Slashdot Mirror
Promising New Drug May Cure Malaria
Diggester writes "Researchers at the University of Cape Town in South Africa have developed a pill that can wipe out malaria with a single dose. It's a development that could save millions of lives in Africa alone, not to mention the rest of the world. But there's a teensy weensy little hurdle that must first be overcome: human testing. According to National Geographic, 'Clinical tests are scheduled for the end of 2013. If this tablet is approved in coming years, this achievement will surely usher in a new age for science in Africa. It will save millions upon millions of lives on the continent, helping avoid at least 24 percent of child deaths in sub-Saharan Africa.'"
... they'll all die of starvation anyway.
I do think this is a positive development, but it's going to have to be followed up with some pretty intense education and condom dispersal in order to actually help things.
An even greater step forward would be to stem the violence, ignorance about birth control, contraceptives and STDs/STIs. Saving lives is great, it would be even better if those lives are not condemned from the start. Well, I guess we'll sort out Africa one step at a time...for today, I'll drink to this cure and all the people it will help.
A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
I here apple has a patent on round edible things.
Nah, I promise new drugs all the time without curing malaria. Must be something else that does it.
Millions upon millions of more deaths due to hunger then. :-(
Seriously, can't we just ship a few pallets of tonic water over? It's an effective treatment, and as a bonus healthcare workers can take some beefeater and have a lovely after-work nightcap.
Now all those newly saved millions have left to do is to try to avoid dying of famine, AIDS, tribal wars, collateral damage in targeted attacks, etc, etc, etc.
There's one other "teensy weensy little hurdle": the cost. Or more precisely: the price. If this is something that WHO or other health agencies can purchase and dispense for a few cents per dose, it could revolutionize life in sub-Saharan Africa. If it's patent-protected and expensive... not so much.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
But, they are worried some people may have adverse reactions to the drug and must undergo further testing.
So, millions will die between now and the drug "going through trials" - am I missing something - if the drug has potential to save millions of lives, isn't the drug trial process a bit convoluted then?
I get the point of testing the drug, but just the absurdity of "we have to go through trials, because someone may die"
As certain folks on here will tell you, this is just a money grab by evil pharmaceutical companies. These poor souls in Africa will be forced to take these tablets simply so the evil companies can make a profit.
This could have been done a long time ago, and without companies making a profit, but it's been put off because of the conspiracy between government and evil corporations to keep the man down by making him pay for medications which can wipe out a disease/affliction/whatever.
As this is purely a profit-driven exercise, it must be shouted down and demonstrations made to prevent this tablet from being used.
Oh, and since this involves use of evolutionary doctrine, we need to get the Christian community in an uproar because this goes against the Almighty's will. If he didn't want malaria to exist, he wouldn't have created it to torment humans. Trying to find a way to prevent/cure malaria is an assault on religion and must be stopped.
Did I cover everything?
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
This look great and all but...how much will it cost?
We can already cure Malaria but the best antibiotic cost a fortune and is the reason Africa still have the disease.
Of course, curing every form of Malaria with a single dose is good, but to be viable for Africa and other poor country, the real question is...how much does it cost?
Elok
Listen to all these comfortable, white, Western cynics. Any point you may have, any criticism you might bring to bear, should be measured against the litmus of millions dead, or millions more suffering irrevocable harm to their childhood development (disease plays a statistically larger role in this than any other, at least in sub-saharan Africa).
Yes: starvation remains a problem. Yes: tribal warfare and corrupt political systems remain a problem. Yes: someone will make money off all this.
If these are the criteria by which you spoiled children support or oppose change in Africa, replete with all the indignant and self-righteous offense that only such children can summon, then you are in fact supporting some asinine Zeno's paradox in which Africa is stuck in misery and never able to leap out it in the 'one fell swoop' you seem to require. Change come at a pace, and it comes at a price.
I doubt any of you are affecting the former, or even paying the latter. You should be ashamed of your willingness to reduce the suffering of strangers to a non-issue.
Note that there has been *zero* human testing yet, not even phase 1 tests on healthy human subjects. From among the compounds that make it to that stage, maybe one in 50 or 100 (!) really makes it to market.
