90% successful aids vaccine.

Recommended Videos

Stalk3rchief

New member
Sep 10, 2008
1,010
0
0
"Spanish researchers have completed the first human trial of a new vaccine against HIV. It has been successful in 90% of the HIV-free volunteers during phase I testing. This vaccine brings great hope to eradicate this plague forever. "

Yet another country has made advances towards curing HIV. The whole AIDS epidemic is something that should have been managed earlier, and now it's obviously getting out of hand. One would argue that you could only get aids by having unprotected sex with shady individuals or doing other unsavory deeds. That's not entirely true though, but I won't get into that. 2.3 - 2.8 million people were believed to be infected with HIV in 2009, and it has a 100% fatality rating. To me, that makes the cure for HIV a necessity.

"The team lead by Dr Mariano Esteban, a researcher at the Spanish National Research Council's Biotechnology National Centre, has been working on this method since 1999. They are using an attenuated virus called the MVA-B, a variation of the Modified Ankara Vaccinia, which was previously used to eradicate smallpox. The Modified Ankara Vaccinia also forms the base of other vaccines. The B refers to the HIV-B, the most common HIV subtype in Europe.

Dr Esteban's team inserted the HIV genes Gag, Pol, Nef and Env in MVA's genetic sequence. In 2008, they tried the resulting HIV nuke on mice and monkeys. It was a complete success."


The rest of the story is here.
http://gizmodo.com/5844706/this-90-successful-vaccine-may-be-our-best-chance-to-eradicate-aids



A while back I posted an article bringing attention for a hopeful HIV cure, which involved rare DNA, bone marrow transplants, but completely cured a man who had aids. I was hoping, while not being a true "cure", that it was a step in an amazing direction. A man who had a 100% chance to die was saved, that just blew my mind. Unfortunately, I was wrong...nothing came of it...at all.

Before you read and try to troll on me, like last time, make sure you know that I'm NOT saying "ZOMG AIDS CURED YAAAAY" I'm saying that people in the world are making amazing steps and the day that HIV is a thing of the past seems to be getting closer. I know that this might not work, and I know that if it does it'll take a long time, but that doesn't stop me from being hopeful.
 

Princess Rose

New member
Jul 10, 2011
399
0
0
That's pretty wonderful. ^^ Thank you, OP - you've made my day a little better. It's nice to know that people are willing and able to stop "unpopular" medical issues like this one.
 

DEAD34345

New member
Aug 18, 2010
1,929
0
0
Hm, the subtype dominant in rich countries (Europe and America) is the one being cured, while the subtype which is by far the most common (that would be subtype C), but mainly affects poor people (read: Africa) is left untouched.
[sub] >>>>>SARCASM ALERT>>>>>[/sub]How unexpected.[sub]<<<<<SARCASM ALERT<<<<<[/sub]​


Anyway, I am of course very glad this cure is being made, but how about we get more money being spent on the subtype that's more than twice as common next time?
 

evilneko

Fall in line!
Jun 16, 2011
2,218
49
53
Pretty small sample size, but still promising.

lunncal said:
Hm, the subtype dominant in rich countries (Europe and America) is the one being cured, while the subtype which is by far the most common (that would be subtype C), but mainly affects poor people (read: Africa) is left untouched.
[sub] >>>>>SARCASM ALERT>>>>>[/sub]How unexpected.[sub]<<<<<SARCASM ALERT<<<<<[/sub]​

Anyway, I am of course very glad this cure is being made, but how about we get more money being spent on the subtype that's more than twice as common next time?
Who says they didn't? Maybe the type B was the one that worked.
 

DEAD34345

New member
Aug 18, 2010
1,929
0
0
evilneko said:
Pretty small sample size, but still promising.

lunncal said:
Hm, the subtype dominant in rich countries (Europe and America) is the one being cured, while the subtype which is by far the most common (that would be subtype C), but mainly affects poor people (read: Africa) is left untouched.
[sub] >>>>>SARCASM ALERT>>>>>[/sub]How unexpected.[sub]<<<<<SARCASM ALERT<<<<<[/sub]​

Anyway, I am of course very glad this cure is being made, but how about we get more money being spent on the subtype that's more than twice as common next time?
Who says they didn't? Maybe the type B was the one that worked.
Maybe, and I really hope so, but I also really doubt it. The big companies that do disease research always focus on the diseases they can make the most money off. As much as I would like it to be so, I hardly think it's a coincidence that the one subtype this cure is for just happens to be the one that affects rich countries, especially when there is such a massive divide in the presence of the subtypes between poor and rich countries.

Also I'm sorry if I sounded really negative, I really am happy that the cure is being made, it's just that the extremely capitalist disease-research industry (if that's even what it would be called) always pisses me off.
 

EHKOS

Madness to my Methods
Feb 28, 2010
4,815
0
0
Blablahb said:
Stalk3rchief said:
It has been successful in 90% of the HIV-free volunteers during phase I testing.
How the hell did that testing make it past the ethics committee, or does that Spanish centre not have one>
We need more leniant ones. This test helped ALOT and I'm glad they did it.

OT: YAY!
 

