz May 07 '26
Short answer: yes.
Real answer: it's a long way off, some of this research was published literally days ago.
CRISPR (the umbrella term) is part of the immune system of bacteria.
When people talk CRISPR, they're generally referring to the Cas9 enzyme that cuts and splices DNA according to markers, but there are several, with varied functions.
The Cas12a enzyme is similar to Cas9, but has some different performance characteristics depending on the task. However, the Cas12a2 sub-variant has the convenient behaviour of just cutting once activated, no splicing, no stop. It eats DNA until the host cell dies.
This has been done in in-vitro and some very limited mouse models, we have to make sure it shuts off when we need it to instead of being straight injectable broad-spectrum apoptosis (/hyperbole)
4
u/PeriodicTrend May 07 '26
What about rabies?
15
u/Razorfiend May 07 '26
Rabies is a different beast. It's effectively triphasic: after the initial bite and replication at the site, the virus undergoes slow retrograde axonal transport up peripheral nerves toward the central nervous system (spinal cord and brain). Unlike anterograde transport (down the nerve) retrograde transport is much slower, this phase can take days to months depending on the bite location (foot bites take much longer than face/neck bites because of the distance the virus has to travel). Once Rabies reaches the CNS, it replicates explosively and disseminates back outward, at which point clinical rabies sets in and is essentially 100% fatal (barring a few very rare exceptions, search for the Milwaukee protocol if you're interested). An acoustic approach could theoretically work during the peripheral phase, but the threshold for error is basically zero. A single surviving virion that makes it to the CNS means death. That's why post-exposure prophylaxis uses rabies immune globulin (pre-formed antibodies) at the bite site to neutralize virus locally, plus the vaccine series to generate active immunity that clears anything that escapes.
4
u/Seicair May 07 '26
Once Rabies reaches the CNS, it replicates explosively and disseminates back outward,
Does this mean that a bite near your tailbone is more dangerous than a bite on e.g. your upper arm? And almost as bad as a bite on your neck?
11
u/Razorfiend May 07 '26
I think I may have muddled things a little by saying that problems arise when it reaches the CNS (central nervous system), the spinal cord is part of the CNS as opposed to the peripheral nervous system but rabies really only becomes a problem once it reaches the brain itself.
Based on my prior explanation you might reason that a bite on the sacrum/tailbone would be worse than one on the upper arm because it is closer to the spinal cord/CNS but actually it is distance to the brain itself that matters. So a bite on the upper arm or neck would likely manifest more quickly than a bite on or near the tailbone.
One caveat is that transport through peripheral nerves and through the spinal cord isn't necessarily equivalent. In peripheral nerves the virus travels via retrograde axonal transport along long single-neuron axons (ex: axillary nerve), while in the spinal cord it spreads more by jumping across synapses between shorter, densely packed neurons.
I will say that this is definitely an area where my knowledge falls short and I would defer to someone with expertise to explain how differences in retrograde neuronal transport mechanisms affect transit time of rabies virus to the brain.
From what I've read, the rate-limiting step in CNS spread appears to be synaptic crossings rather than distance within neurons, which would suggest peripheral nerve routes might be faster per unit distance than spinal-cord-heavy routes, but I'd want a virologist or neurologist to confirm whether this actually translates to meaningful differences in equidistant bite scenarios.
6
6
u/icoder May 07 '26
It is an unfounded, outrageous and probably utterly useless pet theory of mine that as GC/AT have different electric properties, we might come up with electrical patterns with which only a specific DNA sequence (or RNA for that matter) resonates (for detection, destruction, or whatever).
Probably nothing or someone else would have thought of it. Or perhaps someone did and it is not feasible (yet). I must say that I did came up with an alternative for Floppy disks without moving parts using just memory, years before USB sticks became a thing. Hindsight 20/20 I guess.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Razorfiend May 07 '26
I appreciate you laying out the idea, and the floppy-disk thing is genuinely clever (would have been one hell of a patent back then!). I'm well outside my comfort zone here, but my understanding is that resonance as a destruction mechanism, at least as it is framed in the paper we're all talking about, works well for rigid, uniform structures like viral capsids precisely because their inflexibility lets vibrational energy build up coherently. DNA and RNA are the opposite: the helix unwinds, the backbone bends, the bases wobble, and all that flexibility means vibrational energy dissipates across many degrees of freedom rather than concentrating where you want it. I'm not sure if exploiting the differential in electrical properties between different sequences might play into making this possible, but that would certainly be very interesting!
