Humans and germs: A systematic analysis

The novel coronavirus pandemics has been around for some time. Most of the time, we deal with the viruses in an ad hoc manner.  We would like to study the interactions between human societies and germs from the perspective of the whole ecosystem. This is help us understand the long term consequences of our responses to germs.

The economy of RNA life

Novel coronavirus, as well as HIV, flu viruses, have caused havoc to human societies. These viruses are all RNA viruses. Are RNA viruses very strong? On the contrary, they’re very weak. If so, how can they cause so much damage?

Many of us, as babies or parents of babies, have read Three Little Pigs. In that story, the first little pig built a straw house, the second little pig built a stick house, the last little pig built a brick house. RNA viruses are the straw house. DNA organisms are the brick house. Our immune systems can destroy RNA viruses easily, just like a wolf can destroy a straw house easily. So why RNA viruses can cause so much trouble?

It is much easier to build a straw house than a brick house. It takes a lot of time, effort and especially cost to build a brick house. When the last little pig struggled to build his brick house, the first little pig had already settled down in his straw house, raising many young piglets with his wife. Those piglets in turn build many new straw houses and raise many new babies. 

RNA viruses are the same. Comparing with DNA life, RNA viruses are very cheap to make. RNA viruses can multiply very quickly in our bodies, although most of them are quickly destroyed by our immune systems.

Brick houses need some design standards. The shapes of doors, windows have to follow specific designs. Straw houses, on the other hand, are much more flexible. There is really no need for a building code for straw houses. Similarly, the structures of RNA viruses are more flexible than more complex DNA life. RNA viruses are very unstable and mutate very fast. This makes it much harder for immune systems to develop specialized antibodies to efficiently eliminate RNA viruses. 

Many people expect the arrival of vaccines will eliminate coronavirus soon. However, the record of developing vaccines against RNA viruses is mixed. We have not been able to develop HIV vaccine, despite tremendous efforts. Flu vaccines are not very effective, because flu viruses, as RNA viruses, mutate very fast. DNA pathogens, such as smallpox viruses, are more stable. It is easier to develop vaccines against DNA pathogens in general. It may not be easy to find vaccines that will be effective over long time.

RNA viruses can mutate very fast. It is very easy for RNA viruses inhabiting non human hosts to acquire segments of viruses that inhabiting human hosts. It is relatively easy for RNA viruses to evolve the ability to inhabit human hosts. Even if vaccines against novel coronavirus turns out to be successful, new RNA viruses may emerge to host human species. RNA viruses can jump from species to species easily. We will face constant threat of new RNA virus pandemic, giving the high density and high mobility of human population.

If RNA viruses are so successful, maybe we can learn something from them. The key of RNA viruses’ success is their low cost and simplicity. Our modern society is too expensive to maintain. As a result, our families couldn’t afford to have two children on average. With less and less young people, our population ages. This makes our society very vulnerable to any disturbances. 

We demand heavier and heavier armor to protect our aging society. But the heavy armor also wears us down. When the nimble viruses break through our containment, we are utterly exposed and helpless. To revive our aging society, we have to abandon the heavy and restrictive armor. We need to reduce our burden. We need to light ourselves up. We need to rejuvenate our society with more babies and juveniles.

RNA life are more ancient than DNA life. RNA life are simple, agile and versatile.  RNA viruses have weathered all attempts to eliminate them by large and complex  DNA life. The complex and clumsy machineries of human society will never eliminate the eternally young RNA life.  We have to be humble, to live with them, to accept discipline from them and to learn from them.

Human beings as part of the ecosystem

We humans tend to regard ourselves as the masters of the world. But we are simply part of the ecosystem. There are more bacteria cells in and on our bodies than human cells. There are more viruses than bacteria cells in and on our bodies. Bacteria and viruses are integral parts of human bodies.

We treat microbes as harmful in general. That is why we actively sterilize our environment. But most microbes around us are beneficial to us overall. Bacteria help us digest. Many viruses eat bacteria, preventing those bacteria from multiplying exponentially inside humans. The most potent antibiotics are produced by fungi. Fungi in our bodies curb the potential explosion of bacteria. Similarly, bacteria are potent fungi killers. If antibiotics kill too many bacteria, fungi will overrun human bodies, for harmful fungi are no more checked by bacteria. Different kinds of microbes, by constraining each other, keep humans healthy most of the time.

