“Super Infection Therapy” - Could Using A Harmless Virus To Treat A More Virulent Virus Work As A Treatment Option For COVID-19?


Senior Member
A group of virologists have proposed that “Super Infection Therapy” (“SIT”) be tried as a possible treatment option for COVID-19.

Superinfection Therapy (SIT) vs COVID-19

Apr 1, 2020

By Ralph W. Moss, PhD.

I have been a medical journalist for the past 45 years, investigating innovative treatments around the world. In 1991, while on a trip to Eastern Europe, I met scientists pursuing a very unusual type of treatment called Superinfection Therapy (SIT). The basic idea is that if someone has a viral infection, you can sometimes knock it out by giving them a second albeit harmless viral infection.

The idea came from clinical observations of unrelated viruses interacting in patients. Infection by one type of hepatitis virus (e.g. HCV) is often terminated after accidental infection by a second hepatitis virus (e.g. HBV). In such cases, one virus dominates over the replication of the other virus. Nevertheless, in cases when both viruses are pathogenic the disease persists, and hepatitis remains.

An international consortium of virologists propose Superinfection Therapy testing on COVID-19

The innovative Superinfection idea came from Laszlo Csatary, a Hungarian-American medical doctor and was further developed by Tibor Bakacs, MD, PhD, DSc, who currently works at the Alfred Renyi Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Over the years, I’ve gotten to know Dr. Bakacs very well, and we have collaborated on many scientific projects. Another close collaborator is Shimon Slavin, MD, formerly the director of Israel’s National Bone Marrow Transplant Center. Dr. Slavin is currently the medical director of the Superinfection Therapy program.

Administering harmless viruses for Superinfection Therapyhas already worked to prevent or mitigate seasonal flu in more than 300,000 individuals.

Administering harmless viruses for Superinfection Therapy has already worked to prevent or mitigate seasonal flu in more than 300,000 individuals, and to treat hepatitis B and C infections in more than 40 patients. The new treatment is based on biologic action against the pathogenic virus induced by the harmless virus that jump-starts an immediate anti-viral resistance by secretion of interferon, Nature’s anti-viral mechanism that exists in every cell, resulting in recruitment of the innate immune system.

Superinfection Therapy shows promise of working against COVID-19

Significantly, in the laboratory SARS-2 that causes COVID-19 infections is extremely sensitive to interferon. Therefore, Superinfection Therapy shows promise of working against COVID-19!

Superinfection Therapy could provide a safe, effective and inexpensive way of treating the coronavirus pandemic!

So, if within the Monitored Emergency Use of Unregistered Interventions Framework (MEURI) a clinical trial was successful, this could provide a safe, effective and inexpensive way of treating the coronavirus pandemic.
The group’s article has been viewed more than 1,000 times in the past month. But, frankly, that won’t matter much to people dying of COVID-19 infections.

Someone high up in government has to be told about Superinfection Therapy

Someone high up in government has to first understand that Superinfection Therapy even exists, and then they must authorize a clinical trial. So far, Tibor and his colleagues have been unable to reach even a single person with enough clout —and courage—to make this happen. It is a nightmare for them…and for humanity! Imagine being a virologist with a potential treatment for COVID-19, and not being able to get the word out!?

New treatments can take years to be approved!

Normally, new treatments take years, even decades, to be approved. There is a lengthy process of lab tests and clinical trials, filled with all the pitfalls that befall bureaucracies. But with COVID-19, obviously, we don’t have such time. They don’t know where to turn.

I am making a direct appeal to the public. Please help get SIT tested against COVID-19!

  1. Sign the petition to Dr. Anthony Fauci and his colleagues of the White House Coronavirus Task Force at whitehouse.gov.
  2. Tell your friends about this treatment. Share it on social media. If you know anyone in a position of medical or political authority, bring this to their attention.
  3. Donate what you can to the non-profit 501(c)3 foundation that is publicizing this petition. 100% of donated funds will go to this project.
Share this link https://c19.newcancerfoundation.org/sit


The scientific rationale behind Superinfection Therapy for COVID-19:

Why COVID-19 is probably susceptible to Superinfection Therapy:

Superinfection Therapy works against hepatitis B and C:


We strongly urge everyone to follow World Health Organization (WHO) advice on how to prevent and treat COVID-19 infections. https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public

Questions and Answers

Where does my donation go?
It goes to the 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, Center for Integrative Oncology (CIO), earmarked for this campaign.

What will the CIO do with the donation funds?
100% of your donation goes into sharing the Superinfection Therapy (SIT) whitehouse.gov petition via Social Media in order to get to 100,000 signatures. If the petition reaches that goal, additional funds will go directly toward research into SIT or other potential COVID-19 treatments.

