Child Thought To Be Cured of HIV Relapses, Tests Positive Again

An anonymous reader writes: The Mississippi child, who was born with HIV passed from her mother, received HIV treatment for 18 months after her birth. In the course of over two years after the treatment, her blood indicated no trace of the virus or of HIV-specific antibodies, leading many to hope that she may have been cured completely. Earlier this month, however, the virus was detected again. Nearly 4 years old, the child is once more being given HIV treatment, and scientists are trying to figure out how she could have gone so long before relapsing.

Comments

I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate to imagine it....but reinfection?

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Major Blud]

When I first read about this on CNN the other day, the article stated that the child's mother had stopped giving her the anti-viral medication she was prescribed. There was no an explanation as to why.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[jellomizer]

I expect it is more of a case where they got the numbers down so low that the infection wouldn't register, perhaps hibernating in a nook in the body. After the virus stopped getting assaulted it was allow to grow and infect again.
 

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Major Blud]

Found the article:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/10/...

"The child remained on antiretroviral drugs for approximately 18 months. Her mother then stopped administering the drugs for an unknown reason".

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably because being in Mississippi, she got crap from all the people who thought she was horrible for infecting her child, or even having a child, and all of the paperwork required to get the care paid for by the state, and I wouldn't put it past her to be a bit apprehensive about it too.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[barlevg]

The Washington Post story states:

Researchers confirmed through DNA sequencing that the infection in the child is not a new infection, but was the one passed from the mother.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Lord Lemur]

Well, we know Mom is degenerate in some capacity. My first thought was intentional exposure by Mom.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[mwvdlee]

GP implies stopping the drugs was the direct cause for the relapse.
The CNN article states the child was initially "functionally cured" a few months after stopping the drugs.
The facts us readers know, indicate neither correlation nor causation between stopping drugs and the relapse.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, we know Mom is degenerate in some capacity. My first thought was intentional exposure by Mom.

Having aids doesn't make you degenerate.

Granted I didn't read any of the articles, so maybe there is another reason you say that she is degenerate.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it was probably a misunderstanding because they purposely decided that medication was not needed. Adherence to medication is a big problem in general, and it's a really big problem for HIV because a lapse in medication can be enough to allow the virus to rebound with drug resistance mutations to one or more of the three drugs in the cocktail, making it more likely the virus can evolve to be resistant to all three drugs in the cocktail.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Sockatume]

That's what originally excited the doctors: the kid was off her antiretrovirals for two years without relapse.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[i kan reed]

Oh this is the most intellectually lazy of bullshit.

Saying "Why would stopping treatment lead to a relapse?" as if there was no trivially understood relationship there. It's just... silly. I mean, come on bro, no one wants to jump to conclusions, but this is like saying "I stopped watering my houseplant, and at some point, it died. We don't know there's any relationship there."

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Wycliffe]

The Washington Post story states:

Researchers confirmed through DNA sequencing that the infection in the child is not a new infection, but was the one passed from the mother.

If the reinfection is also from the mother (which is what is most likely) then how can they tell whether it is the original infection or a reinfection
from the mother as presumably it's still the same strain in the mother.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[wiwa]

Researchers confirmed through DNA sequencing that the infection in the child is not a new infection, but was the one passed from the mother.

Well, if it was a reinfection then I would expect the mother (or possibly father) to be the likely source. There are all kinds of ways that a mother could accidentally pass on the virus to a young child, especially if her infection isn't well-managed and the child isn't on anti-retrovirals. Could they tell the difference between the original infection and a reinfection if they came from the same source? I can't see how they could.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

+1 Morbidly possible. (it was Mississippi....)

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would stopping treatment lead to a relapse?

Here's a better question: "why would stopping treatment lead to no relapse for 2.5 years, then suddenly a relapse?"

Since that asks why what actually happened, happened.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[gstoddart]

If the reinfection is also from the mother (which is what is most likely) then how can they tell whether it is the original infection or a reinfection
from the mother as presumably it's still the same strain in the mother.

I *think* it tends to mutate when it spreads.

If it has the virus exact same DNA as the mother (or at least the same strain the child already had), then it likely means that this is the strain the child got while in utero. If it was a fresh infection it would be slightly different from the original infection.

It sounds like the people who study these things and know what they mean have ruled it out as being a re-infection, but the same infection which has re-emerged.

