Slashdot Mirror
Compound From Olive-Pomace Oil Inhibits HIV Spread
Researchers in Madrid are claiming that they have discovered that a type of wax found in olive skin can help to slow the spread of HIV. "Their work shows that maslinic acid - a natural product extracted from dry olive-pomace oil in oil mills - inhibits serin-protease, an enzyme used by HIV to release itself from the infected cell into the extracellular environment and, consequently, to spread the infection into the whole body. These scientists from Granada determined that the use of olive-pomace oil can produce an 80% slowing down in AIDS spreading in the body."
Rachel Ray finds another use for Eee-Vee-Ohh-Ohh.
- Greg
Start a happiness pandemic
..and works as a lubricant too? :-)
my, thats handy.
I'm skeptical. The source article, by stating "these scientists from Granada determined that the use of olive-pomace oil can produce an 80% slowing down in AIDS spreading in the body," conflates HIV with AIDs. You can slow down the spread a virus, such as the human immunodeficiency virus, in the body. You cannot slow down the spread of a syndrome, theorized not as caused directly by HIV, but by opportunistic infections as a result of HIV infection, in the body; only said opportunistic infections.
Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
Yikes, there are so many problems with this arguments I don't know where to begin. But, whether you're trolling or not, it's a commonly stated one, so I'll answer it (at least in part).
Regardless of how you define "moral behavior," many cases of AIDS are spread through "moral behavior." People get it from their spouse, when neither of them knew the spouse had it. The spouse might have gotten it from a previous partner, or a blood transfusion problem (fortunately rather rare now). What about the child who contracts it from their mother?
Whether sex outside of marriage is moral or not is a matter of personal interpretation. Certainly much of society views it as normal. Many people have a single monogamous relationship at a time, but more than one through their lifetime. Is that so immoral that we should condemn them to die because of it?
There is no evidence of "recruitment" by homosexuals. Rather, there is a mounting body of evidence that people become homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual as a result of factors beyond their control -- both genetic and environmental. This, combined with ample of evidence of homosexuality in the animal kingdom, would seem to imply that homosexuality is quite natural -- and that therefore the classification of it as immoral is a rather odd invention of mankind.
As to why AIDS gets so much funding -- it's a horrible disease, with a near-100% fatality rate. It infects a staggering number of people. It is currently busy depopulating much of sub-Saharan Africa (where, by the way, the primary mechanism of spreading is between married partners and from mother to child). Diseases that are epidemic in scale, have exceedingly high fatality rates, and which we don't know how to cure should scare anyone. Hopefully all this research will be helpful if another such disease appears.
Olive pomace is the left-over skins and fruit pulp for the first pressings of the olives. Secondary treatment of the pomace with steam and solvents extracts the residual oil and also extracts this seemingly beneficial oil/wax.
Ironically, the cheaper grades of olive oil probably have more of this oil.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
The HIV virus is a very interesting virus. Of all the common viruses, it is one of most deadly and the hardest to cure. It kills millions of people every year. Which other virus is doing that? Please tell me. This is why it is interesting for study. Most of other infectious diseases people are dying of can be cured with antibiotics, but people never get them.
.. you should know that curing AIDS will save many heterosexual and monogamous women's lives in Africa (you and your preacher should be interested in that right?). These are innocent women who's husbands cheated on them with prostitutes. Also importantly, treating AIDS will enable children in Africa to grow up with mothers and/or fathers.
When the next viral pandemic hits, we want to make sure we know all about how to quickly and effectively deal with it.
Cancer and heart disease do get more funding than AIDS (as they should). Although it's pretty sad that I have to mention this
PS> Why don't you stop hating? The venom is eating away your rational thoughts.
I noticed that eastern Mediterranean countries that produce a lot of olives have a lower incidence of adult HIV. Not to imply that there is causation, and I know that other factors are at work, but I still found it interesting.
