Slashdot Mirror


Researchers Modify T-Cells, Make Them HIV Resistant

DieNadel writes to share that naturally occurring proteins called "zinc fingers" are being used in a new approach to AIDS treatment. Using modified T-Cells with the zinc fingers, researchers at the Pennsylvania School of Medicine have shown a reduction in viral load in mice. "'By inducing mutations in the CCR5 gene using zinc finger proteins, we've reduced the expression of CCR5 surface proteins on T cells, which is necessary for the AIDS virus to enter these immune system cells,' explains first author Elena Perez, MD, PhD, Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at Penn. 'This approach stops the AIDS virus from entering the T cells because it now has an introduced error into the CCR5 gene.'"

171 comments

  1. Zinc you say? by nekdut · · Score: 3, Funny

    Aren't we having a zinc shortage? Get it from these fingers!!

    1. Re:Zinc you say? by tsotha · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I knew all those old pennies would come in handy for something.

    2. Re:Zinc you say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can have my zinc when you pry it from my cold dead fingers.

  2. Zinc finger, matrin type 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    This gene encodes a protein containing three zinc finger domains and a nuclear localization signal. The mRNA and the protein of this gene are upregulated by wildtype p53 and overexpression of this gene inhibits tumor cell growth, suggesting that this gene may have a role in the p53-dependent growth regulatory pathway. Alternative splicing of this gene results in two transcript variants encoding two isoforms differing in only one amino acid.

    1. Re:Zinc finger, matrin type 3 by ch0knuti · · Score: 1

      One of the first ontopic posts and the mods give it a -1 Offtopic??

  3. OMGZombies! by gorckat · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh wait...T-cells. I thought it said T-Virus.

    1. Re:OMGZombies! by neokushan · · Score: 2, Funny

      You're probably American, but you might be glad to know that there's a place in England where people could quite literally say "t' t-cells attack t' virus". Not quite what you're looking for, but close enough!

      Now, put t' kettle on!

      --
      +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
    2. Re:OMGZombies! by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ah yes but we don't pronounce it T just t' so its easy to tell the difference.

    3. Re:OMGZombies! by vandelais · · Score: 1

      Oh wait...Mr T-cells. I thought it said A-team.

      --
      Game: Player 'Donald J Trump' now has AI skill level 'experimental'.
    4. Re:OMGZombies! by Domo-Sun · · Score: 1

      Now, put t' kettle on!

      And pass me the zinc fingers. Mmmm! They're delicious.

    5. Re:OMGZombies! by catbertscousin · · Score: 1

      Good news: the AIDS virus is eradicated
      Bad news: we're all UV allergic zombies
      You win some, you lose some, eh?

      --
      No good deed goes unpunished. - Avon, Blake's 7
    6. Re:OMGZombies! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A team? More like GAY team.

  4. Re:So what? by Microlith · · Score: 3, Funny

    They need to be good libs


    As opposed to what, being a good "con" and doing what?

    I would like some background to what I can only parse as a retarded attempt to politicize with a statement that must've taken a whole 5 braincells to parrot.

  5. Re:So what? by Piranhaa · · Score: 2, Interesting

    These guys claim we have 20-30 years at the current rare we're using Zinc. It's the 23rd most abundant element in the earth's crust. I don't see this being an issue right now (2011), but will inevitably be one

  6. law of unintended consequences... by conspirator57 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    what *else* do these surface proteins on the T cell do?

    maybe there is something those altered structures do that we will miss when they stop performing their function...

    not everything in the body is superfluous like the appendix or wisdom teeth.

    --
    "If still these truths be held to be
    Self evident."
    -Edna St. Vincent Millay
    1. Re:law of unintended consequences... by troybob · · Score: 5, Funny

      OMG you had better try to get in touch with these researchers, because this probably did not occur to them at all!

    2. Re:law of unintended consequences... by nizo · · Score: 1

      Considering AIDS eventually leads to painful death, what function would this hinder that would make things worse?

    3. Re:law of unintended consequences... by Gat0r30y · · Score: 4, Informative
      FTFA -

      Some people are born with a mutation on their CCR5 gene and therefore do not have a working CCR5 receptor on the surface of their T cells. These rare individuals are immune to HIV infection and seemingly are not affected by the non-functional CCR5 protein. The zinc finger approach aims to mimic this natural immunity.

      It would appear that these surface proteins are "superfluous", or at least not really necessary.

      --
      Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
    4. Re:law of unintended consequences... by MrMr · · Score: 4, Informative

      After having worked in the pharmaceutical industry for about 12 years I can only say: You'd be amazed.
      T-cells are part of the immune system, and perhaps you remember this recent infamous TGN1412 experiment involving T-Cells

    5. Re:law of unintended consequences... by wizardforce · · Score: 3, Insightful

      whatever function they have, it's probably not as important as not dying of AIDS

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    6. Re:law of unintended consequences... by kid_oliva · · Score: 1

      So they just modify that a bit and then OMG Zombies... Seriously though, they obviously need to extend the type of testing done on animals to include the not so sterile lab rat. It is fascinating to think all that might be possible. I believe it is all the more important to remember that we don't understand half of what we think we do and the need to build in steps to test things we think aren't necessary.

      --
      I eat Karma for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. That's why I don't have any.
    7. Re:law of unintended consequences... by digitrev · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It would appear that way. That doesn't mean they are superfluous. This needs years of research and long term trials before this will be marketable. When you're fucking with the immune system, you better be goddamn sure you're not fucking with the wrong thing.

      --
      Cynical Idealist
    8. Re:law of unintended consequences... by MrMr · · Score: 1

      No, not zombies, corpses. Animal testing doesn't help much here, as the T-cells have more differences than just 'that bit' between species anyway. Somewhere along the line there has to be a so called 'First In Human' experiment, and when messing with the immune system that can really be a problem.

    9. Re:law of unintended consequences... by swid27 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I didn't RTFA, but I'm guessing they're referring to CCR5-delta32. While somewhat rare overall, it's most common in people of Northern European descent. The good news: increased HIV and smallpox resistance. The bad news: decreased overall T cell function and West Nile resistance.