I'm going to go with the people who study these things.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

Because his skydaddy only infects gays and drug users with HIV, q.e.d.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

Modded you up. I have a friend that operates much in the same way as GP. Smart guy, but refuses to connect the dots for lack of absolute evidence. As long as there is a wiggle word or technicality he can hang on to, he will not openly admit the possibility of a thing that otherwise seems entirely reasonable.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[i kan reed]

Because HIV has numerous properties that allow it to remain dormant in a host for a long time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV#Replication_cycle

Re:I hate to imagine it

[IMightB]

No, if you RTFA, it goes:

1) Baby has HIV, given retrovirals.
2) Mother brings in baby for regular checkups/tratments for 18 months
3) Mother and Baby "dissappear" for a few months
4) When baby is brought back in, it tests negative for HIV
5) For about 2 years the baby tests HIV free
6) Baby tests HIV positive again at ~4.5 years of age.
7) We suffer from your misinformed post.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

There are all kinds of ways that a mother could accidentally pass on the virus to a young child
 
Which ways are these?

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe it took that long for the very-suppressed viral load to get back to detectable levels? Maybe something to do with childhood immune systems? Im no virologiest or biologist but I'd start looking for a proximate cause rather than a distal cause.....

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Sique]

By looking at the genetic deviation so far. It can tell you when the both virus tribes have split. If this were a reinfection, it will be genetically even more close to the one found in the mother. If it were an infection from another source, it will be far more different.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[dywolf]

the problem is thats not exactly what happened.
this child was not continually observed and studied.
the mother is apparently not only been bad (and im not passing judgement in saying that) about maintaining the treatment, but also about maintaining any contact or followup with the doctors who did the treatment.

its like walking in and out of a movie every few minutes for minutes at a time, and trying to figure out what happened while you wre out.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[arth1]

If the reinfection is also from the mother (which is what is most likely)

How can you say that is most likely?
HIV does not spread easily. The panic times when people wore gloves and masks around the HIV infected are long gone, thankfully. The HIV virus spreading to family members is quite rare.
Diseases staying dormant for a long time is, however, not unusual at all.
So again, on what basis do you draw the conclusion that a re-infection is most likely?

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

no, you RTFA.
it does not state that the child was tested for 2 years as you state in your number "5".
there is another gap in the child's patient history between it being tested negative ("4") and it testing positive ("6").

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

GP doesn't imply anything. He merely offers that the anti-retroviral drugs were discontinued. It *does* bring up an interesting talking point, that the cessation of drugs *may* have been involved in the relapse, as much as you want to fight that logical connection. The fact is that treatment was discontinued, so we don't know, and we will never know, whether she would have relapsed if she had remained treated. But anyone with half a brain can postulate that *maybe* it is a point worth considering.

This is where you say "I never denied that the cessation of treatment could be related to the relapse." And you would be right. However, you do a disservice to yourself and the rest of us by admitting that you had the insight all along to engage meaningfully but chose not to.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[gregor-e]

As wikipedia assures us (emphasis added):

A retrovirus is a single-stranded RNA virus that stores its nucleic acid in the form of an mRNA genome (including the 5' cap and 3' PolyA tail) and targets a host cell as an obligate parasite. Once inside the host cell cytoplasm the virus uses its own reverse transcriptase enzyme to produce DNA from its RNA genome, the reverse of the usual pattern, thus retro (backwards). This new DNA is then incorporated into the host cell genome by an integrase enzyme, at which point the retroviral DNA is referred to as a provirus. The host cell then treats the viral DNA as part of its own genome, translating and transcribing the viral genes along with the cell's own genes, producing the proteins required to assemble new copies of the virus. It is difficult to detect the virus until it has infected the host. At that point the infection will persist indefinitely.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

False negatives? I'd switch labs.

Re: I hate to imagine it

[halo1982]

Breast milk for one.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

Not that re-infection is the most likely cause, but that if re-infection is what happened, then the mother is the most likely vector, due to the near constant contact.

Re: I hate to imagine it

[barlevg]

Post 18 months? Possible, but unless the mother was actively trying to reinfect her kid...

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Lord Lemur]

No, because she abandon treating her child for HIV for 18 Months.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Lord Lemur]

Yeah, failing to persue life saving medical care for your child for 18 months indicates that she isn't the best kind person.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate to imagine it....but reinfection?

That would be a huge problem because it's politically incorrect to suggest that HIV can be contracted from simple contact.
The government assures you that HIV can be acquired ONLY through exchanging blood through sex, sharing needles, or giving birth.
You are perfectly safe sharing a cubicle, bathroom, and lunchroom with your HIV infected co-workers.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[DigiShaman]

Meaning the virus can never be eliminated, but only reduced asymptotically; thus the symptoms are asymptomatic.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[I'm New Around Here]

I agree with your view.

I thought one of the properties of viruses is that they often stay dormant for a long time, and then re-emerge.

