×

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 Approval For Human Trials

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the who's-feeling-lucky dept.

Canada 365

An anonymous reader writes with news that researchers from the University of Western Ontario have been given approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to begin testing an HIV vaccine in humans. From the article: "The vaccine is the first based on a genetically modified killed whole virus, [researchers said.] ... a clinical trial on 40 HIV-positive volunteers will begin next month. That phase will last a year, after which 600 HIV-negative volunteers will see how the vaccine impacts their immune systems. A final phase, which will take about three years, will involve about 6,000 HIV-negative volunteers."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

365 comments

FP (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441078)

WOOHOOO!!!

Re:FP (2, Funny)

jhoegl (638955) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441152)

I agree, now people can go back to having sex with monkeys!

Re:FP (4, Informative)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441300)

The best guess for transmission from simians to humans was not via sex, but by eating of undercooked monkey meat. (perhaps even raw). Near as I can tell, those perpetuating the sex with monkeys jokes are racists wanting to malign Africans with beastiality claims.

Re:FP (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441464)

Near as I can tell, those perpetuating the sex with monkeys jokes are racists wanting to malign Africans with beastiality claims.

Or they're just making dumb jokes and you have chosen to project wholly invented motivations onto people you know nothing about. One of the two.

Re:FP (2)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441630)

but by eating of undercooked monkey meat.

Oh, you been to El Taco Loco on Augusta Blvd, too? IMHO, their goat's brain tacos are the best in town.

Re:FP (-1)

eparker05 (1738842) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441524)

Attitudes like yours are the reason it took so long for us to get around to curing this disease in the first place. As many of you know, for a long time AIDS was known as as GRID (gay-related immune deficiency). Who would want to cure GRID? Who would want to cure any disease if we can justify that those suffering the disease somehow 'deserved' to get it through karma or some sort of cosmic justice?

I know what you said was a joke, but it highlights a real issue. I hope it's modded up; if only to show people that this mindset still exists even down in the region of our brains where we mask our prejudices with humor.

Genetically modified killed whole virus (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441098)

So it is a kill -9 virus?

Pools closed...no longer? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441108)

So the pool will longer be closed due to AIDS?

Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441120)

Pretty sure this means that they know it works but want to see if it fucks anything else up?

Re:Wow (2)

Jawnn (445279) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441332)

Pretty sure this means that they know it works but want to see if it fucks anything else up?

Well..., only if it fucks it up really bad. When "...common side effects may include: itching, rash, diarrhea, constipation, shortness of breath, nausea, inability to urinate, hair falling out, unusual hair growth, erections lasting longer than four hours, seizure, coma, or death...", it's a pretty safe bet that something that might keep you from getting AIDS will get even more slack that most of the miracle-cure-of-the-month medications whose manufacturers buy so much time on NASCAR broadcasts and Oprah. Well, unless the fuckwit social conservatives manage to derail it because it might lead to "...an increase in sexual activity..."
Here's hoping that the trials go well and this ounce of prevention gets the fast track.

Re:Wow (5, Funny)

zill (1690130) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441366)

When "...common side effects may include: itching, rash, diarrhea, constipation, shortness of breath, nausea, inability to urinate, hair falling out, unusual hair growth, erections lasting longer than four hours, seizure, coma, or death..."

WHERE DO I SIGN UP?

Re:Wow (1)

Beardo the Bearded (321478) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441466)

When "...common side effects may include: itching, rash, diarrhea, constipation, shortness of breath, nausea, inability to urinate, hair falling out, unusual hair growth, erections lasting longer than four hours, seizure, coma, or death..."

WHERE DO I SIGN UP?

GET IN LINE.

Re:Wow (0)

Dahamma (304068) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441502)

unless the fuckwit social conservatives manage to derail it because it might lead to "...an increase in sexual activity..."

You mean social conservatives like these [dkosopedia.com] ? If anything, that would probably make it even more popular with them as an off-label prescription...

Re:Wow (1)

Khashishi (775369) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441584)

How do vaccines manage to have so many side effects if they are made from killed viruses? And what does it mean to kill a virus?

Re:Wow (5, Informative)

cp.tar (871488) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441722)

Anything that happens to you during a trial gets noted as a possible side-effect.
Note that diarrhea and constipation are noted right next to each other, for instance. Ditto for hair loss and increased hairiness.

It is highly likely most of those are completely unrelated to the vaccine, and that you’ll experience no such effects, but at this point, it’s really hard to tell. It pays to be cautious, or even paranoid, when conducting trials.

