Slashdot Mirror
Gene Transfer Immunizes Against Monkey HIV Analog
Al writes "Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania have immunized monkeys against the simian immunodeficiency virus, the animal model that is closest to HIV. They did so by shuttling a gene into the monkeys' muscles, making the muscle cells produce antibody-like molecules that work against SIV. With both SIV and HIV, the chameleon-like mutability of the virus's surface changes so quickly that most antibodies made by the immune system are soon rendered ineffective. Philip Johnson and colleagues designed DNA sequences for two antibodies known to be effective against SIV. They used antibody-like molecules, called immunoadhesins, in which the functional part of an antibody is fused with a more stable section of another antibody. The same approach could be used to deliver antibodies that are effective against HIV, but which the body doesn't normally produce."
...for all the HIV-analogous-positive monkeys.
THL phish sticks
I spent many years in medical school doing research work on viruses, including work with SIV. This article is very optimistic in some of its summaries. HIV and SIV are qualitatively different in the extent of "hypervariability" in their surface proteins. It is generally accepted to be "easier" to create antibodies to SIV, which has been done for many years.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7865316?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=1&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed
The technique described is very interesting, don't get me wrong, and I hope it works. However, there are *already* many techniques that appear to immunize against this HIV analog, which do not work for human HIV. The two are significantly different.
Slashdotter, ID #101. UIDs are in binary, right?
I'm kind of seeing this technique as an end-run around the "decoy" problem. It's been well known for some time that, at least in the general population, the antibody response against HIV tends to get targeted towards features which are non-protective or hyper-mutable.
However, over time we've come to discover a very small number of patients who have unusual resistance to progression. Some of these possess receptor mutations, some have unusual HLA types, while others were merely infected with what appeared to be somewhat milder variants of the virus.
However, in a few rare cases, we discovered patients with antibodies that were unusually effective at dealing with HIV's evasions. Often these antibodies had "weird" features -- things like floppy sections of their variable regions that allowed them to reach down to contact hidden epitopes, and other rare features. While they offered hope that an effective antibody response was not impossible, at the same time there really much chance of designing an antigen in such a way to get the general population to produce these unusual variants.
So, what this work has apparently done, is skip the entire vaccination step. Clone out the sequence for those particularly effective antibody variants, get your target organism to express them directly. However HIV may adapt to the new antibodies, as long as you can find one single person, somewhere in the world with an effective antibody response, it can be duplicated elsewhere.
The analog version is obviously superior. I can feel the soft, velvety texture of the analog virus whereas the digital version seems rough and blocky.
Maybe, but at the same time if it works 80% of the time, then the infection rate will go down much further than that and stop the problem almost in its tracks. If another strain comes out that can get around it, then we've still got existing medications and the ability to adapt the shot to the new strain.
What would be best is if the treatment is cheap enough to administer in Africa (and if it's really effective, than that can be relative since I can see a lot of people and countries giving more money for something this big). Stopping AIDS in Africa could easily be the biggest medical achievement this century.
Is it safe again to screw the monkeys or not?!
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
Yeah, you're probably one of those people that insist on spending a fortune on glass syringes with exotic wood plungers and gold-plated needles, because they feel healthier.
Ignorance is the root of all evil.
A gene therapy in humans that reawakens a gene we lost. The kicker? A kind of antibiotic cream can reawaken it without gene therapy!
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
Worse than that -- some Africans believe that AIDS can be cured by having sex with a virgin. A belief not exactly compatible with halting the spread of the disease. The most effective immunization against HIV is information and education of the entire population. Antivirals don't cure the disease, but they can certainly prevent the taker from infecting others if used in accordance with doctor's orders.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Some groups are using their own pathetic morality to suppress Africans who otherwis don't know any better.
And how bad would the AIDS epidemic be (in Africa or elsewhere) if people followed "oppressive" Christian teachings like keeping the sex in marriage (I'm no expert on Islam, but as far as I know, they too at least theoretically believe the same)? Granted, even many professed Christians don't follow those teachings, but that doesn't make the principle itself less effective. It would also have a profoundly positive effect on the welfare system, and abortion would very nearly be a non-issue. But nobody wants to talk about it, because we don't want to look like we gave in to those right-wing wackos, depsite the fact that there are huge benefits and nobody has ever shown me an actual drawback to it.
Mock and flame away. I'll pay attention when somebody proposes an actual drawback to monogamy (and no, Sarah Palin's daughter is not one. That again is an example of a problem of not embracing monogamy. I want somebody to point out a disadvantage of monogamy itself).
Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
People have been preaching abstinence and monogamy for thousands of years. I don't see any evidence of it having worked.
People are people. They make mistakes from time to time even if they are trying to follow one of these prescriptive, backward religions.
Combine that with the willful spreading of ignorant, superstitious beliefs in Africa and you have a monumental disaster.
It's time the straight-laced preachers of this world and their arm-chair proponents looked at the reality of human nature and thought of something compatible with it that might help instead of berating and condescending.
Stick Men
'Some places' like Vatican City?
Do it right kids, use a condom!
Python coder | PyQt Applications | Writer