Just because she had 'no signs' of infection doesn't mean there weren't a remaining few viruses waiting for the medicine regimen to end.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

Or he quite possibly died of HIV himself some time ago. Clearly he fathered a child upon her, she has HIV, passed it to her child, so therefore he has to have it now as well.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

That doesn't prove it is not a new infection. The mother could have decided to infect the girl again. In other case, the father reinfected his son when he decided to continue raping his son. These people are sick so I wouldn't put anything past them.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[fahrbot-bot]

... this is like saying "I stopped watering my houseplant, and at some point, it died. We don't know there's any relationship there."

My favorite line from a college Logic book: "Breathing causes death. Everyone who has died was an habitual breather."

Re:I hate to imagine it

[i kan reed]

Strictly speaking, the assertion mwvdlee makes is logical. You can't affirm the consequent like that. But it's completely unreasonable in that it freely disregards other available(and in fact trivially commonplace) information about how diseases, and HIV in particular, work.

Re: I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

You, Sir, are a fool.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[slashdice]

Fail. Male to female infection is twice as likely as female to male infection. (That's also true for butt fucking).

If the father is known to have AIDS, it's more likely he passed it to her than vice versa. But we don't have enough information to make any conclusions. She may have acquired AIDS while shooting up a month before the baby was born.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

So I take it you want to continue to destroy her immune system as that is what "testing" for HIV looks for - anti-bodies that attack HIV.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[slashdice]

A lot of kids are sexually active as early as 3 or 4 years old these days. Some schools teach kids about condoms in first grade. Maybe that's not early enough.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[interkin3tic]

From this blog post it sounds like the mother taking her off the drugs was what prompted the initial finding: the doctors would have been unethical to tell someone to take their HIV + kid off antivirals because there's a chance they may have killed all the viruses.

As far as why, the cocktail isn't super convenient. It's a bunch of pills taken throughout the day. Getting a toddler to take multiple pills a day every day is probably a very frustrating thing. I'd imagine the mother (who didn't have any prenatal care and didn't realize she was HIV positive until after birth) doesn't have the best health insurance, so the out of pocket expenses probably really quickly added up.

I mean, that's obviously all small potatoes compared to developing drug-resistant HIV and full blown AIDS and dying. Not excusing her actions, just saying it's understandable.

Re: I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

That would be a huge problem because it's politically incorrect to suggest that HIV can be contracted from simple contact.
The government assures you that HIV can be acquired ONLY through exchanging blood through sex, sharing needles, or giving birth.
You are perfectly safe sharing a cubicle, bathroom, and lunchroom with your HIV infected co-workers.

You, Sir, are a fool.

Explain please.
I made three statements. Which of those do you disagree with, and why?

Re: I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, you only made one statement. The other two sentences are in juxtaposition.

Thus, it is your statement about political correctness that I take issue with: it's not a matter of it being "politically incorrect" to suggest that HIV cannot be transmitted via simple contact. It is verifiably and repeatedly incorrect.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

True, but HIV usually doesn't collectively decide to stay dormant in EVERY cell at once.

Either some unknown signalling pathway caused the HIV to stay inactive, or it was confined to a reservior that didn't somehow didn't leak for several years. Or she WAS cured, then reinfected.

The best explaination I can think of:

The girl was treated before HIV could infect more than a handfull of T-cells. (Or else something unknown killed all but a handful). All of these few stay dormant, until by bad luck the girl encounters an immunogen that activates one of them. Infection proceeds as normal.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually it is gays and drug users that mainly infect their own populations. If you don't practice gay sex or illegal drug use your risk goes way down.

I seem to recall that there is some cultural documentation that frowns on that behavior.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

They take the blood OUT of the patient before they test it that way, moron.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be very unusual for her to relapse while on modern retroviral drugs. They reduce HIV loads very reliably.

The question is whether drug treatment was actually responsible for the temporary CURE, and whether the timing of relapse was simply a delay after drug treatment, or caused by some other event entirely.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

Deailing with people who won't take their antibiotics lends a clue which might apply here.

There are still people who take just enough antibiotics to feel better, discontinue their meds self-declaring themselves "cured", allowing the suffering (but not yet dead) infection a second chance at a growth cycle.

I think there's a strong possibility of an analogy here. And even if that's not what happened, from my dealings with medial news reporting, you can tell a reporter that there's a small chance of improvement and they'll publish "cured".

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

Or the testing sample was damaged in collection.

Or the testing sample was lost and someone didn't want to expose their slapdash handling, so it "came back" healthy.

Or the data entry technician was interrupted and miskeyed one record over another.

Or the test was misread.

Or the test doesn't have high enough fidelity to always detect small enough traces.

Or the test used items that were defective.

