×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Software To Improve AIDS Survival?

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 5 years ago | from the math-saves-lives dept.

Medicine 97

Roland Piquepaille writes "There are more than 33 million people living with HIV worldwide. No cure or vaccine has been unveiled this week in Mexico during the International AIDS Conference. Still, European researchers have developed 'a predictive software system for HIV that could help extend the lives of victims of the killer disease.' The scientists working on the EuResist project have combined HIV databases in Italy, Sweden and Germany, creating what is probably the largest database on AIDS and HIV in the world. Armed with information about more than 18,000 patients, 64,000 therapies, and 240,000 viral mode measurements, the researchers have created new mathematical prediction models, which should soon be available to medical researchers and doctors all over the world."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

97 comments

Predicting mutations? (2, Informative)

ag3ntugly (636404) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532231)

From what I understand, one of the big things about HIV/AIDS is that it mutates quite a bit and is hard to keep up with, if this project can simulate/predict future mutations, I should think it would be quite useful.

Re:Predicting mutations? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532303)

Indeed, and all the recent pool closings are a direct result. If we could just get a handle on this disease and keep it under control our children could go swimming uninterrupted.

Re:Predicting mutations? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532499)

Nigra says: Pool's closed!

Re:Predicting mutations? (3, Interesting)

MrMr (219533) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532539)

It's in fact so useful that this method is already available to doctors commercially [vircolab.com].
But wasting EU subsidies on reinventing a fully functional wheel is probably better than wasting it on something disfunctional.

Re:Predicting mutations? (3, Insightful)

Iloinen Lohikrme (880747) | more than 5 years ago | (#24535667)

Virco is a US company and as you mentioned they have a commercial offering. Those two facts are enough for EU to set their own research and development activities in the field as it sponsors European ability to research and compete and it gives national health care services an free non-commercial alternative to use. Just good use of EU money in my opinion.

Re:Predicting mutations? (1)

MrMr (219533) | more than 5 years ago | (#24538047)

Virco is originally a Belgian company. Their research on HIV mutants in the 1990's was done near the university of Antwerp, and later a short drive down the road in Mechelen. This is the EU competing with the EU.

Re:Predicting mutations? (1)

Iloinen Lohikrme (880747) | more than 5 years ago | (#24539573)

Except they were bought by Johnson & Johnson so they are effectively in American hands. Still as I said before I would bet that public health care services all over Europe would rather use a public tool non-commercial tool than one commercial offering.

Re:Predicting mutations? (1)

Urkki (668283) | more than 5 years ago | (#24536653)

It's waste of money only if it's more expensive to buy the commercial product for EU-wide use... So I suspect it's not waste after all, but saving money.

Re:Predicting mutations? (0, Redundant)

jd (1658) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532773)

That would be my understanding as well. I believe early attempts at producing a vaccine tried to use de-activated HIV but it was actually able to reactivate itself, but you'd have to dig through the early work to get the low-down on that. The most recent efforts were abandoned the other week, with researchers being quoted as saying they had to go back to square one. NOT the simple problem as presented in Neuromancer! Despite claims to the contrary, there are no known examples of survivors and no known examples of anyone being immune. The claimed cases of marginal resistance to contracting the virus are, as far as I know, just claims and rumours. If there was any basis, at least that anyone could make use of, researchers would at least be that far along. The fact that they are so depressed suggests any such resistance is, in fact, futile.

The spread of the disease, the date of origin in humans, and its mutation rate have all recently been revised, suggesting that even the most basic science on the subject is proving extremely tough - far tougher than expected.

My thoughts on the subject aren't much different than they were when I first heard about this killer virus. Virus RNA is a molecule. There are properties of molecules (such as unique absorption lines) that make them possible to detect and attack, without having to care about what the molecule actually is or what the context is. The frequency used by your microwave oven is independent of where the hydrogen-oxygen bond is, and nothing else in the microwave oven will absorb on that specific line. Heat is subsequently transferred by convection, conduction and radiation, but the only points initially targeted are those hydrogen-oxygen bonds.

In the case of X-Ray fluorescence, you use the same technique, only at a much higher energy. It is certainly reversible, so if you shine the right frequency of X-Rays onto something, you get electrons, and if you shine electrons at the right energy, you get X-Rays. But, again, only from the isotope (this time) that corresponds to that very specific energy. Nothing else will interact with either.

In principle, this means that mutations don't matter so long as you can obtain the virus from the infected person. Since you will get all the current mutations in that person, it is utterly irrelevant as to whether there's one or a million. That just determines how many lines you need to emit over. Since the virus is fragile, the risks to the rest of the body from secondary radiation or some coincidence in absorption lines must be relatively small. Certainly smaller than certain death.

Maybe that particular approach is useless, and it very probably is, but at least it's no more useless than all the other methods people have tried, and at least tries to get past the problems of past failed approaches by tackling the problem from a different direction entirely.

