Slashdot Mirror
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.
Would you vaccinate your child ?
Shakespeare poems - infinite monkeys with infinite time.Computer tech support - a few trained ones working from 9 to 5.
I'd like some anti-freeze to drink afterwards, please.
Oh, great. Cocaine prohibition produced crack cocaine and meth, crackdowns on ingredients to make ecstacy produced PMA, heroin prohibition produces all sorts of gross things, etc., etc. Cocaine is actually one of the safer stimulants out there (compared to its main rivals, crack and meth, which emerged due to cocaine's astronomical price thanks to prohibition). This insane drug whack-a-mole game is producing even more deadly and impure drugs. While we could be ingesting small and known quantities of pure marijuana, MDMA, cocaine, opiates, shrooms, and LSD, we're instead ingesting unknown quantities of who-knows-what. Most drug deaths are caused by adulterants, not the pure drug itself.
Is it cocaine specific or does it effect response to a whole class of alkaloids? I would truely hate to be in the dentist chair with drill ready only to find, rather quickly, how well this vacine potentially could work.
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
The anti-smoking vaccine, NicVax, is in phase 2B clinical testing, and appears to work. Sort of: "High antibody responders (top 30%) continued to show statistically significant abstinence at nine months: 9-Month continuous abstinence rate: NicVAX=20% (12/61, p=0.0076) vs. Placebo=6% (6/100)" That's not impressive, yet it's better than most anti-smoking programs.
Nicotine addiction is the toughest one to break. Programs for getting people off cocaine are about 40% successful. Programs for getting people off smoking are about 10-20% successful. Also, addicts tend to "age out" of cocaine and heroin addiction; after age 40, most of them eventually give it up. Not nicotine; people smoke their way to the grave.
One problem with a vaccine approach is that encourage overdoses, to overcome the antibodies. For nicotine, this is less of a problem, because smoking has a limited intake rate. But for cocaine, it's a real issue.
It's encouraging, though, that no side effects of this vaccine have been detected so far vs. the placebo.
The real promise for this vaccine is as a preventative measure. The average age for a new smoker is 13. Only 10% start after age 18. So if this works, a school inoculation program might be the way to prevent smoking.
I'm not sure the local anesthetic effects of cocaine or procaine (which is actually more potent in that respect, but has more potential for allergic reactions in sensitive areas which is why cocaine is sometimes used) would be significantly countered by the vaccine. Local anesthetics act directly on the nerves, very quickly on application at the site. It takes significant time for an immune system response.
:-)
But IANAD
Happily (and thankfully) we don't use a lot of pharmacologically similar compounds in medicine (or dentistry) these days. Even the medical/dental use of cocaine is rather rare these days as safer medications, or combinations of medications, can be used for similar effects. Despite their similar names, most of the "local anesthetics" that one would use in the dentist's chair (lidocaine, benzocaine, etc) have quite different chemical structure than cocaine. Cocaine has effect on both sodium channels (blocking depolarization and nerve conduction thus providing local anesthesia) as well as dopamine and norepinephrine reuptake (more responsible for its CNS effects). Lidocaine and related compounds only block fast sodium channels. Thus, it's unlikely that this vaccine is going to cause serious dental pain problems.
If I understand this correctly, this will prevent cocaine users from getting high. But how does it affect the LD50 (dosage sufficient to kill 50% of the population)?
A cocaine user decides to get high after being "immunized." He snorts a few lines. Huh. Nothing. So he snorts more and more... at some point I am willing to wager he will suffer cardiac arrest or some other life-threatening problem on his quest towards getting high. If the LD50 is not much changed, this may occur pretty easily.
Also, cocaine has a very rapid onset. I am thinking it wouldn't take much to overwhelm the slower immune system response.
This is an interesting experiment as it is always worthwhile to better understand the immune system, but I think this would be a Real Bad Idea to actually implement. Unless the objective is to kill all cocaine users.
It conflicts with the business interests of a politician's donors.
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).
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
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.
Linux Zealots: Smarter than Mac Zealots, but still zealots.
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.
Linux Zealots: Smarter than Mac Zealots, but still zealots.
According to the Justice Dept., of the 1.5 million inmates in the U.S.:
* Drug Offenses 59.6%
* Robbery 9.8%
* Property Offenses 5.5%
* Extortion, Fraud, Bribery 6.8%
* Violent Offenses 2.7%
* Firearms, Explosives, Arson 8.6%
* White Collar 1.0%
* Immigration 2.8%
* Courts or Corrections 0.8%
* National Security 0.1%
* Continuing Criminal Enterprise 0.8%
* Miscellaneous 1.5%