Dags90

New member
Oct 27, 2009
4,683
0
0
Blablahb said:
How the hell did that testing make it past the ethics committee, or does that Spanish centre not have one>
They tested for antibodies, nobody's been injected with HIV yet. Another method used is to vaccinate a large at risk population, and then use baseline infection rates as a control.

Don't be so unimaginative.
 

renegade7

New member
Feb 9, 2011
2,046
0
0
This is not a cure for AIDS, it prevents HIV, the infection that causes it. It won't help you if you are ALREADY infected. Still, this is great news, it means that the virus will one day be eradicated.
 

No_Remainders

New member
Sep 11, 2009
1,872
0
0
Stalk3rchief said:
The whole AIDS epidemic is something that should have been managed earlier
Clearly you forget how the Catholic Church "managed" the situation!

It went something like "NO! NO CONDOMS! THEY ACTUALLY MAKE YOUR PENIS FALL OFF!"

But yeah, I like the idea that we could have people vaccinated. It'd be great for our race as a whole.
 

Esotera

New member
May 5, 2011
3,400
0
0
In the experiment, scientists injected the vaccine in 24 of 30 HIV-free volunteers.
Wouldn't get too excited yet. Also the sample size is at the very limits of statistical significance, so it might not be this effective in people infected with HIV.

Dags90 said:
Blablahb said:
How the hell did that testing make it past the ethics committee, or does that Spanish centre not have one>
They tested for antibodies, nobody's been injected with HIV yet. Another method used is to vaccinate a large at risk population, and then use baseline infection rates as a control.

Don't be so unimaginative.
Also this. Producing a "very strong immunological response" doesn't necessarily equate to a cure. Just felt the thread deserved the clarification.
 

SinisterGehe

New member
May 19, 2009
1,456
0
0
When we cure one version of this virus you know that the other versions are going to go rampart meanwhile? THis is a goood thing indeed, but... People shouldn't let their caution down because of this. HIV virus is evil because it mutates constantly. Accorrding to some document I watched there is 2000 mutations every time it kills the host cell and spreads again. Some of them are successful to function others don't, but the ones that are... They are deadly.

Good thing indeed, but we must not let our caution down..
 

BiscuitTrouser

Elite Member
May 19, 2008
2,860
0
41
RedEyesBlackGamer said:
30 tested on? I think it is premature to draw any sweeping conclusions here.
PEOPLE. DONT LOOK AT MEDIA DISTORTED NEWS AND MAKE ASSUMPTIONS! This man is a voice of reason!

You like to think you people are scientists. Well if you are then you are crappy ones. 30 subjects? What the fuck kinda test is that? No peer review? No repeats? Animal testing phase? No actual medical facility doing thousands of double blind trials on a huge age range? THIS IS NOT SCIENCE.

Unless it can be done twice under the same conditions it isnt science, and until it has been i wont accept it as science.

I WANT this to work. I really do. Im going on to do biomedical science at uni and then medicine, THIS IS WHAT I WANT TO DO WITH MY LIFE. But people. The media hates science. It doesnt portray it right EVER. The faster than light report? I dont buy it, not until its done twice and peer reviewed in a few journals by top physisists. DONT BE DRAWN IN BY THE GOOD NEWS BRIGADEE MEDIA DISTORTIONS. Even if it looks amazing try and jugde it like REAL science. Please people. Dont lose your heads.
 

pffh

New member
Oct 10, 2008
774
0
0
lunncal said:
evilneko said:
Pretty small sample size, but still promising.

lunncal said:
Hm, the subtype dominant in rich countries (Europe and America) is the one being cured, while the subtype which is by far the most common (that would be subtype C), but mainly affects poor people (read: Africa) is left untouched.
[sub] >>>>>SARCASM ALERT>>>>>[/sub]How unexpected.[sub]<<<<<SARCASM ALERT<<<<<[/sub]​

Anyway, I am of course very glad this cure is being made, but how about we get more money being spent on the subtype that's more than twice as common next time?
Who says they didn't? Maybe the type B was the one that worked.
Maybe, and I really hope so, but I also really doubt it. The big companies that do disease research always focus on the diseases they can make the most money off. As much as I would like it to be so, I hardly think it's a coincidence that the one subtype this cure is for just happens to be the one that affects rich countries, especially when there is such a massive divide in the presence of the subtypes between poor and rich countries.

Also I'm sorry if I sounded really negative, I really am happy that the cure is being made, it's just that the extremely capitalist disease-research industry (if that's even what it would be called) always pisses me off.
Do you know how much it costs to research a new drug? Around 1 billion dollars and that's not factoring in how much is spent on research into drugs that failed just the single one that succeeded.
 

Spencer Petersen

New member
Apr 3, 2010
598
0
0
renegade7 said:
This is not a cure for AIDS, it prevents HIV, the infection that causes it. It won't help you if you are ALREADY infected. Still, this is great news, it means that the virus will one day be eradicated.
I think that's the definition of a Vaccine
 

DEAD34345

New member
Aug 18, 2010
1,929
0
0
pffh said:
Do you know how much it costs to research a new drug? Around 1 billion dollars and that's not factoring in how much is spent on research into drugs that failed just the single one that succeeded.
And? What's your point?

I know more profit can be made from cures for rich people, I just wish that disease-research companies weren't motivated solely by profit (and you know, actually wanted to help people). Unfortunately, that's just not how our society works, and that saddens me.