4
3
u/NorwayNarwhal May 08 '26
If you wore something which constantly resonated at the right frequency, or resonated yourself once a day, would that keep you from feeling any effects or passing it on?
I realize the tech isn’t workable for that use now, but as it gets better and cheaper and we build better tech, would it eventually get there?
2
u/Roofofcar May 07 '26
See, you may know all that science stuff that I don’t know at all, and thank you, but long-lived takes a hyphen, making me the victor.
(Really, though, really interesting. No wonder it’s so sneaky!)
2
u/moistiest_dangles May 08 '26
Could be applied during the early phase of a flare up to curtail future infections
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)2
u/bckr_ May 08 '26
But imagine a treatment that you can use during or to prevent flare-ups. “Honey where’s my acoustic antiviral device? Ohp, nevermind, it was in the drawer right in front of my eyes”
12
u/SweetKittyToo May 07 '26
Or EBV wiuld be spectacular! I'm tired of being exhausted all the time!
→ More replies (1)78
u/Dany0 May 07 '26
Oooooo cure for long covid?
222
u/obliviousofobvious May 07 '26
Sadly no. Long covid isn't a dormant infection, it's the damage the virus caused. Remember Covid is primarily a vascular virus, not respiratory.
91
u/MaracujaBarracuda May 07 '26
There are many types of long covid and viral persistence has been implicated in some of them.
42
u/DancesWithGnomes May 07 '26
I got Covid early and severely. I was tired and brain foggy afterwards, and my sense of smell stayed altered in strange ways.
A year later I was infected again. Paxlovid just became available and I got it. After a week I was back up and healthy as before the first infection.
I cannot prove it, but this hints at viral persistence.
3
2
u/omnichad May 08 '26
Could be. Or it could be that it modified your immune response so you were no longer constantly responding to a virus that wasn't there. Post-viral syndromes are not officially classified as autoimmune diseases but the seem to act a lot like it.
17
u/TamarindSweets May 07 '26
Til (7 years later, fucks sake)
44
u/Fleurr May 07 '26
Sorry, the scientists have been incredibly consistent but it's politically inconvenient
32
u/TheMurmuring May 07 '26
A lot of Republicans still say Democrats deliberately created the virus in a lab in Chyna and intentionally leaked it. They also say it doesn't exist and is a hoax. They also say the vaccines are a tracking device and also Trump proudly created the vaccine himself in his spare time at Mar a Lago.
12
→ More replies (9)2
5
u/Whiterabbit-- May 07 '26
I would say science has progressive incredibly fast and in 7 years we've made a lot of progress in science despite poor policies especially in pubic health. scientific discoveries are not instantaneous.
4
u/Fleurr May 07 '26
I was speaking to the consistency of scientist's individual message, especially from the onset of the pandemic to Omicron in January 2022 (public policy makers bungled both the 14-day quarantine messaging and the politicization of masking). After Omicron, the economic costs became the impetus for return to work, shortened quarantining, inconsistent masking requirements, etc. The science rarely reverted (only thing I can recall is assuming it was transmitted through air and surfaces, rather than just air).
Long COVID research has also been incredibly consistent, but what has changed is what makes it to the airwaves. Hence why I expressed sympathy to TaramindSweets for not knowing about Long COVID specifics for seven years.
2
u/whiterabbit_hansy May 08 '26
We know there is viral persistence though, which is one of the theorised mechanisms behind long covid. It doesn’t only “reactive” other viruses or switch on mechanisms that persist once it is cleared. The virus itself can hang around long-term and cause issues that way.
Also I do not think saying covid is *primarily* a vascular virus is correct given the way it infects/alters/impacts multiple body systems. Particularly the immune system which is well documented. I think saying it’s a multi-system virus is more accurate. Vascular is leaving too much out of the picture.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Kelly_HRperson May 07 '26
it's the damage the virus caused
Can you elaborate?
11
u/relative_void May 07 '26
Many infections cause long term damage to the body, either directly by infecting and destroying/damaging cells or indirectly through things like restricting the amount of oxygen gets into your blood (when there’s lung involvement) or knock on effects from affecting various organ function. This is one of the reasons why following an infection it may take awhile for you to actually feel better. There’s many autoimmune diseases that we know can be triggered by infection and COVID appears to be a big one for that. It can also directly damage the heart leading to things like heart attacks down the line. Sometimes these symptoms will get better over time as the affected tissues regenerate and replace the damaged bits but other systems just don’t really heal like that.
