Question concerning AIDs cure...

[tcsenter]

tcsenter, the fact of the matter is that that the majority of people who have aids are not drug users or homosexuals.

Um...yes they are. The CDC and every other apolitical source are unanimous on this. Take your pick: IV drug users, homosexuals, bisexuals, or all of the above = 90%+ of HIV positive people.

I understand that this is true only in western societies such as the United States or the UK and sub-saharan Africa is a different story. There, its sheer ignorance combined with extremely promiscuous cultures.

You say that only people who have high risk lifestyles have aids, what about babies who got hiv from their mothers through no fault of their own?

HIV does not readily cross the mother-child placental barrier. The risk is very low if the mother, usually a prostitue or drug addict, is given protease inhibitors and acyclovir early enough, and transmission from mother to baby is not a certainty even if no preventative measures are taken.

One thing to consider as well is that many people who are infected do not know they are because they don't exhibit the symptoms for many years. Let us pretend you have a girlfriend. Let's say 10 years ago she had an encounter with someone who was HIV positive and the virus was transferred.

We can theorize until we're blue in the face, reality is what counts. The likelihood that I've encountered [sexually] a woman who at some point encountered someone who was HIV positive and became infected is rather insignificant. The likelihood that I would contract the virus is also not a certainty, even if I had sex with an HIV positive woman, being a male who doesn't engage in high risk sexual practices.

Now you are with that girl and you are not using protection because you are in a monogamous relationship and because she is on the pill. It is still possible for her to have infected you without you or her knowing it because the symptoms of AIDS have not appeared yet.

Possible? Sure. Probable? No.

It's possible I could get struck by lightening, but I'm going to leave the house, anyway.

 

[Orsorum]

It's easy to judge, tscenter, until you're faced with the decision. What will you say when a member of your family screws up, makes a mistake, is raped, contracts it through a blood infusion (rare, but still happens), etc.

 

[Orsorum]

I find your inability to accept current, reliable statistics rather foolish.

Your replies have been among some of the most heartless, selfish I've heard in a long time. Would you not stop to help someone who got into a car accident? No, they should have known better than to drive dangerously, it's not your problem. Keep on drivin'.

There's a certain point where most people accept responsibility for contributing to the rest of humanity, even those that, god forbid, make mistakes. Apparently, you're not most people.

God help you if you ever need help from a fellow human being.

 

[Ganryu]

tcsenter I'm sorry I was under the impression we were talking about the entire population of the world, not just your personal chances of getting infected, since apparently to you, you are the only one who matters. The bottom line is still that worldwide 1 in 100 people between the ages of 15-49 are HIV positive, and 80% of HIV positive people were infected through heterosexual sex. I did not know you had the moral authority to make the judgement that these 1/100 people are not worth spending money on to find a treatment or vaccine since they did not live perfect lives. Undoubtedly, it will be significantly more than 1/100 if there is no treatment found. By the way, while you addressed my hypothetical situation about you, you did not address the fact that you are quoting 18 year old sources or that funding is given to those problems which most affect our society.

 

[p0ntif]

greets from an AIDS researcher . . . or more specifically, HIV-1 Associated Dementia (HAD) and HIV-1 Encephalitis researcher. First off, let me say that unless it is qualified as a case of national security or the like, the company that develops this unlikely wonder drug has free reign as long as their patent lasts (i believe its the first ten years or so). And as far as someone coming up with a single drug to cure AIDS, that's a pipe dream. the sucky thing about AIDS is that if you have it, you're pretty much screwed. The virus is fascinating. It adapts and overcomes just about anything you can throw at it . . .it goes places conventional drugs cannot. If you are diagnosed with HIV, and its not a false positive . . . well, frankly, that just sucks. Even Highly Active AntiRetroviral Therapy (HAART), which seemed to be doing a good job of supressing the virus and its replication is just allowing the virus to breed new antiretroviral resistant strains. Sometimes it seems hopeless. The thing is just too damn good at what it does. Oh well.

 

[Ganryu]

By the way tcsenter, you stated in an earlier message in this thread that
"Sure its devastating, so is lung cancer from smoking for 50 years, so is liver failure after being a drunk for 30 years. Should we fund
a preventable disease that is almost exclusively associated with deviant and high risk life-styles to the EXCLUSION of other equally
devastating diseases that affect as many or MORE people through no fault of their own? Of course not, the suggestion is absurd. "

So you must not like the funding of research for lung cancer (the majority of cases which happen to be caused by people smoking which is a high risk life-style that is preventable, and you mention in another thread that:

My father used the patch and said it really helped him quit. Of course, he was diagnosed with Stage III non-small cell carcinoma of
the lung a year later...but then what can you expect after smoking for 40 years.

