Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

New Vaccine Halves Malaria Risk

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the hard-work-paying-off dept.

Biotech 147

An anonymous reader writes "According to a report in Reuters, scientists are celebrating the end of a clinical trial which found a malaria vaccine reduces infection risk by half in children. From the article: 'While scientists say it is no "silver bullet" and will not end the mosquito-borne infection on its own, it is being hailed as a crucial weapon in the fight against malaria and one that could speed the path to eventual worldwide eradication. Malaria is caused by a parasite carried in the saliva of mosquitoes. It kills more than 780,000 people per year, most of them babies or very young children in Africa. Cohen's vaccine goes to work at the point when the parasite enters the human bloodstream after a mosquito bite. By stimulating an immune response, it can prevent the parasite from maturing and multiplying in the liver. ... Cohen said that if all goes to plan, RTS,S could be licensed and rolled out by 2015.'"

cancel ×

147 comments

good or bad? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37760684)

Isn't the world dangerously overpopulated?

Hopefully the reduction in infant mortality will encourage parents to just have a couple kids.

Re:good or bad? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37760762)

About a million people die each year from Malaria. That's a drop in the ocean compared to the net increase in humans. Nothing short of massive cultural shifts in large swathes of the world will halt global population problems.

Re:good or bad? (1, Troll)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760832)

It will not. Ppl as a whole, do what brings them pleasure. When you do not have a job or money, then you spend your time focused on roughly one thing: sex. Now, when nations are controlled by roman catholics, islam, mormons, etc, or you have idiots like reagan and W that say no money to BC, well, you end up with a high birth rate.

If gates REALLY wanted to solve humanities ills, then he would focus on doing large numbers of INNOVATIVE start-ups all over the world. In return, he would require a number of small items: executives earn no more than say 10x what the bottom person earns; The company must invest 1% of revenues to local non-governmental, non-religious charities and 2% of profits to local hospitals, schools, etc;

By doing that, Gates would get a multiplier effect while re-starting the global economy.

Re:good or bad? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37760898)

Agreed on W, but Reagan really didn't attack birth control while in office.

Then again, if you are still using "ppl" in a slashdot post, little things like facts don't bother you.

Re:good or bad? (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761040)

My boss's boss worked for reagan. I seriously doubt that you had anything to do with reagan or know even a fraction of what transpired under him. reagan DID attack BC. In fact, reagan did a lot of things that so few realize.

Nice ad hominem from a coward.

Re:good or bad? (1)

j-pimp (177072) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761544)

My boss's boss worked for reagan. I seriously doubt that you had anything to do with reagan or know even a fraction of what transpired under him. reagan DID attack BC. In fact, reagan did a lot of things that so few realize.

Care to cite something he did that was anti-BC?

Re:good or bad? (1)

slackbheep (1420367) | more than 2 years ago | (#37762160)

Yeah well my uncles friends cousin worked for David Icke, Turns out Icke is really a monkey who went to space and returned with amazing powers of speech, now he wages a war against the reptilian power structure of the world in order to conquer it for his simian brothers. You can believe me, because my information is from such a highly placed source.

Re:good or bad? (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761036)

It will not. Ppl as a whole, do what brings them pleasure. When you do not have a job or money, then you spend your time focused on roughly one thing: sex. Now, when nations are controlled by roman catholics, islam, mormons, etc, or you have idiots like reagan and W that say no money to BC, well, you end up with a high birth rate.

Though only a few would seriously have the ten kids they'd have if they just kept fucking and fucking with no birth control. So in practice the disconnect between having sex and having kids has already happened. The only battleground is where this not-for-reproduction sex happens. Most that practically deal with teenagers have quietly added "but if you do anyway use protection so you don't get pregnant or catch an STD" in additon to the puritan bullshit.

Re:good or bad? (1)

exploder (196936) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760834)

Good or bad that babies (somewhere else, conveniently) are dying? Is that the question? Fuck you.

(I wish I thought this guy was a troll.)

Oh, come on now. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37761104)

Get over yourself. World population needs some trimming.

Take the safety labels off everything, I say.