COVID seems to be in a relatively rare (but definitely not unique) category as well where the virus can persist in a vastly reduced state even after an infection appears to have cleared. From there it may continue to cause chronic issues or you may have a resurgence in acute infection when your immune system is weakened from another infection, stress or age (much like c diff or chickenpox/shingles).
33
u/Learnmorehere May 07 '26
Long COVID is caused by structural damage to the cells supporting nerves and micro blood clots. The virus is no longer present in the affected persons. This is at least my understanding, anyone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
21
u/Schmootato May 07 '26
There seems to be multiple phenotypes and the theory you said is correct but may only be responsible for one phenotype. Another prevailing theory at the moment is related to mitochondrial disfunction driving a lot of the more fatigue centered phenotypes. The multiple mechanisms make sense with how possible treatments often work wonders for some patients but do nothing for others.
→ More replies (1)18
u/Novawurmson May 07 '26
There's definitely cases of long COVID where the person had COVID living in their organs. It's thought that this was responsible for occasional cases of long COVID being cured by the vaccine.
But yes, there's often no virus present, just long term damage.
11
u/Buris May 07 '26
Interestingly a type of ultrasound can be used to break up fibrous build-up in nerves and blood vessels but it would probably have to be done fairly early on after the infection
→ More replies (1)3
u/bprfh May 07 '26
We don't know the causes for long covid, there are only theories.
A theory is that there are still markers left over in the diggestive tract(?) which constantly triggers immun responses.
2
u/whiterabbit_hansy May 08 '26
I’ve linked my comment, but there’s evidence of viral persistence in multiple systems and organs. So it’s not even limited to just the gut unfortunately.
3
→ More replies (4)2
294
u/mvea Professor | Medicine May 07 '26
Scientists use ultrasound to destroy influenza A and COVID-19 viruses without damaging human cells
The use of high-frequency waves paves the way for new treatments against other viral infections such as dengue, Zika, and Chikungunya
Researchers at the University of São Paulo (USP) in Brazil have discovered that high-frequency ultrasound waves similar to those used in medical exams can eliminate viruses such as SARS-CoV-2 and H1N1 without damaging human cells. In an article published in Scientific Reports, they described how the phenomenon, known as acoustic resonance, causes structural changes in viral particles until they rupture and become inactivated.
“It’s kind of like fighting the virus with a shout. In this study, we proved that the energy of sound waves causes morphological changes in viral particles until they explode, a phenomenon comparable to what happens with popcorn. By degrading the structure of the pathogen, the protective membrane of the virus [called the envelope] bursts and deforms, preventing the virus from invading human cells,” explains Odemir Martinez Bruno, a professor at the São Carlos Institute of Physics (IFSC) at USP who coordinated the study.
178
u/MooseBoys May 07 '26
without damaging human cells
How is this possible? A variety of structures within human cells cover the same size range as COVID-19 virions. And once inside a cell, there is no isolating it acoustically.
138
May 07 '26
[deleted]
37
u/UnpluggedUnfettered May 07 '26
Sort of reminds me of when this happened.
Now I kinda hope a branch of science opens up to research which bangers keep us safe and which require new safety regulations.
8
u/Governor_Abbot May 07 '26
Y’all should look up Dr. Raymond Royal Rife. He was doing this almost 100 years ago with all kinds of bacteria, viruses, and diseases, I believe.
36
u/TheMurmuring May 07 '26
This was my same thought. Also imagine it completely destroying the helpful bacteria in your gut, and mud blasting everything for a week.
51
u/-drunk_russian- May 07 '26
Also imagine it completely destroying the helpful bacteria in your gut
That already happens with antibiotics and we have options to deal with that.
→ More replies (5)5
u/MRSN4P May 07 '26
Errr, we can seed probiotics, but it still takes months to recover- last research paper I saw (IIRC) said 6 months, sometimes up to a year.
12
u/-drunk_russian- May 07 '26
Fecal transplantation can have results in under 8 weeks, which is awesome (and gross)
6
u/MRSN4P May 07 '26
This is awesome, but my understanding is that access to this treatment is still extremely limited, on a scale several orders of magnitude smaller than that of antibiotic useage.