Some bacteria do more harm than good to humans. We try very hard to eliminate them or reduce their presence. We are more successful in developing vaccines or treatments against DNA based organisms, which are more stable and easier to target. But RNA viruses mutate very fast. It is more elusive to target the ever changing RNA viruses accurately. Many recent epidemics, such as HIV, influenza, and coronaviruses, are caused by RNA viruses.

When we suppress one type of microbes, we celebrate our success. But from the ecological perspective, we open a rich ecological niche, human bodies, for new hosts. This is why superbugs flourish in hospitals, where most known microbes are suppressed. When we eliminate one type of bacteria, it makes it easier for those weaker and less competitive pathogens to invade us. RNA viruses mutate very often. They make many mistake in reproduction. It is very difficult for them to compete with more stable, more powerful DNA organisms. But when humans eliminate DNA organisms, RNA viruses face less competition. It is we ourselves who make RNA viruses so successful invaders.

From the ecosystem perspective, our war against microbes is futile over long term. But microbes are not our biggest threat. Any society with below replacement fertility is doomed. The biggest threat to our society is the below replacement fertility. What is the cause for such a low fertility? There can be several reasons. One could be the overdrive of our immune systems in a sterile environment. When our immune systems face less external invaders, they often turn to our own cells. This could be the reason more auto immune diseases occur in clean environment. Women’s immune systems could also attack the cells of fetuses. There are evidences that the existence of some parasites is correlated to higher fertility rate. In a society which could not reproduce itself, measures curbing the spread of microbes may further depress fertility rate. Many small businesses were forced to close down by government mandate. The reduction of incomes may compel young families to have less or no children. This will further deteriorate demographic structure of a society.

Demographics and Pandemics

Novel coronavirus pandemics has spread all over the world. While few communities are spared of this scourge, communities with aging demographics are hardest hit. Younger communities are less devastated by the advance of this disease. Why demographics makes such a great difference in the face of pandemics?

The existence of microbes is not the sole reason for pandemics. Microbes have existed for billions of years. Sometimes they cause pandemics. Sometimes they don’t. They may cause pandemics in some populations. They may not cause pandemics in other populations. The occurrence and spread of pandemics are the result of interactions of the whole ecosystem. Specifically, there can be several reasons.

First, older people generally have weaker immune systems. In a population with higher percentage of older people, more people are likely to get sick from the spread of microbes.

Second, with the aging of general population, the work force is aging as well. Many people work to the age of sixty five and beyond. The advent of any disturbance will stress the senior work force more and compromise their ability to carry on the routines.

Third, the medical system and other service systems are already stretched thin even in normal times in an aging society. There is little spare capacity to cushion the extra burden. Furthermore, the arrival of a pandemics often significantly reduces the capacity of the social system. The impact of microbe invasion, or other disturbances, are much more pronounced in an aging society than in a young society.

In most of the Western societies, the birthrate has dropped below the replacement rate for several decades. Yet the policymakers pay scant attention to this vital indicator. To them, the financial markets are the leading indicator of the society. They take many measures to pop up the financial market, most of which further depress the birthrate. In Canada, pension deduction rate has been increasing continuously over time. This infuses more money into the financial market but reduces the amount of money to support young families at their most fertile period. In US, low interest rate and quantitative easing fuels the longest bull market in history. The same policies also dilute the resources to ordinary families. The birthrate in US has dropped to the lowest level in record.

Our society is not supported by the stock market. Our society is supported by food, electricity and fuels. Our society is supported by grocery stores cashiers and stockers, farmers and workers. This becomes plain and simple during crisis. We need more people, more young people with strong immune systems, more young people who can work effectively under stress. To achieve a younger demographics, we can’t keep our eyes glued to the financial indicators. We have to pay attention to birthrate and other vital biophysical indicators. This is the first step we need to take.