Did you mention to him your views on research funding when he was diagnosed?

 

[Freejack2]

Drug companies will never allow a cure to be found. The golden rule is if it's more profitable to treat the symptoms then there will be no cure.
I still wonder how many times a company has found a possible cure for something but supressed it because it was more profitable to keep treating the symptoms. Unless Aids progresses to a point were people drop dead nearly overnight there will never be a cure for it.

 

[sheselectric]

I agree that in the beginning a cure will be so expensive that only the very wealthy will be able to afford it. I have no doubt that one day, though, AIDS will be eradicated.

My father discovered the cure for AIDS. The viral count in patients who already have full-blown AIDS dramatically decreases when they use my dad's cure. However, he still has not received FDA approval in the U.S., so he has been marketing it overseas for the past 7 or so years. I think that's not necessarily a bad thing, considering most of the AIDS cases are in Sub-Saharan Africa/India/Southeast Asia.

 

[Orsorum]

sheselectric - cool. 😀 Props to yo daddy.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: p0ntif
greets from an AIDS researcher . . . or more specifically, HIV-1 Associated Dementia (HAD) and HIV-1 Encephalitis researcher. First off, let me say that unless it is qualified as a case of national security or the like, the company that develops this unlikely wonder drug has free reign as long as their patent lasts (i believe its the first ten years or so). And as far as someone coming up with a single drug to cure AIDS, that's a pipe dream. the sucky thing about AIDS is that if you have it, you're pretty much screwed. The virus is fascinating. It adapts and overcomes just about anything you can throw at it . . .it goes places conventional drugs cannot. If you are diagnosed with HIV, and its not a false positive . . . well, frankly, that just sucks. Even Highly Active AntiRetroviral Therapy (HAART), which seemed to be doing a good job of supressing the virus and its replication is just allowing the virus to breed new antiretroviral resistant strains. Sometimes it seems hopeless. The thing is just too damn good at what it does. Oh well.

Get out of this thread. We'll stand no professional opinion here....

😉

 

[sheselectric]

Originally posted by: Zakath15
sheselectric - cool. 😀 Props to yo daddy.

Thanks. It pisses me off though how things like products containing ephedra are FDA-approved yet not the cure for AIDS. Hopefully it will happen soon.

 

[Cyberian]

80% of HIV positive people were infected through heterosexual sex.

The Centers for Disease Control last year reported that over 90% of all AIDS sufferers are homosexuals, bisexuals, or intravenous drug users. Heterosexuals make up barely 5% of reported cases

😕

 

[Ganryu]

Um.. sheselectric, what is this cure you are referring to? Patients who respond to HAART already have dramatically decreased viral loads but they are not cured.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: Cyberian

80% of HIV positive people were infected through heterosexual sex.

The Centers for Disease Control last year reported that over 90% of all AIDS sufferers are homosexuals, bisexuals, or intravenous drug users. Heterosexuals make up barely 5% of reported cases

😕

If it came down to it, I'd trust the CDC statistics.

 

[p0ntif]

There is NO CURE to AIDS. You can decrease viral load with a number of antiretrovirals. the virus will just come back stronger. It finds reservoirs where conventional drugs cannot touch it (i.e. brain and testes), and the viral load measured by a blood test may be negligible until the virus propogating the reservoir adapts to it. Then you've just made it stronger. Sheselectric, please inform me of this miracle cure that the rest of the world and scientific community is not aware of.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Basic research on HIV continues. No drug company can cover it up. They going to kill all the researchers and then hide their deaths by buying all the newspapers? I have seen just one here who demonstrates knowlege about virology, and he is the one who says he does it for a living. Do you think that the cold has not been cured because of the evil drug company empire? There is no cure for a virus. Not true as I think about it. There is one way. Destroy the protective container surrounding it. That is the cell. Just kill every cell in the human body and POOF! AIDS is cured!. Right now that is the ONLY way to "cure" it. Seems to be counterproductive IMO. Will there be a cure for HIV? Probably not. Perhaps a vaccine, but that is a preventative, not a cure. Coming up with a cure for AIDS will probably be impossible, at least with any forseeable technology. Maybe in a hundred years or so, but not now.

 

[Ganryu]

Zakath, the statistics I mentioned about 80% of HIV+ people receiving it from heterosexual sex is from the National Institutes of Health report. This is referring to worldwide population. For the USA, 60% of HIV+ people are homosexual, 40% heterosexual.

 

[Orsorum]

A vaccine is what most people are looking for, AFAICT.