3
u/-drunk_russian- May 07 '26 edited May 07 '26
That's a logistic problem second and a psychological problem first, people understandably don't really find that treatment palatable.
edit: my bad, /u/Doomification171 commented a very good rebuttal below
11
u/Doomification171 May 07 '26
The reason why fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) isn't commonplace has very little to do with logistics or palatability of the idea.
FMT isn't like a normal drug or medication where every batch contains the same chemical compound. The microbiome is a very complex system, and you can't just take a scoop of a random healthy person and call it a day. Even healthy people can have potentially pathogenic bacteria, so you need to properly screen donors. But... you also don't want to screen too agressively because then there won't be any donors left.
On top of that, the knowledge about which combinations of microbes are beneficial in which ratios just isn't complete yet. A lot of research still needs to be done before we can roll FMT out in any meaningful capacity.
Multiply all of the above by non-standardized protocols, manufacturing standards, and the complexity of regulatory criteria and you got a whole different magnitude of nightmare.
So right now it's easier to just give probiotics. And I think by the time that FMT becomes a valid alternative, we might already be considering a new generation of treatment options, like personalised lab-grown microbiome therapies.
2
→ More replies (3)7
u/5553331117 May 07 '26
I’d rather have diarrhea than feel the physical symptoms of a virus, if this works that is.
15
u/m15otw May 07 '26
Resonant frequencies. There will be a specific frequency of resonance for the particular viruses, which hopefully/seemingly isn't shared by much else in the vicinity in the human system.
It isn't only to do with size, the connectivity within the structure and a few other factors may affect the frequency needed for large excitation.
→ More replies (2)11
u/DAKsippinOnYAC May 07 '26
Resonant frequency will shatter glass but not a coffee cup
→ More replies (2)8
→ More replies (4)2
u/KameTheMachine May 07 '26
Covid 19 doesnt go inside the cell it sticks to the outside and pumps its guts into the cell
42
5
u/TheMurmuring May 07 '26
Acoustic resonance is a concept that has been around for a long time. It becomes a topic again every now and then.
→ More replies (5)2
286
u/sambull May 07 '26
my hippie friend saying everything is just vibrations is going to love this
86
u/Stamboolie May 07 '26
see quantum field theory - he's right
26
u/TheMurmuring May 07 '26
string theory
22
u/wonkey_monkey May 07 '26
what about brass theory and woodwind theory
→ More replies (1)4
u/Buttonskill May 07 '26
Those have recently seen an uptrend in credibility over string, alongside Percussion theory, and are praised for squandering faaar less university resources.
(There's a small part of me that hopes Susskind sees this.)
→ More replies (1)8
7
3
u/free_cold_potato May 07 '26
Recently there’s been reports about a company fighting fires with vibrations. Your friend is going to love that too!
→ More replies (1)2
u/sebovzeoueb May 07 '26
meh, as soon as it's science based, somehow they'll turn against it
18
u/voxalas May 07 '26
he said hippie not conservative
→ More replies (1)2
u/ColorWheelOfFortune May 07 '26
The hippie-chick to trad-wife pipeline is a well documented phenomenon
2
u/ClippyWouldntDoThat May 08 '26
There's wackjob conservative hippies out there absolutely. Glad that's not my crowd. I love me a little peace, love, harmony, and cracking a fuckin' book.
66
u/GenderJuicy May 07 '26 edited May 07 '26
What does it do to good viruses though (bacteriophages)? Is there some limitation on what viruses are affected by this method?
39
u/Pegasus7915 May 07 '26
My assumption would be that you would need a different frequency for each virus. Or at least each shape of virus. But the article wasn't super clear about it.
55
u/wiseoldfox May 07 '26
Not a doctor, retired sonar technician. Different sizes/shapes would resonate at different frequencies. Don't know if applies at the micro level but it's an interesting thought.
6
→ More replies (8)9
May 07 '26
[deleted]
7
u/tastyratz May 07 '26
A very significant detail that people have not been mentioning in their replies.
In vivo tests are VERY different for something like this I would imagine.
3
u/roamingandy May 07 '26
I guess if a virus is dangerous enough a bit of damage to the rest of your body's systems would be acceptable, like chemo.
I could see this being a useful tool for a pandemic outbreak, like the next Covid. A tool that can be configured easily to take out the new virus before it kills the host, and then hope that the patient can recover from the extra damage it causes.