Artificial Vaccine and Natural Vaccine

In times of pandemics, many of us look for vaccines to keep us safe again. What are the properties of vaccines? Vaccines should be similar enough to original pathogens. They should induce our bodies to generate immune responses that are effective on original pathogens. Vaccines should be dissimilar enough to original pathogens. They should not be as pathogenic as the original pathogens.

Researchers work hard in their labs to mutate the original pathogens in a proper way, with proper amount to generate the desired vaccines. Nature is a gigantic lab. Mutations occur everywhere, all the time. Every pathogen has many siblings, cousins and offspring. They are the natural candidates for vaccines. The very first vaccine, a cow vaccine for smallpox, was a natural vaccine from cows. 

Even new vaccines are often speed up natural vaccines. Researchers inject pathogens into chicken bodies, hoping to induce the desired mutations from the interactions between pathogens and chickens.

Do we really have to wait for the lab produced artificial vaccine? Among people never exposed to novel coronavirus, 40% to 60% have the same kind of T cells (a type of immune cells) as those exposed to novel coronaviruses. Coronaviruses are a big family with many cousins. Some common cold are caused by coronaviruses. Probably many of us already got vaccinated by those cousin coronaviruses.

Those natural vaccines may not be effective enough. That may be true. But artificial vaccines may not be effective enough either. There is no guarantee that artificial vaccines are more effective than natural vaccines. There is guarantee that natural vaccines offer broader spectrum protection than artificial vaccines.

To gain broad natural vaccine, it is important not to over sterilize our environment. Nature is not our enemy. Nature is our sanctuary, spiritually and physically. It gives us vaccines. It gives us vitality.

Shall we immunize for every disease?

When we install an app in a computer, it will help run a program smoothly. But we don’t install every app in a computer. Every app will take up some space, clog the system a little bit and slow down the running of the computer somewhat. If we don’t use a program often, we usually rely on the generic browser to perform the task, although it can be less efficient.

Human beings have two set of immune systems, the innate immune system and adaptive immune system. When we get older, we get exposed to more pathogens. Our adaptive immune system gets trained and stronger. With each exposure to new pathogens, our adaptive immune system develops new types of antibodies specifically targeted to that pathogens. But each new antibodies take up some space, clog the system a little bit and slow down the running of the system somewhat. When we get older, our innate immune system, as well as our most other systems, get weaker. It is probably not wise to load all the possible vaccines we can imagine and exhaust the capacity of our bodies.

How to choose which vaccine we should receive? Our bodies are the embodiment of four billion year’s of evolutionary wisdom. They give clues. If a type of antigens poses serious threat to our health, the corresponding immunity, once generated, often last for a lifetime. For example, smallpox immunity will last for a lifetime. If the immunity against some viruses get weaker or disappear completely soon after generation, it suggests that our bodies don’t regard the corresponding antigens as serious health threat. Our bodies don’t think the benefits of such immunity justify their costs.

Immunity against novo coronaviruses usually don’t last very long. Some people who got infected with the viruses will soon be reinfected by the same or similar types of viruses. This suggests that our bodies don’t regard these viruses as serious enough to justify long term immunity. 

Our bodies are not foolproof. Nothing is foolproof. Some suggest that novo coronaviruses could be originated in lab. Our bodies are especially prone to mistakes when dealing with novel creations. This also suggests that it is extremely important to find out the origin of novo coronaviruses. Unfortunately, the majority in the scientific community, out of self interest, are highly hostile to any effort to uncover the truth. 

Shall we immunize for novo coronaviruses?

Action or inaction 

Any action, or inaction, have consequences. There are short term consequences and long term consequences.

Over short term, those who favor action, or active intervention, such as vaccination, may be better off. But over long term, those who are more carefree, focus their effort on basics. Hence they have higher fertility rates and bigger families.

There is an inverse relationship between vaccination rate and fertility rate. Given the minimal fatality rate, especially among the fertile age group, caused by coronaviruses, those social groups with high fertility rates will continue to do well. If anything, those with higher fertility rate and hence higher proportion of juvenile, are more resilient and rejuvenate stronger.

