Electromagnetic waves destabilize the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein and reduce SARS-CoV-2 Virus-Like Particle (SC2-VLP) infectivity

  1. Skyler Granatir
  2. Francisco M. Acosta
  3. Christina Pantoja
  4. Johann Tailor
  5. Angus Fuori
  6. Bill Dower
  7. Henry Marr
  8. Peter W. Ramirez

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Infection and transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to pose a global public health concern. Using electromagnetic waves represents an alternative strategy to inactivate pathogenic viruses such as SARS-CoV-2 and reduce overall transmission. However, whether electromagnetic waves reduce SARS-CoV-2 infectivity is unclear. Here, we adapted a coplanar waveguide (CPW) to identify electromagnetic waves that could neutralize SARS-CoV-2 virus-like particles (SC2-VLPs). Treatment of SC2-VLPs, particularly at frequencies between 2.5-3.5 GHz at an electric field of 400 V/m for 2 minutes, reduced infectivity. Exposure to a frequency of 3.1 GHz decreased the binding of SC2-VLPs to antibodies directed against the Spike S1 subunit receptor binding domain (RBD). These results suggest that electromagnetic waves alter the conformation of Spike, thereby reducing viral attachment to host cell receptors. Overall, this data provides proof-of-concept in using electromagnetic waves for sanitation and prevention efforts to curb the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and potentially other pathogenic enveloped viruses.

Article activity feed

  1. PREreview

    This Zenodo record is a permanently preserved version of a PREreview. You can view the complete PREreview at https://prereview.org/reviews/15361798.

    This study represents an important and timely contribution to virology and biomedical engineering. By investigating how targeted electromagnetic wave exposure can disrupt SARS-CoV-2 virus-like particles, the authors take a significant step toward developing new, non-invasive methods for viral inactivation.

    The use of a coplanar waveguide (CPW) system to determine virus absorption spectra—and to then experimentally reduce infectivity—demonstrates both technical precision and creativity. The focus on the 2.5–3.5 GHz frequency range and its effect on the Spike protein's receptor binding domain (RBD) provides new insights into virus vulnerability to electric fields, offering a compelling foundation for future antiviral strategies.

    This is more than a technical report. It is a proof-of-concept that opens the door to alternative disinfection methods that could be used in environments ranging from hospitals to public transport systems. The fact that these effects are nonthermal enhances the appeal and safety of potential applications.

    Suggestions for Improvement and Further Exploration

    1. Clarify Thermal vs. Nonthermal Mechanism The claim that inactivation occurs through nonthermal means is important. Although temperature was not observed to rise during the experiments, including precise thermal data (plots, sensors, or calibration references) would make this conclusion stronger and more defensible.

    2. Broaden the Scope of Variants Tested The study uses the ancestral Wuhan-1 Spike protein. Including or proposing plans to test additional variants (e.g., Delta, Omicron) would significantly increase the relevance and applicability of the findings.

    3. Explore Longer-Term Structural Impacts It would be valuable to know whether the structural deformation of the Spike protein is reversible or permanent. Including results from additional assays—such as structural integrity over time, or binding kinetics post-exposure—could deepen understanding.

    4. Incorporate Visualization of Structural Damage Electron microscopy or other imaging tools to visualize physical changes in SC2-VLPs would powerfully complement the ELISA and infectivity results, providing direct visual confirmation of damage or morphological change.

    5. Discuss Practical Deployment While the study serves as a laboratory-based proof-of-concept, a brief discussion about real-world applications—such as portable sanitization systems, safety protocols, or clinical implications—would elevate its impact.

    6. Expand on Broader Viral Relevance The paper briefly mentions the possibility of using this method on other enveloped viruses (e.g., HIV, HCV, influenza). Expanding on this with preliminary data or literature comparisons could support broader adoption of the method.

    Conclusion

    This article is a model of scientific curiosity applied to public health challenges. It blends physics, virology, and engineering in a practical and elegant way. The experimental results are compelling, and the method is both innovative and grounded in sound scientific reasoning.

