Beta

×

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!

AIDS Vaccine Breakthrough

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the one-step-closer dept.

Medicine 417

Doc Ruby writes "Scientists at Johns Hopkins University in MD, USA announced they've disrupted the means by which HIV stops the immune system from attacking it. From the article: 'Scientists say they have found a way to disarm the AIDS virus in research that could lead to a vaccine. Researchers have discovered that if they eliminate a cholesterol membrane surrounding the virus, HIV cannot disrupt communication among disease-fighting cells and the immune system returns to normal. [...] "By stealing cholesterol from the envelope of the virus, we can neutralize the subversion," said Graham. "We've broken the code; we can shut down the type of interference that HIV is having on the immune system."'"

cancel ×

417 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The future is here at last (2, Funny)

RenHoek (101570) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507514)

With the recent deluge of articles on curing aids, cancer and even the common cold, is the future finally here? Are we going Deus Ex in a few years now?

Re:The future is here at last (1)

Killjoy_NL (719667) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507552)

We can only hope, but I want the chin augment that Jensen has.

Re:The future is here at last (3, Insightful)

Slashdot Assistant (2336034) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507554)

I have a terrible feeling that in the future we'll be seeing cyborg homeopaths and astrologers traveling in flying cars with little fish decals proudly displayed on the back.

Re:The future is here at last (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507556)

Settle down. The Matrix will reboot in a few minutes. People are getting way too happy for this simulation to continue.

Re:The future is here at last (-1, Offtopic)

Slashdot Assistant (2336034) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507586)

That's why we manage to choose such shit politicians in Ireland. The machines know that if we chose people capable of governing competently and without lining their own pockets the human batteries would become suspicious.

Re:The future is here at last (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507630)

Way to take a nice comment thread in a strange direction.

Re:The future is here at last (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507934)

I had this chicken pizza the other day that was phenomenal.

The secret? A small amount of feta cheese, it turns out. The chopped tomato didn't hurt either.

Re:The future is here at last (0, Offtopic)

CrazyDuke (529195) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507956)

It is simpler than that. Most people want leaders that act as a substitute for their own super-egos, which lead them personally. Leaders that take and do what they want, largely ignore the desires of those they lead, have petty spiteful fights with each other, smack them for back-talk, and generally treat their followers as being innately ignorant, immature, and inferior are exactly what they want. ...and, exactly what they get.

FYI: The super-ego is the part of your mind that criticizes you whenever you do something wrong, and is essentially a warped version of the most dominant parental influence from your childhood.

This reminds me of a couple of stereotypical situations that pop up fairly often: Women that demand that potential mates be their friends first, then wonder why their male friends keep "betraying" them by actually wanting to be mates. Or, for that matter, men that denigrate women that actually enjoy sexual relationships as being sluts and whores, even if they are monogamous and would not sell. Then, they wonder why they end up with virulently avoidant cold fish that clam up the second they get a ring or a kid.

Basically, be careful what you wish for: The human mind is very poor at sorting out conflicting fears and desires.

Re:The future is here at last (3, Insightful)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507624)

I am not sure about the recent part, there have always been miracle cancer cures just around the corner for as long as I have been old enough to read the news.
This is promising, but wake me up when they actually cure/prevent the disease in a person with this.

And what does curing diseases have to do with cyborg augmentations?

Re:The future is here at last (1, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507908)

This is promising, but wake me up when they actually cure/prevent the disease in a person with this.

My thoughts exactly. I don't demean their research, but realistically I'm not that interested in a play-by-play for the development. I'll consider all this a breakthrough when I can go down to Walgreens and get an AIDS vaccine.

Re:The future is here at last (1)

Killjoy_NL (719667) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507996)

Because when we are done curing disease, the next step is augmentations :)

Re:The future is here at last (1)

Bengie (1121981) | more than 2 years ago | (#37508036)

The difference is now there are a bunch of cancer cures on human testing.

Re:The future is here at last (2)

backslashdot (95548) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507632)

Actually HIV may really be on its way out ..modern treatments are to the point where you can live a normal healthy life and die of something else. Well as long as you maintain your health insurance anyway.