Aminopyridines (the class this new compound is from) have known pharmaceutical uses - and some compounds of this class have severe side effects, such as causing epileptic seizures that are difficult to reproduce in animals. .And its pretty reactive amino group is a general red flag.
But of course I wish the researchers luck with their tests.
The continent that birthed all human life cannot support any?
Low population growth rates are a function of being comfortable. If infant mortality is high humans will have far more offspring.
Just being realistic here, slashmydots, you might want to think before typing.
Let's just leave them to die of unpleasant diseases. Oh good. What a super human being you are. Did it ever occur to you that there are links between these things? Like, you know, that healthier people are richer and thus have less children? Not that that's really the point. Also, that climate is where your ancestors evolved, so your first world superiority is perhaps a little misplaced. Just being realistic here.
[FUCK BETA]
When they "cure" 95% of the Malaria. It does leave room for the drug resistant strain to thrive. Not that it is a problem as the 95% is killing the poor people regardless. I hope BIll get to spend his Billions buying up the world supply and giving out if it works. Good legacy to go out with.
Don't we already have sickle cell to help with this? Why are we wasting money when we can just send people with the genetic immunity to malaria to malaria infested countries?
It boggles the mind.
I'm a satanic clam.
Actually, you have the spark of a brilliant business plan. "Pill"? How incredibly boring. Is it that unstable? Make it into a drink! Charge whatever you wanted for it, (price of the pill plus bar markup for the entertainment).
You could have a "Malaria Killer Drink". But no, we like things Safe For Kiddies around here, so it must be a nice boring pill that the school nurse can dish out. That's because we really don't want to fix the economy (increased revenue from the adult drink model). We just like complaining about it while the 1% does their thing.
Mods, I'm being vicious, so don't modslam me from the tone. This is only one example of how if we really wanted to fix the economy, we'd unleash a few more "grownup" products and services into the world. There are hundreds more examples.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Submitted for your serious consideration: For years I've been harping on this. How many lives will be lost delaying this drug 1 year, much less 3-5?
How many would be lost introducing a bad drug prematurely?
Of course, the former millions a year don't show up in front of the cameras as well as a politician with the latter and some (admittedly) horriffic sob stories.
There are gigatons of snake oil fraud to root out. Still, nobody runs the relative numbers of fraud deaths vs. deaths due to delays proving things work to government agencies.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
It works a lot better than Lariam/Mefloquine.
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500164_162-538144.html
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
Actually it used to be quite common in parts of the US as well. It used to be called ague. I'm not sure of it's original range, but I think it was even as far north as Ohio. There are variants like avian malaria which have been a barrier to reintroducing eagles and other species.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
like they did in TFA: No, No, DDT isn't banned when used to combat malaria.
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
The drug testing regime we have was built incrementally to deal with flaws that existed in the previous setup. Remember Thalidomide?
[FUCK BETA]
"The good news is that all the previous animal testing showed this new miracle pill was safe, effective, and had no adverse side-effects."
The bad news is that all the "previous animal testing" in the world is completely and utterly worthless. 92% of drugs which pass animal experiments FAIL in human experiments. (AKA 'clinical trials').
I'm surprised the article uses the phrase "human testing", because it's actually the truth, for once.
Which animals did they have success with? Which animals died or had bad side effects under this drug? What sort of idiot would believe that a given drug would have the SAME effect on ALL animal species?
They test drug X on mice, and it has no effect. They test it on rats, and it kills them. They test it on rabbits, and it cures whatever feeble attempt at replicating a human disease they've produced in the rabbits. Thus - it 'cures the disease', and they can then test it on humans! But what about the mice and rat results? They are ignored, because virtually ALL drugs will have terrible side effects on SOME species of animals - and in case you hadn't noticed, rats, mice and rabbits are NOTHING like humans.
But the whole ridiculous charade continues because MOST people are literally too stupid to even understand what I've written above, and will go along with whatever the T.V. tells them is 'safe to believe' - because they are incapable of EXPLAINING why they hold whatever opinion it is that they claim to 'hold'.
