For a Device Claiming To Fight Viruses, Jargon Is Not the Same as Science – The Wire Science

Image: Fusion Medical Animation.

Bengaluru: ‘Shycocan’ is a tool that purports to have the ability to “attenuate viruses” and is being bought on Amazon for Rs 24,999 apiece. The gadget’s makers have marketed that ‘Shycocan’ can “disable” as much as 99.9% of viruses in a given quantity of house, can be utilized off the shelf with no consumables, and might shield 1,000 sq. ft at a time. Its identify is brief for “Scalene Hypercharge Corona Canon”.

Many articles from June final yr, together with these in Times of India and Economic Times, featured the ‘Shycocan’ as a “device to kill coronavirus”, as did a video from NDTV. Apart from these, some articles had additionally referred to as its skills into query, together with these in Indian Express and Deccan Herald.

Screenshot of ‘Shycocan’ product web page on, April 1, 2021.

Eureka Forbes has additionally marketed the “Forbes Corona Guard, powered by Shycocan” as a tool that would attenuate 99.9% of coronaviruses in enclosed areas. In November 2020, after complaints from scientists, the Consumer Complaints Council of the Advertising Standard Council of India directed Eureka Forbes to withdraw its claims. Yet the corporate nonetheless lists the product as obtainable, together with its purported effectiveness towards the novel coronavirus.

Calls to the Eureka Forbes buyer care numbers listed on the web site elicit conflicting data from staff. One call-centre government supplied to rearrange a free demonstration of the ‘Corona Guard’; one other stated that they weren’t authorised to take care of the product and that I must ship in a request by way of e-mail. Answers to queries via e-mail redirect customers to the Eureka Forbes web site the place the product is listed.

Screenshot of ‘Shycocan’ on the Eureka Forbes web site (, April 3, 2021.

The jargon of ‘Shycocan’

Details on how ‘Shycocan’ works appear to fluctuate barely throughout completely different web sites. However, the commonest explanations of the way it works contain plenty of technical jargon about electrons, unfavourable prices and the novel coronavirus’s spike protein.

Briefly, ‘Shycocan’ can allegedly produce numerous charged particles via the photoelectric impact – i.e. when photons of sunshine strike sure metals, they knock out some electrons. An on a regular basis software of this phenomenon is to provide electrical energy from photo voltaic vitality. But within the case of ‘Shycocan’, this well-known precept is meant to create trillions of electrons that may float round a room and particularly goal and inactivate the novel coronavirus’s spike protein.

Since the spike protein is what permits the virus to contaminate individuals by attaching to and coming into human cells, inactivating this protein ought to render the virus innocent.

According to this gadget’s inventor, Rajah Vijay Kumar, who runs the Organisation de Scalene, ‘Shycocan’ operates on an everyday 110/240V-50/60 Hz wall socket. Kumar initially developed it in late 2018 to cut back absenteeism within the organisation’s campus as a result of flu and customary chilly, and the gadget was reportedly efficient.

Since the flu virus and the novel coronavirus belong to the identical household, he stated, it was solely pure for the group engaged on ‘Shycocan’ to guard themselves towards COVID-19 when the pandemic hit in 2020. (The two viruses don’t belong to the identical household: Orthomyxoviridae v. Coronaviridae.)

But many scientists throughout India have questioned the flexibility of ‘Shycocan’ to provide trillions of electrons beneath such situations.

Umesh Kadhane, a professor and head of the physics division on the Indian Institute of Space Science and Technology (IIST), Thiruvananthapuram, argued that electrons can’t merely be pumped into the air to hunt out viruses and inactivate them.

“In our lab, when we do experiments with electrons, we need to do them in a vacuum. One cannot simply fill the air with electrons because electrons get absorbed by the atoms and molecules in air very quickly,” he defined. “In addition, their claims that the electrons produced by their device will only kill the coronavirus is completely bogus. Electrons cannot distinguish between viruses or bacteria or any other thing.”

According to Kadhane, the maker’s concepts of how ‘Shycocan’ works “are childishly inaccurate and seem to be no more than a scam intended to cheat people.”