I do, however, feel absolutely convinced that if a biochemical or biological solution could be found, it would have been. These guys are not idiots, they're not short on research funds, and they're certainly not short on material. Ergo, that solution domain is likely NOT where any real solutions lie. The answers will necessarily be in physics (work on the basis that we're concerned with a molecule) or mathematics (if prions can refold proteins, and if proteins are what prevent HIV from being identified, then refold the protective protein envelope until it's either recognized or will not function as intended). There are no other fields that are likely to be the least bit of interest.

Re:Predicting mutations? (4, Interesting)

OeLeWaPpErKe (412765) | more than 5 years ago | (#24533591)

Actually said mutagenic properties could be used as a weapon against AIDS instead of trying to counter them.

Aids dies a few decades after the last uninfected human contracts it.

Think about it : mutations in the aids virus will mean longer survival for the carriers of the virus, which means more children, therefore more spreading of the virus. AIDS's evolution would have the same goal as human evolution : human survival.

Hey it's no crazier than carbon trading :-D

Re:Predicting mutations? (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 5 years ago | (#24534371)

Well, that would be true of just about any parasite -- killing the host is bad for business, if you can't find another one.

What you really need to understand (5, Interesting)

Moryath (553296) | more than 5 years ago | (#24534303)

about HIV is that it (currently) cannot be transmitted except by very personal means - which is to say, extremely intimate contact with an infected human being and/or injection of their bodily fluids directly into your body.

Until a mutated "airborne" variation of HIV occurs, the reality is that the vast majority of cases were entirely preventable. While research into how to "treat" the disease is good, actual research into better methods of preventing infection to start with is just as important - both in a medical and sociological sense.

For one example: the US's frighteningly high incidence of AIDS in female blacks is due almost entirely to promiscuous, non-monogamous bisexual black males [nytimes.com] who've been infecting a large portion of the female black population over the past few decades. Efforts to combat this and get the men to use condoms and regularly get tested - and to stop having sex after they know they are infected - have run into walls in black culture. The problems in Africa in this regard are even worse, with some men actually believing that the "cure" for aids is to have sex with a virgin - and then going and raping young girls, emotionally scarring them for life as well as infecting them.

If AIDS is going to be combatted, medicinal "cures" and "treatments" are half the battle - they do nothing against the spread of the disease if you can't also convince at least a majority of the infected to stop engaging in activities that will spread it.

Re:What you really need to understand (1)

Pav (4298) | more than 5 years ago | (#24537129)

The U.S provides much of the internationally available money for AIDS programs. Unfortunately this process has been hijacked (by religious fundies perhaps?). Recipients of this money are forced into concentrating completely on abstinence-only and faithfulness-in-marriage programs... no condoms allowed. See http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/aids/2005/uganda/ [hrw.org] That link is from 2005, and I've listened to recent interviews with AIDS workers complaining bitterly about how this is still the case.

Education? (4, Insightful)

COMON$ (806135) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532243)

I am thankful for the sharing of information but after I RTFA it seems to me that this will only benefit individuals in developed countries with health care. What does this do for countries without a health care system where aids is rampant?

Of course I am a proponent of education being the best way to eradicate AIDS or bring it to a manageable level. There will always be people who will contract it in a truly unpreventable manner. However, in most cases a little caution or healthy set of habits will reduce this dramatically. Reduction in anal sex (2/3 male aids cases are homosexual [cdc.gov]), prolific unprotected sex, and sharing needles are just some off the top of my head. We arent telling people who they can be partners with and we aren't saying they are wrong.

Of course how do we bring education of this matter to countries were literacy is a luxury?

Re:Education? (1)

Statecraftsman (718862) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532321)

I think saving these people will have the right effect. Some of them will undoubtedly want to give back and perhaps go into AIDS and HIV education. If some of the money saved by lowering health costs could be added to the mix we could have a real net positive beyond just prolonging "normal life" of the afflicted.

Re:Education? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532351)

Interesting, you cite reduction in anal sex as a form of education, but don't really give gay men other options. While oral could still be considered, it's their act of intimacy, not yours. I'm not gay, but I have quite a few gay friends (moving to Cali gives quite a cultural difference). Additionally, education in the use of contraceptives falls under the same realm. I have a girlfriend, and while we practice safe sex, not all couples do. Hence the reason I have a 9 year old son.

Sorry, but sex education is only going to get you so far, and the options you offer don't help. I believe in providing better education, but this sounds like a very thinly veiled attempt to tell gay men to not have sex, and promote abstinence, which leads me to believe that you have ulterior motives. (Disclaimer: posting anonymously so I don't get all the gay jokes on my UID)

Re:Education? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532663)

If fags are going to persist in the disgusting practice of buttock-love, can't they at least get one of those new fangled queer marriages? Or will that just make the stable ones even more promiscuous?

Re:Education? (2, Insightful)

COMON$ (806135) | more than 5 years ago | (#24533337)

I was considering whether or not to respond to your post but I think you were unjustly modded flamebait. I apologized in a later post for not saying "unprotected anal sex". The problem which is stated often enough, is that for the most part that the reason for HIV is elective. It is not like getting a cold, or flu, or malaria, people choose to participate in the activity and do it. Maybe it is the diplomat in me but I think that if people are given the option they will do the right thing and protect themselves and their loved ones by following best practices.