    The work deserves recognition not only for its originality but also for its potential to impact future antiviral technologies. With some refinements and expansions, it could serve as a foundation for new strategies in viral control—especially where traditional chemical or thermal disinfection methods are limited.

    The authors are encouraged to continue developing this line of research. Their findings could be part of a new class of electromagnetic-based interventions that reshape how we approach pandemic preparedness and viral containment in the years ahead.

    Competing interests

    The author declares that they have no competing interests.

  2. PREreview

    This Zenodo record is a permanently preserved version of a Structured PREreview. You can view the complete PREreview at https://prereview.org/reviews/13835394.

    Does the introduction explain the objective of the research presented in the preprint? Yes
    Are the methods well-suited for this research? Somewhat appropriate Other studies on microwave inactivation of viruses have measured infectivity directly use plaque or TCID50 assays. This study uses a luciferase readout as an indirect measure of infectivity. It would be good to include a control that compares a traditional measure of infectivity against the measurement made using luciferase (or a citation to another study that has made this comparison). Several aspects of the methods are not described in sufficient detail to allow replication. 1. The dimensions of the CPW wave guide and the media volume used to measure the absorption spectra are not provided. 2. The exposure time for treating the virus in the TEM cell is not provided. 3. The experimental conditions (e.g. media volume, media container [cuvette, dish, slide?]) of the virus in the TEM cell are not described.
    Are the conclusions supported by the data? Highly supported
    Are the data presentations, including visualizations, well-suited to represent the data? Somewhat appropriate and clear I find the data grouping in Fig. 3B unclear. If I understand correctly, multiple individual frequencies were tested (each with five experimental replicates) and have then been grouped into 5 (unequal) frequency bands that are plotted on a bar graph. As frequency is a continuous variable, I think it would be more informative to display the results on a scatter plot without any grouping of test frequencies (testing for significant differences for each frequency does not seem necessary if plotted in this way, fitting inactivation as a function of frequency may be more appropriate). This is important because two frequencies are selected for further testing with an ELISA assay for Fig. 4. The authors note that these resulted in the 'greatest or smallest reductions in infectivity', but as the results of tests at these frequencies are grouped with the results from other frequencies in Fig. 3B, so it is impossible to judge how much greater (or smaller) the results from these frequencies are from the others in the group.
    How clearly do the authors discuss, explain, and interpret their findings and potential next steps for the research? Somewhat clearly The study found the absorption spectra peaked at 3.1 and 6 GHz, and they obtained the greatest inactivation at the former frequency and the lowest inactivation at the later. I think it would have been good for the discussion to comment on how the results at each absorption peak differed (i.e. one gave the best inactivation, the other the worst). I don't think this has been identified in other literature. 'whether our CPW/VNA system reduces the infectivity of IAV, HIV-1, HCV or other pathogenic enveloped viruses is intriguing but was beyond the scope of this study.' My understanding is that the CPW/VNA system was used to measure the absorption spectra while the TEM cell was used for reducing viral infectivity. If so, this sentence should be corrected.
    Is the preprint likely to advance academic knowledge? Somewhat likely The preprint is the first to systematically test inactivation at frequencies below 6 GHz (but see doi.org/10.1117/12.2611335), and I agree that is the first to identify a clear mechanism for the reduction in infectivity caused by EM.
    Would it benefit from language editing? No
    Would you recommend this preprint to others? Yes, but it needs to be improved Better description of the experimental conditions to enable replication (as noted previously).
    Is it ready for attention from an editor, publisher or broader audience? Yes, after minor changes The authors affiliated with Epirus Inc are the investors of a patent related to the use of EM for inactivating viruses (https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2023200689A1). Most journals would require listing this as a financial conflict of interest.

    Competing interests

    I provide consulting services for Resonant Health Inc.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2024.09.11.612487v1 on bioRxiv