HIV will probably be cured over the next decade .. it will not be a single breakthrough though it will be gradual so it won't seem like you woke up one day and HIV is cured .. it'll be like 15 to 20 years from now while sitting on your couch you'll suddenly wonder "whatever happened to that disease everyone was afraid of, HIV?"

Re:The future is here at last (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507740)

Which puts us like 20 years behind. HIV was a really stupid epidemic. Early on folks getting infected was going to happen, but when it became known that it was an STI and that not having sex with HIV infected partners would stop the spread, it became really stupid for people to contract it on the scale that they did.

Re:The future is here at last (3, Insightful)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507842)

Yeah, because that knowledge was so effective in nearly eradicating chlamydia, syphilis, gonorrhea, herpes, trichomoniasis....

Re:The future is here at last (2)

Stormthirst (66538) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507866)

That and using other people's needles for injecting drugs. It's just plain dumb. Might even say it's evolution in action.

Re:The future is here at last (3, Insightful)

Electricity Likes Me (1098643) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507868)

Fun fact: that was largely because at first it spread amongst gay men quicker then heterosexuals, and the prevailing attitude was "great, this will finally get rid of the gays!"

Thus governments assumed they didn't need any sort of public education campaigns about it.

Then at some point, once someone realized straight people also have promiscuous sex (and there are tons more of them so it didn't seem like an epidemic till much later) did we decide to do anything about it.

Nope, it is still in the future (2, Insightful)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507638)

The article hints at a way to attack the virus in the lab. There is absolutely no attempt yet to do the same in a human body. Can it be done safely? While the article says the cholestrerol membrane is not the same as the one that occurs in things related to coronary disease, is it maybe in use somewhere else? Wouldn't be much point in an AIDS vacine that causes you to fall apart in a puddle.

But the cure for AIDS has been here for a long time. How many people do you know with AIDS? I am not just making another joke about slashdotters not having sex, which isn't funny at all damn you!, but am serious. AIDS was this terrible nightmare from a by gone era when some people who made a lot of noise in the media had unprotected sex with everyone else in the group.

When people stopped doing that, AIDS practically disappeared to the point that young people again think it is safe to have unprotected sex with anyone.

The cure is latex, it works, it has been tried and tested. Not science, or as you put it, the futures fault you refuse to take your medicine.

It has always struck me as odd that it tooks AIDS to get people to start using condoms. Like the other diseases out there are not highly dangerous. This story itself is more likely to kill more people before it can start to cure as people think, "Oh there is a cure, we can fuck around again with no condom". This was the result of all the previous aids blocker stories were people interpreted it as a cure and so didn't care anymore.

Odd stuff, just because we got cure for food poisoning doesn't mean people started eating rotten food on purpose.

As for Africa, the aids epidemic is a symthom not the disease itself. Remove aids and the causes for mass infections remain.

Good news that there is a potential new avenue to create a medicine BUT it not yet here and the underlying problems have not been tackled. Humanity is still its old self.

Re:Nope, it is still in the future (0)

ZankerH (1401751) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507724)

And what would the "underlying cause" be? People having sex? Are you advocating an abstinence-only approach?

Re:Nope, it is still in the future (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507756)

One doesn't need abstinence in order to be HIV negative for an entire life. One just needs to get regularly tested, use protection and keep sex partners to some sort of sane number. And avoid sharing needles. Then there's the rare occurence of contracting HIV from a transfusion, but that's a risk that's sufficiently low for most people to not even bother worrying bout. If people would do that, then HIV wouldn't be common and would probably just die out in a matter of time.

Re:Nope, it is still in the future (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507782)

And what would the "underlying cause" be? People having sex? Are you advocating an abstinence-only approach?

The cure is latex, it works, it has been tried and tested.

What do you think latex referred to? (5, Informative)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507804)

I say several times UNPROTECTED sex. I mention latex explicitly. Was I being that subtle in referring to condoms?

And the underlying cause in Africa is not sex, it is rape. Mass rape. It is an cultural attitude to women that is getting ever more brutal.

Read a little about conditions in for instance South Africa before you go all indignant.

Re:Nope, it is still in the future (3, Insightful)

durrr (1316311) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507768)

The cure for AIDS, which stands for Aquired ImmunoDeficiency Syndrome(meaning, that you have it when you have AQUIRED a immunological deficiency in case the name didn't hind at that for you) Is retroviral drugs.

