假说 苯酚可以抗病毒

摘要

关键词：抗病毒；苯酚；局部注射；疫苗

病毒主要分为DNA病毒和RNA病毒两大类。DNA病毒中的碱基胸腺嘧啶和尿嘧啶的化学结构中都有一个嘧啶环，RNA病毒中的碱基胞嘧啶的结构中也有一个嘧啶环，而苯酚分子的苯环结构与这个嘧啶环的六元杂环结构高度相似。因此，在病毒复制时，可以利用苯酚进行干扰，通过竞争抑制，使病毒的碱基配对出错，从而达到部分杀灭病毒的目的。而这部分被杀灭的病毒，则变成了灭活疫苗，强化了机体的免疫系统，使机体能够战胜这种病毒。

由于苯酚有剧毒性，能使蛋白质变性而伤害细胞，故在使用时，需要将苯酚溶液稀释到很低的浓度，低到不能伤害细胞的程度即可。

在治疗病毒性疾病时，只需要用局部注射的方法，将微量的苯酚溶液注射到病毒病灶，即可起到抗病毒的作用。或者通过取患者少量标本如疣体或血液与苯酚混合，制作成特异性治疗性疫苗，从而治愈该患者。

尽管只是一种假设，但是由此作出的预测，却大部分得到了李先生自己的初步验证。因此，此假设意义重大，将会给人类抗病毒事业做出巨大贡献。

1、引言 抗病毒的现状及问题

病毒给人类造成了巨大的危害和损失。在漫长的与病毒作斗争的过程中，人类虽然取得了一定的成绩，但总体的状况并不乐观，远不能满足临床需要（1）；病毒感染是目前世界上最主要的传染性疾病，占传染性疾病病种的四分之三以上。针对门类众多的病毒性疾病尚缺乏有效的治疗药物。对于寻找选择性杀死病毒而不损伤机体细胞的药物来说，更是难上加难（2）。现有抗病毒药物都只能抑制而不能杀死病毒，存在毒副作用大、易耐药、不能彻底清除病毒等缺陷；疫苗的研制成本巨大，进展缓慢（3）；

如果能够找到某种能够在机体内杀灭病毒而又不伤害机体细胞的药物，必然会带来全新的突破。

2、 假说  苯酚可以抗病毒

病毒主要分为DNA病毒和RNA病毒两大类。DNA病毒中的碱基胸腺嘧啶和尿嘧啶的化学结构中都有一个嘧啶环，RNA病毒中的碱基胞嘧啶的结构中也有一个嘧啶环，而苯酚分子的苯环结构与这个嘧啶环的六元杂环结构高度相似。因此，在病毒复制时，可以利用苯酚进行干扰，通过竞争抑制，使病毒的碱基配对出错，从而达到部分杀灭病毒的目的。而这部分被杀灭的病毒，则变成了灭活疫苗，强化了机体的免疫系统，使机体能够战胜这种病毒。

由于苯酚有剧毒性，能使蛋白质变性而伤害细胞，故在使用时，需要将苯酚溶液稀释到很低的浓度，低到不能伤害细胞的程度即可。

目前，还没有任何文献提到苯酚可以抗病毒，李先生是怎么想到这个假说的呢？他不是凭空想到的，而是受到了一个“意外事件”的启发。

他曾经易患口唇疱疹HSV1，每年都要发作一、二次，常需要十多天才能痊愈。有一次，他将万分之6.7的苯酚溶液注射了0.5毫升于自己嘴角生疱疹的部位，第二天就痊愈了，效果明显优于其他任何治疗方法。此后几年，他又用此方法验证了几例口唇疱疹的病人，发现效果特别好，病人都是很快就痊愈，且都是几年都不复发。于是，他又尝试着治疗感冒、带状疱疹等其它病毒性疾病，都取得很好的疗效。无论任何人，如果不是亲身经历，他都不可能会想到，或者不敢相信，苯酚在如此低的浓度、如此微小的剂量下，还能够有如此强大的杀灭病毒的作用。只有受到了意外的启发，才能够提出这个假说。

随着验证的病例及病种的逐步增多，李先生坚信，这绝不是偶然现象，这里面一定有某种内在规律。

当他找到DNA或RNA碱基对中的胸腺嘧啶、尿嘧啶、胞嘧啶化学结构与苯酚的化学结构图一对比，立刻就恍然大悟了。这个嘧啶环的结构与苯酚的苯环结构高度相似啊（见下图），这正是苯酚能够杀灭病毒的关键原因。

胸腺嘧啶、尿嘧啶、胞嘧啶与苯酚的化学结构对比图

当适度的苯酚到达机体的病毒病灶，一部分病毒被直接杀死，变成了灭活疫苗；一部分正在复制的病毒，由于其碱基配对出错，并且病毒自己没有什么纠错能力，要么变成无致病力的病毒，要么干脆不能完成复制，成为单链DNA，有可能成为DNA疫苗（4）。而我们知道DNA疫苗比一般的疫苗效果要好很多。据此，有可能开发出针对每一个病人的特异性治疗性疫苗。由于每个个体身上携带的病毒不止一种，取该个体身上的标本，例如疣体或者血液与苯酚作用，有可能得到多价的特异性治疗性疫苗。