While the civilized world is working hard to pay the vaccine billionaires, the rest of the world is enjoying their family life. While the civilized world is working hard to cover up faces and cover up facts, the rest of the world is enjoying fresh air. While the civilized world is working hard to terrorize the unvaccinated, the rest of the world is enjoying their blissful ignorance.

The wisdom of the body: Immune Systems

Our bodies are the distilled wisdom of four billion years of natural selection. With fierce competition for survival,  our bodies become very efficient. There is not much redundancy. The fact that we get sick from time to time indicates that there is indeed not much redundancy in our immune systems.

Our immune systems are comprised of innate systems and adaptive systems.  Innate systems are our broad spectrum protectors. Adaptive systems are  our specialized protectors calibrated to the specific environment we grow up with. When we grow up, our adaptive systems become stronger. At the same time, our innate systems become weaker. When we expand adaptive systems, we squeeze innate systems. To retain the capacity of our innate systems as much as possible, our bodies often reduce the capacity of those adaptive systems if certain pathogens don't pose great threat to our health. For example, soon after we get vaccine shots for novo coronaviruses, the antibody levels in our bodies start to decline significantly. This suggests that our bodies don't give high priority to adaptive system against coronaviruses.

Novo coronaviruses mainly cause harm to old people. Few children and young people get seriously sick from this type of viruses. Children have strong innate immune systems and weak adaptive immune systems. Older people have weaker innate immune systems and stronger adaptive immune systems. This suggests that innate immune systems are important in fighting off coronaviruses. If so, we should concentrate on improving our innate immune systems, by exercising, relaxing and better foods. Vaccines stimulate and strengthen the adaptive immune systems. While it is helpful to stimulate adaptive immune systems, more of adaptive systems might crowd out innate systems and other parts of the adaptive systems. If we insist on injecting large doses of coronavirus vaccine into our body, this may squeeze the capacity of our immune systems that are responsible for more serious diseases, such as cancer.  

Our bodies are the distilled wisdom of four billion years of natural selection. Much of modern science, such as coronavirus vaccines, is hastily assembled in several years. The crow, the crown and the crowd assert that modern science should tramp over our ancient wisdom. However, modern science can benefit greatly from our ancient wisdom, if we are humble enough to learn. 

How do mRNA vaccines work?

All medicines have side effects. When we decide to use a medicine, we need to study whether the benefits of a medicine outweighs its costs. We often leave the job to experts. However, experts are not impartial. Experts benefit from the growth of the industry. They consciously or subconsciously exaggerate the benefits and downplay the potential harms of medicines. We all know heroin, an addictive drug. How was this drug named? When it was first brough to the markets, producers of this drug thought it had so many benefits with so little harmful side effects. They call it heroin, a heroic drug. Now people know its long term impacts. You might say it is an isolated incident. But it is not. In the past several decades, Purdue Pharma, owned by the Sackler family, marketed OxyContin, a highly addictive drug, to many people. The lives of millions of people have been destroyed. In the process, the medical community actively pushed for the use of the drug. They benefit from the increase of dependant people, who are dependable clients. The media community and the whole elite community stand largely silent. They become more influential when more people need help.  Only those addicted and their families and friends push to end the distribution of the drug.

This time, the majority of vaccines are mRNA vaccine, a new type of vaccine. We will discuss the mechanism of the mRNA vaccine. One dose of mRNA vaccine contains trillions of mRNA molecules. After the injection of the vaccine, these mRNA molecules will enter your cells, command your cells to make spike proteins that are same as from the coronavirus and release them from the cells. When these spike proteins are outside of the cells, they encounter immune cells, which recognize the spike proteins as foreign invaders. Our immune system produces antibodies to attack spike proteins, clamping different spike proteins together, to be destroyed by other immune cells. Some spike proteins are attached to cells. Our immune systems will attack these cells as foreign cells.

Trillions of mRNA molecules will make our cells to produce trillions of spike proteins. These spike proteins will saturate many parts of our bodies, especially capillary blood vessels. When antibodies encounter these spike proteins, they clamp these spike proteins together. This will clot many of the capillary blood vessels, which are tiny. The reduced blood supply will reduce the ability of all organs and weaken our overall health, short term and long term. There are more and more studies about the very harmful impacts of the vaccines. Unfortunately, there is scant reporting in the mainstream media.