The only experiments described are in cell cultures. (I.e. the stuff is dumped directly on cells in in a dish.) The "can produce an 80% slowing down in AIDS spreading in the body" seems to be just wishful thinking at the moment.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
She uses it to fry things, which is a big "WTF?" if you know anything about olive oil. The whole point of extra virgin olive oil is that it's a lighter more flavorful oil, and it's usually substantially more expensive. Use it in a salad dressing or as a condiment, drink it straight out of the bottle like the Greeks do, but don't fry in it, jesus! It doesn't even have a very high smoke point, compared to refined olive oil.
It's like frying something in sesame oil, or flaxseed oil, or any other oil that you can think of that is used primarily for how it tastes, rather than as an efficient conductor of heat.
Of course, in the U.S., EVOO is defined by acidity, so you're not buying real EVOO at the stores, just regular refined oil with a low acid level.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
I'm always skeptical of people who classify Spain as "third world".
The enemies of Democracy are
So how come the home of Olive oil, Italy, has one of the highest infection rates in Europe? http://www.overpopulation.com/faq/hiv-aids/hiv-aid s-infection-rate-by-country-europe-and-the-new-ind ependent-states/
It's because we like immoral behavior; if it only affected religious zealots, we'd add it to the water supply.
I just love how so many so-called Christians can be so happy to watch other people die. Whole buncha stone throwing fake christians in the world today.
Don't get me wrong, I don't hate all religious people. Just the holier-than-thou hypocrites who talk about god while imposing their narrow-minded world view on everyone else.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
Huh? I (stir) fry with sesame seed oil all the time - BECAUSE of the taste.
Not just his, but outside the US, everyone's: the first run off from the first pressing of a batch of olives. It contains the purest oil and the least amount of olive solids. The olive solids create acidity, but that is by no means the proper measure of virgin or extra virgin status.
What did you think it meant?
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
How can they tell which petri dishes of cells like olive-pomace oil? Should they make them fill out a survey?
(IANAL)
What's an extra virgin? the /. regulars should know, right? hey-o!
stuff |
As mentioned in a subsequent reply, Extra Virgin Olive Oil refers to the very first Oil taken from the first pressing of olives, and traditionally has nothing to do with the oil's acidity.
:)
In the states (and I presume canada) oils go through processing to remove impurities, kill bacteria, etc... and so whats labelled on a store shelf as extra virgin olive oil, really isn't, in the traditional sense. This is also why most north american olive oils are shipped in clear plastic containers, instead of opaque glass bottles. Traditional EVOO is light sensitive, and should be stored in opaque glass or metal cans to preserve the best flavour.
But yes, frying in EVOO is ridiculous. I use Peanut oil to fry in, and to season my Cast Iron pans (the best non-stick pan you'll ever know).
Thomas A. Knight
Author of The Time Weaver
I'm a homosexual and I've been HIV+ for 11 years now. Lucky for me, I'm one of the small percentage of people with whom the virus seems to have a difficult time spreading. As such, in those 11 years I have yet to take any medication.
Now with that out of the way, I must stress that as a homosexual I am completely and utterly uninterested in converting ANYONE to my lifestyle. Nor have I ever in my 13 years of being 'out' even tried to 'convert' anyone. I would think that you would find this true of most any homosexual that you'd care to talk to.
With that said, I have yet to collect a toaster oven.
Still #1 -- Lonely Gay Geek
Scandinavia has the lowest rate in the world, Iceland beating everyone save North Dakota, which is populated nearly exclusively by Viking stock. Across Europe, there is a very strong correlation between latitude and HIV infection rates that roughly follows the increasing tendency toward pickling of both sustenance and self.
If anything, it ain't the oil, it's the vinegar.
"If I eat olive oil, I won't get AIDS."
Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
Well, it's not one of the States, it must be the 'third world'.
You can't handle the truth.
Yep, everyone before me is right. The only thing I want to add is that there is actually a group that decides what oil actually fits in what categories: the International Olive Oil Council. All IOOC member nations (the US isn't one) have to abide by their standards in labeling olive oils. By their standards, there can be no refined oil in either EVOO or just plain VOO.