苯酚可以抗病毒，是非常有可能被证实的一种假说。此假说若得到同行验证，意味着人类将会得到首个能够杀灭体内病毒的药物和方法，其重大意义是不言而喻的。

3、 基于以上假说，我们可以作出如下预测：

当我们在治疗病毒性疾病时，只要能够将苯酚针剂送达病毒病灶，将会出现以下特点。

3.1 抗病毒谱广，对大部分的病毒都有效。不管是DNA还是RNA病毒，在复制时都会被苯酚干扰，都会被杀灭。从今以后，人类对大部分病毒性疾病，无论是已知的还是未知的，都可以从容应对并且战而胜之。

3.2 对于急性病毒性疾病，见效快 ，病程明显缩短，不易复发；对于慢性病毒性疾病，通过取病人标本（如血液或者疣体）与苯酚溶液混合浸泡，可以得到专门针对该病人的特异性治疗性的疫苗，将此疫苗分期注射到病人身上，2-6个月,抗体产生达到一定的浓度后，可以看出治疗效果：或者彻底治愈，或者明显好转。此方法也许可以帮助骨髓移植者解决清除巨细胞病毒的难题。

3.3 毒副作用小。由于以不伤害机体细胞为前提，将苯酚的浓度控制在很低的范围，且用量很少，所以毒副作用很少。

3.4 对支原体、衣原体有效，对细菌无效。因为支原体、衣原体的结构和病毒类似，没有细胞结构;而细菌有完整的细胞结构，故在此浓度下，苯酚不能杀灭细菌，但是可以杀灭支原体和衣原体。

3.5 对动物的病毒性疾病同样有效。对于防治非洲猪瘟、禽流感等等，这一点是极其重要的，无需大量捕杀动物，减轻养殖业损失。

3.6 预防病毒性疾病流行，也许可以通过注射苯酚来实现。根据病毒侵犯的系统和器官不同，选择相应的部位局部注射即可。 既是预防也是早期治疗。

4、 验证：

开始验证之前，先要解决苯酚的安全性的问题。

临床上有很多用5%-10%苯酚治疗顽固性疼痛的论文（5， 6），用苯酚作为神经根阻滞剂，已经写进了教科书。既然5%-10%的苯酚注射进机体是安全的，那么，万分之5到万分之10的苯酚，应该更安全。这是逻辑推理可以得到的结果。

从实际情况来看，也可以得到验证。从2004年起，李跃华就在自己身上做了实验：

配方  取常温下苯酚的饱和溶液1毫升，加入到一瓶100毫升生理盐水中，再加入利多卡因100毫克。摇匀备用。苯酚的溶解度是6.7，故此配方的苯酚浓度大约是万分之6.7。此配方已经获得中国专利权。

抽取此苯酚溶液1毫升，注射于自己腿部，安全。逐步加量至10、20、50毫升，分别注射在自己身上不同部位，是安全的。有十多名亲朋好友作为志愿者参与了这一验证过程，证明了此配方的安全性。

十几年来，李跃华摸索出了根据不同疾病在不同的部位给药的方法，以期达到把药物直接送到病毒病灶的目的。这样可以减少药物用量，避免毒副作用。这里要特别强调一下，是局部注射，不是通常的全身用药的方法。下面简述几种病毒性疾病的具体治疗方法和结果，仅供同行参考验证。

4.1．治疗口腔-生殖器疱疹（HSV1）35例。

一般资料：年龄15-58岁，男18例，女17例。

治疗方法：用2毫升注射器抽取前述苯酚溶液2毫升，在出疱疹处进针约1厘米，注射药水0.5ml。如果出疹范围较大，也可以注射1-2ml，注射在出疹部位的皮下，一次即可。

治疗结果：35例全部治愈。如果是刚出疱疹1天即来诊，则第二天疱疹就消退，患处皮肤基本恢复正常；如果是出疹后几天才来就诊，则会有患处次日结痂、几天后痂皮脱落的过程。观察3年无复发，最长的有10 多年未复发。有2个病人第二年在嘴唇其他部位又长疱疹，第二次注射后，也是3年以上未再复发。也有病人反映，曾经有复发，但是症状明显轻微，不需治疗而很快自己痊愈。

分析：从治疗情况可以发现，用苯酚溶液局部注射，效果明显好于其他任何治疗方法，也比疾病的自愈时间要短很多，这提示：苯酚可能杀死了疱疹病毒。其他治疗方法，都不可能让病人不再复发，只有经过苯酚治疗了的病人，几乎都不再复发。偶尔有复发的，也能够不经治疗而很快痊愈，说明疱疹病毒被杀死而产生了持久的免疫力。这至少说明，能够杀灭机体内病毒而又不伤害细胞的药物是存在的，这就是一个全新的突破，必将给抗病毒领域带来深远的影响。（7， 8）

4.2．治疗带状疱疹58例

一般资料：年龄21-65岁，男32例，女26例。

治疗方法：在出疹处及疼痛处，每个部位注射上述针剂0.5ml到1毫升。出疹范围大者，一次注射总量可达50ml以上，在有些疱疹成片出现处，可以像打局部麻醉一样将药物打在患处皮下，每日一次，连续7-10次。