A 3D print of a spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in entrance of a 3D print of a SARS-CoV-2 virus particle. The spike protein (foreground) allows the virus to enter and infect human cells. Caption and picture: niaid/Flickr, CC BY 2.0

“There are just too many red flags in this, and even as a non-expert, just high school science will tell you that these claims are untenable, especially without data,” stated Arnab Bhattacharya, a professor on the division of condensed matter physics and supplies science, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai. “They say they have a white paper, which is basically an advertisement at best that rambles about the phylogenetic tree of SARS-CoV-2 more than anything related to their device.”

This paper claims that ‘Shycocan’ works on the well-proven precept that electrons can inactivate infectious brokers within the air. However, it jumps to this conclusion based mostly on research that use electrons to create negatively ionised air, which has been proven to reduce bacterial infections in hospitals. But these research don’t support any claims that electrons inactivate viruses, solely that ionised air can kill airborne micro organism – which the ‘Shycocan’ supposedly doesn’t. Specifically, ‘Shycocan’ does not harm “good bacteria or fungi”, in accordance with a marketer.

The white paper additionally concludes, based mostly on a single paper printed in June 2015, that viral particles could be inactivated by unfavourable prices. The 2015 paper stories how negatively ionised air can inactivate the canine calicivirus in air and stop it from infecting 100% of (Four out of 4) take a look at topics – on this case guinea pigs. However, the canine calicivirus isn’t a coronavirus; guinea pigs will not be intently associated to people; and ‘Shycocan’ is not an air ioniser.

Overall, it’s unclear how the research cited within the white paper present assist for the efficacy of ‘Shycocan’ in disabling the coronavirus.

It’s additionally unclear how ‘Shycocan’, although able to producing so many electrons – far more than air ionisers which are at present available in the market as air purifiers – apparently doesn’t produce ozone, in accordance with the corporate advertising it. When oxygen within the air encounters free electrons, it turns into ozone.

The ‘Shycocan’ group additionally doesn’t clarify how the gadget solely targets dangerous viruses and doesn’t hurt “good bacteria and fungi” (and naturally people) although lots of our cells additionally carry constructive prices identical to the coronavirus spike protein.

“Even if this device has the capacity to inactivate viral proteins, the fact still is that a subatomic particle does not have a way of distinguishing a viral protein from a human protein. Then how are people safe anywhere around this device?” Reeteka Sud, a analysis coordinator on the National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bengaluru, stated.

Sud can also be a member of a voluntary organisation referred to as Indian Scientists’ Response to COVID-19, or ISRC. She added that misinformation about COVID-19 prevention or cures is making India’s struggle towards the pandemic even more difficult.

“There is a great degree of similarity across various news reports about Shycocan in some relatively unknown news outlets,” Vinay Kumar, a patent guide from Bengaluru with expertise in medical gadget applied sciences, stated. “It appears to be a well-orchestrated job of planting stories with confusing pseudoscientific jargon to escape the scrutiny of unsuspecting journalists.”

Missing items

A view of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland, August 2012. Photo: Reuters/Jason Reed/File Photo

‘Shycocan’ doesn’t have the US FDA’s approval, as many shops have reported. The FDA’s assessment of ‘Shycocan’ states that the gadget “may fall under its ‘Enforcement Policy for Sterilisers, Disinfectant Devices, and Air Purifiers During the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency’” guidelines.

These pointers basically state that ‘Shycocan’ could also be distributed within the US with out having to adjust to a number of the FDA’s regulatory necessities. According to Alok Sharma, CEO of the Shycocan Corporation, the gadget falls beneath the sterilisers and disinfectants class (be aware that in accordance with the FDA, it ‘may’ fall beneath this class), and isn’t a medical gadget. Therefore, it solely wants laboratory testing – and never scientific trials – to determine its security profile to be used close to or round people.

The ‘Shycocan’ firm has additionally proudly claimed to have obtained certification for the CE Mark with Class I designation. This solely signifies that if a tool is of Class I designation, and isn’t a measuring gadget or required to be sterile, no external authority or notified body is required to check the gadget and declare it appropriate or secure for human use.