Just one more example of the FDA's obsession with pasteurization and processing. What a country...Can't get unpasteurized cheese because it might hurt you, but they don't have to label GM foods or hormone pumped cow products.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
But this is illogical. Scientific doesn't mean accurately measured, it's a matter of method. A Fermi problem's solution is not unscientific.
Back to the topic, verifying the effectiveness of a cure for AIDS doesn't necessarily involve a pretty color image of a neutralized HIV. Watch for average life expectancy, reaction to infections. So the technical ability needed is a six month course in statistics, and the testing procedure involves being able to count days of survival for a decent sized sample.
If you want to be logical then be skeptical whenever a therapy involving artificial stuff is compared favorably against a natural cure because:
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
Lots of people get sick or die from food poisoning. Nobody to my knowledge has died from GM foods, irradiated foods, or growth hormone. There are no scientific studies that show negative effects from the first two.
I find the occasionally excessive enthusiasm for pasteurization annoying, but it isn't like there is no reason for it.
Does this mean the AIDS Cocktail will now come with an olive in it?
Shaken, not stirred?
*Ducks*
Oh. Yeah, sure, saute in olive oil. For those who are unsure of the difference, sauteing happens at a slightly lower temperature than deep frying, and the foods are only half covered by the oil. It is also important in sauteing that the food is not crowded in the pan, sauter means 'to jump' in French, and the food should have room to jump about in the pan. If it is too tightly packed, you are in effect simmering or steaming instead.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Try grapeseed oil - can get it at your local asian market, has a very high smoke point, it's quite healthy, and imparts very little flavor - but just enough to taste in something very mild like tofu - and it tastes good!
ôó
Seriously... doesn't slashdot have any mechanisms to ban users who are consistantly racist/anti-homosexual and generally offensive on here? I realise that every one of this guy's posts have been modded down to -1 and therefore rarely get seen but this kind of offensive behaviour should not be tolerated. Thats my 2 cents anyway.
Wouldn't just taking the warning labels off everything solve this problem?
None of the news blurbs about this research mention any sort of publication associated with these findings (for example: "published in this week's issue of Science", etc.). Also, a quick search in pubmed for garcia-granados shows limited publications in specialist journals, nothing nearly as flashy as this olive-oil HIV thing. My guess is they haven't published yet, or even had their paper reviewed yet. Most respectable journals embargo press releases until the issue of the journal comes out in which the findings are reported. This could certainly be interesting, but for now I would take it with a grain of salt, especially the part about "the use of olive-pomace oil can produce an 80 per cent slowing down in AIDS spreading in the body." WHAT body?? There's no way this treatment is in human clinical trials. This statement is pure baloney. Judging from their publication record, the Garcia-Granados lab is purely an organic chemistry/biochemistry lab. I seriously doubt they have any data with mammalian models.
No! You can't possibly! If it's in the US it must be inferior to anything European! Go read your Slashdot handbook immediately.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
Dude, I'm Christian too, but seriously -- comments like this are entirely counter-productive. Let me dissect your, and I use the term loosely, "logic" point by point:
...and most of them aren't caught by immoral behavior.
1) Quote: Why does AIDS get such a huge amount of funding?
Perhaps because it is a truly horrible disease that brings a boatload of suffering to millions of people around the world?
2) Quote: Other diseases kill far more people every year...
True. Do you think no one is working on them?
3) Quote:
Is AIDS/HIV only caught by immoral behavior? Back in the late '80s, there was a huge story on the news about a kid in Florida (IIRC) who caught AIDS from a blood transfusion (this was before screening blood for HIV was as common as it is now). In what type of immoral behavior did this kid engage? How about EMT's, paramedics, doctors, nurses or other good Samaritans who contract AIDS while attempting to render assistance to someone else who has AIDS? If you are a paramedic or E.R. nurse, can you tell for certain which of your patients is "moral" before supplying medical care? Or would you just prefer to let everyone care for themselves?
4) Quote: The pastor at my church says it's the gays promoting their choices as normal behind all this.