In case you have problem with neuances i'll spell it out for you. A HIV infection if left untreated will result in AIDS, at which point you're pretty much toast. A HIV infection on its own does not however qualify as AIDS with modern retroviral treatment(or the intial stage without treatment) will keep viral counts low enough that you do not Aquire any ImmunoDefciency.

Now in fact, that's not a cure for AIDS, it's a postponing of it. As for the cure to HIV, it's not condoms. Condoms are a preventive measure against HIV, not a cure.
Now if you excuse me I'll have to crash the moon into earth before I have to repeat this rant any more times.

Re:Nope, it is still in the future (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 2 years ago | (#37508022)

ow if you excuse me I'll have to crash the moon into earth before I have to repeat this rant any more times.

maybe if you crashed the moon into earth, all those stupid earthlings would stop crashing their rockets between the moons, and the epidemic might stop...

Re:Nope, it is still in the future (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37508056)

In case you have problem with neuances i'll spell it out for you.

Irony implosion imminent.

Re:Nope, it is still in the future (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507808)

Latex condoms are not a cure. They're a preventative measure.

"As for Africa, the aids epidemic is a symthom not the disease itself. Remove aids and the causes for mass infections remain."

Africa is both the epicenter for the disease, and is a poverty-stricken continent where people need to have families, and relatively large ones at that, in order to be taken care of in their old age. These features are sufficient to explain the sustained high infection rate without resorting to the racist twaddle you're apparently peddling. And if you say no, I'm not saying it's because it's some feature of African culture (as if there is such a monolithic entity), it's just human nature, then you've conceded that, in your eyes, the "cure" for the disease is to cure human nature. Great, thanks for sharing, that's really helpful.

Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit (5, Informative)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507962)

"Africa is both the epicenter for the disease, and is a poverty-stricken continent where people need to have families, and relatively large ones at that, in order to be taken care of in their old age. These features are sufficient to explain the sustained high infection rate without resorting to the racist twaddle you're apparently peddling. "

Oh boy, you're so full of bullshit.

"Medical experts have shown a clear association between HIV exposure and coerced sex. Wives who suffer violence if they request condom use or faithfulness are at higher risk of AIDS than unmarried women and girls. That is why defeating the AIDS pandemic requires a second radical proposition: that African women and girls have the right to protection under their own countries' laws.

Why is this concept radical? Because public justice systems in many AIDS-burdened countries are broken or virtually inaccessible to poor girls and women. Rape and beatings are simply the norm, and deterrence and accountability for these crimes in Africa is as rare as AIDS drugs used to be."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/13/AR2006081300716.html [washingtonpost.com]

"Rape, including child rape, is increasing at shocking rates in South Africa. Sexual violence against children, including the raping of infants, has increased 400% over the past decade (Dempster, 2002). According to a report by BBC news, a female born in South Africa has a greater chance of being raped in her lifetime than learning how to read (Dempster, 2002). When South Africa became a democracy in 1994, there were already 18,801 cases of rape per year, but by 2001 there were 24,892 (Dempster, 2002). Numbers vary by different institutions, but are nevertheless extremely troubling. The Institute of Race Relations found that more than 52,000 rapes were reported in 2000, and 40% of the victims were under age 18 (du Venage, 2002). The University of South Africa reports that 1 million women and children are raped there each year (South Africa: Focus on the Virgin Myth, 2002)."

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/444213 [medscape.com]
http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2002/april/virgin.htm [scienceinafrica.co.za]

Also, big families don't cause rape, you can't catch an infection from a clean partner no matter how many times you have sex.

Re:Nope, it is still in the future (1)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507980)

The trouble with having large families, is that large families are themselves a cause for many of the problems...

You have a shortage of food and can't afford to feed yourself properly, so you have lots of kids and make the problem worse?

You may need lots of kids to look after you in old age, but who is going to look after them? They will have to do the same and so you get very rapid population growth... Population grows to unsustainable levels and then any problems like food shortage become much worse.

The situation reaches a point where the land simply cannot sustain the current level of population, and this population level is maintained artificially high by shipments of food from foreign countries.

