3 ms·

If this actually causes physical damage to a virus, it raises the question for me: what else do ultrasounds physically damage? Surely COVID 19 can’t be the only

If this actually causes physical damage to a virus, it raises the question for me: what else do ultrasounds physically damage? Surely COVID 19 can’t be the only thing in our body with a resonance frequency in that range

burlesona 6y ago
I was wondering the same thing.
goda90 6y ago
Viruses are considerably smaller than cells, so that probably plays a part in damage. Though maybe we should study the effects on DNA and organelles within cells. Also, the body regularly damages itself in attempts to eliminate infections. It then can heal. Ultrasound might damage other parts of the body, but it might not be worse than what the infection itself causes.
- dheera 6y ago
  The body is particularly bad at fixing certain kinds of DNA damage though, and just lets itself die from cancer.
clairity 6y ago
ultrasounds are done on people all the time, especially during pregnancy on relatively fragile fetuses. we'd likely know of any serious risks by now. ultrasound is more akin to microscopic shaking than a mysterious flux of (highly potent) energy. also consider that the cov2 virus is particularly fragile, for instance, requiring the external support of water to remain intact. it's why you don't need masks in most common situations (just distance), because the virus disintegrates so easily. some viruses, on the other hand, can essentially hibernate and revive themselves once inside a host. those are the ones that would require enough excess energy that damage to other cells and organelles might be a genuine concern.
- brodouevencode 6y ago
  Great point. If you've never had an ultrasound, it's safe enough that the technician doing them (who may see dozens of patients in a day) isn't even wearing any shielding or protection.
  - UncleOxidant 6y ago
    Ultrasound is highly directed. The practitioner isn't getting exposed to a significant amount of ultrasound energy.
    - brodouevencode 6y ago
      Good point, and a fair one. I would imagine though if there were any chance though they would have to be shielded.
    - InitialLastName 6y ago
      Not only is it highly directed, ultrasonic acoustical frequencies disperse very quickly in air. At 1MHz, the energy absorption in air is ~160dB/meter, so a person sitting at arm's length away from the emitter (even if it weren't highly directed) would receive ~6*10^-17 of the power (if that weren't far below any possible noise floor, which it is).
- _Microft 6y ago
  The proposed ultrasound frequencies are 10-100 times as high as the ones usually used for imaging purposes, so the conclusion that it must be harmless does not naturally follow.
  - clairity 6y ago
    i haven't delved into the specifics here, but note that a higher frequency doesn't necessarily mean a higher flux of energy, so that conclusion doesn't necessarily follow either.
    - 6y ago
NoSorryCannot 6y ago
Ultrasound is just sound above frequencies that humans can hear, which is a vast range from ~20khz up to practical physical limits, gigahertz at least. Your body has resonant parts that can be damaged by frequencies in the _audible_ range, the chief parts being in your ears but other parts, too, if the sound is sufficiently loud, e.g. a shockwave from a powerful explosion. So amplitude (volume) is clearly very important. All that to say, I don't think there's any cause here to draw suspicion upon sonograms or other time-tested procedures.

burlesona 6y ago

I was wondering the same thing.

goda90 6y ago

Viruses are considerably smaller than cells, so that probably plays a part in damage. Though maybe we should study the effects on DNA and organelles within cells. Also, the body regularly damages itself in attempts to eliminate infections. It then can heal. Ultrasound might damage other parts of the body, but it might not be worse than what the infection itself causes.

dheera 6y ago
The body is particularly bad at fixing certain kinds of DNA damage though, and just lets itself die from cancer.

clairity 6y ago

ultrasounds are done on people all the time, especially during pregnancy on relatively fragile fetuses. we'd likely know of any serious risks by now. ultrasound is more akin to microscopic shaking than a mysterious flux of (highly potent) energy. also consider that the cov2 virus is particularly fragile, for instance, requiring the external support of water to remain intact. it's why you don't need masks in most common situations (just distance), because the virus disintegrates so easily. some viruses, on the other hand, can essentially hibernate and revive themselves once inside a host. those are the ones that would require enough excess energy that damage to other cells and organelles might be a genuine concern.

brodouevencode 6y ago
Great point. If you've never had an ultrasound, it's safe enough that the technician doing them (who may see dozens of patients in a day) isn't even wearing any shielding or protection.
- UncleOxidant 6y ago
  Ultrasound is highly directed. The practitioner isn't getting exposed to a significant amount of ultrasound energy.
  - brodouevencode 6y ago
    Good point, and a fair one. I would imagine though if there were any chance though they would have to be shielded.
  - InitialLastName 6y ago
    Not only is it highly directed, ultrasonic acoustical frequencies disperse very quickly in air. At 1MHz, the energy absorption in air is ~160dB/meter, so a person sitting at arm's length away from the emitter (even if it weren't highly directed) would receive ~6*10^-17 of the power (if that weren't far below any possible noise floor, which it is).
_Microft 6y ago
The proposed ultrasound frequencies are 10-100 times as high as the ones usually used for imaging purposes, so the conclusion that it must be harmless does not naturally follow.
- clairity 6y ago
  i haven't delved into the specifics here, but note that a higher frequency doesn't necessarily mean a higher flux of energy, so that conclusion doesn't necessarily follow either.
  - 6y ago

NoSorryCannot 6y ago

Ultrasound is just sound above frequencies that humans can hear, which is a vast range from ~20khz up to practical physical limits, gigahertz at least. Your body has resonant parts that can be damaged by frequencies in the _audible_ range, the chief parts being in your ears but other parts, too, if the sound is sufficiently loud, e.g. a shockwave from a powerful explosion. So amplitude (volume) is clearly very important. All that to say, I don't think there's any cause here to draw suspicion upon sonograms or other time-tested procedures.