I for one, hope they get this right (5, Insightful)

burning-toast (925667) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441126)

I hope this vaccine is as effective as the smallpox and polio vaccines have been. The world would do well to be rid of this particularly crafty and deadly virus. It is also a whole lot easier to introduce vaccination programs into third world countries (which counts as medicinal treatment) which would otherwise have severe religious problems with contraceptives like condoms (which counts as interfering with "God's work").

- Toast

Re:I for one, hope they get this right (4, Funny)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441164)

But it might cause autism in Jenny McCarthy's future kid!

Re:I for one, hope they get this right (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441414)

That whole boondoggle is the perfect example of why you shouldn't take your kids to a doctor with an ax to grind. It turns out that after they took her kid to a real doctor, they found out he had Landau-Kleffner syndrome [wikipedia.org] . Even she doesn't claim that vaccines cause autism anymore, now it is just a general "we need to study vaccines for safety" and "we need to study causes and treatments of autism." Of course, that news didn't get anywhere near the attention the idea that it did cause autism got because it doesn't fit the loons message.

Re:I for one, hope they get this right (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441238)

Don't worry, once HIV goes the was of Smallpox and Polio, there will be an even more deadly infectious disease to fill the void. People keep forgetting that mother nature isn't just sitting on her ass while our scientists are working hard coming up with vaccines. SARS and Swine Flu where probably some of her clinical trials for her new disease. =P

Re:I for one, hope they get this right (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441396)

It's looking like virally caused cancers is Mother Nature's next big thing - transmittable in a variety of ways, including sex? Check. Causes horribly disfiguring disease that still takes months to kill someone, but only after it has silently incubated? Check. Causes the body to be its own enemy? Check.

Once that one is cured, just wait until she rolls out airborne rabies. It'll look something like this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0289043/

Re:I for one, hope they get this right (1)

medv4380 (1604309) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441508)

These aren't new though. They are pre-existing. We're just now finding out that many of the cancers out there are virally caused.

Re:I for one, hope they get this right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441270)

People will find another way to violate themselves and others and introduce new nasty things into their system.

Re:I for one, hope they get this right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441440)

It seems to me that if this works then there should be a vaccine effective against every flu? Because if not then this vaccine is going to be about as effective as flu vaccines. That is, they may do something but nowhere near 100% effective. It will just target certain HIV types and the virus will eventually change enough that the old batch of vaccines will be completely ineffective (wow, that sounds like a money making prospect, eh?).

A lot of those third world countries can use the population control. It's sad for those poor people but if HIV keeps them in check "naturally" then, well...

The volunteers for these trails are going to have to be some crazy brave SOB's, that's for sure. You're injecting a potentially horrible death sentence if the vaccine isn't constructed correctly.

So how much does it cost ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441136)

to get someone to let you inject them with an experimental vaccine for a deadly virus? Is there a clause in the contract for a lifetime supply of AZT should the vaccine's quality control be lacking and the test subject contracts HIV? I've always been curious how this stage of research is handled.

Re:So how much does it cost ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441322)

That's probably why the first round is conducted on HIV+ people. They won't gain anything from the vaccine but they can't accidentaly catch HIV from a failed experiment, either.

Re:So how much does it cost ... (4, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441506)

The test with HIV+ people is to check for side effects. They won't get any benefit from it, but they will experience all of the side effects that come with it (hopefully none, but the point of testing is to try to turn 'hopefully' into 'definitely'). The next round of testing (with the HIV- people) is to see if it actually works. These people are likely to be selected from demographics deemed to have a high risk of HIV infection, and if none of them become infected then it worked. If some of them, but a lower population than would be expected, become HIV+ then the vaccine is partially successful and may be used anyway if it has no side effects: reducing the probability of infection by 50% goes a long way towards eliminating the disease, because now there's a much higher chance that no one who is not immune will come into contact with a carrier.

Re:So how much does it cost ... (4, Informative)

PortHaven (242123) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441560)

My guess, the second batch of volunteers will be those in marriages/committed relationships with HIV+ positive spouses (eg: married to a nurse who got pricked, a spouse who had a bad blood transfusion, victim of rape, etc, etc).

Soo.... (0)

tgetzoya (827201) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441150)

Who's the HIV negative subject going to get injected with a Vaccine that could possibly cause HIV? It technically is possible.

Re:Soo.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441184)

no. you're thinking about live attenuated vaccines. these are dead or killed vaccines. Not possible.

