Whether one can survive depends on if he does a few right things and avoid doing one or more wrong things.

A. Preventive Measures

The first strategy is to avoid contact or exposure to the virus. The main way of spreading is assumed to be similar to SARS. The virus is believed to spread is by close person-to-person contact. The most obvious mean of transmission is respiratory droplets (droplet spread) produced when an infected person coughs or sneezes. Droplet spread can happen when droplets from the cough or sneeze of an infected person are propelled a short distance (generally believe that 3 feet) through the air and deposited on the mucous membranes of the mouth, nose, or eyes of persons who are nearby. Some examples of close contact include kissing or hugging, sharing utensils, talking to someone in close distances, and touching someone directly. The virus also can spread when a person touches a surface or object contaminated with infectious droplets and then touches his or her mouth, nose, or eye(s). In addition, it is possible that the virus might spread more broadly through the air or by other known ways.

The first strategy is avoid being around people and animals that have been infected. Well known preventive measures include frequent hand-washing, disinfection of contaminated clothes, utensils, and furniture, wearing a surgical mask in public, avoiding contact with bodily fluids, washing personal items such as eating utensils, dishes, bedding, etc. in hot, soapy water, staying at home if can, and isolating oneself as much as possible to minimize the chances of getting the virus.

To effectively reduce chances of infection, one must know two important things. Several reports revealed that people can carry this virus without any symptoms but still transmit the virus to their family members. According to the CDC, the incubation time from exposure to when symptoms first start showing up is somewhere between two and 14 days. It is difficult to determine who carries the virus. To avoid infection by unidentified persons, a safest call is avoiding attending events that have close personal contact. In dealing with private activities, one should try to know whether people might come from regions this virus has been reported. However, virus exposure histories cannot be established reliably and a proper presumption is that others carry the virus until more predictable treatment is available.

The survival time of the virus outside the body is unknown. Many studies show that its cousin viruses, SARS and MERS, only live for few hours on the surface of an object. A short survival time can help end an epidermic more easily because people can avoid contacting, using and contaminated objects, places and environments. When the survival time is long, new source of virus is added to a surface or object before existing viruses loses activity. Such a surface or object will continue spreading the virus. The survival time of conovavrious may depend on temperature and relative humanity. Based related virus, relative humidity at low 20% and higher 80% have a greater protective effect than at moderate RH of 50%. At 4°C, infectious virus may persist for as long as 28 days. Virus deactivation rates are generally believed to be exponentially related to temperature. This explains why viruses can survive in the winter but cannot maintain an active epidermic in the summer. When temperature reaches 40 C, the virus will quickly lose activity. Another point is that a minimum concentration or the number of virus molecules is necessary to cause infection. If one washes off 95% virus off hands, the remaining ones may lose practical ability to infect.

The long survival time and long incubation time make public places perpetual infectious sources. If one or more infected persons contact a surface or object on each one or two days, this surface will carry infectious virus forever. Those two properties determine what measures are taken and how long they must avoid. When contact cannot be avoided, the only things one can do are frequent washing hands, using wiping alcohol (when outside, things like salts, acids, and basic solutions may help). Avoid using hands to contact eyes, mouth, noses and any area with soft tissues. The bottom line is avoiding unnecessary exposure. As a general rule, high temperature favors breaking up infection chains.

B. Fight The Infection For Survival

For those who are infected, the strategy is to survive and reduce damages to vital organs particularly the lungs.

We predict that fights against the virus in infected persons are easier than those against the SARS virus. The longer incubation time implies that the virus spreads in the body more slowly as far as its damaging impacts are concerned. This fact implies that patients have more time to adjust themselves in the fight against the virus. However, the trouble is that it is difficult to put an end to this outbreak.

This is an acute infection and must be addressed accordingly. The virus can cause damages to infested cells and eventually kill them. When the lungs are infected, the virus will replicate in the cells. The virus then triggers immune cells to attack and kill the virus. When the lungs are infested by the virus, the lung cell functions will be diminished. However, part of the damages are caused by the immune system that tries to kill the virus. When the viruses have severely damaged cells, the virus as well as the immune system may kill the cells. The death of lung cells decrease lung functions. When a large number of lung cells are killed, the voids will be filled with new cells. If this repairing process takes place slowly, the newly filled cells may healthy. However, if the death and repairing processes are very fast, the filled new cells may contain high amount of fibers. The new tissues will contain scar tissues with reduced or no lung functions. When the lung capacity reaches below the threshold of death, the patient dies unless the patient gets life-sustaining support.

