Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Buckaroo · Apr 24, 2008, 12:20 AM

Is it time to give up the search for an Aids vaccine?

What do you think? Is it time for some other solution?

Most scientists involved in Aids research believe that a vaccine against HIV is further away than ever and some have admitted that effective immunisation against the virus may never be possible, according to an unprecedented poll conducted by The Independent.

A mood of deep pessimism has spread among the international community of Aids scientists after the failure of a trial of a promising vaccine at the end of last year. It just was the latest in a series of setbacks in the 25-year struggle to develop an HIV vaccine.

The Independent's survey of more than 35 leading Aids scientists in Britain and the United States found that just two were now more optimistic about the prospects for an HIV vaccine than they were a year ago; only four said they were more optimistic now than they were five years ago.

Is it time to give up the search for an Aids vaccine? - Science, News - The Independent

Atomic Rooster · Apr 24, 2008, 12:31 AM

Should be AIDS not Aids.

Who cares. The end of the world is 2012.

Buckaroo · Apr 24, 2008, 12:39 AM

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster

Should be AIDS not Aids.

Who cares. The end of the world is 2012.

What's the deal about 2012? Did I miss something on the news?

Shaddim · Apr 24, 2008, 12:59 AM

Ask the Mayans.

nonhuman · Apr 24, 2008, 09:34 AM

Not just the Mayans, I'm pretty sure one of Nostradamus' predictions gave a date in 2012 (close or the same as the Mayans' Dec 21) for an end-of-the-world-sounding event. I think there's also a Chinese prophecy that's similar as well. Basically, everyone seems to think something big is going down towards the end of 2012.

Personally, I don't see that any of the particular predictions actually necessarily point to the end of the world, just some major world-changing event. The development of faster than light travel, or a public visitation by a technologically advanced alien species would easily fit the predictions. Not that I actually believe there's any merit to them...

CollinG3G4 · Apr 24, 2008, 11:45 AM

Originally Posted by Buckaroo

Is it time to give up the search for an Aids vaccine?

I'm not just sure. I'm HIV positive.

olePigeon · Apr 24, 2008, 12:06 PM

A vaccine is not a cure, but it's a huge leap in preventative medicine to help stop the spread of HIV. Should we give up just because it might take 10 years longer than we though? Absolutely not, that is the dumbest excuse. 10 years is a huge amount of time when it comes to advancements in medicine and technology.

There are lots of promising results from new treatments and new discoveries. Just to name a few, we have the Delta-32 gene mutation which makes some people resistant to HIV. There is also a new process by which we can convert type O+ blood into any other blood type for transfusions. We're better at understanding the human genome, RNA, & DNA; stem cell research may lead to further possible treatments. Already they are testing RNA injection into white blood cells which are predisposed to attacking only HIV infected cells (or potentially any other viral infection.) That in itself is promising as an actual cure for HIV & AIDS.

In 50 years we went from horse and buggy to walking on the moon. Imagine what we can do in 20 more years if they have the drive and resources to get it done.

Zeeb · Apr 24, 2008, 02:50 PM

The point of some of the scientists in the referenced article seems to be that we need to refocus efforts toward a better understanding of the virus itself-- before conducting more clinical trials of vaccines. I'm no scientist, but this seems rational. If the clinical trials thus far have been more or less shots in the dark, we may actually find a cure or a vaccine sooner with a refocused effort on basic research.

Buckaroo · Apr 24, 2008, 03:11 PM

I think that we should work to identify all those infected and implement a method to stop all future infections.

Although I'm not sure, but I believe that if they would have done this 20 years ago, then it would have been eliminated by now, and no one alive today would have AIDS.

nonhuman · Apr 24, 2008, 03:14 PM

Well, I suppose you're right that simply rounding up and killing everyone with HIV/AIDS would solve the problem...

OreoCookie · Apr 24, 2008, 03:21 PM

Well, sex ed and distributing condoms would be a start …

Buckaroo · Apr 24, 2008, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by nonhuman

Well, I suppose you're right that simply rounding up and killing everyone with HIV/AIDS would solve the problem...