    10. Re:law of unintended consequences... by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      No, not zombies, corpses.

      So... pre-zombies?

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    11. Re:law of unintended consequences... by RDW · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, that's it. The article abstract is a lot more intelligible than the press release:

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18587387

      They're using Zinc Finger Nucleases:

      http://www.zincfingers.org/scientific-background.htm

      to target and disrupt the CCR5 gene.

    12. Re:law of unintended consequences... by DarkOx · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, I am no AIDS expert but from what I understand is HIV does not really kill anybody. AIDS the resulting condition of HIV, is Auto Immune Difficency Sydrome. Basically you immune system stops working and all the other little virus out there take over start to take over all your other cells and with nothing to stop them; that kills you.

      So if you screw-up someones immune system in the name of HIV proofing and that causes it to not work then they will have AIDS anyway even if you do manage to kill off the HIV infection. So yea if it turns out these things are "important" you might destroy the immune system faster then HIV would have.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    13. Re:law of unintended consequences... by PCM2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      whatever function they have, it's probably not as important as not dying of AIDS

      Upon what data do you base that assumption? Is not dying of AIDS more important than not dying in screaming agony?

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    14. Re:law of unintended consequences... by innerweb · · Score: 1

      I have always loved that explanation. The first thing that came to my mind when I first heard it, was that falling does not kill you, no matter how far, only the sudden stop at the bottom.

      InnerWeb

      --
      Freud might say that Intelligent Design is religion's ID.
    15. Re:law of unintended consequences... by wizardforce · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Upon what data do you base that assumption?

      considering the kind of death that is in store for someone who is severely immuno-compromised, the adverse effects from this treatment would need to be pretty bad to be considered worse. that and there isn't any convincing evidence to my knowledge that this method is any worse than doing nothing to mitigate the effects of an HIV infection which doesn't mean that there can't be any that we don't know about, it means that we would need more testing- in any case, dismissing this out of hand before determining its effectiveness/safety relative to other treatments is foolish at best.

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    16. Re:law of unintended consequences... by PeterPlan · · Score: 1

      The naturally occurring frequency of a mutations in this receptor is fairly high. Assuming you are caucasian, there is a 10% cance that you are are carrying one. Thus, every 1% of all caucasians carry the mutation on both alleles and have a high resistance against HIV. (Samson et al. "Caucasian individuals bearing mutant alleles of the CCR-5 chemokine receptor gene." Nature, 1996) So far, individuals having mutations in both alleles have not been shown to suffer from any mutation specific disease or "side effect".

    17. Re:law of unintended consequences... by PakProtector · · Score: 1

      AIDS stands for Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome, not Auto-immune. It's an infectious disease, not a manifestation of lupus or rheumatoid arthritis.

      --

      Edward@Tomato - /home/Edward/ man woman
      man: no entry for woman in the manual.
      "Qua!?"

    18. Re:law of unintended consequences... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read about CCR5 delta 32 some time ago, and if my memory serves, this mutation protects at least from HIV-A and smallpox, but increases suspectibility to hepatitis C.

      If you already are HIV positive, this would no doubt be a worthwhile tradeoff.

    19. Re:law of unintended consequences... by Fred_A · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, not zombies, corpses.

      So... pre-zombies?

      We scientific types prefer to call them zombie precursors.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    20. Re:law of unintended consequences... by David+Munch · · Score: 1

      CCR5 is a chemokine receptor, which means that it is used by the cells to register chemical gradients in the body of certain ligands. The cells often use these gradients to know which direction they need to move in.

    21. Re:law of unintended consequences... by phagstrom · · Score: 2, Funny

      You not only need to be sure, you need to be HIV-positive...

    22. Re:law of unintended consequences... by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      Well it would probably be a bad idea to do this pre-emptively prior to an HIV infection, but once someone was infected - If it's a choice between "dead T-cells/no T-cells" and "potentially malfunctioning T-cells", "potentially malfunctioning" is better than "none/dead".

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    23. Re:law of unintended consequences... by Taleron · · Score: 2, Funny

      Besides, it's never lupus.

    24. Re:law of unintended consequences... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      So you're saying that people with AIDS don't suffer horrible agonizing death from various infectious diseases?

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    25. Re:law of unintended consequences... by wisenboi · · Score: 1

      +1 to this. My concern is the same: by introducing this mutation that suppresses/removes expression of what the AIDS virus uses to penetrate the cell, what other biological components in the body are affected at all?

      --
      If anyone needs me, I'll be in the Angry Dome.
    26. Re:law of unintended consequences... by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1

      T-cells are part of the immune system, and perhaps you remember this recent infamous TGN1412 experiment involving T-Cells

      Thanks, I was thinking of that trial about a week ago on an unrelated subject, but couldn't remember enough to look it up.

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
    27. Re:law of unintended consequences... by kalirion · · Score: 1

      Rincewind: I'm not going to ride on a magic carpet! I'm afraid of grounds.
      Conina: You mean heights. And stop being silly.
      Rincewind: I know what I mean! It's the grounds that kill you!

    28. Re:law of unintended consequences... by MrNaz · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Oh come on mods, I wasn't serious.

      --
      I hate printers.
    29. Re:law of unintended consequences... by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Well, I am no AIDS expert but from what I understand is HIV does not really kill anybody."

      "Guns don't kill people..."

    30. Re:law of unintended consequences... by porpnorber · · Score: 1

      I must be missing something in your argument. If the article said that people born without eyes are not annoyed by bright lights, would we conclude that eyes are 'superfluous'? The doubts rightly raised by others are about what else this long-evolved (and therefore presumptively useful!) gene does—what it is 'for,' if you will—not questioning these researchers' theory of how HIV exploits it.

    31. Re:law of unintended consequences... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Bullets don't kill people..."

    32. Re:law of unintended consequences... by CTachyon · · Score: 1

      ... HIV does not really kill anybody ...

      Actually, it does, it's just most people die of AIDS before the HIV infection itself can kill. In addition to infecting immune system cells, HIV also infects brain cells, which is the cause of the cognitive impairment descending into dementia that is experienced by a significant number of late-stage AIDS patients. If the patient doesn't die of infection first, AIDS dementia complex can destroy enough brain tissue to finish them off.