Why do we need to solicit donations?
In order to meet the signature goals listed on whitehouse.gov we need to advertise this petition quickly and as broadly as possible. This costs money.

From whitehouse.gov: “If you gather 100,000 signature in 30 days, we’ll review your petition, make sure it gets in front of the appropriate policy experts, and issue an official response.”



Senior Member
It sounds like something that would get shot down by legal departments. While some pairs of viral infections might provide a beneficial result, I can easily imagine combinations causing more serious problems. What if you give someone a 'treatment' virus, and six weeks (or even a year) later, they develop serious ME or some other disease? It would probably be impossible to prove that the treatment didn't cause the disease.

Even worse: what if the bad virus gains some benefit from the treatment virus RNA and becomes even more dangerous? I think most companies would consider that a very scary legal risk.


Senior Member
Also, there's one big further problem here. It's actually true that people rarely get ill with two acute infections at the same time and it's presumably as the quoted text says, due to interferons and the immune system already being activated to fight virus 1 off. However, this benefit is only temporary, there would be no permanent benefit like from a vaccine. You would have to infect someone with another virus just at the right time when the person has caught SARS-CoV-2, at the stage where the patient is probably still asymptomatic. I don't see how they have managed to overlook this "slight" practical problem.

Actually, this idea would be more interesting for someone that has a chronic low-level infection like speculated in ME/CFS. If giving another virus could knock out a chronic infection, then this therapy could potentially be used at any point in time to treat someone with a chronic infection. As we know, ME/CFS patients often get temporary benefits from acute infections, but then almost always fall back to old state, so it still seems unlikely to work for us.
Last edited:


Senior Member
@Wally Interesting idea. Maybe you could just tweet Trump...
@Learner1 - I only re-posted the article from another thread because it was in a “members only” subforum and I thought others on the Forum who may not always log in when checking new posts/threads might not see this article. I have no skin in the game whether this type of treatment would be worth supporting in order to get attention so it might be considered by “decision makers or influencers”. I assume that those decision makers are really, really busy right now, so more normal channels for professionals to get their ideas floated may not be available., so they are trying to find new ways to communicate by using the power of a crowd..

I just thought it was the treatment idea that was interesting because there are case studies where ME/CFS patients developed another infection that caused a very high fever and it appeared that this either cured or put in remission their ME/CFS illness. While this has only been seen to happen on rare occasions, it just leaves open another door to be looked out when researching our strange illness and perhaps a strange illness like COVID-19.. I posted the full article because the author had no copyright concerns with it being shared in its entirety.

@JES and @Wishful - I don’t not know what the doctor (MD) and the four virologists (mentioned in the article) mean by a “harmless” virus. I assumed that while pathogenic it might not be as serious or virulent, but it puzzled me as well as how they could know for sure that it was not “harmful”. I just thought it was interesting enough to share for discussion just based on the credentials of Dr. Moss and the four virologists. Sometimes, it is the out of the box thinking that can be a real game changer. I am also sure there are many gatekeepers and naysayers that this novel treatment would have to satisfy before it could see the light of day in a trial, I would imagine they would be required to show significant efficacy potential and also a low risk/ high benefit when it came to safety. I also would assume that patients would have to consent to a waiver of liability, if they were offered and accepted this type of treatment, in order to also get a sign off from the healthcare providers legal teams.
Last edited:


Senior Member
@Gingergrrl - I only re-posted the article from another thread because it was in a “members only” subforum

I’m not sure why you tagged me or what you are asking me? Was there something you wanted me to read from another thread?


Senior Member
I’m not sure why you tagged me or what you are asking me? Was there something you wanted me to read from another thread?
At @Gingergrrl - so sorry wrong tag.. I meant to tag Learner1 as a follow up to a post.. However, I was interrupted when just starting to post by someone short with four legs 🐶 who wanted my immediate attention. When I came back online, I apparently had you on my mind thinking about another thread/post that I had wanted to ask you a question about.🤔. Sadly for me the question and the other thread has now flown out of my foggy head.🥴. Sorry again for the misplaced tag. If I recover my brain from wherever it landed when it flew away or exploded 🤯, I will hopefully remember my question and figure out if it is worth trying to tag you again. Or perhaps the better choice would be to send myself directly to the burn out bench for some much needed R&R.


Senior Member
Los Angeles, USA
I remember years ago they did this, except it was with bacteria. The patient had staphylococcus aureus, but I don't remember the bacteria they used to fight it.