These novel corona viruses cause little damage to young people in general. However, the vaccines often cause quite big harm, especially to young men. Many heart diseases have been reported after the injection. Now FDA requires the manufactures to put up warning on the labels of vaccines. We should investigate the effects of the vaccines carefully before making a decision on a shot. It is not just a simple shot. It has already ruined the lives of many people.

Is it healthy to sterilize our environment too much?

About one thousand years ago, there was a dynasty in China, called Song Dynasty. It was the most prosperous dynasty in Chinese history. China was the most prosperous country in the world at that time.

Like any other prosperous society, Song Dynasty faced constant threats of looting and other disturbances from its poorer neighbors. Being a prosperous dynasty, it can muster enough resources to defeat looters. But looters won’t go away. For people living close to wealthy societies, looting is their best strategy. In the end, Song Dynasty paid regular tributes to its northern neighbor, Liao, in exchange for peace. The peace had lasted for about one hundred years, with only occasional skirmishes.

Later, the northern neighbor’s further northern neighbor, Jin, rose in power. Song Dynasty saw an opportunity to revenge for the earlier humiliation. Song Dynasty made an alliance with the deep north state to destroy the state in the middle. They succeeded in eliminating the middle state, Liao. But the buffer zone in the middle is gone. The very next year, the capital city of Song Dynasty was captured by the rising state, Jin.

We might laugh at the stupidity of Song Dynasty. Liao has been the neighbor of Song for more than one hundred years. Each is quite adapted to the existence of the other. Why take an extraordinary effort to eliminate your old neighbor to expose yourself to unpredictable and aggressive newcomers?

We are all surrounded by germs, on our hands, on our skin, inside our bodies. Most of these germs are our old neighbors. They eke out a living from our bodies. Our immune systems are very familiar with them. Whenever their numbers increase rapidly, our immune systems can react rapidly to curb their growth. At the same time, these germs are our best defenders against other new and unknown germs. To these old germs, any newcomers are trespassers who should be eliminated actively. In fact, most antibiotics are produced by germs in fighting against other germs. For example, penicillin, the most important antibiotics, is originally produced by Penicillium, a type of fungi.

When we take extraordinary effort to sterilize our environment, we eliminate most of our old neighbors around us. Few old germs are left to defend against new germs our immune systems are not familiar with. We are often unprepared for these new invaders and overwhelmed by them.

We are advised to wash our hands often and sterilize our environment often. Sterilization kills most of the old germs. But it also destroys the buffer zone that keeps most of the new germs away. Is it healthy to sterilize our environment a lot?

Medical professionals work in an environment with a lot of patients, a lot of germs. It makes sense for them to seek additional protection from generous dose of antiseptics. But for ordinary people, is it a good idea to replace a layer of natural and versatile antiseptics with artificial antiseptics?

Consensus is not equal to truth

Since the outbreak of novel coronavirus disease, tremendous amount of research has been done on the virus. However, few researchers are working on the fundamental problem of the origin of the viruses. Instead, there is already a consensus in the research community: The virus is not lab related.

Why are there so few researchers working on the origin of the virus? The origin of the virus is an extremely important problem, both scientifically and for the public health. Scientifically, the origin of a new species or a new type of type is poorly understood. To pinpoint the origin will help understand the mechanism of the emergence of a new type of life and study the process of evolution. It is of great scientific value. For the public health, to understand the origin and process of evolution of viruses will help us prevent or detect early future outbreaks of pandemics. Why are there so few researchers to undertake such an important task?

Why is there such a strong consensus about the origin of the virus, when so little is known? Researchers have a strong consensus because they have a strong common interest. If the novel coronaviruses are found out to be lab related, the reputation of not only one research lab, but also the whole research community will be tarnished. As a result, there will be tighter regulation and less funding in the future. Many careers in the research community of the microbes will be destroyed. Because of the strong common interest of the research community, there is a strong consensus from the research community.