      --
      Range Voting: preference intensity matters
  7. Barclay's Protomorphosis Syndrome by geekmansworld · · Score: 4, Funny

    Haven't we learned not to modify T-Cells already?

    1. Re:Barclay's Protomorphosis Syndrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Haven't we learned not to modify T-Cells already?

      This isn't informative; it's from star trek. mod as insightful or funny.

    2. Re:Barclay's Protomorphosis Syndrome by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1

      In that episode, mutant Barclay could have kicked Spider-man's ass!

    3. Re:Barclay's Protomorphosis Syndrome by geekmansworld · · Score: 1

      And when they both go back to being regular guys, they can decide which of them is more socially awkward.

  8. Re:So what? by arthurpaliden · · Score: 5, Funny

    The world is going to end in 2012 anyway so why worry.

  9. Thats sick by Gat0r30y · · Score: 2, Funny

    sorry. I had to.

    --
    Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
  10. This is probably good news by Whuffo · · Score: 4, Insightful
    HIV is a polymorphic virus - it changes its "shape" often, making vaccines difficult / impossible to create. Sure, they can create a vaccine for variation 32b, but there's a bunch of variants and new ones show up from time to time. A nice simple AIDS vaccine that you can give to kids is - as far as we know at this time - impossible.


    But this technology may provide a way to defend against this virus. By changing the "shape" of our T-cells it will prevent the virus from recognizing its target. This would render it ineffective and be effective against the numerous variants.

    Of course, this is still early in the development cycle. There's always the chance of unintended consequences...

    1. Re:This is probably good news by Red+Flayer · · Score: 5, Informative

      But this technology may provide a way to defend against this virus. By changing the "shape" of our T-cells it will prevent the virus from recognizing its target. This would render it ineffective and be effective against the numerous variants

      This does not make the T-cell invisible to HIV, it sets a trap.

      T Cell (in sexy voice): How about it, Mr. HIV, do you want to come into my place?
      HIV: Om nom nom let me put my arms around you baby... wait, where the fuck do I put my left arm? I can't penetrate without both arms around you!
      T cell: All your binding proteins are belong to me.
      HIV: I'm going to go hit on someone else. Let go of my right arm, you bastard!
      T cell: Om nom nom

      Well ok, it's a stretch, the T cell doesn't eat the virus at the end.

      But the zinc fingers don't disguise the T-cell, they keep the T-cell from expressing one of the antigens on its surface. So instead of the two binding sites needed for the T-cell to be infected, it only shows one.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    2. Re:This is probably good news by kvezach · · Score: 1

      How about a virus that binds only to cells that express both the T-cell receptor and whatever HIV uses to connect to the T-cell receptor? Presumably, only infected cells would express both - the former because that's how HIV got in there, and the latter because HIV is being produced and HIV itself uses the cell's surface as a coat when budding.

      Now, HIV may mutate so that the virus wouldn't recognize the "T-cell inverse", but there's a limit to how much it can mutate before the receptor fails to connect to ordinary T-cells. After all, HIV has to work - it can't just mutate beyond all limits.

      That virus would have to contain redundancy checks so it doesn't combine with HIV itself, so we'll have to wait for the perfection of nanotech, but unless I'm missing something, it should work. Then again, IANAImmunologist.

    3. Re:This is probably good news by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      I'm skeptical.

      HIV is known to evolve affinity for new binding sites: http://endogenousretrovirus.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-just-so-story-turns-into-just-so.html

      Can it evolve around this change? I don't know, but it's very probable.

    4. Re:This is probably good news by omnipresentbob · · Score: 1

      Anybody else think of I am Legend? The recent movie, that is - not the book.

    5. Re:This is probably good news by GroeFaZ · · Score: 4, Funny

      Couldn't you have put it as an analogy that does not involve "making out"? Something slashdotters can understand, like, a car analogy?

      --
      The grass is always greener on the other side of the light cone.
    6. Re:This is probably good news by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I am simply ignorant, but is it impossible that mutations in the AIDS virus could adapt to this? Also, how can one change the genetic code in all of the existing cells in the body to produce only the new and improved T-Cells and even if we could do that what other side effects might that have? I seem to remember from a couple of articles that attempts to alter genetic code of living humans (through viruses for example) has had limited success and resulted in death of the patient in some cases. I suppose that it is analogous to altering the byte code of a program while it is executing in memory, something which is dangerous at best and generally results in a crash (or in the case of living things death). Unfortunately there is no reboot for living organisms as far as we know.

    7. Re:This is probably good news by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      Retroviruses do this DNA-mutation on the fly all the time.

      That's why they end up as part of our lineage's DNA.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    8. Re:This is probably good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure exactly how this will in any way improve on existing AIDS therapy. We already have a drug called maraviroc (Selzentry) which is a CCR5 antagonist, preventing HIV from using CCR5 to gain entry into cells. The problem with this drug is that CCR5 is only one of two co-receptors on the surface of CD4 cells which allows HIV to bind. A person's CD4 cells can have only CCR5, only CXCR4 (the other co-receptor), or both. Many strains of HIV can use either CCR5 or CXCR4 to gain entry into CD4 cells. Some people are "fortunate" enough to ONLY have CCR5 on their CD4 cells, and in these people, maraviroc can effectively prevent HIV from binding to cells. However, in people with both CCR5 and CXCR4 or CXCR4 alone on their CD4 cells, HIV can still bind to and infect cells. Reading the article, I don't see how this new method would be any less susceptible to this characteristic of HIV than maraviroc.

      What would make a huge leap (IMO) in HIV therapy is if this group could develop a method of introducing mutations using these zinc fingers so that they change CXCR4, and this new therapy along with maraviroc could potentially inhibit HIV binding to any CD4 cell.

    9. Re:This is probably good news by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not possible* for the HIV virus to adapt to this, as it requires two different binding sites. If you remove one of the sites, binding and insertion is impossible.