治疗结果：58例全部治愈，随访3年无复发，并且无一例出现后遗神经疼痛。一般情况下，治疗一次即可减轻疼痛，依次出现疱疹萎缩、变黑、结痂，直到痊愈。

4.3．治疗腮腺炎31例

一般资料：年龄7-28岁，男16例，女15例。

治疗方法：取双侧下颌角下方及双侧胸锁乳突肌中点，共4个部位，每个部位注射上述针剂0.5ml，每日一次，连续3-5次。

治疗结果：31例全部治愈，第二天即退烧，3-5天痊愈。

4.4．治疗感冒150例

一般资料：年龄1-80岁，男82例，女68例。

治疗方法：取双侧胸锁乳突肌中点、第七颈椎脊突处、胸骨凹与气管连接处，共四个部位。每个部位注射上述针剂0.5ml,每日一次，1-3次。

说明：这150例病人中有的是感冒初起者，治疗一次即愈；有的是感冒2-3天才来诊，治疗2-3次即愈；有的是在别处治疗1-2周甚至一个月，仍有发烧咳嗽等症状而来诊，判断为下呼吸道感染、病毒性支气管炎或者肺炎，注射7-10次即愈。在治疗过程中，还发现一个特点：有感冒发烧者，治疗后24小时左右一定会退烧，并且不会再反复发烧；而感冒迁延7天以上没有痊愈，有咳嗽而无发烧症状者，第一次注射后，有部分患者会出现发烧症状，但是第二次注射后，体温会降至正常并且不再反复发烧。这说明：苯酚杀死了病毒，病毒的尸体引起部分病人发烧。

感冒病毒的种类很多，但是都能够按此方法治愈，证明苯酚对多种病毒有效。那么，流感和禽流感，也可以按此方法治疗，应该有显著效果。

4.5．治疗尖锐湿疣5例

一般资料：5例病人全为男性，年龄26-51岁。其中2例为阴茎包皮湿疣，3例为肛周湿疣。

治疗方法：常规消毒表面皮肤，局部麻醉，取3-6粒米粒大的疣体，或者取1-3粒黄豆大疣体，伤口压迫止血。芝麻大疣体暂且不管。将取得的疣体放置于事先消毒好的10ml玻璃试管中,加入前述苯酚针剂6ml，另外加入克林霉素（2ml:0.3g）0.5ml，再加入硫酸阿米卡星（2ml:0.2g）0.5ml，摇匀，于常温下放置24小时。次日起，取0.5-1ml上清液作臀部肌肉注射，隔2-3天一次，连续3次后，可以隔7天一次，共6-8次。

治疗结果：3例一次治愈，2例一个月后复发，其中一例再次取疣体与苯酚溶液混合制作疫苗，同上次一样注射。还有一例复发的病人，原本准备再次制作疫苗，病人因故推迟了一个月，结果发现疣体自己消失了，不需要再次治疗了。说明慢性病毒性疾病的病人，其产生足以抵抗病毒的抗体，至少需要2个月的时间。最后，这5例病人全部治愈，观察半年以上未复发。其中有4例已经5年以上未复发。

4.6. 治疗HIV感染者1例

2015年9月，在给一名患者取疣体制作疫苗时，考虑到该患者是一名HIV阳性病人，故同时取了1毫升血液一起加入苯酚溶液中混合，再按上述方法作疫苗注射。该患者男性，年龄27岁，2015年7月检查CD4为838，病毒载量为53156(见附件1），此前从未接受任何抗艾滋病毒治疗，至今也未使用任何抗艾滋病毒药物。疫苗法治疗3个月后，2016年1月复查，CD4为723，病毒载量是25631（附2），病毒减少了一半。这还是仅仅取了1毫升血的情况下。这提示：疣体与血液混合制作的疫苗可能是一种特异性多价疫苗，既能够治愈尖锐湿疣，也对HIV病毒有一定治疗作用。如果多取些血制作疫苗，会是什么结果呢？接下来是该病人HIV治疗情况。

具体操作步骤及检查结果：

取患者血液20毫升,加入含苯酚万分之6.7的生理盐水20毫升，加微量肝素抗凝；加克林霉素0.15克及庆大霉素4万u，以预防细菌污染。摇匀，置室温下静放2天;离心，得上清夜32毫升，作为疫苗。每隔三日给患者肌肉注射此疫苗3毫升，共5次。此后每月注射一次，每次3毫升，连续5个月。此为一个疗程。

2017.1复查，患者CD4为607，病毒载量为20966。（附3）重复按上叙方法，打疫苗一个疗程。

2017.7复查，患者CD4为685，病毒载量为6600。（附4） 重复上叙步骤，再打疫苗一个疗程。

2018.1复查，患者CD4为856，病毒载量为294。（附5）

从目前的检查结果来看，用此疫苗法来治疗HIV感染者，可以持续维持患者的CD4在正常范围，让病毒载量持续降低。假如以后病毒载量又升高到五千以上，还可以再抽血制作疫苗。如此下去，可以一直维持病人的健康。

此方法简便易行，避免了每天口服抗病毒药物的麻烦和副作用，病人乐意接受，值得深入研究和推广，为常规抗艾滋治疗的耐药病人、依从性不好的病人、小儿、孕妇等特殊病人，提供了一个新的治疗途径（9）。当然，还需要更多的病例研究。

4.7. 治疗手足口病2例

2例患者均是女性，分别为2岁和3岁。均因为发烧、咽痛、流涎一天而来诊。这段时间本地流行手足口病，检查可见患者咽红，有散在芝麻大水泡，诊断为手足口病。试用前述苯酚溶液注射，注射部位与治疗感冒部位一样，剂量一样。结果2例均次日退烧，咽痛减轻。每日一次，连续三次，痊愈。

