Cocaine Vaccine In the Works

martyros writes "Researchers at the Baylor College of Medicine are performing clinical trials of a vaccine that teaches the immune system to attack cocaine, preventing it from giving a high. The vaccine is made by attaching inactivated cocaine molecules to the outside of inactivated cholera proteins. When the immune system attacks the cholera proteins, it also 'learns' the cocaine molecules as well. The result is that the immune system 'recognizes the potent naked drug when it's ingested. The antibodies bind to the cocaine and prevent it from reaching the brain, where it normally would generate the highs that are so addictive.'" An earlier story from The Star notes that human trials for vaccines against both cocaine and nicotine are well under way.

Comments

Analogs

[Harmonious Botch]

I hope this wundervacine will not attach to some of the body's natural painkillers.

Re:Analogs

[cayenne8]

"I agree with your ``It`s my body and I fuck it up if I want to'' slogan, only from the point of view of the government, the reason they ban certain substances is that abuse of it leads to either a) illegal behavior because of the cost to keep you in ``business'', b) generates a significant increase in medical care due to after (side) effects of the abuse, c) a+b"

The thing is...if you de-criminalized drugs, you'd pretty much cut out "a", in that prices would drop as would profits currently being gained by criminal organizations. Remember prohibition on alcohol in the US? It prompted the rise of the gangs/mafia. Once it was over, well, I certainly don't see many people doing gangland violence over booze these days. Alcohol is just a drug like the others currently banned. It is a toxin that affects the brain.

If we cut out the crime aspect of drugs, we'd save a TON of money in tax dollars each year supporting DEA, and the overcrowded prison system. We could concentrate a small portion of that money to help programs for addicts. Heck, like liquor...why not tax legal pot sales?

Also, don't forget, it wasn't that long ago that any and ALL drugs were perfectly legal in the US. It was not the horrible effects of them that caused them to be banned either....most of them were banned in order to be able to use that to target ethnic groups in the US. Chinese - opiates, Blacks - Cocaine, Mexicans - Pot.

Frankly, I'm still wondering where in the Constitution it gives the Feds. the right to say what drugs are illegal. At least when they tried to do it for alcohol, they did a constitutional amendment. No such thing has been done for "scheduling" of current chemicals (thanks Nixon).

Re:Analogs

[CastrTroy]

Well then why do we need lengthy prison sentences for drug use. Just make it so that drug related health problems are not covered. Then for those who commit other crimes while on drugs, well, we got laws against other crimes anyway. This would make it so that people who can handle casual drug use not be punished for other people inabilities to handle their drug use.

Re:Analogs

[colmore]

This argument is only valid if criminalization creates a large scale decline in usage. If the effect is only slight, then the many associated problems with criminalization are too great.

Every law, currently enforced or not, is a right taken from the individual and given to the police. This shouldn't be done except in cases of overwhelming necessity. It would be a great day when the laws of the land were few enough to list by memory.

Re:Analogs

[Gospodin]

I don't believe in vaccines personally.

What does this mean exactly? You don't believe they exist? You don't believe they work?

Re:Analogs

[jombeewoof]

...There is a tiny bit of concern that it will be marginally "easier" to access at the street corner, but it is ALREADY quite easy... I would imagine that if drugs were decriminalized, it would be MUCH more difficult for children to get their hands on.
Test it out yourself.
Give any 14 year old in America $30, tell them to come back with either alcohol or illegal drugs whichever is easier to get.
Guaranteed, they will bring back drugs 99% of the time.
I've seen it in action hundreds of times over. It is much easier for children to get drugs than it is for them to get booze.

I'm not saying it is impossible or even difficult to get booze, but it sure is easier to pick up something that is not regulated than it is to get something that is regulated.

Re:Analogs

[jombeewoof]

I would place a heavy bet on the prison system being just as full if we legalized all drugs...some people are just leeches and will find some other way to earn a dishonest living. But those who are in prison for simple drug offenses, like possession of small amounts of controlled substances would not be there.
That is a HUGE amount of people. The worst thing about that is, when they get out of prison they are in a much worse state than when they went in. Nobody will hire an ex-con. Not for anything other than shit work.

Re:Analogs

[calyphus]

Making the substances illegal inflates the costs associated with their use, increases side effects, and actually promotes experimentation if not long-term use. The argument for banning psychoactive substances has much less to do with actually protecting society (a valid reason) than a prudish restriction of individual freedom. Prohibition creates more problems while solving none.

Re:Possibly useful, but...

[Daimanta]

Ofcourse I won't. I wouldn't deny them the wonderful experience of highly addicting and dangerous drugs.

Re:Possibly useful, but...

[kieran]

Would you vaccinate your child ?

Or your employees? Or your signed artists?

Gibson called it...

[lwhalen]

Wasn't this a subplot of Neuromancer or something, where the main character was forcibly taken away from his various addictions by having his liver modified to not process the various chemicals?

Re:Possibly useful, but...

[Total_Wimp]

Would you vaccinate your child ?

I doubt it would matter much. There's a lot of evidence that drug abusers will simply switch drugs when their drug of choice becomes unavailable.

It's a real comfort to know that meth, oxy and alcohol abuse will still be available to our children after we save them from the scourge of cocaine.

Re:Possibly useful, but...

[Seumas]

You'll be getting the vaccination yourself as soon as your car and life insurance carrier requires you to submit to it or face double the fees. And once your employer demands it for employment. And once it's required for citizenship. And once you are placed on a "cause for suspicion" list simply for not being vaccinated.

Re:Possibly useful, but...

[somersault]

I agree that this sounds like a great thing, though I hope they don't follow this line of reasoning too far. It shouldn't be something for the parents to decide, otherwise you may get parents that decide they don't want their children to experience any kind of rush when doing dangerous sports, or decide that they block some naturally occurring highs because they don't want little eating lots of sweets, or getting knocked up. That's when the world starts to get creepy!

Or D

[oncehour]

It conflicts with the business interests of a politician's donors.