Considering this unique disease dynamic, we propose two different strategies. In the early phrase of infection, the strategy is to stop the virus as quickly as possible. This can help because the immune system responds too slowly. It is known that antibodies bind to viruses, and thus mark them as destruction targets so that white blood cells can engulf and destroy them. Each antibody producing cell could produce almost two thousand antibody molecules per second, it still takes 4-7 days to get detectable amount of antibody (IgG) in blood. What is vitally important is the speed to produce a large number of antibodies in the body in the EARLY stage.

If the immune system works well, the infected person most probably will not feel obvious symptoms. What he feels is like a flu for a few hours or just a day or so. However, if the immune system fails to stop the virus in the early stage, the viruses invade a large number of lung cells, replicate there, and kill lung cells. In this stage, anti-virus drugs may be used, but real benefits are unknown. After a virus enters a lung cell, it may stay in a dormant phase and then start replicating in a reproductive phase. This time window is vitally important relative to the time window for the immune system to boost up its response. Now, a wise strategy is altering the body’s physiological condition so that the body slows down the transition from the dormant phase to the reproductive phase (based on the bacterial model). Virus infected cells may still have partial or full functions and killing them is not a good strategy. Based on studies on other virus, we can reasonably infer that conditions that stimulated cell growth also promote virus replication, but slow growth favors the dormant stage. Based on indirect research evidence, elevated salinity and aeration influences the switch from the dormant phase to the active phase. Indirect studies imply that moderate limited nutrition may prevent the virus from bursting in the body. One rational strategy is to slow down the transition by using antioxidant such as glutathione that can remove free radical intermediates. Another approach could be to cause the host to produce excessive CI repressor that inhibits reproduction.

Medicine has done very little to understand how to manipulate a large number of life parameters that can alter outcomes. The final resolution of the disease cannot be achieved by anything other than the immune system. However, it takes some time for the immune system to generate enough antibodies. Whatever the patient needs is really to buy time. All of those measures from drugs, nutrients, and environmental factors may be used like applying brake to stop the virus from bursting replication. Nutrition restriction must be reasonable because nutrients are also required by the immune system and all organ’s normal functions. What is important is to slow down the virus bursting speed and give the immune system to catch up, but should not starve vital organs. Both absolute levels and restriction duration must be reasonable. Patents must explore those variables on their own.

Some reports reveal that after the virus has caused symptoms, the patients may die within one or a few days. This fact implies what might happen is that the immune system fails to generate enough antibodies to stop the virus in the early phrase, and the virus infects too many lung cells by too many virus units. As a result, the virus causes too much damages to the lungs or have destroyed the lungs before the immune system scales up its response. It is also possible that the immune system might have generated too many antibodies that cause excessive inflammation-like reactions. In either ways, the lungs contain too many dead cells, too many virus debris together with cells/virus wastes, which could not be promptly removed. The accumulated wastes then cause the lung tissues to swell and impair the blood flow in the tissue. The serious impaired blood micro-circulation causes lung tissues to die. Moreover, the lung health is on vicious degrading cycles: after the lungs have been compromised by the virus infection, the diminished oxygen delivery is expected to weaken both heart function and renal function, and thus further weaken the blood circulation in the sick lung tissues and the renal capacity to remove metabolic wastes from the whole body. Both effects will further reduce the lung capacity to remove virus debris, cell debris, and metabolic by-products. This vicious cycles may quickly lead to lung tissue death. In the end, the lungs become white matters.