以上七种病毒性疾病，既有急性的也有慢性的，既有DNA病毒，

也有RNA病毒，它们足以说明：利用苯酚可以抗病毒。具有抗病毒谱广、见效快，副作用小的特点，能够杀死病毒而不伤害机体细胞；同时，为开发特异性治疗性多价疫苗提供了新的思路和实例，使有些难治的疾病如尖锐湿疣、疱疹，HIV等的治疗变得简单而高效。

从上述验证过程也可以看出二点不同寻常之处; 第一，对急性病毒性疾病，采用的是不同于平常的肌肉注射和静脉给药方法，而是找到人体表面相应的点，进行局部注射，以期药物能够直达病灶。第二，对慢性病毒性疾病，采用的是取患者的标本（血液或者疣体）制作疫苗的方法，以期得到专门针对该患者的特异性治疗性疫苗。也就是说，给每一个患者制作一份他独有的疫苗。这打破了人们的思维定式。通常情况下，人们会认为，某种病毒性疾病，应该研制出相应的疫苗供所有人使用。然而，实际上有些情况下这是行不通的。大自然是没有那么简单的，它必然是多姿多彩变化无穷的。因此，人们对疾病的研究，不应该因循守旧、一成不变。只有敢于创新，才能取得突破。

5、结语

一个真正有价值的科学假说，原理往往是简单的。但是，从观察现象，提出问题；到提出一个能够逻辑自洽、自圆其说的理论；继而做出可以观测的预测；提出验证方法，能够重复的被同行验证。这每一步都是极其艰难的，是形式逻辑和实证精神的密切结合。这中间往往需要若干年的时间。如果能够得到学术界的验证及认可，其意义也是巨大的。因此，这一理论假说的验证，还需要医学界同行做大量的工作。比如，找到苯酚杀灭病毒的直接证据，或者观察用苯酚治疗各种病毒性疾病治疗前后的病毒数量对比；在一些病毒疫情严重又没有有效办法的地方，也可以用苯酚治疗病毒的方法来尝试一下，可能收到意想不到的效果；对动物的病毒性疾病如非洲猪瘟，可以尝试用苯酚与单个动物的血液混合的方法制作特异性治疗性疫苗，也许可以很快控制疫情。文章中的验证部分，只是一个初步的线索和参考，只是从无到有、从0到1的起步工作。实际上这几种疾病的治疗，每一种都可以独立写成一篇临床论著，只是需要按要求进行多中心大样本随机双盲对照试验。这不是一个人或者一个小诊所能够完成的工作，还需要全社会的大力协作，开展从1到N的大量工作，以促成能够杀灭病毒的药物的早日面世，以解除千千万万病人的痛苦，挽救千千万万的生命。

参考文献：

【1】De Clercq E, Li G. Approved antiviral drugs over the past 50 years. Clin Microbiol Rev, 2016, 29(3):695-747.

【2】Martinez JP, Sasse F, Brönstrup M, et al. Antiviral drug discovery: broad-spectrum drugs from nature. Nat Prod Rep, 2015, 32(1):29-48

【3】Graham B. Advances in antiviral vaccine development. Immunological Reviews. 2013;255(1):230-242.

【4】Tomas Lindahl，nature publishing group，lnstability and decay of the primary structure of DNA.1993；709-715.

【5】Nathan P, Scott T. INTRATHECAL PHENOL FOR INTRACTABLE PAIN:. The Lancet. 1958;271(7011):76-80.

【6】Puig C, Driscoll C, Kern E. Sluder's Sphenopalatine Ganglion Neuralgia—Treatment with 88% Phenol. American Journal of Rhinology. 1998;12(2):113-118.

【7】Earnshaw D, Bacon T, Darlison S, Edmonds K, Perkins R, Vere Hodge R. Mode of antiviral action of penciclovir in MRC-5 cells infected with herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1), HSV-2, and varicella-zoster virus. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. 1992;36(12):2747-2757.

【8】 Wood M. A RANDOMIZED TRIAL OF ACYCLOVIR FOR 7 DAYS OR 21 DAYS WITH AND WITHOUT PREDNISOLONE FOR TREATMENT OF ACUTE HERPES ZOSTER. The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal. 1994;13(10):941.

【9】Bhatti A, Usman M, Kandi V. Current Scenario of HIV/AIDS, Treatment Options, and Major Challenges with Compliance to Antiretroviral Therapy. Cureus. 2016;.

检查报告

附件1：

2015年7月检查报告，CD4 838；

2015年3月，病毒载量 53156；

附件2：

2016年1月，CD4 723；

2016年1月，病毒载量 25631；

附件3：

2017年1月，CD4 607；

2017年1月，病毒载量 20966；

附件4：

2017年7月，CD4为685（化验单丢失）；

2017年7月，病毒载量 6600；

附件5：

2018年1月，CD4 856；

2018年1月，病毒载量 294；

这篇文章准备投稿到《柳叶刀》，还需补充资料。以下是英文版。

Cover Letter

Dear Sir/Madam:

Since the progress made in the field of antiviral agents is far from sufficient to meet the actual needs of clinical practice, I have proposed a hypothesis based on my own research for many years:

Phenol can be antiviral.

Although this hypothesis is simple, it is strictly derived from logical reasoning and can be self-explanatory. The predictions made should be able to be verified repeatedly, and I have verified some of them by myself.