      As for changing the genetic code, that's not what you're doing. Instead you are putting out a honeypot to attract the virus. The virus can still infect normal cells, but the modified cells can't be infected -- if you have enough of them, then the normal cells can go about their business. Here's a very simplified model:

      Say each generation of HIV has an infection success rate of 50%, and produces three viruses when it lyses its host cell. Each generation would then result in a 50% increase in number of viruses (N*0.5*3). Let's say that you have a 1:1 ratio of normal cells to modified cells. Any viruses that try to infect the modified cells fail, and are taken out of circulation. Now each generation will have a population of only 75% of the prior generation (N*0.5*0.5*3). You can practically get rid of the virus over many successive generations.

      * By not possible, I mean very very unlikely. It would require wholesale change of the virus structure.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    10. Re:This is probably good news by Domo-Sun · · Score: 1

      Or a "Libraries of Congress" analogy.

    11. Re:This is probably good news by quanticle · · Score: 1

      This is /. Did you really think anyone would really get the dating analogy?

      Next time, use a car analogy, please.

      --
      We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
    12. Re:This is probably good news by Barny · · Score: 1

      So, to put it in a way people on here might actually understand ;)

      The T-cell fakes its md5, HIV comes up, checks to see if this is the right cell to corrupt and finds the hash doesn't match what it wants, and ignores it.

      See, and no cars or tubes :)

      --
      ...
      /me sighs
    13. Re:This is probably good news by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      You can practically get rid of the virus over many successive generations.

      but never entirely right? This sounds similar to HAART, it can reduce the virus to very low levels, but it would take more than a normal human lifetime to clear the virus completely using these types of methods. At best it would probably allow a reasonably normal, if somewhat shortened, lifespan with the virus never completely cleared but (hopefully) well controlled.

    14. Re:This is probably good news by budgenator · · Score: 1

      HIV viruses might work

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    15. Re:This is probably good news by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      Actually, that's kind of the weird thing about HIV. It infects its host, then the host "wins", and the HIV is almost unnoticeable at that point. However, enough T-cells have the odd DNA code that HIV inserted into it, and so far, I've only heard it as "mysteriously" the T-cell levels drop, even though the virus is in remission. The virus eventually takes over, because the T-cells aren't in high enough numbers to stop it anymore, but the T-cell levels drop WHILE they're winning against HIV.

      I can only think that its high mutation rate is related, in that it infects a human, infects their t-cells, the human host beats off that virus, but there are a number of T-cells that are infected with a piece of inactive virus code that then sabotages them.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    16. Re:This is probably good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even so, it still leaves you with basically a full-strength immune system. Kind of like how males can get HPV, but not suffer any of the symptoms, whereas it can cause infertility and cervical cancer in females. Obviously different mechanisms, but the important point is getting it under control.

    17. Re:This is probably good news by RabidMoose · · Score: 1

      You can practically get rid of the virus over many successive generations.

      but never entirely right?

      Doesn't matter. This keeps the virus from reaching a critical load necessary for "infection".

    18. Re:This is probably good news by CTachyon · · Score: 1

      Actually, there's pretty good evidence now that HPV is also responsible for certain mouth, throat, penis, and anus cancers. The sheer number of mouth and throat cancers caused by tobacco (chewing and smoking are both dangerous) puts HPV to shame, but unprotected oral sex (with either gender) can spread HPV to the mouth and throat.

      Also, HPV isn't responsible for infertility, except in the sense that it can cause cancers that require fertility-damaging surgery to remove. Most of the STDs that cause infertility are bacterial, not viral, and non-cancerous HPV infections are almost entirely harmless.

      --
      Range Voting: preference intensity matters
  11. Worst summary ever... by JDevers · · Score: 4, Informative

    Talk about completely misreading even the one paragraph blurb. Zinc fingers are a large group of protein sub-structures which are used to interact with DNA. This group used them to induce a specific mutation which now seems to be HIV resistant How long this will last is really up in the air though, HIV and all other RNA viruses evolve very quickly.

    1. Re:Worst summary ever... by Otter · · Score: 1
      In fairness, the blurb here comes straight from the godawful UPenn press release, which refers to "minute, naturally occurring proteins called zinc fingers". The "minute" is also odd.

      How long this will last is really up in the air though, HIV and all other RNA viruses evolve very quickly.

      That doesn't seem to be a problem with the naturally-occurring CCR5 variant, though.

    2. Re:Worst summary ever... by cleojo42 · · Score: 1

      So glad that someone pointed this out. There is actually a naturally occuring mutation in this gene that renders people resistant. It is more predominant in the western european population. Summaries like this are why the US population doesn't know anything about science.

    3. Re:Worst summary ever... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly they do not evolve very quicky because evolution is only a theory, and God created HIV and all other RNA viruses 6000 years ago and they haven't changed since.

    4. Re:Worst summary ever... by JDevers · · Score: 1

      The naturally occurring variant is such a small percent of the population as to not be an evolutionary pressure for HIV, if huge numbers of people all of a sudden basically have this gene that pressure will increase quite a bit.

    5. Re:Worst summary ever... by Requiem18th · · Score: 1

      If the switch is done suddenly enough it could actually starve HIV to death before it can evolve. What worries me is...t Human Immunodeficiency Virus is actually a rather generic title for a very specific virus, but wouldn't any virus that prey on T-Cells a HIV virus of sort? In other words we are fixing only and implementation of the problem not the general problem itself, human genetic code may start an evolutionary race similar to that of Windows. Even worse is that these changes may in fact be more attractive for other kinds of viruses.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
    6. Re:Worst summary ever... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Even worse than that is the reference to the "AIDS virus". HIV is the virus. AIDS is the resulting condition.

    7. Re:Worst summary ever... by chooks · · Score: 1

      This group used them to induce a specific mutation which now seems to be HIV resistant

      As others have noted, the CCR5 mutation already exists in nature -- in general in those of western european descent. However CCR5 (chemokine receptor 5) is just one co-receptor that HIV can use. Generally the CCR5 variant is involved in early stage HIV infection. As the disease progresses, HIV can change to use just the CXCR4 receptor or both the CCR5 and CXCR4 receptor. One would presume that the gene mutation would not effect acquisition/progression of disease in the CXCR4 variants.

      --
      -- The Genesis project? What's that?
  12. Pennsylvania School of Medicine? by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 1

    Who wrote that summary? They can't even get the name of the school right - it's the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.