Based on reported stories, we suggest that a sound strategy is not same as what the medicine might suggest based on controlled trials. We note that death happens when a vital organ function is insufficient to maintain life for a short time. Any measure that can quickly kill an overwhelming number of infested cells may be bad. We have seen from many images attached to case reports that a large number of lung cells die and replaced by white matter. While it is not clear whether lung cells are killed by the virus, prescription drugs, or the immune system, we predict that a large scale of cell destruction is bad for several reasons. First, if a large number of lung cells die in a short time, the dead lung cells are replaced by new cells rapidly. A fast repairing process will most likely result in production of scar tissues. Any attempt to use drugs that can cause rapid cell destruction may lead to bad final results. A much strong argument is that rapid large scale lung cells deaths must be a cause of death. We found that humans always die from temporarily depressed usable organ capacity. If a drug can cause infested lung cells to die rapidly, the lungs will lose functions. This will push the lung usable capacity belong the threshold of death. Even if death does not take place, the fast repairing process will generate more scar-like tissues which cannot be cured. Any measure that can aggregate inflammation may speed up death. While the immune system’s direct attack to the virus is welcome, if the immune system rapidly attacks on infested cells on an excessively large scale, it causes massive collateral damages to lung tissues.

After the virus burst replication is controlled and patient condition is stabilized, a wise strategy is getting rid of the virus at moderate speeds. What will help the most is lifestyle and diets which can influence the immune system. In addition, the patients should consider several things. Inflammation of all sources can temporarily reduce usable organ functions. When the usable lung capacity is limited, additional inflammation may be a contributory cause of death. Based on currently known data, the virus is really not very lethal. Whether one can survive depends on how to fight. We would try to take supplemental non-medical measures to reduce inflammation and avoid eating anything that is known to aggregate inflammatory responses and anything can cause allergy-like reactions for the patient. Similarly important is reducing physical activity to the minimum. This is completely different from treating chronic diseases. Assuming that 20% of normal lung function is essential for sustaining life, it the lungs can deliver only about 30% of the capacity, extra demand of 20% may cause death. It is vitally important to avoid extra burden on the lungs (as well as heart/kidneys) that are under distress. Finally, the patient should find what environment factors to which the virus is sensitive. There are a large number of things to be considered: water, salts, types of foods, environment conditions, etc. and use them as weapons against the virus. Under the rate balance theory, each factor used correctly may help a little bit, but tens to hundreds of little bits can make a huge difference. We must reject the binary notion used in medicine. A wise objective is for the body to develop immune responses that are not too fast but sufficiently powerful enough to kill the remaining viruses. We stress healing speed because we observe the general rule that fast healing always come with scar tissues while slow healing results in healthy tissues. Death is often caused by scar-like tissues in the lungs.

Based on facts reported in media, we found several scenarios. In the first scenario, infected persons experience no symptoms and even do not know they have been infected. The immune system is good enough kill entering virus. In a second scenario, the symptoms of infested persons are mild and most of them recover quickly because their immune systems respond quickly and kill or control the viruses BEFORE they are able to cause massive damages to lung cells. In a third scenario, the immune system is too slow in response and the lungs rapidly degrade. The patients either die from temporarily depressed usable lung capacities or permanently lost lung functions. They die several days after the initial onset of symptoms. Deaths caused by temporarily depressed lung capacities may be due to wrong treatments, poor treatment strategies, improper diets, and improper care. This is a quantitative problem but not a binary issue. In the last scenario, patients experience extended symptoms without resolution. The most probable causes are compromised immune systems or excessive immune responses. In some patients, measures fail to control the virus or poor treatments cause excessive inflammation. The excessive inflammation may lead to shut-done of the immune response to avoid massive destruction of lung cells. Thus, the viruses are not killed and the disease condition will last for longer time until death. Those patterns also show that statistic data is meaningless, patients can beat statistical predictions by exercising correct strategies. It is possible that final death rate would be comparable to the rate of hospital accidents.

We also stress the importance of taking preventive measures. As we have implied, the immune system response characteristic is vital to survival. If the body’s immune system is compromised, the immune system fails to act in the early stage of infection, but triggers an excessive immune response that the body could not sustain. Regular exercise and balanced diets can help people to improve immune surveillance. Those who live bad lifestyle and eat unbalanced diets may have much higher inflammation degree. When the virus attacks, the body fails to detect the virus or fails to generate enough antibodies in short times. When a large portion of lung cells are infested, the immune system launches a belayed large-scale war against massive viruses in the lung cells. The attack may destroy severely-damaged host cells, and result in severe systemic inflammation. If the body senses severe inflammation, it may has to shut down the immune system to avoid organ destruction. The body now lacks the ability to control the virus, and will be in continuous infection. This is why building a great immune system is vitally important in the long run. However, a strong immune system cannot be built when an epidermic has already stricken the person. It takes months or even several years to tune up the immune system.