If this article could be accepted by the editorial board of your journal, it would be not only my personal fortune, but also the blessing of mankind, because it will make new contributions to human health.

Best regards.

Sincerely,  Yue-hua Li

Aiyinsi Clinic, Wuhan, China

2019/10/10

Abstract: Abstract

Keywords: virus-killing; trace phenol; local injection; hypothesis

Mr. Li found that injection of trace phenol in some local sites of human body can quickly cure herpes labialis, herpes zoster, mumps and chickenpox, the curative effect for HIV is also distinct.Accordingly, Mr. Li proposed his madness hypothesis: Using the method of local injection of trace phenol, it can kill viruses without harming

human cells; This method can be used for the prevention and treatment of viral diseases outbreaks.

Hypothesis: Phenol Can Be Antiviral

Yue-hua Li  Bachelor of Medical Science

Outpatients department of Aiyinsi

Address: No. 172, Yongan Tang, Hanyang Avenue, Wuhan, China

Correspondence author: Yue-hua Li

Telephone: [phone]

E-mail: [e-mail]

Funding and source of funding: Self-raised

1. Fighting Against Viruses: Present Status And Existing Problems

Viruses have caused enormous harm and loss to human beings. In the long fight against viruses, although we have achieved substantial progress, the overall situation is far from desirable, nor meeting the clinical needs.（1）Viral infection is currently the most common cause for infectious diseases worldwide, accounting for more than three-quarters of these diseases. There are still no effective therapies or drugs for viral diseases.（2） It is even more difficult to find drugs that selectively kill the virus without damaging the living cells. Most of the existing antiviral agents have problems such as high toxicity, severe side effects, potential drug resistance, and failure to completely eliminate viruses.  On the other hand, the cost of developing vaccines is tremendous and the progress is rather time consuming.（3）

If it is possible to find a drug that can kill the virus in the body without harming the living cells, it will definitely deliver a whole new breakthrough. Through years of research, Mr. Yue-hua Li discovered that phenol may be exactly such type of drug. He found some clues about this subject from practices and therefore proposed the following hypothesis.

2. Hypothesis: Phenol Can Be Antiviral

Mr. Li holds that on the premise of ensuring safety, testing it on researchers themselves is the most convenient and efficient way. Mr. Li discovered the antiviral effect of phenol through the experiment on himself.

He used to be susceptible to herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV1) and had one or two episodes every year. It often took more than ten days to heal. He once injected 0.5 ml phenol solution of a concentration of 6.7 in 10,000 into the part of the mouth affected by herpes, which healed the next day. The effects were significantly better than any other therapies. He further discovered by finding more cases that it is only effective by injecting into the affected part; and injecting into other parts is ineffective. Therefore, he realized that phenol has to be injected into the viruses lesion to be effective, rather than by means of intramuscular injections or intravenous fluids to reach the average blood concentration throughout the body to kill the virus. For different viral diseases with different lesions, the injection sites are different. The corresponding injection sites can be located by trial and error; this is just a technical issue. From the perspective of clinical effects, the overall response rate (ORR) and cure rate of this therapy are surprisingly high, which can only be explained by the killing of viruses by phenol.

Supporting Theory One:

Since the structure of the cells is different from that of the virus, their tolerance to phenol is different. As long as the right concentration of phenol is determined, it will be possible to kill not just one but a wide variety of viruses without harming the living cells in the body.

Supporting Theory Two:

The molecular structure of phenol is similar to that of thymine, uracil, and cytosine in the base pairs of DNAs or RNAs（See figure below）. As a result, it will cause interference, competition, and make it erroneous during virus replication and base pairing. Moreover, the virus’s ability to correct error is considerably weak, while such ability of error correction of the living cells is much stronger. For this reason, determination of a proper concentration of phenol can interfere with virus replication without harming the living cells, and may even cause virus to stop from replicating and die.

Supporting Theory Three:

When an appropriate dose of phenol reaches the viral lesion in the body, a portion of the viruses will be directly killed and become an inactivated vaccine. A part of the viruses being replicated, because of the error in its base pairing, either becomes a non-virulent virus, or simply cannot complete the replication. Instead, it becomes a single-stranded DNA and may become a DNA vaccine.（4） As we all know, DNA vaccines are much more effective than the regular vaccines. On this basis, it is possible to develop a specific therapeutic vaccine for each patient. Since each individual carries more than one type of virus, taking specimen from the individual, for instance, the effects between the warts or blood and phenol, may get a multivalent specific therapeutic vaccine.

In summary, the hypothesis can be simplified as follows:

Phenol can be antiviral. Based on the different structure and tolerance of the living cells and viruses; based on the similarity between the molecular structure of phenol and the pyrimidine in virus base; based on the different ability to correct error in replication of the living cells and viruses, an appropriate amount of phenol can be applied to the viral lesion, kill the virus without harming the living cells, and obtain the multivalent specific therapeutic vaccine.

3. Based on the above hypothesis, we can make the following predictions:

During the treatment of the viral diseases, as long as the phenol injection can be delivered to the viral lesion, the following features will occur.

3.1 A wide spectrum of antiviral activities that is effective for most viruses. Both DNA and RNA viruses will be interfered by phenol during replication and will be killed. From now on, human beings will be enabled to cope with and defeat most of the viral diseases, both known and unknown.