Placebo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441162)

"Ok, so you either were injected with the actual vaccine or the placebo. Go have sex with this shady hooker to see if it worked!"

There is no such virus (-1, Troll)

Grindalf (1089511) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441180)

There is no such virus, the acquired immune syndrome has always existed for certain types of bedroom activity. But then again that would prevent people from perpetuating the lie that a condom prevents this, and so the lie persists in a certain type of doctor.

Re:There is no such virus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441304)

The kind that knows what they're talking about.

I'd hate to meet your doctors.

Patient: Doctor, I think I have strep throat Doctor: Nope. Buttsex! Patient: Is there anything you can give you. Doctor: Nope, can't thwart god's will. He gave you that soar throat to punish you for all the Buttsex. Patient: But I'm not homosexual. Doctor: Yes you are. All diseases are caused by Buttsex. Anyone saying otherwise should have their medical license revoked.

Re:There is no such virus (1)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441486)

I'm confused, you deny that HIV exists, and that you think sex causes disease, and condoms don't prevent this sexually transmitted disease? I'm curious that you assert there is AIDS (even if only non-HIV AIDS) and that sexually transmitted disease can't be stopped with condoms. What mechanism of transmission is there for non-HIV-AIDS? Is it just that if you have "bad sex" that God strikes you down with a non-existent incurable disease?

If so, that would be a pretty strong case for proving God, so I'm surprised more people haven't latched on to the "God kills people for sex, and I have proof" bandwagon.

Still no cure for cancer... (0)

squireofgothos (310804) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441194)

Alright, fine! I'll go back to lurking on Fark...

Re:Still no cure for cancer... (2)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441582)

You know not all cancers are the same? and saying 'cure for cancer' is ignorant, right?

Re:Still no cure for cancer... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441700)

You know not all cancers are the same? and saying 'cure for cancer' is ignorant, right?

Then why is there a "Cure for Cancer" wonder in Civilization, eh? Answer that smart guy.

Numbers game. (0)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441198)

Trial 1: One year.
Trial 2: Length unspecified, but probably one year.
Trial 3: Three years.
Add in about six months per trial for paperwork, awaiting new approval and so on... six and a half years.

This had better be good.

Interesting point to consider though. If the trials were conducted with reckless disregard for the safety of the test subjects, trials one and two could be eliminated. That saves three years, at the expense of perhaps killing a few of the volunteers in the remaining trial. If the vaccine makes it to practical use three years earlier though, that would be a lot more additional lives saved. Could more people be saved overall by considering testing volunteers semi-expendable in order to hasten medical advance?

Re:Numbers game. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441272)

Go volunteer.

Re:Numbers game. (4, Insightful)

Fned (43219) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441292)

Could more people be saved overall by considering testing volunteers semi-expendable in order to hasten medical advance?

Ask the volunteers.

Re:Numbers game. (1)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441330)

Could more people be saved overall by considering testing volunteers semi-expendable in order to hasten medical advance?

Why, are you volunteering to be expended?

Re:Numbers game. (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441624)

"this ahs better be good."

don't be a dumbass. It is what it is. If it doesn't work, then that's data as well. Learn why we have this process before showing everyone how stupid you are.

Re:Numbers game. (1)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441626)

Somebody linked to the trolley car problem yesterday.

I think skipping one and two would count as the trolley car with the fat man on a bridge (which most people agree is wrong).

Re:Numbers game. (2)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441634)

Could more people be saved overall by considering testing volunteers semi-expendable in order to hasten medical advance?

The ends never justify the means. Never. Note that if they could, any action, no matter how heinous, could be justified. So they don't. Which is why such experiments ought to never be considered ethical.

Re:Numbers game. (4, Insightful)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441706)

"The ends never justify the means" is just a cliche excuse people use to escape having to make the hard decisions.

Re:Numbers game. (1)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441672)

Likely for something like this, the manufacture of the vaccine is the real bottleneck. They could produce now and won't break any laws or rules, they just can't sell/use it (in the US). So, if they start full-scale production now, they likely would still sell out on day 1 of sale 9 years from now. Would people get infected between now and then? Likely. But the long term effect wouldn't be much different, as the number of distributed dosed 9 years from now would be the same in either case. And, given how most things are distributed, those with "high risk" careers would be first, and those "at risk" more than them will be ignored for a few years (vaccinations for firefighters and nurses, not for druggies and gays).

Re:Numbers game. (1)

PortHaven (242123) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441730)

Or 3 years, if you bypass the FDA.

