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!

HIV Vaccine Trial Shows 90% Immune Response

samzenpus posted about 3 years ago | from the cure-is-near dept.

Medicine 386

fergus07 writes "Researchers at the Spanish Superior Scientific Research Council (CSIC) have successfully completed Phase I human clinical trials of a HIV vaccine in which 90% of volunteers developed an immunological response against the virus. The MVA-B vaccine draws on the natural capabilities of the human immune system and 'has proven to be as powerful as any other vaccine currently being studied, or even more,' says Mariano Esteban, head researcher from CSIC's National Biotech Centre."

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

But will it able to cure (-1, Troll)

dottslash3 (2466192) | about 3 years ago | (#37544736)

this [aeonity.com] ?

warning! (1)

Cyko_01 (1092499) | about 3 years ago | (#37544756)

link is goatse

Re:warning! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37544828)

Parent is a troll, link is not goatse.

Re:warning! (1)

GillyGuthrie (1515855) | about 3 years ago | (#37544972)

parent has dns hijacker installed?

Re:warning! (1)

_0xd0ad (1974778) | about 3 years ago | (#37545206)

No, it's an Aeonity blog hosting Goatse via a bit.ly link. Telnet comes in handy sometimes.

I also took the opportunity to add a few more AdBlock Plus filters.

||bit.ly^$third-party
slashdot.org#a(href*=/boredgeek)

Re:But will it able to cure (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37544876)

this [aeonity.com] ?

idiot.

90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (0, Troll)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about 3 years ago | (#37544752)

Healthy relationships would kill HIV 100%, not 90.

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37544778)

Your dumb.

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (-1, Troll)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about 3 years ago | (#37544874)

Yes yes satirical jokes make people dumb, not the newfags who don't get them.

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37544956)

> newfags
> herp
> not /b/
> fuck right off

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (-1, Troll)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about 3 years ago | (#37545138)

I don't have to go to /b/ to label fags appropriately. Sue me.

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (1)

reeno49 (1558221) | about 3 years ago | (#37545248)

Consider yourself sued!

We could alternatively settle out of court with a game of Quake 3.

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545300)

Not "herp" but "aid"

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545008)

Your != You're

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545214)

And AC apparently has nothing better to do than to grammar troll.

Nice to see that he doesn't have anything of value to contribute to society.

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (5, Insightful)

BradleyUffner (103496) | about 3 years ago | (#37544786)

Healthy relationships would kill HIV 100%, not 90.

Meanwhile, back in reality....

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (2)

cpotoso (606303) | about 3 years ago | (#37545004)

I wish I had modpoints to mod you up. Indeed, fantasyland is just that...

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (1)

ShavedOrangutan (1930630) | about 3 years ago | (#37545086)

I don't understand why the concept is so difficult. There is a 100% effective way to prevent catching HIV. Don't have sex with someone who has it! Why is that so unrealistic?

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (2, Insightful)

Dahamma (304068) | about 3 years ago | (#37545254)

And don't ever get sick enough to need a blood transfusion.

Oh, and don't ever work in the health industry or volunteer anywhere that you could accidentally come in contact with infected blood.

Are you trolling or just that naive?

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (4, Insightful)

HateBreeder (656491) | about 3 years ago | (#37545256)

Because HIV infected individuals have a large glowing neon sign attached to their foreheads saying "I HAVE HIV!"

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (2)

flaming error (1041742) | about 3 years ago | (#37545266)

It is not "100% effective" because sexual intercourse is not the only transmission vector.

It is unrealistic because we have a very strong instinct to reproduce, and that generally involves at least one other person/orangutan whose HIV status we don't really *know* except perhaps a short period immediately after they are tested.

Go Educate yourself (1)

Radtastic (671622) | about 3 years ago | (#37545350)

You are woefully uneducated. I suggest you use your google-fu on other ways HIV is transmitted. [google.com]

Yes, sex with an infected partner. And sharing of needles, blood transfusions, and babies born from infected mothers, to name a few.

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (2)

cachimaster (127194) | about 3 years ago | (#37544978)

That's not the way vaccines work. If the prostitute is also vaccinated (very likely) probabilities compound and you have 90%*90% = 99% chance that prostitute won't kill you.

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (2)

nomel (244635) | about 3 years ago | (#37545244)

So, you're saying you can have sex with 100 vaccinated prostitutes and only get HIV once...