3.2 For acute viral diseases, the effect is quick and the course of disease is obviously shortened, with a low probability of relapse. For chronic viral diseases, a specific vaccine can be obtained by taking the patient’s specimen (such as blood or warts) and mixing it with the phenol solution. When the vaccine is injected into the patient in separate stages for two to six months, and the therapeutic effect can be observed after the antibody has reached a certain concentration: obviously improved or completely cured. This method may help those who have undergone bone marrow transplant solve the problem of eliminating giant cell virus.

3.3 Minimal side effects. To not harm the living cells, the concentration of phenol is kept at a very low level, and the dose is small so the side effects are considerably weak.

3.4 It is effective against mycoplasma and chlamydia but ineffective against bacteria. The underlying reason is that the structure of mycoplasma and chlamydia is similar to virus, which has no cell structure, while the bacteria have a complete cell structure. Therefore, at this concentration, phenol cannot kill bacteria but it can kill mycoplasma and chlamydia.

3.5 It is also effective against viral diseases in animals. For the prevention and treatment of African swine fever, bird flu, etc., it is extremely useful as it can reduce the loss of farming without killing animals in large quantities.

3.6 Prevention of viral diseases may be achieved by injection of phenol. According to the system and organs invaded by virus, the appropriate site should be selected for injection. It is both prevention and early treatment.

4. Verification

Before verification, we must first solve the safety problems of phenol.

There are many clinical researches on the treatment of refractory pain using 5% to 10% phenol （5,6） as a nerve root blocker, and this approach has been written in textbooks. Since 5% to 10% phenol is safe to be injected into the body, then 0.05% to 0.1% phenol would be safer. This is a result of logical reasoning.

It can also be verified through the actual practice. Since 2004,  Yue-hua Li had been experimenting on himself:

Formulation: Take 1 ml of a saturated solution of phenol at room temperature, add it to a bottle of 100 ml of normal saline, and add 100 mg of lidocaine. Shake sufficiently and put aside for later use. The solubility of phenol is 6.7, so the phenol concentration of this formula is about 0.067%.(This formula has been patented in China)

One ml of phenol solution was taken and injected into his own leg. It turned out to be safe. The amount was gradually increased to 10, 20, and 50 ml, and injected into different parts of his body. It turned out to be safe. A dozen friends and relatives participated as volunteers in the verification process, which proved the safety of this formula.

For more than a decade, Yue-hua Li has explored ways to administer drugs at different sites according to the type of the diseases, in order to achieve the purpose of delivering drugs directly to the viral lesion. By doing so, the dose of drugs can be reduced and side effects can be avoided. It should be noted that it is a local injection, instead of the usual systemic medication. The next part will present a brief description of the detailed treatment methods and outcomes of several viral diseases, for reference only.

4.1. Treatment of oral-genital herpes (HSV1) in 35 cases.

General information: 18 males and 17 females aged 15 to 58 years old.

Methods: A two-ml syringe was used to take 2 ml of the above mentioned phenol solution. The needle was placed about 1 cm from the herpes, and the injection was 0.5 ml. If the herpes occur in a large range, it would also be acceptable to inject 1 to 2 ml into the skin of area infected. One injection would do.

Outcome: All 35 cases were cured. If the patient immediately visits one day after the onset of herpes, the herpes will diminish the next day, and the skin of the affected area will basically return to normal. If the patient visits several days after the onset, there will be scarring of the affected area, which may peel off after another few days. No recurrence has been observed in three years, and the lesion has not recurred for 10 years in the longest case. Two patients had herpes in other parts of the lips in the second year; after the second injection, the lesion did not recur for more than three years. One patient also had herpes in other parts of the lips in the second year; without treatment, the lesion was automatically recovered after two days.

Analysis: According to the treatment details, it can be found that the local injection of phenol solution is significantly better than any other methods, and it takes much shorter time than the self-healing of the disease. This likely suggests that phenol kills the herpes simplex virus. All of the other methods fail to guarantee that there will be no recurrence. Only patients treated with phenol almost had no recurrence. Even if there is recurrence occasionally, it can be cured quickly without treatment, indicating that herpes virus is killed and the body produces long-lasting immunity. This at least shows that the drug that kills the virus in the body without harming cells does exist. This is a brand new breakthrough, which will definitely bring revolution to the antiviral field.（7,8）

4.2．Treatment of herpes zoster in 58 cases

General information: 32 males and 26 females aged 21 to 65 years old.

Methods: In the sites of onset and pain, each part was injected with 0.5 to 1 ml of the above agent. If the herpes occurred in a large range, the total volume of one injection could reach 50 ml or more. In the presence of some large areas of herpes, the drug could be injected into the skin of affected area like local anesthesia, once a day, for 7 to 10 times in a row.

Outcome: All 58 cases were cured. No recurrence was found in three years during the follow-up, and no post-treatment neuropathic pain occurred. Under normal circumstances, one course of treatment is sufficient to relieve pain, followed by shrinking, blackening, crusting, and eventually healing of the herpes.

4.3. Treatment of mumps in 31 cases

General information: 16 males and 15 females aged 7 to 28 years old.

Methods: A total of four sites, including the lower edges of bilateral mandibular angles and the midpoints of bilateral sternocleidomastoids, were injected with 0.5 ml of the above agent, once a day, for 3 to 5 consecutive times.

Outcome: All 31 cases were cured. The fever was cured on the next day, and the disease was healed in 3 to 5 days.