Also when you have a situation of insufficient resources, people become desperate to acquire those resources via any means necessary and that results in ever more brutal wars.

Re:Nope, it is still in the future (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507850)

Jesus dude... you starting with a mostly rational opener and then just took a running leap off of bat-shit cliff.

AIDS is not all media hype. People have it. More people will get it. Fixing that is "a good thing".

And yes, we know that crazy problems and a lack of education result in higher infection rates in Africa. Well that, and the church condemning the use of condoms. But that doesn't have much to do with whether or not we want a vaccine, ya'know?

Re:Nope, it is still in the future (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507892)

I think it was condoms that caused people to start using the phrase "it's better than sex" when referring to pleasure activities. Cuz without one, I can't think of anything better than sex. And if you've practiced "safe" sex your entire life, you're truly missing out.

Re:Nope, it is still in the future (2)

XavierGr (1641057) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507972)

AIDS was this terrible nightmare from a by gone era when some people who made a lot of noise in the media had unprotected sex with everyone else in the group.

AIDS is still a nightmare in third word countries. Don't dismiss it just because symptoms in the developed world are relatively scarce.

Re:Nope, it is still in the future (4, Insightful)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507974)

Problem is there is this nasty thing called "religion" whose adherents keep on insisting that condoms are somehow wrong, and that sex is for procreation only.

A big part of the problem is all those religious jerks that are coming to those third world countries to insist on that. Fortunately they're not getting all that much traction in civilized places, but in third world countries it's devastating.

Add to that ridiculous notions held by people in some of those countries, like that sex with a virgin will cure you, and you have one horrible mess as a result.

Kicking out all those missionaries and bringing in some proper education would do wonders.

Re:Nope, it is still in the future (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507992)

The cure is latex, it works, it has been tried and tested.

You know that. I know that. But try telling that to all the zillion word users out there...

Re:Nope, it is still in the future (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507998)

The cure *isn't* latex. Cure implies that it already happened. Condoms are, however, a good precaution. Something you use to avoid.

Other than that, I do agree with you. Sadly technology moves faster than society.

You know what this means! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507522)

Unlimited anal sex with Monkeys, here I come. Science Fuck Yea!.

Real or hype? (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507538)

Scientists say

traditional indication of hype

could lead

Oh its just hype after all.

Oh well... I'd like a /. story about how its real easy to have a working nuclear fusion reactor. All you need is to build a reactor, and then turn it on. No big deal, everyone be happy now.

This is not a story about vaccine trials, just a "wouldn't it be great if ..."

Re:Real or hype? (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507566)

Uh, it is (relatively) easy to have a working fusion reactor. The big problem is that it consumes energy rather than producing it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusor [wikipedia.org]

Re:Real or hype? (1)

joss (1346) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507612)

Its not that complicated when you go large.. like the sun for instance. Something medium sized would be good though, last I heard they were about 20 years away (they've been saying that for about 40 years though so.. ymmv etc)

Re:Real or hype? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507658)

You know, slashdot is a fun place to read comments because occasionally you'll get a pro biochemist or a gifted grad student giving real, informed commentary.

Posts like this, though - the uninformed cynicism is as unhelpful as the "Yay! The Cure is Here!" uninformed optimism.

Re:Real or hype? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37508016)

The problem is that the cynicism comes from being informed.

Re:Real or hype? (2)

edumacator (910819) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507698)

This is not a story about vaccine trials, just a "wouldn't it be great if ..."

The title is a bit misleading, but the content isn't. Knowing how to disarm the virus is a significant development. It's certainly not the same thing as a cure, but it is more than hype.

Re:Real or hype? (1)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507744)

I also wonder, how they retain cholesterol at normal body cells that need it to their normal function.

Re:Real or hype? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507764)

Or like we put 2 carbon atoms together in a lab, therefore space elevators. Someone is charging an outrageous amount of money for a glue gun on an old printer motor, therefore we will print cars and houses. The most powerful country on Earth (at the time) spent an entire decade to get two men to walk on the Moon for a few hours, therefore we will colonize the universe.

How am I doing so far? Got the flavor of the sci-fi deluded clueless geek?

hooray (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507540)

Cheap hookers for all!