The problem with conspiracy theories is that it requires everyone involved in the conspiracy to carry the secret to the grave. Most people can't keep a secret. Ergo, conspiracies of the magnitude you are describing tend to be very, very rare.
5) Quote: The homosexuals are indoctrinating your children and making them choose their lifestyle. They can't reproduce so they have no choice BUT to recruit. They are forcing the government to back their behavior with laws... Laws against God and Jesus.
Like I said above, I am a Christian, too. I disagree with the homosexual lifestyle for the same reasons that you don't agree with it. But I'm also the first person to say, yeah, I've made mistakes in my life, too. I'm no more or less perfect than the very people you want to turn your back to, and neither are you. You say God gave laws prohibiting homosexuality. He also gave laws prohibiting adultery. Do you remember the story in the New Testament where the Pharisees wanted to stone the woman "caught in the act of adultery"? Do you remember Jesus' answer? "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."
Now let's take this one step further. What do you think is a Christian's purpose on earth? Somehow I doubt it's to work hard five days a week, sit in a pew on Sunday morning, buy a big house and a nice car and watch the world turn. I suspect it has a little more to do with telling others that they can be freed from the screwed up lives we tend to live when left to our own devices. If that's the case, then do you think someone is going to listen to you if you start out by telling them that, because of their own immorality, funding to cure the disease that is slowly taking their life away should be canceled? How callous is that? On the contrary, I think a true Christian -- someone who really lives the life modeled by Jesus -- would instead be rushing to the sides of the AIDS victims in an attempt to reach them with the gospel before the end of their lives. If researchers can develop a drug to buy you more time to reach such a person, a Christian should be all over that.
The pastor at my church says you should hate the sin, but never the sinner. That , in my humble opinion, is pretty good logic.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
Yes, it is a nasty disease, a friend of mines 25 year old son was recently diagnosed with it. And a very gifted pianist I know has had it for several years. I have a lot of sympathy and compassion for anyone with this terrible disease. But that said, there are two simple rules...
1. Don't share needles if you are a drug user.
2. Sexual contact - use a condom.
If everybody followed these simple, common sense rules, there would be no HIV/AID epidemic.
Of course you're assuming that if the condom fails, you will get definitely HIV, which is a faulty assumption.
You really need to multiply that 1% (the chance of failure) by the chance that you'll become infected from a known positive partner (depends on the act but even receptive anal sex is about 1 in 50 or 2%) by the chance that your partner is HIV+ in the first place (varies greatly by population but even among gay men in big cities it's about 10%). So instead of 1%, you're looking more at something like 0.01 * 0.02 * 0.1 = 0.002% or about 500 times less risky than the figure you claim. And that's for a high risk population engaging in a lot of sex with different partners.
No wonder its called Canola oil these days.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
You have no idea where Universidad de Granada is, do you? Hint: Granada, Spain, a "First World" NATO country. TFA even says it's the medical branch in Madrid. You know where that is? Hint: also Spain.
The enemies of Democracy are
You have to pass all these obstacles:
- Have an infected partner
- Have a broken condom
- Actually contract AIDS from the exposure
Now in most cases, if you knowingly have encounter the first obstacle and proceed with sex, protected or not, you are knowingly engaging in a heavy risk. Multiple partners of course increases the risk of being unknowingly exposed, so knowing your partner is a bit thing, but adding protection to a known partner does greatly reduce risks.
99% protection is still pretty damn good if you've got a reliable partner and are practicing good sexual practices/hygiene, although I would personally advocate against promiscuity I have nothing against sex itself. One would hope that having sex weekly for several years, you would have a partner who had been screened against HIV and safe. I'd like to know where you got the 99% number, care to cite your sources and factors?
Note that 99% is absurdly optimistic if it only includes condom failure. I chose that number on purpose, being generous and simplifying things.
If you want to argue over details like chance of infection with unprotected sex, then I'll take back my 99%. Real world condom success, including the problem of many people who mess up, is far lower. (be careful: many condom-related numbers wrongly exclude incorrect usage)
Shall we go with 70% instead?