4.4. Treatment of cold in 150 cases

General information: 82 males and 68 females aged 1 to 80 years old.

Methods: A total of four sites, including the bilateral sternocleidomastoid midpoints, the seventh cervical vertebrae, and the sternal recess and tracheal junction, were injected with 0.5 ml of the above agent, once a day, for 1 to 3 consecutive times.

Note: Among the 150 patients, some of them had a cold for the first time and were cured after one course of treatment; some visited 2 to 3 days after catching a cold and were cured after two to three courses of treatment; some had been treated elsewhere for one to two weeks or even for a month, still having symptoms such as fever and cough, and they visited and were diagnosed as lower respiratory tract infection, viral bronchitis or pneumonia, which were cured after 7 to 10 times of injection. In the course of treatment, another feature was found: Those with colds and fevers will definitely have their fever cured about 24 hours after treatment, and there will be no repeated fever; however, for those with cold not cured for more than 7 days, having symptoms of cough but no fever, some of them will have fever after the first injection, but their body temperature will drop to normal and there will no repeated fever. This shows that phenol kills the virus, and the dead body of the virus induces fever in some of the patients.

There are many types of cold viruses, but they can all be cured in this way, proving that phenol is effective against a variety of viruses. Then, flue and bird flu can also be treated using this method, and significant effects should be achieved.

4.5. Treatment of condyloma acuminatum in 5 cases

General information: 5 males aged 26 to 51 years old. Among them, two had foreskin condyloma, and three had perianal condyloma.

Methods: The superficial skin was routinely disinfected. After local anesthesia, 3 to 6 warts in the size of rice grains, or 1 to 3 warts in the size of soy beans, were resected and taken, and pressure was applied on the wounds to stop bleeding. The warts in the size of sesames were left for the time being. The obtained warts were placed into a pre-sterilized 10ml glass test tube, 6 ml of the above phenol agent was added, and 0.5ml of clindamycin (2ml: 0.3g) was added. Then 0.5 ml of amikacin sulfate (2ml: 0.2g) was added, and the tube was shaken for mixing and put still at room temperature for 24 hours. From the next day, 0.5 to 1ml of the supernatant was taken for injection in hip muscles, once every two to three days. After three consecutive times, the agent could be injected once every seven days, for a total of 6 to 8 times.

Outcome: 3 cases were cured after one treatment, 2 cases relapsed after one month. The warts of one relapsed case were taken again and mixed with the phenol solution to prepare the vaccine, which was injected in the same way as the previous treatment. For the other relapsed case, preparation of vaccine had been already planned, but the patient delayed it for one month for some reason. It turned out that the warts disappeared and did not need to be treated again. This suggested that for patients with chronic viral diseases, it would take at least two months to produce adequate antibody to fight against the virus. Finally, all of these five patients were cured, and no recurrence was observed for more than six months. Four of them had not relapsed for more than five years.

4.6. Treatment of HIV infection in one case

In September 2015, when removing the warts of a patient to prepare vaccine, given that this patient was HIV-positive, 1 ml of blood was taken and added to the phenol solution for mixing. Then the vaccine was prepared and injected as described above. This patient was male, aged 27 years old. His CD4 count was checked as 838 and virus load was 53156 (see Annex 1) in July 2015. He had never received any anti-AIDS virus treatment or used any anti-AIDS virus drugs. Three months after the vaccine treatment, the patient was reviewed in January 2016, and his CD4 count was 723 and virus load was 25631 (Annex 2). The virus was reduced by half, which was achieved by only taking 1 ml of blood. This suggested that the vaccine prepared by mixing the warts and blood may be a specific multivalent vaccine that can cure condyloma acuminatum and also has a therapeutic effect on HIV. If more blood was taken to prepare the vaccine, what would happen? Next is the treatment for this HIV patient.

Detailed operation procedures and examination results:

A total of 20 ml of the patient’s blood was taken and added with 20 ml of normal saline containing 0.067% of phenol, as well as a small amount of heparin for anticoagulation. Then 0.15 grams of clindamycin and 40 thousand u of gentamicin were added to prevent bacterial contamination. It was shaken for mixing and let stand for two days at room temperature. Then the solution was centrifuged and 32 ml of supernatant was obtained as the vaccine. The patient was intramuscularly injected with three ml of this vaccine, once every three days, for a total of five times. After that, the vaccine was injected once a month, 3 ml each time, for 5 consecutive months. This made one course of treatment.

Review in January 2017: The patient’s CD4 count was 607 and virus load was 20966. (Annex 3) The above method was repeated to administer the vaccine for one course.

Review in July 2017: The patient’s CD4 was 685 and virus load was 6600. (Annex 4) The above method was repeated to administer the vaccine for one course.

Review in January 2018: The patient’s CD4 was 856 and virus load was 294. (Annex 5)

Based on the existing examination results, the use of this vaccine to treat HIV-infected patients can continue to maintain the patient’s CD4 count in a normal range, constantly decreasing the virus load.

This method is simple and easy, getting rid of the troubles and side effects of oral administration of antiviral drugs every day. The patients would be willing to accept it and cooperate. This method is worthy of in-depth research and promotion, as it provides a new alternative of conventional anti-AIDS treatment for patients with drug resistance and poor compliance, as well as for special patients such as children and pregnant women.（9） Of course, more case studies are needed to further verify the efficacy of this method.