Re:Education? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532373)

What does this do for countries without a health care system where aids is rampant?

Both America and Russia have a few nukes that could help with that problem. It would probably be cheaper than proper disposal too.

Re:Education? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532485)

What does this do for countries without a health care system where aids is rampant?

It is a lost cause. There are too many aids victims now. It is simply too late to help them all. The focus must be to help these countries develop their economies. Teach them how to fish, if you remember the chinese proverb.

This is not my uneducated opinion, but in fact you can hear Professor Hans Rosling [wikipedia.org] speak of this with a great deal of knowledge behind him.

Re:Education? (5, Informative)

BitterOldGUy (1330491) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532565)

...prolific unprotected sex...

Many if not most of those countries that have the greatest AIDs infections rates have an cultural attitude against condoms, want a woman's vagina to be dry so that it's more pleasurable to the man (I don't get that one), and all in all, have patriarchal societies where women are second class citizens - if one at all.

There's also ignorance too.

We can develop the best drugs in the World and give them away but, I'm afraid, it may not have much of an effect in places like Africa.

Re:Education? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532687)

Many if not most of those countries that have the greatest AIDs infections rates have an cultural attitude against condoms

Not really. They just haven't completed primary education, are illiterate and may not even know what a "virus" is. They believe in witch doctors and think raping a virgin will cure the illness.

On of the greatest problems in Africa is how you teach people how to use a condom to protect against aids, since the population can't read and do not understand bacteria or viruses.

If you call illiteracy "cultural attitude" then maybe...

Re:Education? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24533269)

Can you post a study link that proves what you are saying?

The reason these countries have a huge number of AIDS/HIV cases is because diagnosing it does not require a test like we do on the western world. Diarrhea, weigh loss and persistent cough is enough for an AIDS diagnoses in Africa. It's called the "Bangui AIDS definition". Under this definition, malaria or tuberculosis is seen as AIDS. And those governments are not against it, because such a definition of AIDS brings in foreign huge amounts of foreign funds.

Get your facts.

Re:Education? (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#24533561)

it may not have much of an effect in places like Africa.

It would, however, have a significant effect here -- and for anyone coming here from Africa.

When did we start trying to fix the rest of the world first? Change starts at home. (Regime change starts at home, too.)

Re:Education? (0, Flamebait)

Jorgandar (450573) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532633)

First you need to better educate yourself.

You should have said reduction in *unprotected* anal sex. It's been widely shown that condoms are just as effective at preventing transmission of HIV in this scenario as in any other, including heterosexual vaginal-penile intercourse. However you just say "anal sex" in general and point out that 2/3 of AIDS cases are "homosexual". (answer is closer to 1/2, CDC is currently funded by bush and friends)

Also incorrect. You mean gay MEN. Lesbian women have the lowest instance of HIV/AIDS of any group. It's also worth pointing out that Black Americans have levels of HIV/AIDS in their communities that rival those of some African nations. It's not a "homosexual" disease. Its a disease that afflicts those who are shunned, poverty stricken, rejected from their families, and generally kicked around in everyday life.

Something in your post seems to indicate you have some level of homophobia. Get over it. Find a gay friend and learn from him. Figure out that he's not some raging demon hell-bent on spreading disease and destroying marriage.

Re:Education? (2, Informative)

COMON$ (806135) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532699)

In your rush to rant you forgot to read my post:

I said: "2/3 male aids cases are homosexual" as a pointer to anal sex. So rather than reading what you want to read maybe you need to generate a level of tolerance before you get in trouble again.

But yes I have several gay male friends and fear for their health due to this disease.

Re:Education? (-1, Troll)

Jorgandar (450573) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532821)

Yes, that's what i read, and that's not a very good pointer. You should learn to use non-insulting pointers.

You said "anal sex" rather than "unprotected" anal sex. Wheras you didn't mention "unprotected" in the hetero-sex part.

Its like saying "blacks" and then following up with "european americans".

If you still dont understand why what you said would be insulting, that's sad.

Re:Education? (1)

COMON$ (806135) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532955)

No, you are just being overly sensitive and not willing to admit you jumped to a nasty conclution.

You are trying to make this an ethical debate and I am not going to get into that.

I simply pointed out that anal sex is a common way to contract hiv, I do not know of any studies that are accurately showing the method of contracting hiv as a person could have had several partners and tried several positions before learning that they were HIV infected. Therefore the best pointer that I know of to this is the fact that homosexual men have an unusually high level of HIV infections in their group. So then rather than make an observation based on complete opinion I referenced an article. Given I should have referenced the CDC article to back my other two examples but I felt the CDC article did not do the other two justice and knew that saying anal sex would bring out the homosexual bigots on both sides.

I do apologize for not stating "unprotected anal sex", that was my fault.