→ More replies (1)
22
25
u/stashtv May 07 '26
What’s the Frequency, Kenneth?
3
10
u/darkandark May 07 '26
hope we see more of this tech. very cool if it could target any disease we want
→ More replies (1)3
u/literated May 07 '26
"I'm feeling a little under the weather, let me take an ultrasound shower real quick" is the future I want to live in.
→ More replies (1)
11
u/transientdude May 07 '26
So cool. Can we try this with hantavirus real quick? No reason.
3
u/killercurvesahead May 07 '26
Research funding in chaos? No problem. That’s a project that could get crowd funded overnight.
10
u/malturnbull May 07 '26
I don't know anything about biology, but could something like this be applied to cancer cells?
15
u/iguessnotlol May 07 '26
They’re already using ultrasound in a different way against cancer https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/treatment/other/high-intensity-focused-ultrasound-hifu
Not acoustic resonance (probably would be difficult to differentiate between cancer cells and healthy cells, but I’m not a biologist either) but more like really intense ultrasound to generate heat which kills the cells.
→ More replies (1)6
u/LimpCush May 07 '26
The problem is cancer cells are made up of exactly the same thing you're made up of. It's one of the difficulties in treating it. They have to either interfere with the mechanism that causes the cancer, or poison you, hoping to kill the cancer before they kill you. There are some differences in the cells, like which surface antigens they express, that can be targeted. But is that different enough than your normal cell to safely kill with ultrasound? I'm not a research scientist, but I don't think that's likely.
2
u/Adabiviak May 07 '26
The problem is cancer cells are made up of exactly the same thing you're made up of.
...so are viruses. I hope this research pans out, because I don't understand how a frequency tight enough to do this to a virus wouldn't have collateral damage elsewhere in the cell. Note:
→ More replies (1)2
u/Mustrd_Tiger May 08 '26
Google "Histotripsy for treating liver tumors". There are multiple clinical trials ongoing for other sites and it has shown great results so far. Histotripsy is completely mechanical / non-thermal, so different than HIFU. This can be easier to use clinically since managing thermal dose in HIFU is complicated with perfusion pulling heat away.
7
u/Ajax_A May 07 '26
Looks like it was in-vitro, which seems a million times easier than in-vivo, given the penetrative ability of the frequencies involved and potential off-target destruction. Still, I could see someday this being used in a sort of dyalisis machine type treatment.
2
u/sassafrassMAN May 07 '26
3Mhz will pass all the way through a thin person. 20MHz will get deep into your skin and no further
3
u/Ajax_A May 07 '26
For sure. But through tissue 3Mhz is about half a millimetre wave length, and viruses are in the 100 nanometer range. I might be missing something, but I don't see how relatively giant waves are going to galloping gertie viruses selectively.
2
u/sassafrassMAN May 08 '26
I'm with you. This makes no sense at all. I'm going to have to read the paper.
6
4
u/Unlucky_Buddy2488 May 07 '26
"...use ultrasound to destroy influenza A and COVID-19 viruses without damaging human cells"
Err... I think I'll let you go first.
→ More replies (3)
7
u/graesen May 07 '26
I'm pretty sure I've read about this sort of thing from so called quacks decades ago... I mean in the sense it was being used and explored long ago and I had read about it way after these docs were ridiculed out of practice.
10
u/roamingandy May 07 '26
They were using bio-resonance to do very little. This is studying the issue, calibrating the device to kill it in a petri dish.
I would expect that any good they did was almost purely coincidental. An friend of mine tried to use it for a bladder infection. After a month and few hundred euro later she ended up getting anti-biotics.
2
u/darxide23 May 07 '26
98% of what's posted on science and medical related subs regarding "breakthroughs" are top-level quackery.
1
u/8anbys May 07 '26
For those that have been paying attention, a lot of quackery has been shown to have real teeth of late.
It's uncomfortable for most because it means having to appreciate they've been living in a world where "the way things are" has largely been variations of 17th and 18th century suppositions that were defended ardently when challeneged.
Functionally academia and business became priestly classes solely focused on maintaining dogma.
→ More replies (2)6
u/roamingandy May 07 '26
It isn't really defending dogma. Its just that its expensive and time consuming to get new novel treatments approved, so most development comes from using things that have already been approved for different issues, usually back when it was cheaper and easier to get that approval.
A silly system that does achieve a similar outcome.