There are many consensuses in religions. The founders of various religions often claim they have encountered angels. These stories are not the truth. But they are religious truth. Anyone questioning the truthfulness of their stories constitutes blasphemy. Increasingly, scientific work is conducted by the coercion of consensus, not by the search and research for the truth. Many theories are not the truth. But they are scientific truth. Anyone questioning the truthfulness of their stories are anti scientific. Increasingly, facts are not important in public discussion. You don’t need to be factually correct. But you have to be politically correct.

Evidence in Scientific Research

Some years ago, I was taking a physiology course. After one class, I talked to my teacher. I heard that cranberry juice was helpful easing gallbladder stone problems. I drank some. It seemed working. I asked him if there is any formal research about it. He said that he was not aware of any such research. In general, there is little incentive to work on something in the public domain, something that is not patentable, something that can’t be turned into a product. Not only you can’t make money off your research, but also you will reduce the value of other drugs by providing cheap alternative remedies. This will harm and therefore offend your colleagues.

Even cranberry juice is truly helpful in easing some health problems, you can’t find scientific evidence for few scientific researchers are interested in finding evidence.

Take ivermectin for example. Many people in places where drug regulations are not very rigid have used ivermectin to treat novel coronavirus diseases. From the reports, the results are very positive. However, ivermectin, an old drug and a successful drug for some other diseases, is very cheap. There is little enthusiasm in the highly paid research community to conduct rigorous research on the effects of ivermectin on novo coronavirus diseases. To do this could serious depreciate the value of vaccines. To this day, there is little attempt to seek rigorous evidence about the effectiveness of ivermectin. Hence there’s little “scientific” evidence about the effectiveness of ivermectin although there are a lot of evidence about the effectiveness of ivermectin.

Evidence in scientific research is also affected by the framing of concepts. I once took a pathophysiology course. At the beginning of the semester, my teacher dutifully copied the definition of health from the government. A student raised a question. Why the definition of health doesn’t include the health of reproduction? It is such a fundamental issue. My teacher paused. Then he told a story.

When he was an undergraduate student, he had a good friend. Her greatest wish was to have a big family, with a lot of kids. Today, she is a successful physician. But she is still a single, with no kid. If we include reproductive health into the definition of health, she would be very sad.

Many highly educated people, especially highly educated women, have few children. The fertility question is carefully avoided in learned societies. The relation between drugs and fertility is rarely examined by researchers. As a result, the impact on fertility of many drugs remain rumors.

Researchers are eager to provide evidence when evidence will enhance their own careers and benefit their profession. Their colleagues will salute their valuable contributions and reward them with money and status. Researchers are reluctant to provide evidence when evidence will damage their own careers and harm their profession. Otherwise, their colleagues will punish their treason and banish them from their circle.

On fundamental issues, scientific evidence is overwhelmingly one-sided. Scientific evidence overwhelmingly support the dominant parties. However, this does mean we can not find truth or near truth. The expensive double blind experiment is a recent practice. But living systems have been seeking truth for billions of years. They try to find out what are edible and what are harmful. They try to find out who are friendly and who are dangerous. The elite institutions don’t have the monopoly on truth.

One effective way to seek truth is economic reasoning. Take immune systems for example. If every adaptive system has only benefit and no cost, the antibodies will always be there, they will always be replenished, they will never disappear. The very fact that some antibodies will decline and disappear suggests that there is a cost for adaptive immune systems. The very fact that different adaptive immune system will depreciate at different pace suggests that the cost and benefit of different adaptive immune system is different. However, there is every incentive for researchers to highlight the benefit of their research products and little incentive for researchers to highlight the cost of their research products. We just have to figure them out ourselves.   

Information has always been costly and will always be costly. We can only get information by trial and error. We can only filter information through rumors. There is no way around it. To depend on the feeding of the authority is a sure way to be enslaved by the authority.

Concluding remarks

When the novel coronaviruses were spreading rapidly, it is natural to take hasty steps to stop their advance. With time, we should sit back to access the real danger. Over long term, the demographic trend in our societies pose far greater threat. Population aging is caused by the structure of our social systems. The danger of an aging society becomes very clear during pandemics. This may provide us an opportunity to reflect on and reform our social systems, which is very difficult in other time.