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (1)

Radres (776901) | about 3 years ago | (#37545384)

90% * 90% = 81%. This is the chance that two events with 90% probability will occur at the same time independent of each other. I think what you're trying to say is 90% + (90% * 10%) = 99%.

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (1)

magusxxx (751600) | about 3 years ago | (#37544982)

Thank you, June. Now go fix Wally and the Beaver their dinner.

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545002)

Unless you get raped. Although you probably didn't think of that, because you have a penis.

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about 3 years ago | (#37545262)

Getting raped doesn't imply a healthy relationship at all, the consent is KINDA MISSING (unless thats your thing rofl). Also men get raped all the time, DOC, strange european ladies (she was actually kinda hot), etc...

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (1)

hedwards (940851) | about 3 years ago | (#37545274)

That's not prevalent enough to be much of an issue. What you're forgetting is that rape only spreads HIV in a subset of cases where one party has HIV already. And HIV would almost certainly have died out years ago if rape was the primary driver of new infections.

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545026)

except for rape, IV drug use, and medical accidents.

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (1)

kimvette (919543) | about 3 years ago | (#37545136)

Well, yeah, aside from tainted transfusions, blood contact from sports injuries, at dentists, unlicensed back-alley tattoo shops, or giving first aid to an infected person, as well as the small (some tiny nonzero) possibility of contracting HIV through hard surfaces such as toilet seats, as well as contracting HIV from the mother (yes, there are babies born with HIV) - and let's not forget idiots who shoot up and even more moronically share needles. Aside from those few? Sure, healthy relationships will prevent 100% of HIV/AIDS cases. Oops, we forgot another one: your BF or GF is a windower/widow and his or her spouse was infected, and didn't know, and you don't know, so in your healthy relationship you contract HIV. But yeah, healthy relationships will be a 100% iron-clad guarantee that HIV will be vanquished over the course of a single generation, so let's not devote resources toward finding a cure or preventive vaccine.

At least, that is your opinion now, until you're a car accident victim and are treated by an infected EMT, or an infected doctor, or are tattooed by an artist who is violating all kinds of health codes by putting ink back into the bottle for reuse, or you happen to be the unfortunate soul who proves that the infinitesimal chance of contracting HIV from a toilet seat isn't so improbable after all, or until you found your wife's previous partner had HIV and it has been incubating in her body but when you got your marriage license she still tested clean, or your dentist is infected and infects you, then, suddenly, you won't be such an ass and will see the good sense of spending money to protect the responsible folks from the sluts and the drug users, and even from the innocents (EMTs, men and women who have been cheated on, doctors, etc.) who may be harboring the infection.

Contrary to your belief, not everyone with HIV is a reckless intravenous-drug-using slut. The idea is to protect everyone from the disease because there are too many opportunities for the responsible to contract the disease from the reckless.

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (0)

ShavedOrangutan (1930630) | about 3 years ago | (#37545378)

Show me some numbers on how many catch it through these non-risky acts versus how many catch it from casual sex. Sure, there are numerous ways to catch it, but I'll bet the vast majority is through unsafe sex.

And nobody's advocating not searching for a cure/vaccine, I'm just saying that there's nothing wrong with abstinence or long-term relationships (which ARE safer).

Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (1)

i kan reed (749298) | about 3 years ago | (#37545192)

If only there were any evidence of that. Lifetime monogamy is not necessarily a healthy relationship. There are lots of reasons for that, not least of which being that people change, and not always positively. Moreover you are pretending the only transmission vector is sex, which is just absurd given how the pathogen actually spreads.

Getting an immune response will not help (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37544866)

The macrophages engulf it just fine now. Of course, they break it up, and then parts ultimately get picked up. So, what is needed is to BLOCK its site without causing any side issues.

Re:Getting an immune response will not help (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545166)

I'm certain that eminent molecular biologists who developed the vaccine in question are grateful to you for sharing your valuable insight with the world, because I'm sure that as an Anonymous Coward on Slashdot, you are so much more qualified and knowledgeable than they are about HIV's abilities and vulnerabilities.

Great (1)

G-News.ch (793321) | about 3 years ago | (#37544890)

That's great. This combined with existing anti-retroviral therapies might actually extinguish HIV from the face of the earth in only a few decades, if used widely.

Re:Great (5, Funny)

AmazinglySmooth (1668735) | about 3 years ago | (#37544924)

Abstinence, combined with existing anti-retroviral therapies might actually extinguish HIV from the face of the earth in only a few decades, if used widely.