If human trials look good. Field test in Africa. Some regions have a 1 in 3 infection rate. Almost any reduction, even with side affects, would probably be beneficial in that region.

In fact, I think if approved. I'd like to see a President/Congress with the balls to purchase and donate a few million doses for Africa.

A brighter future? (3, Insightful)

willaien (2494962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441226)

Good to hear that this is going forward. Hopefully, this will lead to a brighter future for Africa.

I worry about the health of the participants, but, HIV isn't a death sentence anymore. I would volunteer for the trial, assuming that, in the worst case, they cover my medical expenses and anti-retrovirals to control it.

It would be worth it.

Re:A brighter future? (4, Informative)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441254)

HIV isn't a death sentence for the well-off. Treating it requires a cocktail of antivirals, all of them very expensive, plus frequent tests to see when the drugs need swapping out as the virus evolves. The drugs themselves have some unpleasant side effects too.

Re:A brighter future? (1)

willaien (2494962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441326)

Yes. Perhaps I should have been more specific - since the trial is being conducted, any infectees would receive care.

In Africa, or other poor countries, it is still a death sentence.

Re:A brighter future? (1)

geekmux (1040042) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441518)

Good to hear that this is going forward. Hopefully, this will lead to a brighter future for Africa.

I worry about the health of the participants, but, HIV isn't a death sentence anymore. I would volunteer for the trial, assuming that, in the worst case, they cover my medical expenses and anti-retrovirals to control it.

It would be worth it.

Ah, if you think covering your medical expenses while toying with an unproven vaccine is your "worst case" here, then perhaps you should really sit back and re-think this, no matter where your ethics lie.

Trust me, I commend you for stepping forward for the betterment of all mankind, but realistically your life is on the line here, not your bills. In theory you could end up better...or worse, and any "controls" put in place would likely be questionable at best.

Genital Mutilation (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441234)

Let's hope this line of research dampens the damage being done by the pro-circumcision lobby's dubious attempt to present circumcision as a viable tool for preventing HIV.

Re:Genital Mutilation (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441274)

It won't. They are offering a quick, cheap solution - people won't easily reject such an offer, even if it doesn't actually work. Plus they have a lot of religious support in some parts of the world - Muslims eager to demonstrate how the ancient practices of Islam included medical secrets only just discovered by those backwards westerners.

Re:Genital Mutilation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441480)

Especially in regions practising dry sex.

Re:Genital Mutilation (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441566)

circumcision reduces the risk of all STD, not just AIDS.

Plenty of studies on pubmed. of course you have no interest in actually learning the science or the facts.

Re:Genital Mutilation (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441702)

Amputation reduces the spread of STDs even more. That doesn't mean we should encourage it.

I'm still sore about Herpes! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441250)

Can we work on that next?

Re:I'm still sore about Herpes! (1)

DanTheStone (1212500) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441576)

Maybe if we discover that herpes is the cause of most cancers, instead of just a handful, it will receive some attention. If an incurable disease isn't killing people, it's not as much of a concern.

Positive news (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441258)

This isn't just positive news, its HIV positive.

Just curious (4, Insightful)

iceaxe (18903) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441280)

Why does a Canadian University need approval from the U.S. FDA?

Re:Just curious (1)

rish87 (2460742) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441360)

Well the article mentions the actual vaccine is being made in Maryland and Colorado (US)....

Re:Just curious (1)

iceaxe (18903) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441448)

Hmm. I suppose then the FDA regulates the export of the vaccine for use in trials, rather than regulating the research of scientists in another country. That makes sense.

Re:Just curious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441556)

Kang said the virus is being manufactured at labs in Maryland and Colorado because there is no suitable lab in Canada.

That is what the article says; though UWO apparently has some work to do creating a "suitable lab" in Canada (knowing my fellow Canadians there have probable been no calls yet inquiring about this matter) but that is manufacturing. The actual clinical trial is something different.

clinical trial on 40 HIV-positive volunteers will begin next month.

That phase will last a year, after which 600 HIV-negative volunteers will see how the vaccine impacts their immune systems.

A final phase, which will take about three years, will involve about 6,000 HIV-negative volunteers.

So 1 year for that, then the unspecified test with the 600 volunteers but let's say 1 more year, then a final test weighing in at 3 years, will make it at least 2017 before you will see anything on the market. Move on, nothing to see here yet.
 

Re:Just curious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441364)

The research is being done in a lab in the US because there is no suitable lab environment in Canada, this may be why.