    Man, them's some shitty editorial standards you've got there.

    1. Re:Pennsylvania School of Medicine? by kvezach · · Score: 1

      Man, them's some shitty editorial standards you've got there.

      What standards?

  13. CRC error? by gameboyhippo · · Score: 1

    Anyone else read this as a CRC error?

    1. Re:CRC error? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      I wake up in a cold sweat some nights dreaming of CRC errors in my Zmodem batch downloads!

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  14. Alternatively: by my_left_nut · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Researchers Throw Finger at HIV"

    1. Re:Alternatively: by Savior_on_a_Stick · · Score: 1

      Bastard! I had a line floating around that involved an ECC mutation... Now, you've gone and thrown it all away....

    2. Re:Alternatively: by Grizzlysmit · · Score: 1

      "Researchers Throw Finger at HIV"

      how about "Researchers Give HIV the finger"

      --
      in my life God comes first.... but Linux is pretty high after that :-D
      Francis Smit
  15. Re:This is probably good news..waiting to fark up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Okay, great. We're injecting rats with aids, modifying their dna, ....I am just waiting for petsmart to issue a recall on rabid big-ass-badger sized rats that infect people with a mutant form of aids through IR-eye contact channels.

    I'm too lazy to logon.
    -Mazanoid

  16. Philly School of Medicine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Get outta heah, you sick bastid!"

  17. T-Virus by StillDutch · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Are we now going here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-Virus#T-Virus ?? Could be the end!

  18. Brilliant! by DeVilla · · Score: 4, Funny

    That sounds like a great plan. Insert errors into our genetic code until the virus leaves us alone. That's got to work.

    1. Re:Brilliant! by FilterMapReduce · · Score: 1

      That sounds like a great plan. Insert errors into our genetic code until the virus leaves us alone. That's got to work.

      Well, one in every billion-odd genetic errors results in evolutionary mutation. I suppose if you're feeling really lucky...

      (Hey, they got us this far!)

    2. Re:Brilliant! by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      If only the same principle worked for Microsoft...

    3. Re:Brilliant! by quanticle · · Score: 1

      Ummm, you do realize that that's how evolution works, right? Any mutation (beneficial or not) can be seen as a "random error".

      --
      We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
    4. Re:Brilliant! by Sabz5150 · · Score: 1

      That sounds like a great plan. Insert errors into our genetic code until the virus leaves us alone. That's got to work.

      Look up CCR5delta32.

      --
      "Who modded this informative? Whoever it is must've been smokin' some of that martian pot!"
  19. Re:So what? by cyphercell · · Score: 3, Funny

    Because....

    We run out of zinc, jackass!!!

    --
    Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
  20. Why don't we use HIV cells behavior against them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since they seek out t-cells, why not make a t-cell trap? Create a t-cell-like cell that has no value to replication of HIV virii, and once the HIV virus gets in, it's trapped.

  21. Mod Up Parent by halsver · · Score: 1

    Do it

    --
    Roughly half my comments are never submitted. You may be reading the better half...
  22. Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by Darkk · · Score: 0, Troll

    I have to wonder by modifying the T-Cell will it screw up the immune system? Mutate it to do something else? I think the only true way to control HIV problem is through education and prevention. If people are stupid enough to have unprotected sex with an unknown partner then it's their problem. Also, this re-enforces the nature of being faithful in a relationship so stop screwing around people!!

    1. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 3, Insightful
      But what happens when one partner is unfaithful, contracts AIDS, and passes it on to the faithful partner?

      What happens when someone with AIDS rapes someone?

      What happens when someone with AIDS passes it along to their unborn child (a rare occasion now due to modern medicine)?

      Get off your high horse tool. Some people are infected not because of their behavior, but fate. A fix should be available for them, as well as everyone else infected.

    2. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by Dunbal · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      A fix should be available for them, as well as everyone else infected.

            The problem is when you're dealing with for profit pharmaceutical companies, a "fix" is not in their best interest. Not many research dollars are going to be assigned to THAT. Keeping you alive and dependent on their overpriced medications is far more profitable. Don't hope for a "fix" for anything. Expect lifelong "treatments" instead.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    3. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      What happens if you get AIDS while trying to help someone who is injured? Unprotected sex is NOT the only way to get HIV infections. If it was I would agree with your stance; but it is not. Just because its the most common vector does not mean its the only one.

      I would really hate if I or someone I care about who was smart enough to know something about who their sleeping with and use protection ended up contracting HIV some other way and could not get treatment. Especially if the treatment is never developed because some fools like you assumed that unprotected sex was the only way to get it and it will never mutate to become more infectious through other vectors.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    4. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by RockWolf · · Score: 1
      While I agree with the sentiments of your post, this:

      What happens when someone with AIDS passes it along to their unborn child (a rare occasion now due to modern medicine)?

      is unfortunately far too common in many parts of Africa. In western society, as you say, it's rare - but totally rife in other parts. I've read statistics that the HIV infection rate in some areas is over 20%.

      Education, health care, etc may be the long-term answer... No one apparently is sure of a short-term preventative measure, though.

      --
      February 9th, 2009 8:55pm: Slashdot becomes self-aware.
    5. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If people are stupid enough to have unprotected sex with an unknown partner then it's their problem. Or stupid enough to work in a hospital and get stuck with an infected needle. Or stupid enough to be born with an HIV-infected mother. Or stupid enough to get a transfusion that wasn't properly screened. Fact is, there are millions of people out there that are HIV positive through no fault of their own! That being said, yes, education, prevention, and possibly vaccines are important. The probability of actually curing something that can hide dormant inside a cell for 70+ years seems very low to me. Oh by the way, your own body "messes around" with T-Cells all the time, in order to train it to react to new types of infection...

    6. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by Darkk · · Score: 1

      A fix should be available for them, as well as everyone else infected.

      The problem is when you're dealing with for profit pharmaceutical companies, a "fix" is not in their best interest. Not many research dollars are going to be assigned to THAT. Keeping you alive and dependent on their overpriced medications is far more profitable. Don't hope for a "fix" for anything. Expect lifelong "treatments" instead.