Re:Education? (2, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#24533079)

The wording of your post as a little odd. I had to read is several times to realize you did not making an anti-gay statement.

The position really isn't a factor , it's the gay culture.
Homosexuals would seldom wear a condom, and person zero had homosexual 'engagement'.

Those number are leveling out. Lat I looked, young girls (teens) were the fastest growing segment getting AIDS.

Re:Education? (1)

COMON$ (806135) | more than 5 years ago | (#24533169)

The wording of your post as a little odd.Hey this is /. what do you expect ;) Of course we do have a lot of bigots and flamers that need to be put in their place so I guess I deserved a good berating for not checking my grammar. Lat I looked, young girls (teens) were the fastest growing segment getting AIDS.

That is interesting....do you have links to that study? I can look on goggle I guess. It makes sense though, with the growing abstinence culture some girls are starting the belief that anal sex doesn't count as sex so technically you are still a virgin. I wonder if that has anything to do with it. It would be neat to see if it is just that sexual activity among teenagers is growing.

Re:Education? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24534707)

some girls are starting the belief that anal sex doesn't count as sex

BEST FUCKING NEWS I HEARD ALL DAY!!!

Seriously, this kicks ass and I hope it becomes widespread. I mean, it has always been prevalent among Catholic girls, but if it got out to the general population I'd start going to church.

Re:Education? (1)

Jorgandar (450573) | more than 5 years ago | (#24534703)

I'm not being overly sensitive. All i knew about is what you said, not what you meant. You want to know all about HIV/AIDS? Go to the experts, the people who live with it every day.

www.aidsmeds.com

For the record, i'm not HIV+, but i have many friends who are. They did not pick it up because they were being promiscuous or unfaithful. (Their partners turned to drugs due to various social problems, and transmitted it to them) Drugs play a HUGE role in destroying the gay community. They are responsible for many, many HIV transmissions. Do you know why gays turn to drugs? Because there are politicians, bigots, and slashdotters saying we're not real people and dont deserve to marry. The pain is real, and so are the consequences.

Re:Education? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24536009)

Do you know why gays turn to drugs? Because there are politicians, bigots, and slashdotters saying we're not real people and dont deserve to marry.

There are more non-gay drug users than gay drug users, so you need to explain why the non-gay people use drugs. Oh thats right, it's fun ! But, of course, a gay man would never use drugs for fun, would he ?

Re:Education? (1)

Jorgandar (450573) | more than 5 years ago | (#24546419)

Some may use it because it's "fun", but that's just a surface level claim. Dig deeper and there's a lot more going on than they simply the desire to have "fun". Underneath every drug addict i've seen it wasn't about fun but about escaping from something.

Re:Education? (1)

Jorgandar (450573) | more than 5 years ago | (#24534737)

...and Sorry about jumping to nasty conclusions. I seemed to have misplaced my faith that that some people have good intentions.

Re:Education? (1)

cdrguru (88047) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532751)

Education is pointless when you have government officials dismissing the idea that you get AIDS from sex, as is the case in Africa.

Education is pointless when the gay community is beset with people that feel AIDS is just something that happens to you. I'm not saying the folks with the "gift giving" [nih.gov] and "bug chasing" mindsets are all that common, but come on! Treating it with privacy, secrecy and protection isn't sensible either - people that have it can spread it, and they do. Sometimes intentionally. If we treated people infected with AIDS as we treated people infected with syphilis 200 years ago we would be much further ahead of the game.

AIDS is primarily a behavior-driven problem. It is harder to cure than syphilis but just as behavior driven. Most of the people that got syphilis before 1900 died from it in one way or another. And it wasn't pretty. However, syphilis wasn't viewed the way that AIDS is today because it was pretty clear how not to get syphilis even in 1700. It is just as clear today how not to get AIDS. Why is the infection rate 100 or 1000 times what the syphilis infection rate was, even factoring it by population?

Until we can convince people that it isn't fun, necessary or invitable that they will get AIDS we aren't going to do anything about it in the US. Until incredibly ignorant people stop spreading silly lies [scienceinafrica.co.za] about AIDS in Africa and elsewhere, nothing is going to improve.

Trying to frame this as a rich first-world vs. poor third-world problem is pointless. For the most part, drugs that allow infected people to live longer in some places are pointless. The point is to reduce the level of infection the same way it would have been reduced long before there were antibiotics or treatments for other diseases. Why aren't we doing that?

Re:Education? (1)

megaditto (982598) | more than 5 years ago | (#24533203)

Why aren't we doing that?

Political correctness and sensitivity, I bet. It would be very easy to round up and sanitize all the AIDS patients: something like random saliva checks followed by a reversible chemical castration and a discrete implant/ankle bracelet. It could be done rather inconspicuously, combined with an employee urine test, during a breathalyzer traffic stop, or at a DMV photoshoot :)

But I just don't think most people would go for it. In particular, even though many AIDS victims did "deserve it" by having consentual promiscuous and unprotected sex and drug encounters, there is a significant minority that got AIDS through no fault of their own, e.g. from rape, blood transfusion, dirty medical equipment, or from their parents. So the problems is, many people would feel that AIDS profiling would penalize these victims. I am not even going to mention all the Nazi deathcamp similarities.