Many of our cellular phone chargers additionally carry the CE Mark. All this implies is that your charger will in all probability not provide you with a shock or burst into flames if you attempt to use it. The CE Mark itself doesn’t be certain that ‘Shycocan’ works because it ought to.

As of now, there seem like no printed scientific research, experiments or publicly obtainable information (that different scientists can use) to determine the efficacy, security or usability of ‘Shycocan’. All of the data on the gadget is to be discovered on the corporate’s web site, in information articles, press releases and anecdotes associated by the individuals advertising it.

The Shycocan Corporation shared a number of paperwork with The Wire Science upon request. One is a abstract itemizing what organisms they’d examined ‘Shycocan’ on and its supposed results. But there have been no particulars of the strategies utilized in these exams and no information, solely conclusions. A second doc defined intimately their experiments on Bacillus micro organism – solely one of many a number of tons of of “good bacteria” – that remained unaffected by ‘Shycocan’. As such, specialists stated, neither doc is convincing proof of the gadget’s efficacy towards viruses or its “perfect safety” for people and animals.

Regarding these experiments, Sud raised a couple of issues about how micro organism have been uncovered to the electrons emitted from ‘Shycocan’. “The ‘Shycocan’ reports do not include any tests done to ensure the said particles (electrons) did get to the intended target.” The paperwork additionally don’t clarify how the experimenters ensured that ‘Shycocan’ was producing electrons because it ought to or that these electrons had reached the take a look at organisms.

Upon additional request, the corporate additionally offered The Wire Science with some further paperwork of research on ‘Shycocan’ carried out at IIT Guwahati and the University of Madras.

None of them had the extent of element that scientists usually must independently assess the conclusions. For instance, in this 2004 paper, scientists describe the results of ions within the air on micro organism. The experimental strategies point out the densities of ions reaching the micro organism throughout experiments and the way the researchers calculated them. The researchers additionally repeated their experiments at the very least twice to make sure the outcomes have been dependable. But the ‘Shycocan’ firm failed to say what number of instances their experiments have been repeated.

For one other instance, in papers printed in 2015 and 2017 – on the results of ionised air on viruses – scientists describe a number of rigorously thought-out experiments to make sure that the ionisation truly impacts the goal viruses. They additionally embody particular particulars about all of the organisms (e.g. pressure varieties) and their progress and housing situations.

“In conclusion, while I am happy there have been attempts made to test ‘Shycocan’, there are gaping holes in the information given,” Sud stated. “On top of that, the design of the study has to be so as to ensure human bias is not a factor. I don’t see that here.”

A request for remark despatched to ‘Shycocan’ CEO Sharma and a public relations middleman went unanswered on this depend.

For now, information websites proceed to publish articles about ‘Shycocan’, some syndicated by the Press Trust of India. For instance,  current articles like this and this, each printed final month, claimed that 25,000 ‘Shycocan’ models have already been put in in faculties, hospitals, auditoria and different public locations. The articles additionally declare that the Centre for Advanced Research and Development and the Organisation De Scalene Foundation have launched ‘Shycozone’, a cell software to find ‘Shycocan’ units. The app is thus apparently the primary “safe zone mobile app” that purports to determine areas the place the virus isn’t current.

In a video shared with The Wire Science, the Shycocan Corporation additionally claimed that the gadget is being utilized by corporations like these of the Tatas, Tech Mahindra, Finacus and Cello. In addition, at the very least two eating places in Bangalore, Jus’Trufs in Jakkur and Satkriti Satvik, have marketed their use of ‘Shycocan’, claiming that their amenities shield their prospects and that prospects don’t must put on masks on their premises.

At a time when COVID-19 circumstances are rising within the metropolis, and within the nation, confidence within the energy of scientifically confirmed measures like carrying masks shouldn’t turn out to be subsumed by the rest.

Anusha Krishnan is a contract science author and editor specialising within the organic sciences. With a PhD from the Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, she believes that the artwork of storytelling is essential for profitable science communication.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here