      They're just bad as tobacco companies for their nicotine addiction. Granted they need to find the cure and vaccine for it but the way it is now it's not gonna happen anytime soon. HIV is very real and people need to do everything they can to protect themselves. Seems lately people are being naive thinking it'll never happen to them and still continue to have unprotected sex with unknown partners. Rape and other situations are a separate issue altogether. I'm talking about deliberate acts of being stupid by not using protection. To me that's not an excuse. Protection isn't 100% effective but at least they should make an effort to prevent the spread of HIV.

    7. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by freeweed · · Score: 1

      If people are stupid enough to have unprotected sex with an unknown partner then it's their problem. Also, this re-enforces the nature of being faithful in a relationship so stop screwing around people!!

      No it doesn't, not in the slightest.

      It reinforces the nature of using a condom while screwing around, nothing more.

      PS: Every partner might as well be treated like an "unknown" partner. Unless you have 7x24 video surveillance of their every move, you could quite easily be infected with HIV. Trust doesn't stop viruses, and thousands of cases demonstrate my point.

      In summary, HIV has nothing to do with screwing around, and nothing to do with "unknown" partners. It has everything to do with unprotected sex, and unprotected sex only. The only way to 100% guarantee you'll never catch HIV is to never ever have penetrative sex. Period. With anyone, no matter how much you trust them. You can be 99.9999% sure if you use a condom. Anything else, you're taking your life into your own hands.

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    8. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I guess when Isaac Asimov was infected with HIV from a contaminated blood transfusion he deserved to get sick and die!

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    9. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be human is to fuck. All that dog wants to do is hunt.

    10. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Also, this re-enforces the nature of being faithful in a relationship so stop screwing around people!!

      Would you kindly get off your high horse, cheating is not a pre-requisite for contracting HIV. The majority of HIV is contracted from a partner that they are having a relationship with. The chances of contracting HIV from having unprotected sex with a person is lower than most STD gonorrhoea for example, you are far more likely to contract HIV from having unprotected sex more often with a steady partner who you (and they) didn't know they were infected than you are with from a one night stand with a partner who was infected. This is backed up by the fact that the majority of HIV infections happen in third world countries via normal relationships, this is due to 1) lack of sex education, 2) lack or unafordability of STD testing 3) religious interference such as abstinence programs (redundant, I know its covered under lack of education). Point in short, you are less likely to get HIV and AIDS from cheating than you are by being uninformed.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    11. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by Fred_A · · Score: 2, Funny

      I guess when Isaac Asimov was infected with HIV from a contaminated blood transfusion he deserved to get sick and die!

      Absolutely, according to the original poster he shouldn't have had a transfusion without a condom, so it was completely his fault. (details are left as an exercise to the reader).

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    12. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      religious interference such as abstinence programs

      What? How does that even make sense as a reason for disease to spread, rather than a random slam at abstinence-based education?

      If an area teaches abstinence, people will either (1) listen or (2) not. If they listen- if they are abstinent- they aren't going to spread HIV, and they're unlikely to be infected. If they're don't listen, then it doesn't matter whether they were taught abstinence or not, because they're not listening.

      Alternate explanation: the majority of HIV infections happen- anywhere- due to non-monogamous behavior. (Note that I'm referring to "pure" monogamy, here, not "serial" monogamy.) You may or may not believe monogamy is somehow unrealistic, but it's hard to argue that it wouldn't largely halt the spread of HIV.

      Regardless, any treatment is at least hopeful- medicine is about making people better, whatever they have or haven't done to get there.

    13. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happens when someone with AIDS rapes someone?

      What happens when someone rapes someone with AIDS?

    14. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you, ignorant asshole. My brother contracted HIV from a blood transfusion during surgery when he was 4 months old.

    15. Re:Messin around with T-Cells a bad thing? by x2A · · Score: 1

      "How does that even make sense as a reason for disease to spread"

      The argument is that abstinence programs teach "don't do it" instead of "here's how to do it safely". People who break from abstinence programs are less likely to be prepared - less likely to have condoms with them.

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
  23. Re:So what? by cp.tar · · Score: 5, Funny

    They need to be good libs

    As opposed to what, being a good "con" and doing what?

    Conning people?

    --
    Ignore this signature. By order.
  24. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know this is offtopic to the article, but ontopic to the parent post.

    Just because the Mayans calendar ended then means what exactly? They didn't even invent, let alone UTILIZE the wheel...

    I'm glad this was modded funny and not informative, every time someone says this I die a little inside...

  25. HIV and dating ... by freaker_TuC · · Score: 1

    I find your dating example pretty ackward,
    I've never seen a sexy T-cell before but anyways...

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
  26. A world without zinc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jimmy: Hey, what gives?
    Jimmy's Dad: You said you wanted to live in a world without zinc Jimmy. Well now your car has no battery.
    Jimmy: But I promised Betty I'd pick her up by 6:00. I better give her a call.
    Jimmy's Dad: Sorry Jimmy. Without zinc for the rotary mechanism, there are no telephones.
    Jimmy: Dear God! What have I done?
    (Jimmy pulls out a gun and points it to his head and fires)
    Jimmy's Dad: Think again Jimmy. You see the firing pin in your gun was made out of...yep...zinc.
    Jimmy: Come back zinc, Come Back!!

  27. Zinc finger != protein by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Zinc fingers aren't proteins... they are parts of proteins (motifs) that bind to DNA. Along with zinc finger, there are four or five other common DNA-binding motifs that are in found in most DNA-binding proteins.

  28. Re:So what? by physburn · · Score: 0

    So what? Cure for Aids, now I can have my orgy. Its true, no one gets Aids when there using there (Zinc) fingers. Hear god: reality.net.ConnectException: Resource unavailable prior to the Eschaton.

  29. Re:So what? by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just because the Mayans calendar ended then means what exactly? They didn't even invent, let alone UTILIZE the wheel...

          Not only that but they were able to predict "the end of the world" and yet utterly failed to foresee the end of their own civilization?

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  30. Re:So what? by ortholattice · · Score: 1

    ...we have 20-30 years at the current rare we're using Zinc.