"vaccine breakthrough?" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507546)

This isn't anything of the sort. It's laboratory discovery of potentially immense importance that could lead to a vaccine, but right now that's all; it hasn't been tested in animals.

captcha: worded.

There goes the world. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507548)

This really was the only way we were going to control the population. This was not a problem, this was a solution.

What a week (1)

RichardJenkins (1362463) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507564)

the cure for AIDS, coming at you faster than the speed of light!

Re:What a week (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507844)

... from a double-decker sized satellite from space! Using time-travel! AWE!

And what about the African population control? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507570)

Has no one considered the ramifications this will have? I know this sounds like racist trolling, but just think about it for a while... We have a virus epidemic at our hands that keeps the annual population growth rate down a bit in a part of the world suffering from defunct infrastructure and defunct society due to tyranny and corrupt rule, to the extent that little else than migration is the solution to the problem for the people living there. Suddenly, if we eradicate this virus, the world will have a million more immigrants to take care of - annually. Who pays?

Re:And what about the African population control? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507590)

I agree, it does sound like racist trolling.

Re:And what about the African population control? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507610)

even if op was a racist troll (we can't know for sure), your response says a lot more about you than him/her - you saw what you wanted to see and ignored everything else.

Re:And what about the African population control? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507646)

The rest was just as idiotic, and didn't warrant comment.

Re:And what about the African population control? (1)

Slashdot Assistant (2336034) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507616)

Assuming that is true, I suspect that reform of immigration is a slightly more humane option than the equivalent of letting letting the homeless die each winter to reduce the number of beggars one must pass when wandering around the city.

Re:And what about the African population control? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507644)

Look at it another way... A huge number of African prostitute immigrants... Cheap, efficient and no more risk...

Re:And what about the African population control? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507688)

a part of the world suffering from defunct infrastructure and defunct society due to tyranny and corrupt rule

The USA has an AIDS epidemic?

Re:And what about the African population control? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507710)

Emigration wouldn't solve anything, and the only reason to bring it up is... that's right: racist trolling.

What the population-booming countries of Africa need to solve that problem is 1) economic development and improved health care (so that there will be less "need" for a couple to over-reproduce) combined with 2) education and availability of effective birth control (so that they can follow through on the option to have fewer children).

(Furthermore, AIDS is a rather ineffective method of population control. Yes, it has a terrible death toll in much of Africa, but it's not keeping the population from growing, and a vaccine would have little impact on that.)

Re:And what about the African population control? (1)

budgenator (254554) | more than 2 years ago | (#37508034)

Don't worry those truly worthy of the Darwin Award will think any vaccine is a CIA plot to infect them with HIV or cause autism or some silly shit like that. Hell we develop a vaccine for cervical cancer caused by HPV [wikipedia.org] , and people refuse to give it to their kids because of some idea that it encourages premarital sexual activity. While the potential of a HIV vaccine is exciting, we still have measles [wikipedia.org] , rubella [wikipedia.org] , Diptheria [wikipedia.org] and pertussis [wikipedia.org] , so it's unlikely that a HIV vaccine will eliminate HIV.

About time. (1)

Commontwist (2452418) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507592)

Given all the research being put into AIDS and cancer, the ever growing understanding on how viruses and the body works, and the increasing human ability to manipulate things on a nanoscale I was beginning to wonder what was taking so long.

Heck, once AIDS is solved, cancer should be next, and I hope some kind of universal anti-viral agent that boosts the immune system's effectiveness ten fold eventually comes. Something that can clean up plaque from blood vessels would be nice too.

Re:About time. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507664)

To clean plaque from your blood vessels - how about a healthy diet and exercise you fat fucking sack of shit!

Re:About time. (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507990)

Funny, I've got a self-help book coming out with that very title.

Re:About time. (2)

Huntr (951770) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507670)

I liked this article from a few days ago about using AIDS to kill cancer. http://nyti.ms/ouwqci [nyti.ms] Seemed poetic or something.

Re:About time. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507762)

Please explain to me what attacking the HIV has to do with fighting Cancer? How does being able to cripple one type of virus automatically fix the failure rate of the human bodies cells to regenerate? Cancer is a condition caused by a hundred and one things, AIDS is a condition caused by a handfull of things. You can not reasonably expect a breakthrough in one to immediatly mean a solution to the other.