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37544974)

Now that's funny.

Re:Great (3, Insightful)

magsol (1406749) | about 3 years ago | (#37544988)

Good luck with abstinence being "used widely".

Re:Great (5, Insightful)

sulimma (796805) | about 3 years ago | (#37544990)

Abstinence will actually extinguish the whole human race from the face of the earth in only a few decades, if used widely.

Re:Great (1)

Cryacin (657549) | about 3 years ago | (#37545292)

Here's hoping that the crazy zealot religious types follow their own advice and stay abstinent then. But I guess that's too much to hope for.

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545438)

So does the lack of abstinence. Although it'll take a decade or few more while we consume pretty much everything else on this planet.

Re:Great (1)

Colonel Korn (1258968) | about 3 years ago | (#37544992)

Abstinence, combined with existing anti-retroviral therapies might actually extinguish HIV from the face of the earth in only a few decades, if used widely.

If you want to discuss fairy tales, similarly probable is that quantum mechanics will allow all the HIV to tunnel its way off the planet at the same moment.

Re:Great (1)

ani23 (899493) | about 3 years ago | (#37544998)

are the guys advocating abstinence trolls, serious or just ones who cant get any?

This is slashdot... (1)

publiclurker (952615) | about 3 years ago | (#37545156)

What do you think?

Re:This is slashdot... (1)

reeno49 (1558221) | about 3 years ago | (#37545318)

What do you think?

I think his/her intention was not to think.

Re:This is slashdot... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545522)

... all of the above?

Re:Great (1)

Dahamma (304068) | about 3 years ago | (#37545306)

This *is* Slashdot, so likely all three...

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545006)

Abstinence, combined with existing anti-retroviral therapies might actually extinguish humanity from the face of the earth in only a few decades, if used widely.

Re:Great (3, Insightful)

Riceballsan (816702) | about 3 years ago | (#37545016)

Abstinance alone, on a global scale in roughly one century can whipe out aids, cancer and every other disease from the human race, even solve world hunger and the economy.

Re:Great (1)

king neckbeard (1801738) | about 3 years ago | (#37545134)

Unfortunately not. Technology has allowed people to have children without having sex.

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545144)

Abstinence can wipe out cancer? Does that mean all cancer is hereditary? Or do you just mean that dead people don't get cancer? Citation needed.

Re:Great (1)

HBI (604924) | about 3 years ago | (#37545146)

I'd substitute "forced sterilization" for the abstinence. Once effective tests for diseases with at least a component of genetic transmission are commonplace, someone's going to bring this up. Best warm up the ethical arguments now against this, we'll need them.

Re:Great (1)

Xenkar (580240) | about 3 years ago | (#37545556)

Forced sterilization of everyone with genetic diseases pretty much means sterilization of the entire species since there is always some genetic disease in a person, hiding as a recessive gene. Just remember that when they start their little crusade to wipe out diseases.

(Disclaimer: I have Hemophilia B, Osteochondroma, and genetic predispositions to various mental disorders, which means I'm near the top of the list of peeps who'll get sterilized.)

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545018)

You must be married.

Re:Great (1)

Americano (920576) | about 3 years ago | (#37545034)

Abstinence would also... extinguish humanity from the face of the earth within only a few decades, if used widely, too!

Or did you forget that:
1) not everybody contracts aids from sex, and so it will still be able to spread via IV drug use, perinatal transmission, and nonsexual contact with the blood of infected people;
2) humans reproduce using sex;

Or did you have data to share that demonstrates that the sole cause of AIDS is losing your virginity outside of marriage?

Re:Great (2)

hedwards (940851) | about 3 years ago | (#37545372)

IV drug use is something that people can avoid. And it's pretty unusual for folks that aren't working as EMTs, military personnel or similar to come into contact with random blood. And in the case of the military, having HIV is automatic grounds for not being allowed to enlist. I would assume that it's grounds for discharge.

As for reproduction, it's not an issue, you only need to have sex with one person for that to happen. And ultimately, if everybody did have sex with precisely one partner or had the appropriate testing done, you wouldn't see HIV routinely being spread via sex.

You might still have some cases popping up, but a virus needs a certain number of new infections to keep from being quarantined or otherwise die out.

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545464)

Sex with multiple partners is also something people can avoid... but they don't. Do you really think we'll eliminate heroin addicts by wishing hard to the imaginary sky daddy?

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545044)

...along with the human race.