Re:good or bad? (2)

dragonhunter21 (1815102) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760982)

The reason they have so many kids is because infant mortality is so high. They have to have six kids just to make sure that one of them survives to adulthood.

We've seen in other countries that as quality of life improves, birth rate drops. This is a solid first step towards improving the quality of life.

Re:good or bad? (2)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761072)

Exactly there is actually a problem in some "First World Countries" that their population is dropping. Because their lives are not so filled with death, they feel they have the time to wait to have a child when it is the most convent or not at all, and limit their children to 1 or 2.

Of course there is this funny concept that these countries at the same time complain both about their population from birth dropping being a bad thing, and the population influx from immigrants being a bad thing as well.

I guess population growth is only good for these countries if you are white.

Malaria seems to be adaptable (1)

maroberts (15852) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760692)

...so will this vaccine and others become useless in a few years, as malaria seems to have become resistant to other treatments over the years?

Re:Malaria seems to be adaptable (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37760770)

Vaccines != antibiotics.

Re:Malaria seems to be adaptable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37761284)

Vaccines != antibiotics.

So? Can't diseases become resistant to vaccination? Or to put it another way, what's to stop another strain of malaria arising that can infect people that have been vaccinated?

Re:Malaria seems to be adaptable (2)

andot (714926) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761620)

AFAIK humans are not primary carriers of malaria sporozoites. So elliminating humans from malaria life cycle is not enough to trigger rapid evolution in favor of other malaria strains.

Re:Malaria seems to be adaptable (1)

mlush (620447) | more than 2 years ago | (#37762004)

True but vaccines train the body to recognise markers so one presumes that a strain of malaria may arise without the markers that are recognised.

Possibly, the big achievement is find anything to target. malarias coat proteins are highly polymorphic to better avoid the immune system and all the stable stuff is hidden under the coat protein.

If a resistant strain does become prevalent it should be possible to create a vaccine against that targeting the same protein.

Vaccines != Antibiotics (1)

maroberts (15852) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761322)

True but vaccines train the body to recognise markers so one presumes that a strain of malaria may arise without the markers that are recognised.

Re:Vaccines != Antibiotics (1)

mlush (620447) | more than 2 years ago | (#37762026)

True but vaccines train the body to recognise markers so one presumes that a strain of malaria may arise without the markers that are recognised.

Possibly, the big achievement is find anything to target. malarias coat proteins are highly polymorphic to better avoid the immune system and all the stable stuff is hidden under the coat protein.

If a resistant strain does become prevalent it should be possible to create a vaccine against that

Re:Malaria seems to be adaptable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37760798)

"Over the years" - did you mean until the patent runs out?

Darwin? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37760696)

If half of the parasite population survives, won't selection quickly favour the resistant part of the population?

Re:Darwin? (2)

Dragon Bait (997809) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760846)

If half of the parasite population survives, won't selection quickly favour the resistant part of the population?

If it were an antibiotic and not a vaccine, you'd be right.

With a vaccine, you're encouraging the child's immune system to combat malaria. If the half that the vaccine doesn't work for die before procreation then overtime the vaccine would become more effective (assuming that why the vaccine works for some and not for others is genetic based).

Just what we need, more 3rd world children (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37760700)

Let nature run its course. The turd world is already overpopulated. They can't even feed themselves. Malaria is nature's way of keeping things in check.

Re:Just what we need, more 3rd world children (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37760888)

If they can't feed themselves then curing malaria is irrelevant to population growth in the third world and will only benefit that proportionally tiny amount of malarial infections of people in the developed world. So you should be happy anyway.

Troll rebuffed.

Re:Just what we need, more 3rd world children (2)

retroworks (652802) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761012)

Written by a troll on a computer with a hard drive engineered in Singapore. Fifty years ago, Singapore was a malaria pit. Today it has hospitals which rival anything in the West. And they engineer hard drives used to write crap about people who will be engineers and software designers fifty years from today if we allow free and fair trade to run its course.

Not a silver bullet... (1)

coinreturn (617535) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760738)

Is it just bronze then?