Re:About time. (1)

budgenator (254554) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507826)

Thinking of Cancer as one disease is about the same as thing every infection as one disease.

Cure for aids already discovered (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507618)

I dont understand why the progress for aids research keeps being posted. They already found an antibody that will eliminate 90% of aids virus's. It is in Phase 1 Human Trials right now. Everything regarding aids research is old news.

Re:Cure for aids already discovered (2)

ponchietto (718083) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507640)

What about the other 10%?

Re:Cure for aids already discovered (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507770)

[citation needed]

And I don't mean "pulled out of your ass".

Re:Cure for aids already discovered (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37508046)

Or from wikipedia, because it's pretty much the same as "pulled out of your ass".

Still Infected? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507628)

Would the patient remain HIV+, even if a vaccine is preventing the virus from attacking it's host? Can the virus still be transferred to others?

Re:Still Infected? (1)

Cyko_01 (1092499) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507674)

RTFA
the vaccine does not prevent the virus from attacking it's host. It enables the immune system of the host to fight back and kill the virus

Wooo! (1, Funny)

mustPushCart (1871520) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507662)

I'm off to the whorehouses!

Only one to protect yourself (5, Funny)

Adult film producer (866485) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507668)

Abstinence. Don't be tempted by sex unless you are 100% absolutely sure. I would suggest waiting until marriage.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507700)

Mod parent +5 Funny.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (4, Insightful)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507704)

Laugh all you like, but if people actually took that advice a few years ago we wouldn't have AIDS anymore.

That and "Don't share needles".

Re:Only one to protect yourself (2)

seven of five (578993) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507716)

What about those folks that can't get married?

Re:Only one to protect yourself (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507786)

Those folks typically die before they reach adulthood. If you can get yourself laid, then you can get yourself married. It's not like it's that hard to find somebody that is as desperate as the person who hypothetically isn't ever going to marry because they can't.

The only major exception I can think of is where the law prohibits marriage and those folks usually end up partnering up for life without the documents.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507818)

The only major exception I can think of is where the law prohibits marriage...

The other major exception is most Slashdot readers.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (1)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507924)

The only major exception I can think of is where the law prohibits marriage and those folks usually end up partnering up for life without the documents.

Not necessarily. Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing is a matter of opinion, but a marriage contract does have an effect on the likelihood of a couple staying together.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 2 years ago | (#37508040)

but a marriage contract does have an effect on the likelihood of a couple staying together.

Not necessarily. Kids do. And unfortunately, those who are not allowed to marry can't have their own kids, and aren't allowed to adopt kids.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (1)

bryanp (160522) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507916)

What about those folks that can't get married?

In this context it doesn't matter. If you are in a faithful monogamous relationship then you're okay. If you aren't then the problem (and solution) is the same no matter your gender, orientation or marital status.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (5, Insightful)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507886)

Aye, and if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon.

The problem with this advice – and pretty much every other "just say no" solution to a social or medical problem – is that it ignores human nature... and the empirically documented fact that it simply doesn't work. Some people inevitably will have unprotected sex, will share needles, and will do everything else that they're told not to do. A "solution" that ignores this fact is one that is not 100% effective.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507732)

That would result in many sexually unhappy people who have just committed their life to (married) a person that does not satisfy them, or has bad sexual performance. It's a good idea to try things (safely) and figure out what you like before you commit to something.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (1)

Yosho (135835) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507754)

Why do you think marriage would protect you from getting AIDS? Or are you implying that people with AIDS shouldn't be allowed to marry?

Re:Only one to protect yourself (1)

kenj0418 (230916) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507814)

Why do you think marriage would protect you from getting AIDS?

Because abstinence is always effective.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 2 years ago | (#37508064)

Why do you think marriage would protect you from getting AIDS?

Because he doesn't believe in adultery, divorce or premarital sex.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507774)

Easy enough for most slashdotters, they weren't going to have sex anyway.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (5, Insightful)

Sasayaki (1096761) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507788)

Abstinence is the worst of all the safe-sex choices.

The best way to describe it is, "It is 100% effective, when used correctly. When not used correctly it is 0% effective, and among females and males between 14-25 it has a very high failure rate."