The most important strategy for avoiding death is to stop direct infection on lungs. If lungs are infested first, it is impossible for the immune system to destroy the virus. Several days delays in immune response may give enough time for the virus to destroy the entire lungs. In comparison, the viruses that initially infect other parts such as mouth, eyes, etc. may reach the lungs after a few days of delay. When the virus reaches the lungs, the immune system may have been scaled up to stop virus replication or destroy them. In other words, infections originated from body parts other than the lungs are not lethal except unless the immune systems of the infected persons are compromised (They can infect other people). If avoidance is impossible, one should use a good mask. If no good mast, use any mask and even just a piece of cloth. Masks are used to catch up respiratory droplets (approximately 0.6 to more than 1000 µm) which are much larger than virus molecules. If a mask can reduce respiratory droplets in breathed air to less than 1%, it may reduce millions of infection points in the lungs to fewer than a thousand points on an exposure occasion. The reduced infection points will make differences in this subtle speed race between the virus and the immune system. No protection is perfect and none can be perfect because some respiratory droplets must get into the lungs by passing spaces between the mask and nose/face area. However, a reduction of respiratory droplets in breathed air can alter outcomes of the speed race. For doctors who are constantly exposed to respiratory droplets, better masks should be used because the infection points in the lungs are added up from constant exposures on all days.

The importance of fighting strategy is reflected in the history of SARS in 2003. The death rates of SARS were from 70% to less than 10%. The death rates were more than 50% initially, but quickly declined. It reached 9.6% in China. The most useful measure is herbal formulations as they can address three organs. Based on early reports on coronaviruses outbreak, we estimated that the true death rate is not much larger than 3%. The low death rate implies that the virus is mild. When people are enabled to prevent and fight, both infection incidence and death rate will decrease. From all data, we believe that achieving nearly a unity survival rate is possible. This three percents death rate could be avoided just by manipulating one or more of a large number of lifestyle factors.

It is hard to tell whether the medical treatments are correct. By using the population approach, medicine cannot develop treatment protocols based on personal specific conditions and could not consider critical dynamic data in finding cures. When population trials are used, it is nearly impossible to study all timing effects of disease development, immune responses, usable organ functions, drug effects, treatment effects, and scarring process. The failure to consider multiple dynamic characteristics must be the biggest mistake that prevents medicine from finding best treatments and perfect cures that must exit in nature. We disclose our strategy as soon as possible, and detailed study with references will be published at least half a year later.

C. Challenges to Precision Bio-medicine

Bio-medicine attempts to solve diseases by using synthetic drugs to affect specific mechanisms, this approach has not succeeded for the entire history. We can show there are many fundamental problems that cannot be overcome.

Each human being must live among millions to billions to viruses and other microorganisms. Use of specific molecular mechanisms to contain an infectious disease is feasible only for the disease agent with genetic stability and its appearance frequency is very low. COVID-19 is a RNA virus that can mutate rapidly. Each year, it can generate millions of variants. Any attempt to contain the virus by using genetic specificity is unrealistic and impractical. There is no way that research can beat the virus in the race. Since humans have evoluted? with RNA viruses, humans must have inherent ability to fight against all viruses.

Vaccine benefits are limited due to lung unique vulnerability. A prior infection may not completely protect a host person from getting future infection. We imagine to see a possibility of widespread exposure to viral particles followed by fast cell-to-cell infection which can take place before the immune system is able to produce enough B cells that produce antibodies. The unique vulnerability of lungs is an additional reason for observed poor results of flu vaccination. Viral mutation can easily defeat acquired immunity. Prior infections and vaccinations may shorten the phase lag between the viral reproduction and immune response, and is expected to make differences in infections that are originated from limited infection points or cells in lungs.

The specific mechanism cannot take advantages of multiple factors benefits. Lifestyle and personal health may account 10 to 100 times difference in death rate caused by COVID-19.