    Well, if zinc runs out, HIV will be the least of our worries; none of us can survive without it.

    Seriously, the amount of zinc in these "zinc fingers" (which already exist in our bodies) is a trace amount.

  31. call me a skeptic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    isn't modifying our t-cells a little dangerous? i would think that we need the receptor sites that they are suppressing, nature usually doesn't keep things around that we don't have a need for!!!

    1. Re:call me a skeptic, but... by Kevin72594 · · Score: 1

      nature usually doesn't keep things around that we don't have a need for!!!

      http://www.livescience.com/animals/top10_vestigial_organs.html I wouldn't be so sure about that.

  32. Re:So what? by snowgirl · · Score: 1

    I know this is offtopic to the article, but ontopic to the parent post.

    Just because the Mayans calendar ended then means what exactly? They didn't even invent, let alone UTILIZE the wheel...

    I'm glad this was modded funny and not informative, every time someone says this I die a little inside...

    The Mayan calendar isn't ending... they're just adding a new digit... much like what will happen in the year 9999 for us.

    --
    WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
  33. Re:So what? by Ihmhi · · Score: 2, Funny

    The world's gonna end on Diablo III's release date?

  34. T-Virus? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    T-Cells you say, eh?
    Then you revive the dead cells, and it comes zombies?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T_Virus

  35. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Partially true. In 2112, we come back and discover the guitar and rock the world. -Rush, circa 1976.

  36. Re:SLASHDOT SUX0RZ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Make them Goatse resistant? Slashdot could use some of that

  37. Re:Why don't we use HIV cells behavior against the by PCM2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That's pretty much what all AIDS drugs have attempted to do, thus far. Making fake cells seems problematic, since you would have to replace the patient's own cells with them until all the virus has been "cleaned up." But interrupting the life cycle of the virus is the main goal of therapy. Viruses typically use enzymes and proteins to move in and out of human cells. Influenza, for example, uses hemagglutinin to break its way into the cell, then later uses neuraminidase to break back out when it's ready to spread further. If you can somehow block the action of either of these proteins, you have managed to disrupt the viral life cycle. If it can't spread, it should eventually die off. Thus, if a doctor gives you medicine to fight a bad flu, he's probably giving you what is called a "neuraminidase inhibitor." Scientists have tried to create many HIV drugs along similar lines. The problem, as always, is that the HIV virus mutates so rapidly that you can't assume that what worked an hour ago will still work now (literally).

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
  38. Re:So what? by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

    No, we run out of zinc in 2011 and the end of the world comes in 2012.

  39. Re:So what? by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know this is offtopic to the article, but ontopic to the parent post.

    Don't apologize... it's the way discussions are supposed to work. Too bad that more mods don't realize it.

    This post is, sadly, only tangentally ontopic since I'm replying to something that wasn't the main point of your poost. Alas.

  40. Re:SLASHDOT SUX0RZ by Smartcowboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What could possibly go wrong?

  41. Re:So what? by alta · · Score: 1

    As opposed to a good 'con' who would try to stick it in their SUV and burn it!

    The statement was sarcasm aimed at a combination of the 'zinc shortgage' story earlier today and the mostly 'lib' agenda of conserving resources.

    --
    Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
  42. Re:So what? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

    The Mayan calendar isn't ending... they're just adding a new digit... much like what will happen in the year 9999 for us.

    So...this is supposed to be the Mayan Y2k? I hope they still find some PALENQUOBOL programmers..

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  43. They're chemokine receptors. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    CCR5 is a receptor for a class of signaling molecules used to coordinate action between T cells, other white blood cells, and other cells (like endothelial cells) that sense infection.

    You can buy mice that have had CCR5 nuked entirely. They're slightly more susceptible to fungal and viral infections (HIV is an exception because it actually uses CCR5 to get into the cell), and slightly more resistant to damage caused by immune system malfunction (like asthma).

    The reason they're not totally immune-disabled is that the CCRs are highly redundant. Most of the CCR5 signals will also be picked up by CCR1, CCR3, etc. Which is not to say this treatment is guaranteed to work (TGN1412 worked great in monkeys, and then killed people), and hacking the CCR5 gene in every cell in the body is not really feasible, but it's still interesting.

  44. Re:So what? by Anpheus · · Score: 1

    Before, actually, in keeping with Blizzard's habit of missing the release date.

    It's only due to the crazy physics involved with the world ending that somehow the game ends up finished anyway.

  45. Best Science Solution EVER!!! by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For years I've heard of HIV research focusing on either slowing the spread of HIV or focusing on killing the virus.

    This solution instead makes it so the virus will have no effect. I would imagine that a HIV infected victim that has not been vacinated should even be able to receive immunized T-cell injections or even pill supplements.

    The approach to this problem just reminds me of the kid that suggested letting the air out of the tires of the bus stuck in the tunnel. Of course it's obviously much more technical to modify T-cells in laboratories, but the beauty of the approach is equally elegant

  46. Re:So what? by saxoholic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just because the Mayans calendar ended then means what exactly? They didn't even invent, let alone UTILIZE the wheel...

    Not only that but they were able to predict "the end of the world" and yet utterly failed to foresee the end of their own civilization?

    This isn't actually true. The Mayan long count actually continues after 2012. The Mayans actually thought the world wouldn't end until sometime around 3000. The cause for the misinterpretation is in the way the Mayans wrote the date. There's a whole other digit that usually gets left out, because they saw no need to write the entire long count for things thousands of years in the future, but on a handful of totems you can actually see the entire long count for the end of the world date, and it's not until the 3000s, so we're good for a while.

  47. Re:So what? by Fred_A · · Score: 3, Funny

    No, we run out of zinc in 2011 and the end of the world comes in 2012.

    We could just move the end of the world forward by one year to solve the problem.

    --

    May contain traces of nut.
    Made from the freshest electrons.
  48. Re:So what? by MaXiMiUS · · Score: 1

    I prefer late, but good, over rushed and mediocre.

    *glares at EA*

    That, and the fact that Blizzard finally announced Diablo III is good news to me.

    Anyways.. back on topic.. yay T-Cells!