How many non-Slashdot users do you know that are 25 years old and never had sex?

Re:Only one to protect yourself (1)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 2 years ago | (#37508076)

Moreover, if you need to fiddle around too much, the rod may have become limp again before you've got it on, spoling all the fun...

Re:Only one to protect yourself (3, Insightful)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507790)

This only works if:
1. You can actually stick to it, including those hormone-addled teenage years.
2. Your spouse (spouses, if you divorce and remarry) managed it as well.
3. You manage to avoid other means of infection. Rape, accidential exposure to blood.

It's also rather untidy, having to alter your life in order to avoid disease. Much tidier to simply remove the disease through science.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (1)

Electricity Likes Me (1098643) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507904)

The notion is similar to what Lord Monckton proposed, which was rounding up all the HIV+ people and putting them in internment camps. Which would work, except be (1) morally repungent [means never justifies the ends because the means is never 100% effective] and (2) assumes you'd actually be able to find 100% of HIV positive people.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#37508062)

I don't like that bit about the means justifying the end. Sometimes it does. A famous example would be Typhoid Mary. Even after she was found to be a asymptomatic carrier, she reacted with complete denial - continuing to work as a cook, leaving a trail of death in her wake, yet never accepting that she was the cause. After all attempts to convince her of the danger she posed failed, forced quarantine was just the only option left - if she had been allowed to keep her freedom, she would have without doubt have unintentionally killed many more people.

Quarentine wouldn't have worked on HIV anyway. The disease was first identified in the US, but had it's origin in Africa. By the time it was identified, it was already too late to contain.

Re:Only one to protect yourself (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507798)

Good advice, also, go fuck yourself! It's safe!

Re:Only one to protect yourself (1)

Deathly809 (887240) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507896)

Is marriage code word for tonight?

Linux users celebrate! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507720)

I know you fags will be buttfucking one another with no reservations now.

Give it a month. (2)

idbeholda (2405958) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507728)

We won't see or hear about these breakthroughs again because there won't be any "profitable" method of distribution.

It's a big deal (2)

mattr (78516) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507758)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_HIV/AIDS_adult_prevalence_rate [wikipedia.org]

Can't understand how anybody can post snarky troll crap at all.
Did you know there are over 30 million people with HIV and 1 million are in the U.S., and it's apparently accelerating maybe?

These researchers probably deserve the nobel and the medal of honor. Here's hoping that something amazing comes out of this.

Of course the tangent everyone will want to know about is this cholesterol film around the virus they are disrupting.. and a naive question about whether there is something simple that can be done to reduce this cholesterol and weaken the virus' immune disruption activity, before waiting years for the real thing.

wild (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507766)

with big pharma out of town, we can get back to out incredible orgies!

seriously, just strip the cover and it won't work? don't tell me they didn't try that 25 years ago.

Such an awesome crowdsourcing success! (1, Interesting)

kamelkev (114875) | more than 2 years ago | (#37507920)

I thought this was going to be another one of those "wow we have a cure for HIV but xyz" type of articles, but there is so much more to it than that.

The coolest part about this breakthrough is that it was directly generated by people playing the game "fold it". The game (which I've played in the past) involves turning various little nobules on molecules in order to try to match them up to certain shapes. It's fun and mindless, I had *no idea* that the results were actually being used by scientists working on important problems.

This is truly crowdsourcing at it's best - check out the first page of the scientific paper for more details, after that it gets pretty bio-nerdy:
http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/zoran/NSMBfoldit-2011.pdf

Working at FedEx (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507926)

I remember driving through the hazardous materials area in a tug once. I saw a big red vat with skull and crossbones labelled "HIV" in big letters. Fastest U-turn I've ever done.

What about the developing world? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37507988)

These comments betray a shocking lack of understanding for the reality of AIDS in the developing world. Family units are being wiped out by AIDS, in countries where people don't even understand that it can be transmitted by blood. "Just use a condom and it's no big deal, we don't even really need a cure" is a stupid attitude for America but is downright heartless when you consider the situation in a lot of Africa.

Kudos to the researchers - a step forward in a test tube is still a step forward.

Dennis Miller's Big Score (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37508072)

Now Dennis Miller will finally be able to indulge himself in his sodomies....

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

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>