Poverty is the REAL issue (0)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760764)

So sad. Malaria is a major killer of ppl. That is a fact. HOWEVER, it occurs where poverty strikes. So, gates, copying Carnigie and Rockfellers to end up with a decent name, is working on this. Basically, he spends money now on curing human SYMPTOMS, while ignoring the main issue that really needs to worked on: poverty. For example, gates, like China, continues to pull money out of the west, and then talks about giving it away without making it productive. Yet, the man has the ability to bring the world out of recession by using that money to fund a large number of innovative start-ups around the world. Note that I said innovative, not necessarily profitable. These start-ups that help create wealth for MANY, that would then invest into their own nations conditions if taught to do so, as part of winning that money. Such a waste of money.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (5, Insightful)

dragonhunter21 (1815102) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760906)

Is a man who dedicates half his fortune to curing a major cause of death in the third world to establish his good name really any worse than the man who does same for purely altruistic reasons? The money's the same, after all.

It's a damn sight easier to eliminate a disease than to eliminate poverty. If they have more bodies available to work, then the economy will pick up. Baby steps.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37761002)

he is not dedicating half his fortune to that. Not even 5%.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (3, Insightful)

Hentes (2461350) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761026)

If they have more bodies available to work, then the economy will pick up. Baby steps.

Africa already has the highest population growth. A successful economy needs more then that just people.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (2)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761268)

Very true. It also needs people who can survive until the age when they can begin contributing to society. This vaccine might help with that.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (3, Insightful)

Hentes (2461350) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761464)

Employment rates in Africa are terrible. The problem is not a shortage of workforce.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37761852)

Africa already has the highest population growth. A successful economy needs more then that just people.

Quite right. It needs healthy people.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (2)

mutube (981006) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761996)

Quite right. It needs healthy people.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37761054)

"More bodies available to work" is the problem, it depresses the average wage. In a time of famine, do you really want more people?

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (0)

muon-catalyzed (2483394) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761062)

> If they have more bodies available to work, then the economy will pick up..
and more copies of OS could be sold, Gates knows this, the sales of Windows per country are function of population size.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (1)

dragonhunter21 (1815102) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761172)

Really? You're looking to slam Gates so much that you're willing to overlook his over $28 billion in charitable contributions because the company he founded stands to make some cash off selling computers to them? I'm willing to bet that, even optimally, Gates won't make back a tenth of that as a result of this. Not everything has an ulterior motive.

Do some research (-1, Troll)

arcite (661011) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761504)

The Gates foundation has more funds invested in such corporations as Exxon than they they do in the actual charities they purport to be running. The whole thing is a tax shelter/scam.

Re:Do some research (3, Insightful)

bws111 (1216812) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761812)

You're an idiot. Which is better? A foundation that invests in things that make money, and can therefore give the profits of those investments to charities for an extended period of time (forever, if the investments are good), or a foundation that gives away all it's worth at once?

Re:Do some research (0)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#37762158)

No matter what you do with ill gotten gains, it does not remove the original crime/sin.

Re:Do some research (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37762262)

Quick, tear the flesh from your bones to feed your children.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (1)

blizter (1242428) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761194)

In Soviet Russia, if they have more bodies available to pick up, then the economy will work.

Gates Foundation is selfserving (0, Flamebait)

arcite (661011) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761460)

Do some research on how they invest their funds; the corporations where they hold their monies; the entire charity is a tax shelter, a self-serving monument to one man's ego. If this drug were truly revolutionary, it would be released for free and made available to the generic drug makers.

Re:Gates Foundation is selfserving (1)

mcmonkey (96054) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761724)

Do some research on how they invest their funds; the corporations where they hold their monies; the entire charity is a tax shelter, a self-serving monument to one man's ego. If this drug were truly revolutionary, it would be released for free and made available to the generic drug makers.

If it was released for free, you'd just come back and say they'd charge for it if it was worth anything.

Gates already has a good name (4, Insightful)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761170)

Some times the pathetic attitude of people here really disappoints me.

Even with his billions he can't lift the world out of recession, he has the same hamstring everyone does, government. How do you propose solving government induced poverty? Spend his billions trying to overthrow petty tyrants? How do you expect him to sort out which start ups have a possibility at success let alone are not scams or will simply succumb to the corrupt governments of the countries they are in?