    --
    It's never just a game when you're winning. - George Carlin
  49. Re:So what? by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

    But we still won't see Duke Nukem Forever... *weep*

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  50. humm by luther349 · · Score: 0

    the problem with aids is its ablity to adapt to such treatments thers been t-cell blockers befor the vires just mutated to get arund it. trust me if it was that easy to stop aids it would been done a very long time ago.

  51. zinc fingers by slashdotinmyface · · Score: 1

    Zinc fingers are motifs (i.e. a combination of secondary structural elements with unique topolgy) - not a type of protein! But then again, you guys are computer scientists or engineers or w/e you call yourselves...so who cares as long as it sounds smart...eh?

  52. Re:So what? by alnapp · · Score: 4, Funny

    Mod +1 relieved

    Phew

  53. Re:So what? by budgenator · · Score: 1

    It means we get to wear funny hats, blow noise makers, say "I luv you man" and get rip roaring drunk. The next day we get to wake up with a punitive hang-over and praying the new girlfreind isn't a tranny!

    --
    Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  54. Nature does it too... by Mutatis+Mutandis · · Score: 2, Informative

    As it happens errors in the CCR5 receptor occur naturally and with a significant frequency, mainly in European populations. This 'delta32' mutation results in a defective receptor, but the people with it are healthy. There is also a drugs on the market, maraviroc, that specifically inhibits CCR5. People with the CCR5-Delta32 mutation are 'long term non progressors', they carry the virus but don't develop AIDS, probably because the virus is incapable of destroying their immune system. HIV is actually found in variants that use the CCR5 or CXCR4 receptors as co-receptors to enter cells. Apparently X4-tropic viruses, while deadly, have a limited effect on people with uncompromised immune systems. Most infections are with R5, and X4 strains evolve in the later stages of disease. I don't think anybody as yet understands why, but this is a very reproducible occurrence.

  55. CCR5 vs CXCR4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No big deal. HIV will switch to using CXCR4 as a coreceptor for entry. It happens anyway, even with CCR5 tropic variants , now it will just happen earlier :-)

  56. Re:So what? by Zaatxe · · Score: 1

    [...] the entire long count for the end of the world date, and it's not until the 3000s, so we're good for a while.

    And then the Psychlos arrive...

    --
    So say we all
  57. No, not zinc fingers... by marciot · · Score: 1

    ... tin whiskers are the way to go.

  58. Re:So what? by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

    They didn't even invent, let alone UTILIZE the wheel...

    And yet, the wheel would have been largely useless to them, as they had no sizable draft animal and the terrain was largely unsuitable to wheeled vehicles.

    Just sayin... the lack of the wheel had little to do with their potential for engineering.

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  59. Re:So what? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

    So does that mean there should be a +1 meta?

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  60. Re:So what? by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1
    "There's no archaeological or historical evidence that the Mayans themselves expected anything other than a New Year's Eve party to happen on this date: Claims that this rollover represents a Mayan prediction of the end of the world appear to be a modern pop-culture invention."

    http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4093

    --
    (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
  61. Re:SLASHDOT SUX0RZ by VeNoM0619 · · Score: 1
    Yes agreed, this definitely needs to be tagged whatcouldpossiblygowrong.

    because it now has an introduced error into the CCR5 gene.'

    Hell, even iamlegend (like a story was previously tagged) would do as well.

    --
    Disclaimer: I am not god.
    We may not be created equal
    But we can be treated equal.
  62. Re:So what? by Nadaka · · Score: 1

    Actually, they did predict the coming of the bearded white skinned gods from the east and that this would signal the end of their civilization. They predicted the exact date, down to the day that the conquistadors arrived.

  63. Really by KingPin27 · · Score: 1

    Yes - this is good news - but can they cure my cold?

    --
    "i lost my dignity on a slippery wiener"
  64. Call James Bond by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Zincfinger
    He's the man, the man with the galvanized touch
    A spider's touch
    Such a cold finger
    Beckons you to enter his web of sin
    But don't go in..."

  65. Still no sign of HIV virus by qwan · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I just came here to see if any slashdotter atleast had some knowledge on HIV. All of these theories cropping up as cures and no one sees the truth. So that is what is needed to let AIDS virus attack. I am sure they dont have any test results to show. Like put the hiv virus and these t-cells in a testube together and show us some results. Cause the damn HIV virus is a hoax. I have yet to see a test or a cure that actually has been proven with a live culture of HIV virus. All on theories Before you argue please look for scientific proof on virusmyth.net. Thank you

  66. Re:So what? by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    Actually, they did predict the coming of the bearded white skinned gods from the east and that this would signal the end of their civilization. They predicted the exact date, down to the day that the conquistadors arrived.

          Where can I find this documented? Please no links to crackpot sites.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  67. Re:SLASHDOT SUX0RZ by KozmoKramer · · Score: 1

    Do NEVER Click if you suspects da GOATSE Foo!!!

    --
    My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my Father! Prepare to die!
  68. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, they had the wheel. See:

    (The Mayan Calendar)
    http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/43/7043-004-C8081944.jpg

    That they chose not to use the wheel to make vehicles may have had something to do with the fact that there were no burden animals in the American continent: horses, cows or donkeys. Horses were re-introduced by Europeans.

    The long count, by the way, is nothing more than a larger time division in the Mayan calendar system, similar to a "century" or "millenium" in the Gregorian system. Why we would think that Mayans interpret the end of a long count as the end of the world is beyond me....

  69. Re:So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is actually a lie fabricated by overzealous priests writing history in their own favor. There's a lie like this for every group of native people in the Americas. From Moctezuma to the Inca, everyone was supposed to be having vivid hallucinations and prophecies regarding the coming of the "true god" or a man with light skin. You are referring to the legend of Quetzalcoatl, by the way, in case you're interested enough to get educated on this.

  70. Re:So what? by Abreu · · Score: 1

    You try to build a wheeled cart (using period available materials and tech) that is more efficient moving goods through rainforests and mountains than a few serfs carrying it on their backs.

    Dude, Yucatán is not a place where you can build a roman-style road.

    --
    No sig for the moment.
  71. Maraviroc goes genetic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like it's taking a genetic slant on Pfizer's Maraviroc.