Re:Education? (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | more than 5 years ago | (#24534489)

It would be very easy to round up and sanitize all the AIDS patients: something like random saliva checks followed by a reversible chemical castration and a discrete implant/ankle bracelet. It could be done rather inconspicuously, combined with an employee urine test, during a breathalyzer traffic stop, or at a DMV photoshoot

Of course, we could treat it like any other VD - require the doctors to report incidents to Public Health officials, have the Public Health people get a list of sexual partners from the AIDS victim, backtrack till they make sure everyone involved is at least aware they have AIDS, and mandate treatment.

Alas, it's not politically correct to consider the most deadly form of VD in history VD. So, instead, we do nothing worthwhile to deal with the issue, and people keep right on being infected (and inevitably dying).

Re:Education? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532869)

Reduction in anal sex (2/3 male aids cases are homosexual [cdc.gov])

Reduction in unprotected anal sex (2/3 male aids cases are homosexual [cdc.gov]),

There, fixed it for ya!

Re:Education? (1)

daveime (1253762) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532895)

What does this do for countries without a health care system where aids is rampant?

Exactly the same thing as any eventual cure will do for them ... absolutely nothing, as a real cure for HIV/AIDS is the holy grail of pharmaceutical profits for years to come.

The best they can hope for is Robotussin (thanks to Chris Rock for this suggestion).

A non-Education based way to "cut" AIDS (2, Interesting)

ruin20 (1242396) | more than 5 years ago | (#24533149)

Circumcision [bbc.co.uk] cuts the chances of contracting aids by 70% during a single sexual encounter. Now this doesn't mean that a man running around practicing unsafe sex is 70% less likely to contract aids, as it would be just a matter of time, but if all the men were circumcised the effect of a single infected woman sleeping around would be a lot less.

it's already funded [washingtonpost.com] and being offered as a solution

Re:A non-Education based way to "cut" AIDS (2, Informative)

daveime (1253762) | more than 5 years ago | (#24533397)

Surely it would just mean that it would take 70% longer for everyone to become infected ?

I remember watching a documentary once on AIDS, and one particular African guy who KNEW he had the disease but had embarked on a quest to hump every female that moved anyway.

With that kind of mentality, you are just prolonging the inevitable.

Education will not work with people that are uneducatable.
Prevention will not work in a country where there are a million other nasty ways to die (starvation, genocide, Rober Mugabe etc etc).

The sooner we accept that Africa is a lost cause the better ... but we're not allowed to say that are we, because the truth really does hurt.

Re:A non-Education based way to "cut" AIDS (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24533899)

Circumcision [bbc.co.uk] cuts the chances of contracting aids by 70% during a single sexual encounter. Now this doesn't mean that a man running around practicing unsafe sex is 70% less likely to contract aids, as it would be just a matter of time, but if all the men were circumcised the effect of a single infected woman sleeping around would be a lot less.

it's already funded [washingtonpost.com] and being offered as a solution

That's great and changes one exponential curve ... into another exponential curve.

Let's say the uncircumscribed chance of infection of a single encounter is 100% and circumscribed is 30%. Let's also say that people have sex with the same person 10 times and then move on. And let's say people have 5 sexual partners in their lives. The chance of AIDS getting passed with 100% certainty is 100%, the chance with 30% is ... 99.9999940951%. Oh great ... So you can imagine the difference this makes ...

(I'm assuming kids from infected mothers/fathers don't have the disease, but they may obviously get themselves infected the "normal" way)

"Normal":
1 person will infect 5 others in 1 generation (assuming a generation is about 30 years)

It takes : log(5;6000000000) = 13.98 generations = 419 years 8 months 5 days 23 hours and 5 minutes

"Chance of infection 'reduced by 70%' !"
1 person will infect 4.9999704755 others

It takes : log(4.9999704755;6000000000) = 13.98 generations = 419 years 8 months 5 days 23 hours and 5 minutes AND 42 seconds

So you've saved the human race ! For about 42 seconds. Well done ... (the difference is so little, because in order to make a "real" difference you're going to have to make sure that getting to 3 billion infectees is delayed by at least 15 years.

Then marriage :

Let's take muslim marriage principles first, since AIDS is a LOT more prevalent in muslim countries : there are 10% promiscuous women (I'm not saying 10% hookers, just 10% of women who remarry for whatever reason, most men have multiple partners, but, let's be generous, only 3. I mean, women don't have to turn hooker to get into this 10%). This changes the infection rate, of either men or women, to about 3 others, over their entire lifetime.

Well then you get log(3,6000000000) = 20.49405922217591609 generations

or 614 years, 9 months, 26 days, 16 hours, ...