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545052)

Abstinence, combined with existing anti-retroviral therapies might actually extinguish mankind from the face of the earth in only a few decades, if used widely. ...there, fixed that for you.

Re:Great (1)

Belial6 (794905) | about 3 years ago | (#37545064)

Well, sure, if there are no humans, there will no be AIDS in humans.

Re:Great (1)

93,000 (150453) | about 3 years ago | (#37545234)

Reminded me of : "There are no more elephants. There is also no more unethical treatment of elephants." Flight of the Conchords

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545096)

Unlimited free condoms, combined with existing anti-retroviral therapies might actually extinguish HIV from the face of the earth in only a few decades, if used widely.

Abstinence. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545102)

You have never had sex, have you?

Re:Abstinence. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545510)

You must be new here. This _IS_ slashdot, have you looked around?

Re:Great (1)

Barefoot Monkey (1657313) | about 3 years ago | (#37545126)

Abstinence, combined with existing anti-retroviral therapies might actually extinguish HIV from the face of the earth in only a few decades, if used widely.

Abstinence, whether-or-not combined with existing anti-retroviral therapies, might actually extinguish humanity from the face of the earth in only a few decades, if used widely enough.

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545162)

Abstinence, combined with existing anti-retroviral therapies might actually extinguish HIV from the face of the earth in only a few decades, if used widely.

Huh? Sexual transmission is the only way HIV spreads? Wow...guess I understood wrong all these years.

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545210)

Abstinence is what my wife and I practiced until our wedding night. Our marriage is great.

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545508)

At least you can say that the sex with your wife is the best sex you ever had. Not many husbands can claim that.

Re:Great (1)

Nadaka (224565) | about 3 years ago | (#37545358)

Abstinence, if used widely enough would also wipe humans from the face of the earth in less than 10 decades.

Re:Great (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | about 3 years ago | (#37545370)

I wouldn't mention abstinence on /. Most of the people around here are unwillingly abstinent and a little sore about it.

Re:Great (5, Informative)

medv4380 (1604309) | about 3 years ago | (#37545028)

I'd be learly of this until Phase II and Phase III are completed. Developing an Immune response is different then having a successful vaccine. The antibodies have to be ones that will help in eradicating the infection, and since HIV mutates so rapidly there is no grantee that it will work long term in world wide eradication.

Re:Great (2)

DriedClexler (814907) | about 3 years ago | (#37545112)

Can I be the one who injects people with HIV (the virus that causes AIDS) to test out their immune response?

Re:Great (1)

medv4380 (1604309) | about 3 years ago | (#37545302)

So you're the one who shut down the Hollywood Porn [baltimoresun.com] industry last month.

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545298)

It's dufferent than, not different then.

Re:Great (1)

halivar (535827) | about 3 years ago | (#37545396)

No, no, it's different than, not dufferent than.

Re:Great (1)

medv4380 (1604309) | about 3 years ago | (#37545444)

Are you sure it's not thæn?

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545352)

And I'm glad it's being researched in Spain. If an HIV treatment were being discovered in the US, you know some right-wing whackjobs would do whatever they could to stop it so that "them gays dont live as longer derp derp".

This is bad (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545084)

HIV still hasn't carried out the mission it was originally designed for, which was to kill off all of the blacks and homosexuals, they can't create a vaccine yet!

Re:This is bad (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | about 3 years ago | (#37545184)

Rofl, they still have aids.

Nice anti-government remark ;)

PhiCorp (0)

jimmerz28 (1928616) | about 3 years ago | (#37545120)

As long as PhiCorp doesn't stock up on the vaccine in anticipation of Miracle Day I think this looks like some promising news.

Re:PhiCorp (1)

impaledsunset (1337701) | about 3 years ago | (#37545204)

Meh, I don't care, even an AIDS epidemic can't possibly be worse than Miracle Day.

10% (1)

tesdalld (2428496) | about 3 years ago | (#37545142)

sooo.... what happened to the other 10 percent? They all got HIV? That would suck.

Re:10% (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545186)

I assume they're testing with an inert version of the virus, then checking the response. I doubt 'lets see if you get aids' would pass any ethics board. ;)

Re:10% (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545380)

No. They just didn't show high enough levels of the antibodies that the researchers were expecting.

The trial went something like this: They took blood from someone and put it in a test tube. They added the vaccine to the test tube. They waited a certain period of time, then tested the blood to see how much of a certain chemical/protein/whatever was present. If it was high enough, that's a positive response, which 90% of the samples had. If it was too low, that was a negative response, which 10% of the samples had. It's possible they didn't draw blood first, but in that case they just gave the people a shot, waited a period of time, drew blood, then checked how much of the expected result was present.