You seem to ascribe a lot of guilt to one man who actually is trying do good. Did you ever consider that he has evaluated his options and is taking the choice that provides the best bang for the buck?

What are you doing, please don't say that since you don't have X amount of money you cannot help.

Re:Gates already has a good name (-1, Troll)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761352)

If you think that gates has a good name, then you are less than 35 or are not in the tech world. You also do not know the man, or have met him. The fact is that Gates is an asshole. Not like Ellison, but a real ass. The charities are not his. They are melinda's. She, as a marketer, started it to rehabilitate his name. In fact, the first act was to give cheap cheap computers to libraries, which required buying software from MS at 30% off. The thing was a sham. but it worked. It boosted MS's profits. These days, bill does not tie it directly, but indirectly. He is having R&D work closely with experts and then get patents. Patents that MS owns, not the ppl that actually developed these. Gates is not giving away his money. he is buying IP and a name.

Re:Gates already has a good name (2)

kkwst2 (992504) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761820)

Well I'm over 35, have met him, and don't think he's an asshole. I'd hang out with him over Steve Jobs (RIP) any day. His egocentricity does not approach that of what Jobs was. He is giving away his money. He already has. You appear to not like how he's using it, but it doesn't take away from the fact that he's giving away hundreds of millions to different research groups and charities.

Re:Gates already has a good name (3, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#37762358)

First off, I am 52 and have known plenty of ppl that have worked closely with him. Gates has a well earn reputation as being an asshole esp. in Seattle (and yes, jobs is supposed to have been quite a bit meaner; not an ellison, but up there).

It is HIS money. He can spend it the way that he sees fit. HOWEVER, just as America's efforts on Africa for the last 60 years have hardly paid off. We never solved the real issue which is POVERTY. We gave them free food which in turn, took local farmers out of work. How can you compete with FREE food? YOu can not. Gate's solution is the same way. he will solve one problem, but it will only increase the other issues: population increases without monetary increases.

The only workable solution is to help them start businesses and build up infrastructures such as hospitals and schools. Mostly schools.

Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. teach a man to fish, you feed him and his kin for life. If nothing else, look at how much good we did in Europe, Japan, and south korea with marshal plan and then later in China with our current stuff. Europe was brought back to life after being devasted in WWII by working closely with them. By the 70's, they Europe, japan were on their feet. SK has come into their own over the last 2 decades.
China is a different issue. We sought to do the same, but Chinese leaders are in a cold war with the west, which is why we are going to have to do something soon. The best thing that we can do with Africa and South America is help them expand economically.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (4, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761236)

Basically, he spends money now on curing human SYMPTOMS, while ignoring the main issue that really needs to worked on: poverty.

You would make a really shitty triage doctor. When a patient is laying on the gurney with a gunshot wound, you don't throw your hands up and say "Well, until I can treat the underlying problem of gang violence that got him here, fuck it." Helping end disease in Africa will mean a major improvement in lives there. Would it be nice to ALSO end poverty? You betcha. But when you have limited resources, you don't START with the hardest and most intractable problems, you start out with the smaller problems that you can actually SOLVE with those limited resources.

Even a Bill Gates, with his vast individual wealth, couldn't even begin to deal with the issue of poverty in Africa. That would take a coalition of dozens (if not hundreds) of governments willing to pool their resources and work together. And even then it would be a HUGE challenge.

What's REALLY sad that people on /. can't look past their mindless hatred of Bill Gates to acknowledge the real good he's doing in Africa. The bizarre thing is that some of these same people are the ones who cried like their daddy had died when Steve Jobs died--a man who lined his own pockets with billions while never doing ANYTHING to help the sick and impoverished. Not one fucking THING have you or your idol done for the poor in Africa, yet all you can do is criticize Bill Gates, one of the few who is actually getting off his ass and doing something to help.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (2, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761530)

Actually, it is yourself that would make a shitty triage. You would obviously try to cure a broken leg or a gunshot wound to the arm, while ignoring the fact that the patient is not breathing and has no circulation.