One catch with this last figure, if muslim women have babies earlier than others, which seems to be true, though I don't know how much, this shortens the generation gap, making the number of years go down (and if they have babies on average 7 years earlier, this makes the difference exactly 0)

If everybody followed Christian marriage principles aids would be stopped dead in it's tracks. Now let's not kid ourselves however saying everybody is faithful : let's say (a random) 10% of people become "promiscuous". What happens ?

Since the 2 groups don't fuck with eachother (since anyone who does so obviously is part of that 10%, or becomes part of it by that act), AIDS will i infect the promiscuous group very quickly (in a matter of years) and will die out in the non-promiscuous group equally quickly : it will infect some insignificant number of them every generation, but it won't spread.

Hmmm this turned out to be a very politically incorrect post. Great :-p.

Re:A non-Education based way to "cut" AIDS (1)

ilovesymbian (1341639) | more than 5 years ago | (#24537515)

all african-americans are circumcised, but those in DC have the highest percentage of AIDS, 18 times higher than the national average... circumcision is bollocks.

Re:A non-Education based way to "cut" AIDS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24539681)

Circumcision has successively been stated to be a remedy to masturbation, to penile cancer, to cervical cancer (transmission from men). Strangely, as soon as one claim was proved to be bullshit, the next one was promoted. I wonder what circumcision will cure once this particular claim is proven flase: tuberculosis, ebola, world hunger, the subprime financial crisis ?

Re:A non-Education based way to "cut" AIDS (1)

MadMidnightBomber (894759) | more than 5 years ago | (#24548529)

Condoms cut the chances of contracting AIDS by >99% and - this is the important bit - DO NOT INVOLVE REMOVING THE END OF MY PENIS

Re:Education? (3, Funny)

antirelic (1030688) | more than 5 years ago | (#24533985)

Not education, software. I know of one particular piece of preventative software that has saved nearly 10 million people from contracting HIV, Chlamydia, gonorrhea, Crabs, Herpes, etc..

Its called "World of War Craft".

Re:Education? (1)

akayani (1211810) | more than 5 years ago | (#24534569)

Maybe we could divert some of the cash being spent on unnecessary drug testing to supply free HIV tests to the developing world. Then again you could add HIV to virtual sex in Second Life. Wouldn't that kill the fun for some.

Re:Education? (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 5 years ago | (#24534817)

Tax everyone into oblivion to create massive, feel-good education programs that politicians can use to fool people into thinking the politicians are human, and watch them fail to work because the *real* problem is that people just don't give enough of a shit to change their ways.

Me? Cynical? Damned right!

Re:Education? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24535965)

prolific unprotected sex

slashdotters are safe

Re:Education? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24538599)

So, how was Thursday's klan meeting?

Re:Education? (1)

Renraku (518261) | more than 5 years ago | (#24540471)

Any culture that doesn't adapt is a culture that will die out. Just like in nature, if a species cannot adapt, it will die out.

AIDS knows no boundary within the human race. Africans, Americans, Chinese, Japanese, etc..everyone is vulnerable. We will either adapt, as a race and as humanity, or we will die out.

Some cultures don't want to adapt, so some cultures are in clear danger of being wiped out.

My tip (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532253)

if (location == africa)
    goto anywhere_else

Easier said than done, even in the US. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24539227)

Obviously, if you live an impoverished life in a horrible (health-wise) country; leaving is no easy trick.

But even right here in the good ol' USA, the plight of African does affect us. I was banging an Au Paire for a few weeks before she told me where she was from... South Africa. Yes, I practiced reasonably safe sex with her (condoms); but as cute as she was, I think I would have opted out if I'd known where she was from and how bad things were there.

I get tested for HIV with every time I'm dating someone long enough to want to lose the condoms - but even though I've always checked out fine, those few days while you're waiting for the results - ya start reflecting on all those girls you were 100% safe with. It's like being Ebinizer Scrooge getting a visit from the Ghost of Pussy Past. And little Miss South Africa is always one of the girls that gets paraded in front of my imagination until the doc tells me the test was negative.

Bad summary (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532331)

There are more than 33 million gayboys, Iv drug users, and other subhumans living with HIV worldwide

Fixed.

Re:Bad summary (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532797)

Actually, once you are diagnosed with AIDS, you are treated as a subhuman.

I'll admit I help perpetuate this. I'm more worried about AIDS than hunting with Dick Cheney. I'm not gay or very promiscuous, I use protection, and I get tested regularly, but it's still incredibly worrisome to my generation. AIDS has been around as long as we have, and you're still SOL. Chris Rock is right.

Misapplied Resources (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532393)

Dick-sucking faggots deserve every bit of the excruciatingly painful death they receive from AIDS. Since the Anal Intercourse Detection System is God's punishment for being a simpering queer in the first place, who the hell do we think we are to waste God's gifts like this? Your arms are too short to box with God. So lets apply this technology to more deserving causes instead and just let the butt pirates die off.

Re:Misapplied Resources (1)

trytoguess (875793) | more than 5 years ago | (#24534719)

Luckily (or oddly) the cooch licking female queers have the best chance of not getting HIV. Well I'll be, think I just stumbled on indisputable proof that God is male. Who here doesn't like girl on girl action?