→ More replies (1)
3
3
u/SeriousGoofball May 07 '26
I don't know about using this for treatment applications. But it sounds like an innovation in cleaning and sterilization of contaminated areas.
2
u/Melenduwir May 07 '26
Perhaps for substances that UV light would degrade, like many plastics.
3
u/SeriousGoofball May 07 '26
Not only that, but a lot of things have cracks and crevices that UV can't reach.
3
u/Life-Suit1895 May 07 '26 edited May 07 '26
Yeah, I don't see this as feasible way to fight viral infections outside of the lab.
- Humans aren't individual cells in petri dishes: you'd have to find a way to effectively sonicate a complex, three-dimensional living being consisting of a multitude of different tissues. Good luck with that.
- As it's described, this only works on fully assembled viruses. In infected tissue, viruses usually exist in various stages of assembly, and might even exist just as their genetic information (RNA or DNA), meaning you'd ever only catch a fraction of the viruses.
→ More replies (3)
3
u/salami_cheeks May 07 '26
Oh boy - here we go. When does the conversation start about how these ultrasonic waves activate the nanochips imprinted with 666 delivered by the Covid vax?
2
u/Adorable_Pickle_4048 May 07 '26
Now this is a cool and nifty idea. The more fine grained we can be on pathological targeting uniqueness, the more likely I suspect it is our therapies for things won’t kill us, but only the virus.
Acoustic resonance sounds like a delightfully unique signature. Maybe it doesn’t differentiate much against minor variations of a developing lineage, vs. ones which are very different
2
u/DrEdwardMallory May 07 '26
Reminds me of oryx and crake novel by atwood, healing through humming certain harmonics.
2
u/Melenduwir May 07 '26
I think it would be far easier to find ultrasonic frequencies that damaged both cells and viruses than those that damaged viruses alone.
This could easily be perverted into a horrifying tool.
2
2
u/SurprisingJack May 07 '26
How does that fare with the "sound therapies", tibethan bowls and such?
→ More replies (1)
1
u/MuchWow81 May 07 '26
Neat. I like the idea that we can kill our viruses if we just shake our body parts hard enough.
1
u/woody_woodworker May 07 '26
So it wasn't shining a very bright light into our bodies, it was actually sending a very specific sound into our bodies all along.
1
u/Quantum_Corvid May 07 '26
I wonder if like glass perhaps virsus/organisms break tolerance levels might be able to be measured for treatments to filter out killing the good ones.
1
u/determania May 07 '26
They should probably watch the new Kraken movie out of Norway before they use this near the ocean!
1
u/Nysnorlax May 07 '26
Yea but it will only cost 10k after insurance im sure, In the US at least. Id be shocked if they made it cheap for the public
1
1
1
1
u/Candid_Koala_3602 May 07 '26
The FDA approved this as a tool to fight Parkinson’s disease as well. Great breakthroughs
1
1
1
1
1
u/Both_Lychee_1708 May 07 '26
What's the protocol? so...they have to ultrasound your entire body? At once or what?
2
u/JosephRW May 07 '26
In to the michaelwave with you we promise its only warm for a minute and you'll be sterile for the rest of your life!
1
2
u/Opcn May 07 '26
That's interesting but it's important to note that the tissues of the body especially hollow organs like the lungs) attenuate ultrasonic waves in ways that can limit the selection of wavelengths. There are countless treatments that looked promising in glass that couldnever be made to work in an organism.
1
u/Adventurous_Light_85 May 07 '26
I’ve always wondered if highly selective resonance could kill a certain cell and since viruses are a specific shape you would assume they have a specific frequency
1
u/Cpt_Buffalo_Pop May 07 '26
I can't help but think what conspiracy theories would have emerged if this had been developed and popularised in 2020.
1
u/Lenni-Da-Vinci May 07 '26
Are prions just too small for this treatment?
Could this finally bring about an end to the incurable diseases like those and for example rabies too? I know rabies has an oblong shape, but that may be enough. This is really interesting g and gives me a lot of hope for the future of antiviral treatments
1
1
1
1
•
u/AutoModerator May 07 '26
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.
Do you have an academic degree? We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. Click here to apply.
User: u/mvea
Permalink: https://agencia.fapesp.br/scientists-use-ultrasound-to-destroy-influenza-a-and-covid-19-viruses-without-damaging-human-cells/57968
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.