Vivisection is medical fraud, plain and simple.
How many lives will be lost due to distrust of western medical science if they push forward prematurely and find serious side effects?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
...to mosquitoes. A few insect generations would solve that and other mosquito-borne illnesses.
He wants population control, and here we are working to eliminate a major natural population control mechanism.
Millions of dead kids = good for the environment.
...I hope they also figured out how to increase the food supply by 25%, if we're going to cut the mortality rate.
Has NOBODY seen "I AM LEGEND"?
Can we give it to the mosquitos?
If you are concerned about population consider India, more people than Africa and 1/15 the area.
Yes, civilization has degraded to the point where people will ignore any and all data in an article and instead complain about its diction.
Llllllllllliccccckkkk myyyyy baaallllssssss!
Yes,they do run those numbers. Instead of ranting and displaying your ignorance, maybe you should research.
Maybe you should make an attempt to understand that ti's more complex then comparing lives lost, like determining effect?
Fuck, you people are short sighted, ignorant and have the ego to say you must know everything. twads.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Beyond the savings in human lives, there should be a productivity boom. Malaria is contracted periodically in adulthood by people in an environment where it is prevalent, and it can wipe out an individual's productivity for a couple weeks at a time, several times a year. In some areas, it can be contracted with the same frequency with which westerners are used to the common cold. So, you're looking at perhaps a 10% increase in productivity just from keeping adults at work instead of in their sickbed or tending sick children.
It's hard to provide food and shelter when a significant part of the population is in bed with terrible pain and extreme fever and unable to work. Or their children are, which leads to the same result because they have to stay home to take care of them.
What makes you think you are in any way superior to others? What's about African climate that makes it unfit for human life? Are you really that stupid or you just get off on trolling?
... they'll all die of starvation anyway.
The thing is, Africa is an amazingly fertile country. If farmers could just farm, they would easily be able to feed Africa and the children therein.
The great thing about a malaria cure is it takes one huge load of population control, meaning that going forward there will be more and more people - until the countries to inept to let farmers farm are overthrown and Africa becomes the land of plenty it once was.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Malaria is so common in Africa that most Africans don't consider it to be that big of a deal. You get malaria, go to the doctor and take some medication and then get better. Over time, your immune system will be more resistant to malaria so you don't get as sick.
Malaria is a serious disease for those who don't have access to medicine and is left untreated for a period of time. A new medication is not going to help much if people don't have access to it.
Sounds like South Africa has their own version of the FDA. Millions will die while they wait for the bureaucrats, but at least they die safely!
Liberty in your lifetime
Moderators, I beseech of you. Please moderate the parent in an upward direction.
Cheerio!
Immanuel
One of the more effective forms of birth control is lowering infant and child mortality - like, ya know from malaria.
But, don't let me stop your subtle dismissal of the behaviours of an entire continent. Have fun at the Klan rally.
It's in Tampa this year, isn't it?
A cure. I forgot that sometimes happens when US drug companies that would rather treat are involved
True, but because this is a single dose drug it is quite a lot less complicated to test.
love is just extroverted narcissism
Silver Biotics made by American Biotech Labs (ABL) kills malaria within days (among many other viruses and harmful bacteria, including HPV, Herpes, and even HIV). The FDA, however, does not allow them to claim any of their clinicially-proven results in their marketing--despite the fact that they sell the *exact same stuff* to hospitals via a 2nd company as a fully FDA-approved pharmecutical, because it kills MRSA completely within hours, and poses zero risk for causing more resistant strains.
The US military has been stockpiling their stuff for years. They couldn't give a rat's ass what the FDA says about it--they just like results.
"A novel class of orally active antimalarial 3,5-diaryl-2-aminopyridines has been identified from phenotypic whole cell high-throughput screening of a commercially available SoftFocus kinase library."
.. and superior to chloroquine in the K1 strain .. Compound 15 completely cured Plasmodium berghei-infected mice with a single oral dose of 30 mg/kg." link
"One of these frontrunner compounds, 15, was equipotent across the two strains
AccountKiller