I'm not naive enough to think that a definitive cure has been found, I've dealt with certain viruses all my life. They cannot be cured, only put into submission.

The question still remains, if a company managed to magically develop a medicine or supplement that could act as a vaccine or inhibitor, what would become of it? Would it be distributed by that company, or overruled and distributed by the US/etc gov't?

 

[p0ntif]

Or at the very least, point me in the direction of a scientific publication that explains any clinical trials demonstrating the efficacy of this treatment. I'm going to call it a treatment, as there is no established cure, and I am doubtful that there will ever be a CURE for AIDS in our lifetime. treatments, yes . . .cure, doubtful. Perhaps with nanotech . . .

 

[sheselectric]

Originally posted by: p0ntif
There is NO CURE to AIDS. You can decrease viral load with a number of antiretrovirals. the virus will just come back stronger. It finds reservoirs where conventional drugs cannot touch it (i.e. brain and testes), and the viral load measured by a blood test may be negligible until the virus propogating the reservoir adapts to it. Then you've just made it stronger. Sheselectric, please inform me of this miracle cure that the rest of the world and scientific community is not aware of.

I'd like to prove you wrong. ImmunoScience

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Zakath15
A vaccine is what most people are looking for, AFAICT. I'm not naive enough to think that a definitive cure has been found, I've dealt with certain viruses all my life. They cannot be cured, only put into submission. The question still remains, if a company managed to magically develop a medicine or supplement that could act as a vaccine or inhibitor, what would become of it? Would it be distributed by that company, or overruled and distributed by the US/etc gov't?

Assuming a cure, and HIV hasnt in fact become the next Black Death, the company who invested in the research would be allowed to market it.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0.5in 0pt; TEXT-ALIGN: justify">
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">AARRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: XZeroII
What will most likely happen is that it will sit in testing for about 5-6 years. After that time, if no more than 2 people die (doesn't even have to be from the vaccine) then it will be distributed quietly to the wealthy and people who will pay tons of money for it. After they have been milked, there will be a big announcement and they will announce that supplies are limited and it will cost a lot of money. After a few years, the price will come down slowly. Of course the cure will not be one shot or anything, it will take years and many injections and return visits to the hospitals before you are 'cured'. About 10 - 15 years after the cure is discovered, some politician will announce that his/her goal is to erradicate it and then the poor will get some. Sadly, this is the only way it works. Of course, this all depends on there being no side effects whatsoever to the vaccine because if there are any, the gov't won't allow it to be distributed. They seem to do that quite often when it comes to good medicine.

If anyone wants to know what an F-tard looks like, head on over to XzeroII's house. This post is proof positive that he doesn't know f*ck all about how drugs get discovered, researched, developed, approved, and/or distributed.

Wow, I would have expected someone to at least discredit me by proving my points wrong, but you have just gone overboard. Ok, since you seem to know so much about this process, why didn't you put the "real" way it's done in there? Because you are an 8 year old! Did you know that there are cures for certain types of Cancer that are available in other countries but are not allowed in the US because it killed maybe 3 people during testing (of thousands). I saw this on Fox News, so it's not the most reliable, but it's not the Tabloids either.

 

[Ganryu]

One of the major problems is that the mutation rate with HIV is very high, and because it is constantly under selection to improve (because of the drugs that are used to treat it), it will be very difficult if not possible to design a vaccine that will cure all strains of HIV. You may be able to make a vaccine that can protect against one strain, but not all of them, the same problem that you have with the flu or cold. Hayabusarider, it is true that the way to kill the virus is to get rid of its protective coating, meaning the cells that it infects.. that is how you your body responds to viruses, there are numerous immune cells (CTLs, macrophages, etc) that will kill infected cells once the immune response has developed. The problem is that this response requires activation by helper T-cells which are the ones that HIV targets and kills. (FYI, I'm a molecular biologist).

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Ganryu
One of the major problems is that the mutation rate with HIV is very high, and because it is constantly under selection to improve (because of the drugs that are used to treat it), it will be very difficult if not possible to design a vaccine that will cure all strains of HIV. You may be able to make a vaccine that can protect against one strain, but not all of them, the same problem that you have with the flu or cold. Hayabusarider, it is true that the way to kill the virus is to get rid of its protective coating, meaning the cells that it infects.. that is how you your body responds to viruses, there are numerous immune cells (CTLs, macrophages, etc) that will kill infected cells once the immune response has developed. The problem is that this response requires activation by helper T-cells which are the ones that HIV targets and kills. (FYI, I'm a molecular biologist).

That make 3 of us.

Academia or industry?