Re:Misapplied Resources (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24535627)

If that was supposed to be funny, it just came off as horribly offensive and jerkish. Makes you look like an ass, not a comedian.

Re:Misapplied Resources (1)

trytoguess (875793) | more than 5 years ago | (#24537123)

Lets see, pointing out lesbians have the worse chance of getting HIV is offensive? I guess talking about god could be offensive in certain places, but this is slashdot. Finally this one likes girl on girl action. One would have to be a prude to take offense at that.

Try again good sir.

What a hacking target... (2)

Zantac69 (1331461) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532409)

Once this database is setup, I am sure it wont be long until someone taps it...maps it...and publishes it.

Next step...demonization of the infected.

Yahoo! :eye roll:

Re:What a hacking target... (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 5 years ago | (#24533993)

demonization of the infected

Didn't they make a movie about that? I think it was called 28 Weeks Later [imdb.com]. Or maybe it was 28 Days Later [imdb.com]. Maybe it was I Am Legend [imdb.com]. Oh, now I remember, it was Quarantine [imdb.com].

Seriously, what is with all the movies about disease that turn people into raging demons?

Statistics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532421)

The CDC provides some good statistics to at least help inform yourself of whether you're high-risk.

Here are the data. [cdc.gov]

Re:Statistics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532515)

They should maintain a list of recently closed pool's [photobucket.com], so a person can see if they've swum in one and need to get tested.

hmmm (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532431)

Wonder how accurate it is. I was just told by the doctor today that my blood test came back positive for HIV. But he was laughing as he said it, so either he was a sociopath or it wasn't serious. He then explained that the second confirmatory test came back negative, and that's the one that's more accurate.

Re:hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24533141)

The tests are bogus... There are 60+ known medical conditions that will cause reaction on HIV tests. This is publish data, not a conspiracy.

None of these tests have been approved by the FDA to detect the presence of a virus. In fact, each one of these tests state in their package insert that they can't detect HIV.

Re:hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24533627)

There are no accurate HIV tests.

The test you took diluted your blood by 400 times, if you took the Eliza test (the standard initial test). If there is no blood dilution, everybody tests positive. As in, these "HIV antibodies" (which the tests detect, since they can't prove a virus is there) are normally produced by everyone. They are not a reaction to a foreign entity.

Did you know that 50% of all dogs test positive for HIV?

Oral swabs are the worst. Never take them.

Don't tell me (1)

MrCawfee (13910) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532507)

Install Norton and hope it doesn't decide to update while you are driving.

Re:Don't tell me (1)

Xserv (909355) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532967)

Worried about updates? Shouldn't you be more worried about.. I dunno, Norton running? Although it could be a cure -- you wouldn't have enough resources available to "run" the disease...

21M people have died of AIDS... (1)

mgemmons (972332) | more than 5 years ago | (#24532567)

and they only have 18,000 in their database? Surely there has to be more data available than that?

Re:21M people have died of AIDS... (3, Insightful)

WarwickRyan (780794) | more than 5 years ago | (#24533117)

Well, the vast majority of AIDs cases are in the third world, where they probably don't have access to databases. Or doctors.

Re:21M people have died of AIDS... (1)

Amorymeltzer (1213818) | more than 5 years ago | (#24533523)

Getting the proper amount of people for anything scientific is hard. The number is "low" for a number of reasons (actually, I see it as pretty high):

- There's rigorous screening or information collection, which is a big deterrent.
- It has to be voluntary to ally with ethical guidelines, hence everyone has to "opt in" and sign.
- There is limited compensation since the money has to go to actual science.
- There is limited compensation to deal with a huge number of resources.
- That's a combination of only three countries - Germany, Italy, and Sweden.

Also, don't forget about population. By 2006, Germany [who.int] had 24908 AIDS cases (13516 died), Italy [who.int] had 57375 (35077 died), and Sweden [who.int] had 2095, of which 1317 died.

That's 84378 total cases. Assuming both living and dead patients are eligible for the database, then 18,000 is 21.33% of everyone who has AIDS in those countries. That's unbelievable. If that success was applied to a worldwide database, we'd have a database of over 7 Million individuals.

mod do3n (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532861)

Join in. It can be Working o8 various

There will never be a cure of AIDS or a vaccine (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24532987)

And the reason why is because they were wrong in assuming HIV as the cause. Yes, it was an assumption. If you don't think it is, show me published peer-reviewed literature that proves it. And claim for yourself a $50,000 prize for finding this paper, as a bonus: http://aliveandwell.org/ . I haven't found it yet.

It shouldn't be hard, right? Isn't there a pandemic? Aren't people dying all over the globe? Yet we only see this on TV. Ask yourself how many people you personally know who died of AIDS. Then, account for those that died of heart disease, diabetes, cancer, etc. Who wins?

