DNA Transduction Induced by Weak EM Field

Anton SF
Over the years there have been several reports, which indicate that chemical molecules have a characteristic electromagnetic (EM) signature that carries the information and function of the molecule. Moreover, it has been suggested that the molecular information can be recorded from the physical molecule and transferred to a separate aqueous solution using an external EM field in the extremely low-frequency range. Many scientists, including Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier, have investigated EM imprinted solutions. With respect to Luc Montagnier, he and his research team have been investigating EM signals from serially diluted DNA solutions and have found that the EM signals can be transferred via a resonance phenomenon to aqueous solutions and induce the formation of water nanostructures. These water nanostructures provide the DNA template to reconstruct the original DNA molecule. Further, it is postulated that Taq polymerase (the enzyme responsible to copy DNA) can “see” the EM signature of the DNA molecule through exchanging wave fields. This mechanism is supported by the Gauge Theory Paradigm of Quantum Fields.

This post reviews a 2018 publication titled “Rate limiting factors for DNA transduction inducted by weak electromagnetic field” by B. Q. Tang et al. that was inspired by the work of Luc Montagnier and his research team.

What was the purpose of the study?

The purpose of the study was to examine various factors that affect DNA transduction with the goal of increasing the transduction rate. The variables that the authors investigated were:

  1. the composition of the aqueous solutions, 
  2. the material of the vessel,
  3. the dilution steps, and
  4. the origin of DNA fragments.

What did the authors do?

The experiments were conducted over a period of one year. In essence, for the experimental set-up, DNA and aqueous solutions were placed next to each other in a copper coil for 16–18 hours. During this time, it was expected that information transduction would occur resulting in an informed aqueous solution referred to as the “transduction solution”. Following, the authors performed polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and gel electrophoresis on the transduction solutions (or serially diluted transduction solutions) to confirm whether the transduction process was successful (Fig. 1). To compare, control experiments were also performed.

Fig. 1. Main steps of the experiment.

What did the data reveal?

The data revealed that DNA transduction was dependent on:

  1. the composition of the aqueous solution,
  2. the material of the transduction vessel,
  3. the incorporation of a dilution step, and 
  4. the origin of the DNA fragment.
Below is a summary of the results.

1. The composition of the aqueous solution

To investigate the effect of aqueous solution composition on DNA transduction, two different samples were prepared and then submitted to PCR. The first sample consisted of pure water alone and the second sample consisted of pure water mixed with PCR ingredients (Fig. 2). The data obtained showed that the DNA transduction rate was higher for the aqueous solution composed of pure water with PCR ingredients compared to just pure water (Fig. 3).

Fig. 2. Experimental setup for 2 different aqueous solutions.

Fig. 3. Average transduction rate for aqueous solutions with and without dNTP and buffer.


2. The material of the transduction vessel

To investigate the effect of the material of the vessel on DNA transduction, the authors compared the use of a hydrophilic quartz cuvette to a hydrophobic Eppendorf tube (Fig. 4). It was observed that using a hydrophilic vessel was more effective with respect to DNA transduction compared to a hydrophobic vessel with a transduction rate of 38.5% and 8.7%, respectively (Fig. 5). An explanation for this observation is the formation of an “exclusion zone” near the surface of the hydrophilic material, which is postulated to contain numerous coherent domains. These coherent domains could potentially lead to the formation of nanostructures in water and serve as a DNA template during PCR amplification.

Fig. 4. Experimental setup for 2 different types of vessels.


Fig. 5. Average transduction rate for 2 types of vessels.


3. Incorporating a dilution step

To assess the effect of serial dilution on DNA transduction, the authors examined undiluted and diluted transduction solutions of two DNA fragments, DNA105 and DNA183 (Fig. 6). The data revealed that when the transduction solution (i.e. the informed aqueous solution) underwent a decimal serial dilution (D10), the rate of transduction significantly increased for both fragments compared to undiluted samples (D0) (Fig. 7). The authors explain this observation through coherent domains – that is, even though following serial dilution the concentration of solute decreases, the number of coherent domains increases and therefore, there is an increase in the ability to imprint all frequencies.

Fig. 6. Introducing the dilution step to assess the effect of serial dilution.

Fig. 7. Average transduction rates with and without the dilution step for 2 DNA fragments.

4. Origin of DNA fragments

To explore the effect of the origin of DNA on transduction, the authors studied DNA from a pathogenic source (DNA105) and DNA from a non-pathogenic source (DNA183 and DNA285) (Fig. 8). It was found that DNA transduction was successful for all three fragments; however, the rate of transduction was somewhat affected by the origin of the DNA – the DNA fragment of pathogenic origin appeared to be slightly more active compared to DNA of non-pathogenic origin (Fig. 9).

Fig. 8. Experimental setup for DNA fragments with different origins.

Fig. 9. Average transduction rates for DNA fragments with different origins.

In summary, the authors achieved DNA transduction into aqueous solutions under the influence of an EM field. Moreover, the authors concluded that:

  •     for successful DNA transduction, a low-frequency EM field is required;
  •     the addition of PCR buffer and dNTPs to the aqueous solution enhanced the transduction rate;
  •     the use of hydrophilic transduction vessel resulted in a higher transduction rate;
  •     performing serial dilutions of the transduction solution increased DNA transduction rates; and,
  •     DNA transduction was successful regardless of the DNA origin – that is, DNA fragments from both pathogenic and non-pathogenic origins can transfer information.

What does this mean?

The evidence presented by B. Q. Tang et al. is in line with the work of Luc Montagnier and others and demonstrates the various parameters that affect the rate of DNA transduction. Furthermore, the authors explain the observations through the viewpoint of quantum electrodynamics and coherent domains. Although further investigations are necessary to fully comprehend water imprinting, these results support the transfer of molecular information into the water and open the door for the use of informational medicine, which includes ICs, as possible inexpensive and non-toxic treatments.


B. Qing Tang, Tongju Li, Xuemei Bai, Minyi Zhao, Bing Wang, Glen Rein, Yongdong Yang, Peng Gao, Xiaohuan Zhang, Yanpeng Zhao, Qian Feng, Zhongzhen Cai & Yu Chen (2018): Rate limiting factors for DNA transduction induced by weak electromagnetic field, Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2018.1558064

DNA Transduction Induced by Weak EM Field
Jun 30, 2024
Good morning
Could this article explain why you recommend taking glass bottles for impregnations?
In this regard, is it correct to soak in a glass bottle or jar and then pass the liquid into a plastic jar or bottle?
Show original
1 reply
Hide branch
Show modal