That is not what I suggested. Stop being stupid.

Buckaroo · Apr 24, 2008, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Well, sex ed and distributing condoms would be a start …

Useless, and has been for the past 20 years.

OreoCookie · Apr 24, 2008, 05:03 PM

Right, that's why HIV infection rates are high in countries where condoms aren't popular and low in countries that have decent sex ed and high acceptance of condoms …

nonhuman · Apr 24, 2008, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by Buckaroo

That is not what I suggested. Stop being stupid.

It essentially is. How else are you going to accomplish your goal of isolating all those infected and preventing them from infecting anyone else? You could castrate them, so they can't spread the virus through sex, but they can still spread it through other means. The only way you could possibly ensure that their bodily fluids could never come in contact with another person is to kill them. Otherwise there's always the chance that someone will escape and (having been rounded up and thrown in a giant prison) decide to get some revenge and start intentionally infecting people.

ghporter · Apr 24, 2008, 09:24 PM

HIV is a crafty virus, but we're learning more and more about it every day. Maybe a vaccine isn't the answer; maybe it's a treatment that turns off the virus' means of replicating, or turns off its means of invading cells to begin with-both are potential approaches that are under study.

It's NOT time to stop looking. Just the opposite. AIDS today is more of a chronic disease than the quick, nasty killer it was in 1985. We have both the time and the motivation to find both treatments and preventatives.

Bucaroo's ideas might work if AIDS were limited to a small percentage of EVERY population. In some parts of Africa though, the infection rate is enormous. Preventing new cases takes changing what happens in those societies (in some, for example, it's perfectly acceptable for a husband to patronize prostitutes, which means that he brings home a gift that keeps on giving, and of course the whole idea of using condoms is completely unacceptable there and elsewhere). And if it's not possible to round up EVERYONE with the virus, then the whole effort fails totally.

Doofy · Apr 25, 2008, 04:59 AM

How can you fight AIDS by preventing new cases when there's people out there who have bug parties?

ghporter · Apr 25, 2008, 08:10 AM

Education (to show people why it's important to actively not spread the virus) and then some serious punitive actions when they willfully do it anyway. In many states here, it's the kind of felony that gets you locked up in nasty prisons for a very long time to intentionally infect someone with HIV- through sexual contact or other means. This isn't a medical or even public health issue, but rather an issue of antisocial personalities (in the clinical sense), and needs a different approach than regular disease prevention.

OreoCookie · Apr 25, 2008, 08:47 AM

I think we have to separate the measures for first-world countries with relatively low infection rates and third-world countries where sometimes half the population is infected. Getting people from being infected is a first step and condoms is definitely the way to go there.

olePigeon · Apr 25, 2008, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

I think we have to separate the measures for first-world countries with relatively low infection rates and third-world countries where sometimes half the population is infected. Getting people from being infected is a first step and condoms is definitely the way to go there.

You have to get through the religious and superstitious barriers first.

Zeeb · Apr 25, 2008, 02:33 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

How can you fight AIDS by preventing new cases when there's people out there who have bug parties?

The existence of these parties defies any reason. It's unbelievable that a few people have turned a deadly disease into a sexual fetish. Then again, there are people who crave to have a perfectly healthy limb amputed. You will always find an oddball who will do anything.

These parties are extremely rare. Most rational people respond to simple education and precautions. That's really the best we can do right now. Unfortunately, sex by its very nature is often uninhibited. Even rational people fully educated about HIV can get it under those circumstances. If it weren't for unprotected sex neither you nor I would exist.

Helmling · Apr 26, 2008, 01:38 AM

Originally Posted by Buckaroo

Useless, and has been for the past 20 years.

What? What the hell are you talking about? We started seeing a serious drop in new infections in the U.S. when awareness was at its height. Now these kids today act like AIDS is in the past and lo-and-behold, new cases start to rise.

An education campaign is exactly what we need.