When you solve malaria, you will now cut the death rate. That will put pressure on the local community. LOADS of it. Right now, the reason why Malaria spread so quickly and easily is because mosquitoes carry it from one person to another. They are right next to each other. Once malaria is cured, then another disease will step right up there because more ppl will occupy the same space, but with the same amount of money to solve issues. Actually less overall as well as less per person. Once it is realized by gates that he screwed up, he will not want to solve the next symptom.

The ONLY answer is to solve poverty. You solve poverty by creating new companies, and then have these companies invest into the local area. Those investments clean up the area, while employing ppl. Once you clean up an area, and have enough money to separate ppl, then disease drops.

BTW, I suspect that even the above will be false. I doubt that gates or others like yourself will look at this rationally and logically. For example, America keeps pouring food and other resources into solving Africa and south America's problems. Yet, new ones pop up. The SMART solution is to work these locals and give them the same capabilities that we have: solve problems LOCALLY. By having enough to deal with it. Brazil is a nation that is building itself up this way. And they ARE addressing issues.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (2)

SpeZek (970136) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761846)

It's quite amazing how many leaps of logic you take to assert that fighting a disease is a bad thing.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#37762184)

I did not say that fighting a disease a bad thing. I said that he is fighting a symptom, and not the cause. The root cause of this is poverty. The real issue is that once you solve THIS disase, unless you take care of the poverty issue, another will QUICKLY rise to the top and kill as many or more in total numbers. The reason is that once you stop the deaths, then you will have higher population densities in some of the worse places going.

Beyond that, what leaps of logic did I make?

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (2)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 2 years ago | (#37762440)

Actually, it is yourself that would make a shitty triage. You would obviously try to cure a broken leg or a gunshot wound to the arm, while ignoring the fact that the patient is not breathing and has no circulation.

This is my first and only comment on this whole article, but... your analogy is bullsh*t.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761928)

Malaria is a major killer of ppl.

Actually, it is a major killer of children. Gates foundation is not draining the U.S. coffers in their attempt to ease the pain and suffering of those children. Bill and Melinda Gates contribution and construction of the foundation is not a blank check to the foundation. Donations have been, and are still being, accepted from global contributers. China's money is not the U.S.'s money. Money spent on China's goods is gone. It belongs to China. If they wish to help children with their money, good for them. If money protected someone from getting bitten by a mosquito we would have clothing made from it.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37762228)

maybe poverty would stop if people kept dying of curable diseases

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37762332)

Are you really so foolish to think that poverty isn't partially created by people getting sick, and dying? Disease isn't merely just a symptom of poverty, it's also a cause.

Re:Poverty is the REAL issue (1)

Kyusaku Natsume (1098) | more than 2 years ago | (#37762520)

Africa would get a good lift up if the Europeans and Americans paid reparations for the damage done under the colonial conquest of the continent and the slave trade. Despite being mostly a tax evading scheme, I will recognize Gates that at least him is doing it in a far bigger scale than what would be recommended by his accountants and enough to do a palpable good. Here in Mexico, our billionaires are 150% assholes.

"Licensed and Rolled Out" (2)

GeneralTurgidson (2464452) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760786)

A vaccine which could save almost a million lives should be donated to humanity.

Re:"Licensed and Rolled Out" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37760852)

Who the hell would develop it then? You may not like it but this research costs real money.

Re:"Licensed and Rolled Out" (0)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761190)

There's this concept that's been catching on in (most of) the civilized world for the past few millennia called "government". It typically collects money from individuals and pools it to be spent on things that address the greater good of humanity.

Re:"Licensed and Rolled Out" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37761614)

There's this concept call "thinking" that has been catching on. You ought to try it sometime. Contrary to your moronic statement, governments do not spend money on things "for the greater good of humanity". They spend money on things that are good for their nation. How much money do you think that the countries affected by malaria have to spend on developing a vaccine for malaria?

Re:"Licensed and Rolled Out" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37761976)

Ever heard of the UN, fucktard?

Sickle? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37760790)

Is it Sickle Cell?

Child vaccine (0)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760796)

Africa needs an effective vaccine against babies more than a vaccine against mosquitoes.

Re:Child vaccine (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37760812)

That's called HIV. I'm not kidding, but I'll post this AC.

Re:Child vaccine (0)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761388)

Yeah, most people would be ashamed to post something so fucking stupid.

