Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Breakthrough Portends Cure For the Common Cold

Posted by Soulskill on from the also-portends-breathless-headlines dept.

breadboy21 writes with this excerpt from the Independent: "Scientists have been able to show for the first time that the body's immune defenses can destroy the common cold virus after it has actually invaded the inner sanctum of a human cell, a feat that was believed until now to be impossible. The discovery opens the door to the development of a new class of antiviral drugs that work by enhancing this natural virus-killing machinery of the cell. Scientists believe the first clinical trials of new drugs based on the findings could begin within two to five years."

12 of 180 comments (clear)

  1. Stunning Research by Dr. Strangelove by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Funny

    But studies at the Medical Research Council's laboratory have found that the antibodies produced by the immune system, which recognise and attack invading viruses, actually ride piggyback into the inside of a cell with the invading virus.

    Yes but these 'Slim Pickens' antibodies are often regarded as clinically insane by the others that watch in confusion as the suicidal antibody hoots and hollers, waiving its antibody cowboy hat around as the virus blasts them both into the cell.

    --
    My work here is dung.
  2. Two to five YEARS??? by MrHanky · · Score: 5, Funny

    My cold will be over by then.

  3. This is fantastic news! by i_ate_god · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I look forward to seeing how this annoyance will evolve into a serious threat

    --
    I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
    1. Re:This is fantastic news! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I wonder however how many flu symptoms are the effect of your body's defenses, and whether any of them will be worsened by such a drug

      The cytokine storm that causes fatalities with some influenza variants is due (roughly speaking) to the body breaking down the virus too quickly, swamping its ability to dispose of the byproducts. This looks like it would cause your body to break down the virus faster, which could be problematic.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:This is fantastic news! by PseudonymousBraveguy · · Score: 4, Funny

      None of them are going to cure you in a finger-snap.

      "The average cold lasts seven days, but if you take this drug it will be over in a week"

    3. Re:This is fantastic news! by Taibhsear · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This isn't like antibiotics though. This is a naturally occurring chemical that your body produces. The human body has been fighting colds for ages and they haven't evolved into a serious threat, nor will it. It's key to survival is the fact that it doesn't kill you. That way it can spread and infect more people, thus insuring its survival. However, that said, what effects throwing in an excess of antibodies that your body would normally produce does to the immune response over time is another question entirely. Could the body come to assume there was a magical load of antibodies going to come on its own (the drug) and decide not to waste the resources to make any of its own anymore? That's more my worry. (sort of like how a certain type of diabetes is induced rather than genetic)

    4. Re:This is fantastic news! by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 4, Funny

      Shh! If I can convince enough stupid people this actually works I could make the world a better place.

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
  4. Re:NO! by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nice rant. No, actually, completely irrelevant rant. This research shows how your body breaks down viruses and provides a potential means of stimulating this response. If anything, it makes it harder for viruses to adapt, because they're faced with exactly the same defence mechanism as without this boost, it's just more powerful so they are destroyed faster and have less time to adapt.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  5. Totally wrong by Toe,+The · · Score: 4, Funny

    No, no, no, no, no. This is just silly.

    I have seen several Star Trek episodes where they emphatically pointed out that they had never found a cure for the common cold. So how could there be one in the mere 21st century? Idiots.

    Transporters that can reverse the aging process? Sure. (Though somehow they repeatedly forget this and continue to die of old age.) A cure for most every disease except the common cold? Sure! But a cure for the common cold itself? Impossible!

  6. completely wrong way to think about colds by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Interesting

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/05/opinion/05ackerman.html

    i just read this last month

    the common cold is an immune system overreaction. the virus does not cause the cold, our own bodies overreact to the cold, and that causes ALL symptoms. which explains why cold medicines work: they modulate the immune response, they don't actually fight the virus

    But, as medical science has realized over the past few decades, the most prevalent cold viruses in fact do little direct harm to our cells. In one experiment in 1984, researchers at the University of Copenhagen performed biopsies on nasal tissue taken from people suffering severe colds, then did the same after the subjects had recovered. To the scientists’ surprise, none of the samples showed any sign of damage to the nasal tissue. Further vindicating the viruses themselves was another study around the same time showing that rhinoviruses infect only a small number of cells lining the nasal passages.

    so the virus comes in, borrows some cellular machinery for a few days, makes a few copies, and then leaves. our body's response is to call out the entirety of the navy, the marines, the army, the air force, the cavalry, mortar batteries, drone predators, and tactical nuclear strikes. for a crime which amounts to a homeless guy squatting in an unused home for a day or two

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  7. Re:NO! by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nice rant. No, actually, completely irrelevant rant. This research shows how your body breaks down viruses and provides a potential means of stimulating this response. If anything, it makes it harder for viruses to adapt, because they're faced with exactly the same defence mechanism as without this boost, it's just more powerful so they are destroyed faster and have less time to adapt.

    You tried to label a comment as "completely irrelevant" but still you demonstrate you fail to understand the basic aspects pertaining to evolution. The thing is, "making it harder to adapt" does not, nor it can ever mean "making it impossible to adapt". They will adapt. It will only take a single virus to survive a stimulated response for it to replicate and propagate. With all the other unadapted virus out of the picture, the replicas of the adapted virus will in essence have an entire ecosystem at their disposal, where they will freely propagate, infect and replicate. Your poor understanding of this subject is what lead incompetent health officials and irresponsible patients to contribute to the development of the so called superbugs, which are no laughing matter.

    But hey, keep spewing uneducated drivel and accuse those who demonstrate a better understanding of the subject as making "completely irrelevant rants". Meanwhile nature does work in spite of your lack of understanding.

    --
    Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
  8. Re:NO! by Jayemji · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That reason could be that the metabolic expense is too high for someone who lives off 1000 Calories a day. Not really a problem for most 1st world folks nowadays...