Re:Just curious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441384)

If you read the article it says that it's being manufactured in the US - possible reason?

Re:Just curious (4, Insightful)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441428)

I assume it's because they want to run the trials in the United States. I imagine there's practical reasons for that - the US is a pretty significant pharma market, and anything denied there is quite likely to be blocked in other countries, whereas Canada is a smaller country (11% the size of the US by population) that's not as critical for a pharmaceutical company to sell in.

Re:Just curious (1)

iceaxe (18903) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441496)

That makes sense too, given that there's really no distinction between University research and corporate R&D. The ethics of that situation is another topic altogether.

Re:Just curious (1)

zill (1690130) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441520)

Probably because the clinical trial will be conducted in the US.

A Korean pharmaceutical company developing a vaccine in its Canadian subsidiary and then conducting clinical trial in the US.

Four years until it's available? (0)

J'raxis (248192) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441282)

I guess the FDA has to make sure the drug is truly safe, after all. At least all those people who will contract and die of AIDS over the next four years will die safely.

Re:Four years until it's available? (1)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441380)

Yeah how dumb is it to make sure this works before selling it. Totally illogical.

Re:Four years until it's available? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441608)

No kidding, I mean its just injecting the HIV-negative patient with (modified) HIV, what could possibly go wrong?

Re:Four years until it's available? (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441526)

Who the hell dies in four yeas after getting aids? wait, that would be no one.

Re:Four years until it's available? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441534)

You're complaining that they don't mass vaccinate using a drug they don't know will work or worse might kill people.

Who are you planning to lynch when your kid gets the vaccine and he and a few million others die from it?

Re:Four years until it's available? (1)

Khashishi (775369) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441652)

Quit your whining. Four years isn't a long time for phase 2 and 3 testing. Do you really want to mass inoculate people before you know it's safe?

Plot from a horror/action movie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441296)

Why does this sound like a plot from a horror movie?

The Year: 2012
The month:Dec

The vaccine being tested does not work. It instead causes the virus to further mutate into an airborne variety

Result: Those fearing 2012 were correct. A Global pandemic....

Habbo Hotel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441352)

And the residents of Habbo Hotel express cautious optimism over a future where the pool is no longer closed due to AIDS.

Just curious? (-1, Troll)

PortHaven (242123) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441454)

How long until this vaccine is mandatory for 2 year olds?

I figure, if it passes clinical trials, 5 years later we'll require every toddler to have it before they can attend pre-school. (Got to stop all that pre-school sex.)

Re:Just curious? (2)

iceaxe (18903) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441612)

1. If it's proven safe for 2 year olds and prevents them from acquiring HIV infection, why the hell not?

2. There are a whole lot of other ways to get infected besides sex.

3. Personal freedom without consequence to other people is a lie that unscrupulous politicians and for-profit demagogues tell to get what they want from the credulous.
  (3b. Social engineering without consequence to personal freedom is also a lie that a different set of unscrupulous politicians and for-profit demagogues tell to get what they want from the credulous.)

Re:Just curious? (1)

zill (1690130) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441636)

Yes, mandatory vaccination is violation of individual liberty. But just imagine the benefits of completely eradicating HIV. For one, no one will have to be vaccinated against it ever again.

Once again, Science (4, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441504)

delivers the goods.

Seeing aids go from you are going to die, to testing a vaccine in 25 years is freaknig awesome.

human lab rat (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441578)

Back in college I would frequently get paid to be a test subject for medical research (to test for, say, metabolizing rates of a blood pressure medicine, etc); it was a fantastic way to help pay for school, and my grandmother was proud to tell everyone that I was "helping out the medical research community". The WORST was a concurrent heroin trial, where all the subjects were easily identified as "those guys puking in the toilets all day long"...and yes they were compensated. That being said, I cannot imagine how much they'd have to pay me to examine my body's reaction to an HIV vaccine....!

LD FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441600)

wait till everyone realizes that once AIDS is "cured by prevention" they'll eventually have to deal with the millions that are infected with Lyme Disease who've been ignored, chastized, marginalized and left to suffer for so long. Sex with monkeys will seem downright religious.

Jesus is gonna be pissed (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38441642)

Now that we're messing with "God's plan" for people. (sarcasm)

do they use a placebo? (1)

apcullen (2504324) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441690)

So in the clinical trials, do some of the volunteers NOT get the actual vaccine? It seems like you have to validate its effectiveness against something... but giving people a placebo instead of an actual vaccine against a life-threatening disease seems sort of dodgy...
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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...