Re:Child vaccine (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37761434)

But he still suckered you in, troll bate.

Re:Child vaccine (5, Informative)

timeOday (582209) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761202)

Boy did you walk into that one!

One of the Gates Foundation biggest health initiatives is family planning [gatesfoundation.org] .

Family Planning Overview

Family planning saves lives.

One of the most cost-effective public health interventions available today is family planning. Voluntary family planning is a critical lifesaving intervention that can significantly improve the health of women and their families.

Through family planning:

  • Maternal mortality is reduced. Family planning could prevent up to one third of all maternal deaths by allowing women to delay motherhood, space births, avoid unintended pregnancies and unsafe abortions, and stop childbearing when they have reached their desired family size.
  • Deaths and illness among young women are reduced. Pregnancy is the leading cause of death for women under 19, with complications of childbirth and unsafe abortion being the major factors. Adolescents aged 15 to 19 are twice as likely to die in childbirth as those in their 20s, and girls under 15 are five times as likely to die as those in their 20s.
  • Child health and survival is improved. Reducing the number of births less than two years apart, births to very young and older women, and higher-order births, family planning lowers child and infant mortality. For example, if women spaced their births at least 36 months apart, almost 3 million deaths to children under age 5 could be averted.

    ...

Seriously, they get it. Enough that they are drawing the ire [jesus-is-savior.com] of certain other groups, for what it's worth.

Re:Child vaccine (2, Interesting)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761418)

When people that insane are against you, there's a good chance you're doing something right.

Re:Child vaccine (2)

maroberts (15852) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761414)

Africa needs an effective vaccine against babies more than a vaccine against mosquitoes.

The two are related; people have more babies when they are aware that many of their offspring may not survive till adulthood. They will generally have less if the chances that their children will survive are greater.

They don't need a vaccine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37761722)

A little self-discipline goes a long way.

Incredible Result (3, Insightful)

Covalent (1001277) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760824)

Malaria is incredibly resistant to both the immune system and treatment. This is an impressive result.

And as for all of the "Won't this lead to overpopulation" comments, I think it will do the opposite. Birth rates in malaria areas are very high in part because of the poverty and lack of education in those areas. Those areas are poor in part because of malaria and its ability to ravage families. There may be an initial population spike from this vaccine, but time and again we have seen that increasing the standard of living lowers the birth rate. The best way to control overpopulation is to reduce poverty and educate people (specifically women). This vaccine goes a long way to doing both.

Re:Incredible Result (1)

swb (14022) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761496)

So which lowers birth rates, increased economic standards of living or relief from the disease pressure of malaria? I also don't see where preventing malaria increases education, women's or anyone else's, or reduces poverty by any direct means.

I think this is great for people who live in malarial areas as a means to reduce misery, but I think there's a lot of weak conclusions drawn about the larger impact of reducing malaria, especially in the face of endemic poverty, political instability, political repression and in many cases, rampant tribalism.

I'm not sure it will greatly increase population pressures, but I also don't think it will do much to help them and overpopulation (7 Billion and counting) is a real problem.

Re:Incredible Result (1)

kkwst2 (992504) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761896)

Well, for one, a huge amount of resources now are spent by humanitarian organizations in treating and fighting malaria. If this puts a significant dent in that, some of the expense and effort put into fighting malaria can be used for education, training, building infrastructure, etc.

Re:Incredible Result (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37761910)

If it's reasonably possible that all your children will die if you get only x children, then people will have x+1 children or more. Curing diseases reduces x, so people don't have to have as many children to be reasonably sure of having surviving children. Any way to reduce x is helping, both in reducing deaths and in reducing population.

Re:Incredible Result (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37762502)

Children with malaria don't go to school. Siblings of children with malaria stay home and take care of their siblings. And if one of the parents gets malaria?

There is a very real loss of education and economic growth here, not to mention all

The European Union could learn from this (1)

Errol backfiring (1280012) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760926)

If we vaccinate humans, we can fight a disease with immunity. But we won't vaccinate cattle. Rather than fight the diseases, we gladly slaughter our entire fauna, but won't fight the diseases.

