Slashdot Mirror
Man Cures Himself of HIV?
IZ Reloaded writes "A 25 yr old British man could be the first person in the world to have cured himself of the deadly HIV virus. He was diagnosed HIV positive in 2002. After another test done the following year, he stunned doctors when his test results turned negative. He is now a wanted man after researchers and doctors want him to come back for further testing but he has so far refused. Experts think he could have something in his immune system that may help in producing vaccines against HIV."
I don't know where you get this, I saw an interview with him last night on TV, and he said he wanted to help other people, and that he was cooperating with scientists to figure out what caused the virus to disappear.
From TFA:
HIV != AIDS just to let you know
HIV is a precursor to AIDS
He was going in for repeat tests every two months, so his status is well documented.
It is possible that this guy could have cured himself of HIV. There are a number of possibilities...
1) He was infected with a weakened serotype of HIV.
2) He has some unusual CCXR gene polymorphisms or some other gene defect leading to reduced ability of HIV to replicate, or the ability to clear the virus.
It is possible the original test was wrong. However, in virtually all labs I know of, on a positive test there is a repeat and follow up test done. This normally a western blot. So, the odds of the result being wrong is exceedingly low.
If this is for real... this guy is the luckiest son of a bitch alive.
I leave myself open to corrections
Addendum: Prostitutes lose HIV immunity
A group of prostitutes thought to be immune to HIV have now become infected, causing dismay to scientists hoping to develop an Aids vaccine.
Well, it says that after he got the negative result, he sued the hospital for fucking up the first time and making him think he had AIDS. The article goes on to say "The results came back negative and Mr Stimpson began legal action against the trust, convinced there had been a mistake with the original diagnosis. But an extensive investigation, including DNA testing on his blood samples, has confirmed all the results". I'm not sure if that means "DNA testing to confirm both samples were his" or "DNA testing for vDNA pairs produced by the RNA transcription of the virus".
The reason some people are resistant to the plague, and HIV, is due to a mutation in the CCR5 gene. This gene encodes an immune system cell surface protein that HIV uses to bind to the cell. People missing this gene generally can't get infected with HIV.
This has been known for quite some time and is not news. This guy most likely has the CCR5 mutation. Lucky for him, but it ain't a cure for the other 90% of the population.
Certainly a false positive is a problem. A friend of mine had a positive test for HIV come back after donating blood, which surprised him because he does not engage in the sort of risky behavior that typically puts one at risk for HIV infection.
From the article, it sounds like he only got two tests for HIV, so it's possible the first one was just a false positive. However, the description of him as suicidal and the fact that he waited so long before getting a second test seems to indicate that either he doesn't know much about HIV transmission or he did engage in behavior that put him at HIV infection risk.
Either way, I'm sure that researchers will find something interesting if he's willing to help out. If it wasn't a false positive and his body was able to clear itself of HIV, that would be quite an accomplishment.
Uh, no. He sued them when the first negative test came back, on (what would normally be) the sound theory that was evidence that the original positive test had been botched. The hospital then did extensive testing on both the positive and negative samples, at which point they came to the stunning conclusion that both results were correct. The lawsuit ended at that point.
No, but when you figure a prostitute has 3-4 johns a night, every night, her chances of having no infection after a year is pretty damn low. Call it 1000 jobs a year, and with an infection rate of p, the odds would be .98^(1000p). P only has to be 3% to make it a 50/50 shot. Some parts of Africa are much higher.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
It's a quote. Tony Hancock. Classic British comedy from the 50s.
CCR5 is a key receptor for HIV entry in cells (macrophage-like) relevant for viral dissemination. Indeed, the man could have some form of CCR5 variant. My guess is that they already checked for the delta32 version and that they're drawing a lot of blood from this guy and doing a lot of DNA sequencing.
I've always wondered whether there would be a similar mutation on the CXCR4 receptor, which is another key receptor. This one's in cells (helper T-cell-like) that are relevant for the persistence of HIV in the body. Since, apparently, the virus was able to get into the bloodstream of this man, my two cents would be that CXCR4 rather than CCR5 could play arole in this phenomenon of self-healing.
Occam's Razor simply indicates which possibility is the *most likely* to be correct.
Good grief. It doesn't *indicate* anything, or "suggest" in the manner the grandparent post used the word. It's a guideline or a rule of thumb that says, "choose the simpler possibility."
These tests are redundant to prevent misdiagnosis; I know, because I've got a "false positive" condition that comes up as AIDS too often. Rather than going to one source, look to others for more information.
3 40,00.html#121
Then look up "John Moore" in the "human patent" case to see what this poor sap is in for...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1870
"Stimpson was tested three times in August 2002 at the Victoria clinic for sexual health in central London and the results showed he was producing HIV antibodies to fight the disease."
"In October 2003, after impressing doctors with his good health, Stimpson was offered a new test, which came back negative. Further tests in December 2003 and March last year also proved negative."
"The tests were re-checked by the Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust when Stimpson threatened litigation believing there must be a mistake, but the results confirmed all the tests had been accurate."
"Eustace? Eustace? Are you there? Are you there?" = John Leeming
Wrong. They did, but not anymore.
Most *MODERN* test both antibodies produced by host (appears several weeks up to a few months post infection) AND viral antigens (protein p24 is a popular target, and is present in blood after 16days post infection.).
Our hospital uses such combined test. Also, for increase accuracy, two different tests, from two different producers, each one testing both targets. So if all four results (test 1 Ag, test 1 Ab, test 2 Ag, test 2 Ab) are the same, chances are the answer is erronous are *VERY VERY VERY* low.
Some test, add also a check for viral genes (gag protein is said to be rather stable across mutants, is detectable after 12 days post-infection). This test target is less popular because RNA (which the virus is made of) is less stable and more difficult to replicate through RT-PCR. This is another target that *may* have been controlled by the hospital.
The articles say that the british hospital controlled the tests (because the patient tried to sue them) and conclude both were correct.
So it is likely that the hostipal uses several tests on different targets (like our does), and because each time all results concorded, there's very low chance that the results are wrong.
Link for info on HIV tests
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Not in this case. From AFA:
14 months later a blood test suggested that he no longer carried the virus. A further three tests confirmed the finding.
Perhaps the guy just wants to lead a normal life now. He should be in his full right to choose so, and no one has the right to claim that he must do anything -- it's his life and his choices. He doesn't owe HIV infected people or "humanity" any damn thing.
Someone here proposed harassing him. I find that totally reprehensible, and just recommending it is illegal most places. Post that recommendation again with your full name and address.
What's next? What else should be forced upon individuals because it's clearly in the best interest of humanity? Where are the limits? Anyone who doesn't think there are any, and that the need of humanity goes before the need of individuals have justified Dr Mengele and his research too.
Regards,
--
*Art
From BBC News website (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4432564.stm) "He has told the papers he would do anything he could to help find a cure." Sounds to me like he's not being as much of a piece of shit as people here led me to believe =p
which is totally what she said
Try over three million per year or >250,000 per month. And 95% of the burden is on developing countries.
See World AIDS & HIV Statistics for stats.