Statistically, AIDS is related to certain drug use (in developed nations) and poverty (poor countries). That's why AIDS is confined to drug-using males in the US and Western Europe (90% of all cases), while in Africa, it hits males and females just as equally. A virus that know its location on the globe AND the sex of the host, indeed!

Testing HIV positive is a result of toxicological attacks on the immune system. Or not. Blacks statistically test positive way more often than anyone else. Or are you saying that blacks are fond of "risky" sexual behavior? The current theory is racist. And why have prostitutes never been a risk group? Only the IV drug user ones are getting sick, whether they admit to using condoms all the time or not.

I could post links to millions of published studies to back up the above facts. But knowing this will be rated down into oblivion, I won't bother. Good luck pursuing AIDS failures for another 20 years. Big Pharma investors are quite happy with your tax dollar billions in their pockets.

PS: I'm not black, or have AIDS, or think condoms are not necessary. I'm just curious and looked into it. You should do the same.

Aids survival? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24533539)

Wait. Why do we want AIDS to survive?

Re:Aids survival? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24534809)

I agree with the above post. As horrible as it seems from a humanistic perspective, you are just spreading the disease by keeping people with it alive longer.

linsux fanbois should be happy with this (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24533837)

you know those faggots get pounded in the ass daily.

Wasting time... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24534095)

I never understood why so much time is being spent on an AIDS vaccine... AIDS is a virtually victimless disease. A good 9 times out of 10, you did something you probably shouldn't be doing in order to get the virus in the first place. It's really quite simple to avoid getting AIDS, and I don't think I need to outline the procedure here...

Yeah, I feel bad for the little kids in 3rd world countries that are born with it and all that, but I sure am a big fan of natural selection.

The software I recommend to fight viruses like ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24534231)

aids is Nod32: for all your antivirus needs.

World of Warcraft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24534369)

Aside from some sort of freak accident, you're unlikely to ever get into a situation where there's even a remote possibility of catching AIDS. This is due to the condition known as "forced virginity."

Like brand new again. (1)

suck_burners_rice (1258684) | more than 5 years ago | (#24534635)

I have a better idea. This will cure not only AIDS but all other ailments as well in one fell swoop. Invent a technology that permits downloading the entire brain content of a human being into a computer, and then uploading it into a new clone of that same human being. Now, if you get sick with some sort of disease, or if you get maimed or something, all they have to do is pop your brain content into a new body and voila! You're like brand new again.

a more environmentally friendly option (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24535381)

Even better: make sure all the people with HIV die quickly and do not transmit it to anyone else. Also, it would remove a big chunk of CO2 producers and resource consumers from an overburdened planet.

Re:a more environmentally friendly option (1)

suck_burners_rice (1258684) | more than 5 years ago | (#24535487)

Did you know that people with HIV have just as much right to live as do population alarmists such as yourself?

Technology for misery (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24535119)

This is exceedingly dumb. If anything, we should use technology to make sure more and more negros get HIV and eliminated from this planet. They have been nothing but a source of misery to all humans.

I plead you to visit StormFront [stormfront.org] with open mind and read all the views for some time to understand just how these savages have harmed our civilization. To try and use technology to SAVE these animals, well,.......

OH BOY (1)

Dissidence101 (1341487) | more than 5 years ago | (#24535635)

Here we go again.. Around and around the mulberry bush. Jesus. You know, the AIDS orthodoxy has been giving us this mathematical computer modeling bull shit for 20 something years but nothing worthwhile prevails , just like no cures, no significant therapies, and certainly not anything nearing a vaccine. More data bases? = More funding. Want to help stop AIDS? Stop the freaking funding, because clearly whatever these lunatics got brainwashed into thinking in the very beginning just AIN'T working. Want better answers? Start asking better questions.

Re:OH BOY (1)

BlueParrot (965239) | more than 5 years ago | (#24538829)

I'm sorry but you're a moron. Nowadays the life expetancy of a 20 year old diagnosed early with HIV is as high as 49 years in some countries. Without treatment it is measured in single digits. In addition people on antiretroviral drugs are dramatically less likely to transmit the disease to others than those who are not. I'd argue that you have fuck all idea what you are talking about and that you hence ought to shut up.

Re:OH BOY (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24625375)

thats odd being most people DONT TAKE THE FUCKING MEDS. Some 2/3 of the million supposedly infected in the US do not take them yet more fuckers die per year due to suicide. Your second point you'll need to cite a reference that shows HIV sexually transmitted at all. Virtually every study *assumes* sexual transmission. The oft cited Padian showed no seroconversion after entry into the study.....wow and this is the largest (and longest) study into sexual transmission. Im sure John Moore will chime in soon and declare that "We observed no seroconversion after entry into the study" is misunderstood.

typical ignorant slashdot replies (1)

m0llusk (789903) | more than 5 years ago | (#24536311)

A new method for managing a devastating disease is made available and the big issues with it are gay people are scary and yucky and Africa is backward. That is so insightful, informative, and helpful! Retroviruses only happen to people who are bad or live in bad places, so why even bother to study them?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...