First Phase of AIDS Vaccine Trials Successful

rbarreira writes "Xinhua online is reporting on the success of the first trial phase of an AIDS vaccine, which was started on March 2005. From the article: '"Forty-nine healthy people who received the injection showed no severe adverse reactions after 180 days, proving the vaccine was safe," said Zhang Wei, head of the pharmaceutical registration department of the SFDA. "The recipients appeared immune to the HIV-1 virus 15 days after the injection, indicating the vaccine worked well in stimulating the body's immunity," he told the press conference.' After the results are further analyzed, 800 more voluntaries may be needed for the second and third phases of the vaccine's trial."

Comments

49 people + 180 days = proof??

[lecithin]

"Forty-nine healthy people who received the injection showed no severe adverse reactions after 180 days, proving the vaccine was safe,"

Okay, success is good, but...

This is not proof. It isn't even close to it.

How long was Fen Phen tested? Thimerosal? RotaShield? Whoops.

I hope that this does work but stating that the vaccine has been prooven safe is very misleading.

Re:49 people + 180 days = proof??

[antifoidulus]

In this case detecting HIV antibodies could very well prove useless. The body may develop HIV antibodies from the vaccine and still not have HIV. You have to measure viral load in the blood, which can be quite tricky.

Re:49 people + 180 days = proof??

[Anonymous Coward]

> Tell that to the gay community.

Thank you! Finally, someone who gets it.

I'm a lesbian. I also have an immune system/skin condition called psoriasis. I've spent the last eight years fighting with different doctors for the chance to try new treatments when they become available.

"This drug causes birth defects so women of child-bearing age..."
"I'm a lesbian."
"Yes, but while you are of child-bearing age I'm not comfortable prescribing..."
"Lesbian. Leeeeeeeeesbian."
"Yes, I understand, but while there is a possibility of your becoming pregnant..."

Certain rules do not apply to certain groups. I wish more medical doctors had the reasoning capacity that you have.

Proof of Immunity?

[infidel13]

According to the article, "The recipients appeared immune to the HIV-1 virus 15 days after the injection." Maybe someone can help with this, but how do you test immunity with fatal illnesses? Obviously you can't simply expose the subjects to the pathogen causing the disesase (not ethically, anyway). Does anyone in a medical field happen to know how this works?

Booster shots?

[tacarat]

I'm curious if this vaccine is being set up for one-time immunizations with possible booster shots, or if it'll be a more frequent thing like the flu shots. One of the vexing traits of HIV is it's rapid mutation rate. The flu and cold viruses are pretty much the same.

"Spring break is coming up! Get your annual HIV immunizations here!"

The only real downside is that if this (or another) vaccine is effective and reliable, then there's the risk of other STDs becoming more prevelant again as people relax their safe sex practices. That includes unplanned pregnancies. Some people really do need a hypothetical gun to their heads to think about using condoms or monogamy.

Re:Duck and Cover

[debilo]

I'd be more interested in genuine scientific proof of the link between HIV and AIDS. There isn't one you know. I've never unterstood this scientific war. People readily believe that a virus causes the common cold, but for some people, there's doubt that HIV causes AIDS?

Could someone with more insight please explain why there are scientists who deny there's a link?

I Wish They Would Elaborate...

[clragon]

"The recipients appeared immune to the HIV-1 virus 15 days after the injection, indicating the vaccine worked well in stimulating the body's immunity," he told the press conference.
...
"The HIV-1 specific cells injected into the recipients were the DNA fragments of the virus which don't cause infection," [Sang Guowei] told Xinhua.

Biology is not my forte, but since the HIV-1 virus was made to NOT cause an infection, how would they know if the vaccine actually worked?

Re:Lack of information

[benicillin]

To clarify what this very eloquent yet seemingly retarded contributor previously wrote: The director clearly knows what he is talking about. Test subjects were injected with parts of the virus that don't cause infection so as to NOT INFECT THEM!!! with the virus. Instead, they were given non-infectuous parts of it so that the body would be able to recognize the virus if it were to come into contact with the system later. This is the whole point of vaccines.

I am willing to bet these patients would be somewhat unhappy if they were given the infectuous portions of the disease.

Yes, but Manto Tshabalala-Msimang knows better!

[slashdotmsiriv]

"This is useless" would say-the Health Minister for South Africa, Manto Tshabalala-Msimang.

She has her own "very effective" approach against AIDS/HIV. She sais it is vital for people to build up their immune system so she strongly
believes in giving people the choice between antiretroviral drugs and taking traditional remedies, such as lemons,
garlic and beetroots. In fact she promotes mostly the second while her boss, never acknowledged that HIV is the cause of AIDS.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/healthnews.php?new sid=50037