We do not focus on antiviral drugs. Drugs are not our focus, but are presumed to be important. We stressed the need to use things that are readily available from nature. Antiviral drugs can make the area A smaller, and thus making B smaller and make D2 disappear.

We believe that diets affect infection, disease progression and self-resolution. We started seeing evidence that India nationals resist this virus better. We still have not seen infection on Indian nationals who once lived in Wuhan at the time of outbreak. We will explore potential causes and figure out what kinds of foods can make really big differences. We noted from our studies that it is extremely important to study the roles of foods because most nutrients can have complex effects spanning negative effects, no effects, and positive effects.

Although age is an important factor, we recently saw several reports, where 91 and 95 years old people had recovered from the disease. Many factors can be used to make real differences. We will pay attention to all hints that may lead to predictable cures.

The hair-splitting arguments, data analysis, disease theories, etc. have no meaning unless they can be used to deliver real benefits to patients. If drugs do not help, whether one can survive the pandemic depends on whether one can do a few right things and avoid doing a few wrong things. We understand the death risk and the equation for determining death and must explore how life factors affect the death equation. Lifestyle’s importance is implied in 10-100 times differences in the death data among different nations. We note this 10-100 times difference in death rate is caused by different lifestyle patterns among people in different cultures. There are no basis to believe that lifestyle in some nations are close to the best point in health optimization. It is possible health optimization would easily reduce death rate to 1%. We believe that health optimization has enough power to contain COVID-19 pandemic.

In our disruptive study, we proved that the risk model is wrong because risk determination for a population is in violation of the forbidden rule: Jack Doe death risk cannot be transferred to John Doe.

In one study, we proved that the Ro model for predicting infection incidences is wrong in every assumption used. We further found that nearly all of the twenty to nearly a hundred of model parameters are created out of imagination with little relevance to personal ability to resist the virus or the ability to survive.

We proved that only infection initiated through the respiratory track is most dangerous while infection by other routes pose far lower danger.

We proved that body temperature management is the most important measure for preventing the diseases and turn the diseases into a mild flu.

We proved that use of multiple factors is the best strategy for surviving the pandemic.

We proposed a two-phrase lung damage model which sheds light on how to treat infections and pointed out some wrong practices used in medicine. This model is important to how to address all respiratory infectious diseases.

We rejected the popular belief that population can contain the pandemic by repeating vaccinating the population. The idea is based on the well known fact that when a person’s immune system is activated, it can quickly contain the virus and other microorganisms. We pointed the flaw is that activated immune system can cause widespread damages to all viral organs and the whole body. This idea may be sound only if it is used only for short duration or an instance when there are no other alternative measures. We proposed that the net impacts of vaccinations must be judged by considering their impacts on (1) vital organ structure integrity, (2) the tissue ecosystem, (3) the immune system, and (4) the CNS function. Based on the pattern of personal injuries caused by other drugs, we found that activated immune system can systematically damage the structures of organs and body parts, alter the tissue ecosystem, alter the CNS function. By impairments to the liver, the vaccine can damage the immune system. Thus, we must warn that keeping the immune system active for more than brief need is the worst mistake that can destroy the health of the population.

We suggested against the world that the best approach to fighting the pandemic must include four components: nutritional condition, organ functional capacities, the CNS system, the immune system, plus several unique issue with lungs: lung micro-circulation condition, thoracic free space, personal activities, environmental conditions, etc. Anyone can find a large number of other factors.

We proved that mRNA vaccines can deliver short-term benefits in less than 1% recipients while the expected harm to recipients is about 100%.

We predicted that mRNA vaccines can cause widespread damages to the CNS, liver, kidneys, the immune system, etc. The biggest damages are caused by massive DNA mutations in human liver cells. While it is known that RNA virus can also alter host DNA cells, we found RNA-induced DNA mutation are limited in both locations and severity, but mRNA induced DNA mutations must be widespread in the liver. Thus, we predicted that DNA mutations in the liver cell will have an effect of damaging the immune system, impairing ability to resisting all diseases, and shortening recipients life spans. When medical political organizations hijack medicine to be used as a revenue-producing instrumentality and leaders cannot see the vaccine endangerment to the population, it is inevitable to bring humanity disaster to more than 200 million people in the U.S. and world.