Re:The European Union could learn from this (1)

jpstanle (1604059) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761396)

Huh? Is malaria infection a big problem with European cattle? Is there some other disease ravaging European cattle herds that could easily be prevented with a vaccine that isn't used?

I don't quite understand what point you are trying to get across. Could you clarify?

Re:The European Union could learn from this (1)

rvw (755107) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761798)

Huh? Is malaria infection a big problem with European cattle? Is there some other disease ravaging European cattle herds that could easily be prevented with a vaccine that isn't used?

I don't quite understand what point you are trying to get across. Could you clarify?

Not malaria, but diseases like Q-fever and pig plague/swine fever do have vaccins. For some reason they don't want to vaccinate, and thus they kill the complete stock. I believe using the vaccine results in not being able to get a clear picture of the disease, where is spreads, if it stops, etc.

Africans immune to malaria (2)

Compaqt (1758360) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760962)

I was going to say, aren't Africans immune to malaria? But wiki [wikipedia.org] sayeth: apparently only a third of sub-Saharan Africans are immune to malaria.

Re:Africans immune to malaria (0)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761222)

Where on earth would you get the idea that Africans were immune? Did you think that it was only killing hundreds of thousands of Europeans and Asians per year in Africa?

Re:Africans immune to malaria (1)

Compaqt (1758360) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761532)

>Where on earth would you get the idea that Africans were immune?

Am I missing something? The reference is right there in the post you responded to.

I thought it was well known that Africans who have sick-cell anemia have the upside of being immune to malaria. What I didn't know is that not all Africans have this immunity, which I luckily checked before posting.

Re:Africans immune to malaria (1)

kkwst2 (992504) | more than 2 years ago | (#37762090)

Perhaps you are missing that your comment demonstrated an astounding combination of ignorance and lack of reading comprehension. Sickle cell TRAIT (heterozygotes) makes you resistant, not immune, to malaria. Sickle cell anemia (homozygotes) makes you die early (and generally have a painful and debilitating life before that without treatment). Says so right in the article you linked to. And to not know that nearly a million Africans are dying from malaria each year is remarkable.

Re:Africans immune to malaria (2)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761294)

In the happy side effect camp, the "immunity" to malaria involves sickle cell anemia which has its own huge set of problems. If you end malaria, then you also end natural selection for sickle cell and make their whole society healthier in the long term.

Health Care in Emerging Markets (4, Interesting)

retroworks (652802) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760968)

Malaria kills about 2414 people per day. But the number one cause of death for women in places like Lagos and Cairo is blood loss during childbirth. The West's invention of a malaria vaccine will be hugely important. But in the meantime, during Cohen's 24 years of working on the vaccines, the west has criminalized the sale of surplus property from USA hospitals to emerging markets. Shredding our own surplus property causes our health care costs to go up, and forces emerging markets to buy brand new equipment they cannot afford, which takes money they need - to buy malaria vaccines. They need computers and need basic things like hospital beds. Here is a link to a story which ran yesterday, that "medical waste" was illegally shipped to Brazil. Had the story translated... it was uniforms and beds. The message is that Western hospitals cannot share surplus property - computers, blood gas analyzers, or beds - with emerging markets. By coincidence, 24 years ago I lived in Africa as a Peace Corps volunteer, and had to dig a grave for a colleagues two year old son. I kept links there and have been trying to help the hospitals during the same 24 years. During the past 24 years, while Cohen perfected his vaccine, donations of surplus property to hospitals in Africa has been criminalized. Sometimes simple things, like donating hospital beds, can save as many people over the period as a new vaccine. The system is sick. http://retroworks.blogspot.com/2011/10/headline-medical-waste-exported-to.html [blogspot.com]

Will it work in mosquitos? (1)

beh (4759) | more than 2 years ago | (#37760978)

Unlikely, but, would it be possible to design it in a way that it works in mosquitoes as well? (So, that the mosquito might possibly get the antibodies as well?)

If oral vaccination works for polio in humans - would it be possible to design an oral vaccination that might help eradicate the Malaria pathogens in mosquitoes? (i.e. can we 'cure' the mosquitoes before they bite us again?)