Re:10% (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545436)

If think it's better to look at it as, if you sleep with someone(s) with HIV 10 times, you'll get it. If the someone(s) are also vaccinated, you'll have to go to 100 times. Moral of the story, get tested before switching partners.

awesome (5, Funny)

rish87 (2460742) | about 3 years ago | (#37545178)

I can finally go back to sharing needles. I gotta save money, what with the economy in the gutter.

Natural? (1)

Atzanteol (99067) | about 3 years ago | (#37545208)

"The MVA-B vaccine draws on the natural capabilities of the human immune system"

Isn't that how *all* vaccines work?

Re:Natural? (1)

Delarth799 (1839672) | about 3 years ago | (#37545398)

Most vaccines introduce a dead or severely weakened version of the disease into the body so the immune system can recognize the disease and kill it in the future. This vaccine attacks the virus itself and strips if of the ability to attack the immune system and allows it to do its job. So its not really doing what a normal vaccine would do by introducing a dead HIV virus into the body.

How do they test?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545236)

I was wondering how do they perform clinical trails? Do they inject the vaccine with a person and then have him have sex with a HIV positive lady?

Thanks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37545264)

I'd like to take a moment to thank the brave people who are undergoing this study for the sake of humanity. I'm sure they're being compensated accordingly, but I nevertheless think it takes a huge amount of humanity to say, "Sure, I'll try out this vaccine and then you can try and infect me with something I will suffer under for the rest of my life, for the good of the world." Perhaps I could be wrong, and there will be no deliberate attempt at infection, (which would make for a very weak trial, I think). But even still, thanks to all the voluntary guinea pigs in the world who are taking risks to help save the rest of us.

first post-HIV-cure realization (2)

Tumbleweed (3706) | about 3 years ago | (#37545276)

Oh yeah, they never did cure Herpes, did they? :(

Re:first post-HIV-cure realization (2)

vlm (69642) | about 3 years ago | (#37545428)

Oh yeah, they never did cure Herpes, did they? :(

Too profitable.

Imagine the crushing damage to the medical industry if they ever cured the common cold?

Re:first post-HIV-cure realization (1)

RenHoek (101570) | about 3 years ago | (#37545432)

To be honest.. once they've tackled HIV, if they start refocusing on the lesser STD's, I wonder if they'll just fall like a house of cards. I mean HIV is pretty advanced. It shouldn't be too hard to take out the remain ones should it? Or am I being too naive?

Re:first post-HIV-cure realization (2)

medv4380 (1604309) | about 3 years ago | (#37545560)

Naive, herpes [wikipedia.org] hides in nerve cells between breakouts. I'm sure if you trained the immune system to hunt it down in those cells their would be other consequences. Your immune system deals with it just fine when it finds it, but killing nerve cells is usually bad. This is also why the 1st outbreak is usually the worst with Herpes since once you're body know what it is it can kill it before it causes too much damage, but depending on the version it still causes damage.

Re:first post-HIV-cure realization (2)

Belial6 (794905) | about 3 years ago | (#37545448)

Which makes me suspicious. The can make a vaccine for the variant of Herpes (Chicken Pox) that has one outbreak, and that is the end of it, but they can't make a vaccine for the variant that has reoccurring outbreaks for the the persons entire life. For that variant, they can only come up with on going treatment to suppress the symptoms.

Free love baby! Groovy! (1)

RenHoek (101570) | about 3 years ago | (#37545404)

I wonder if a vaccine against AIDS will result in a sexual revolution as happened in the '60s with the advent of birth control pills.

And yes, I do know there's more then one STD out there, but that didn't stop them in the 60's either.

Science 1000000001, god 0 (3, Funny)

hyades1 (1149581) | about 3 years ago | (#37545450)

Looks like the big, homophobic Guy in the Sky takes another one in the 'nads from our friends in the medical research community.

I wonder what Pat Robinson's got to say about this. He's been remarkably quiet since all those tornadoes ripped through the Bible Belt, sucking up true believers like a vaccuum cleaner on meth.

Re:Science 1000000001, god 0 (4, Insightful)

anagama (611277) | about 3 years ago | (#37545550)

Not just homophobic, crustaceaphobic as well [godhatesshrimp.com] .
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?