4.7. Treatment of HFMD in 2 cases

Both cases were females, aged 2 and 3 years old, respectively. Both of them visited for fever, sore throat, and drooling for one day. Recently, hand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD) was prevalent in the area. Pharyngeal redness was observed in the patients. There scattered blisters in the size of sesame, diagnosed as HFMD. Injection of the above phenol solution was tried, at the same site and same dose as the treatment of cold. As a result, both cases had fevers reduced and sore throat relieved on the next day. The injection was administered once a day, for three times in a row, then the patients were completely healed.

The treatment of the above seven types of diseases is enough to illustrate that the use of phenol can be antiviral. Characterized by a wide spectrum of antiviral activities, short course, and minimal side effects, it can kill the virus without harming the living cells. Moreover, it provides new ideas and examples for the development of specific multivalent vaccines, delivering simple and effective treatment of some refractory diseases, such as condyloma acuminatum, herpes, and HIV.

The above verification process also shows two unusual points: first, for acute viral diseases, the drug was locally injected into the corresponding surface point of the body, in order to directly deliver the drug to the lesion; second, for chronic viral diseases, specimens (blood or wart) were taken from a patient to prepare a vaccine, in order to obtain a specific therapeutic vaccine for this patient. In other words, a vaccine unique to each patient was prepared. This broke people’s stereotypes. Under normal circumstances, it is believed that a vaccine should be developed for a certain viral disease to protect everyone from it. However, in fact, this is impracticable. Nature is not so simple; and it necessarily is colorful and ever-changing. Therefore, the study of diseases should not be conservative and invariable. Breakthroughs can be made only by innovation.

5. Conclusions

The medical profession needs to do a lot of work before the verification of this theoretical hypothesis: for instance, to find the direct evidence that phenol killed the virus; in some places where the virus outbreak is serious and there is no good idea, the injection of phenol may also be tried, which may have unexpected effects; for viral diseases of animals, such as African swine fever (ASF), a specific therapeutic vaccine may be prepared by mixing phenol with the blood of a single animal and may soon control the epidemic.

A truly valuable scientific hypothesis is often simple, with observable predictions. The determination of the efficacy of any new therapies or new drugs must be followed by a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial with a large size. The medical profession needs to do a lot of work before the verification of this theoretical hypothesis: for instance, to find the direct evidence that phenol killed the virus; in some places where the virus outbreak is serious and there is no good idea, the injection of phenol may also be tried, which may have unexpected effects; for viral diseases of animals, such as African swine fever (ASF), a specific therapeutic vaccine may be prepared by mixing phenol with the blood of a single animal and may soon control the epidemic. The verification part of the article was just a preliminary attempt and reference. It is just starting from scratch, going from zero to one. For this reason, it absolutely cannot verify all the predictions. A great collaboration among the whole society is needed to carry out the enormous works from one to N, so as to facilitate the early launch of drugs that can kill the virus. By doing so, it will relieve the suffered of millions of patients and save the lives of numerous people and animals.

Conflict of interest：

The author declares that there is no conflict of interest in the publication of this article.

Thanks：

Thank you for supporting my family and friends and for supporting volunteers and sick people for my work; and thanks to Dr. Huawen xin（China） and Dr. Yao Kun（New Zealand) Rui Wang master(USA)  for their help.

Consult：

【1】De Clercq E, Li G. Approved antiviral drugs over the past 50 years. Clin Microbiol Rev, 2016, 29(3):695-747.

【2】Martinez JP, Sasse F, Brönstrup M, et al. Antiviral drug discovery: broad-spectrum drugs from nature. Nat Prod Rep, 2015, 32(1):29-48

【3】Graham B. Advances in antiviral vaccine development. Immunological Reviews. 2013;255(1):230-242.

【4】Tomas Lindahl，nature publishing group，lnstability and decay of the primary structure of DNA.1993；709-715.

【5】Nathan P, Scott T. INTRATHECAL PHENOL FOR INTRACTABLE PAIN:. The Lancet. 1958;271(7011):76-80.

【6】Puig C, Driscoll C, Kern E. Sluder's Sphenopalatine Ganglion Neuralgia—Treatment with 88% Phenol. American Journal of Rhinology. 1998;12(2):113-118.

【7】Earnshaw D, Bacon T, Darlison S, Edmonds K, Perkins R, Vere Hodge R. Mode of antiviral action of penciclovir in MRC-5 cells infected with herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1), HSV-2, and varicella-zoster virus. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. 1992;36(12):2747-2757.

【8】 Wood M. A RANDOMIZED TRIAL OF ACYCLOVIR FOR 7 DAYS OR 21 DAYS WITH AND WITHOUT PREDNISOLONE FOR TREATMENT OF ACUTE HERPES ZOSTER. The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal. 1994;13(10):941.

【9】Bhatti A, Usman M, Kandi V. Current Scenario of HIV/AIDS, Treatment Options, and Major Challenges with Compliance to Antiretroviral Therapy. Cureus. 2016;.

Annex 1:

Examination report: July 2015, CD4 count was 838;

March 2015, virus load was 53,156;

Annex 2:

January 2016, CD4 count was 723;

January 2016, virus load was 25631;

Annex 3:

January 2017, CD4 count was 607;

January 2017, virus load was 20966;

Annex 4:

July 2017, CD4 was 685 (laboratory test report was lost);

July 2017, virus load was 6600;

Annex 5:

January 2018, CD4 count was 856;

January 2018, virus load was 294;