Re:Will it work in mosquitos? (0)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761258)

It works by triggering the human immune system. I can't imagine that mosquitoes have anything resembling that to work with.

Re:Will it work in mosquitos? (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 2 years ago | (#37762104)

can we 'cure' the mosquitoes before they bite us again?

We can introduce male mosquito genetically altered to have glow in the dark genes. This would help to eradicate the species of mosquito that caries malaria.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/life/genetic/gm-mosquito.htm [howstuffworks.com]

Re:Will it work in mosquitos? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37762580)

Only if you can completely swamp the population with your engineered males. Any members of the population that remain glow-gene free will just become the new race of malaria mosquitos. You'd have to get this population below sustainable density for it to work. I don't see it working. Maybe engineering an infectious mosquito disease that attacks larva, but engineering diseases is a big can of worms.

The article you link actually talks about making *stronger* mosquitos that both outcompete the normal strain and are immune to the malaria parasite. That's different - they will naturally tend to displace the malarial sub-population of that species of mosquitos. You could even throw in a weakness that they normally don't encounter in the wild that will let you wipe them out later if you want.

What's the hold up? (1)

slasho81 (455509) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761046)

Why 2015? What's taking 3 years?

Re:What's the hold up? (1)

Lockyy (2486084) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761360)

Production of vast amounts of vaccine won't be quick, nor cheap.

It's a really horrible question to have to ask... (1)

pev (2186) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761164)

I was under the impression that most African countries that have the highest incidences of death by Malaria roughly correlate to the countries that also have death via famine. If that is the case, where's the food coming from for the extra 390,000 people that won't be dying every year? Will they just end up dying of starvation instead?

Re:It's a really horrible question to have to ask. (2)

rvw (755107) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761874)

I was under the impression that most African countries that have the highest incidences of death by Malaria roughly correlate to the countries that also have death via famine. If that is the case, where's the food coming from for the extra 390,000 people that won't be dying every year? Will they just end up dying of starvation instead?

If a woman gives birth to a child that dies, that's a big waste of human energy. Having to give birth just three times (in a lifetime) instead of five (as an example) means more time and energy for work and earning money. Plus think of the grief of the loss of those children, that has a big impact on your life, another waste of energy, even if it's quite common in Africa.

Re:It's a really horrible question to have to ask. (1)

rvw (755107) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761912)

I was under the impression that most African countries that have the highest incidences of death by Malaria roughly correlate to the countries that also have death via famine. If that is the case, where's the food coming from for the extra 390,000 people that won't be dying every year? Will they just end up dying of starvation instead?

If a woman gives birth to a child that dies, that's a big waste of human energy. Having to give birth just three times (in a lifetime) instead of five (as an example) means more time and energy for work and earning money. Plus think of the grief of the loss of those children, that has a big impact on your life, another waste of energy, even if it's quite common in Africa.

Plus, there are not more children born, probably only less children die. There might be a spike in the first few years however.

Will a successful vaccine create new problems? (2)

RNLockwood (224353) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761210)

If this really works and is widely deployed then governments need to figure out how to clothe, feed, educate, and find jobs for the the increased population. If not the increase of disadvantaged persons will probably breed civil unrest and war.

Re:Will a successful vaccine create new problems? (1)

mjr167 (2477430) | more than 2 years ago | (#37762588)

So I suppose we should just nuke Africa because those people aren't worth saving?

MALARIA CURE DISCOVERED!!! (0)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761350)

Pliny knew you could cure malaria by drinking tea made from olive leaf. It is not an accident that 75% of all medications are derived or synthesized from natural sources.

Wow that such a scam is allowed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37761492)

That is sickening. So someone has created and will be "licensing" a vaccine to very poor third world countries for something that can be eradicated with proper nutrition and hygiene. Completely and totally unethical. The stupidity and greed needs to stop. Ranks right up there with Paul Offit's diarrhea vaccine.

Dont take vaccines! (1)

xmorg (718633) | more than 2 years ago | (#37761918)

Vacines give you #$%#$% terrets! Syn#$%$#drom!
dont take them, im not even #$%# playin.

Just what we needed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37761956)

...more cases of autism.

Load More 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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...