Or the containers were contaminated unbeknown to the testers and retesting in different containers would yeild positives.

Or...

Or...

Certainly a lot of these items above didn't happen; however, we barely get enough evidence to really even believe that she was cured.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

But that doesn't prove stopping the expensive drugs was the cause. The mother could have abused the child again and reinfected her.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[i kan reed]

[calling a moron a moron]

You're doing god's work.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

Technically it can be eliminated if every cell that contains a copy of the HIV genome, and all intact viral particles, are eliminated. However, that's currently technically impossible to verify, so the best we can do right now is say "we can't detect it".

Re:I hate to imagine it

[sexconker]

Why would stopping treatment lead to a relapse?

Here's a better question: "why would stopping treatment lead to no relapse for 2.5 years, then suddenly a relapse?"

Since that asks why what actually happened, happened.

Why do people get shingles decades after having had chicken pox?

Re: I hate to imagine it

[sexconker]

He made 3 statements.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[parkinglot777]

The baby continued on antiretroviral treatment until 18 months of age, when the child was lost to follow up and no longer received treatment. Yet, when the child was again seen by medical staff five months later, blood samples revealed undetectable HIV levels (less than 20 copies of HIV per milliliter of blood (copies/mL)) and no HIV-specific antibodies. The child continued to do well in the absence of antiretroviral medicines and was free of detectable HIV for more than two years.

However, during a routine clinical care visit earlier this month, the child, now nearly 4 years of age, was found to have detectable HIV levels in the blood (16,750 copies/mL).

Hmm... I would assume that the #5 is correct (see bold portion in the quote from TFA). The only wrong info I am seeing is the "almost 4 years" instead of "4.5 years" time range...

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate to imagine it....but reinfection?

Our antibodies recognize viruses by the protein arrangement. If you've already recovered from a viral infection, your body will recognize that strain and already has defenses. The reason we have a flu shot every year is that different strains hit. If this child was reinfected, it would be from a different strain.

Re: I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

I did not claim that HIV could be transmitted by simple contact, I said that it is politically incorrect to suggest that it can.
This is a true statement. It is politically incorrect to suggest HIV can be contracted with simple contact.

And then I made a statement that pointed out that HIV cannot be contracted otherwise than by certain body fluids.
This is a true statement.

And then I made a statement pointing out that you are safe at work from catching it from HIV infected co-workers.
This is a true statement.

Re: I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

The concept of political correctness has nothing whatsoever to do with whether statements are true or false.
The concept has to do with the idea that certain topics cannot be discussed or studied because the discussion is in itself offensive or possible harmful to some group regardless of the side taken.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

Or that she couldn't afford it because the anti-retrovirals are expensive, and it could've come down to the choice between anti-retrovirals and food. The child can live without anti-retrovirals, but not without food.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[s0nicfreak]

The mother could have abused the child again

I'm pretty sure the first time, the child got it from being in the mother's uterus; not from abuse.
I'm also pretty sure that it would have to be some awfully creative abuse for female to female-4-year-old abuse to spread HIV.

Re:I hate to imagine it

[Anonymous Coward]

I shit you not: in med school this spring I had a group project where the other members of the team decided to propose revamping sex ed to include mandatory instruction for 12 year olds reharding how to "safely" troll for anonymous sex using smartphone apps like Grindr.

One question

[Anonymous Coward]

Has he been breastfed?

Re:One question

[barlevg]

After 18 months? Unless the mom is Lysa Arryn...

Re:One question

[wiwa]

Breastfeeding beyond 18 months is pretty common and actually recommended by many health authorities. For example, in Canada the official guidelines recommend exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months, and extended breastfeeding up to at least two years of age.

Re:One question

[barlevg]

Yeah, but the mother presumably knows that HIV is passed through breastmilk. So it seems unlikely she would continue to breastfeed longer than absolutely necessary (which, given the existence of formula, means the kid was almost certainly never breastfed).

Re:One question

[Lord Lemur]

It also seems unlikely that a rational parent would forgo medical treatment for their child for a year and a half. Or would have passed on the chance to prevent initial infection be seeking appropriate treatment during the pregnancy. Or not abandon treatment for another 2 years on a whim. You give her too much credit. She clearly isn't acting in her childs best intrests.

Re:One question

[barlevg]

For 18 months you take your infant to a doctor who pumps her full of drugs, which, while curing her of a terrible disease, gives her horrible side-effects. Then the doctors tell you they think she's cured, but that they want to continue the debilitating drug regimen "just to be sure." Is it really so irrational to say, "No, screw that. My daughter's better now. No need to subject my baby to all this continual agony"? Not saying this is what happened, but since you don't know the specifics and circumstances any better than I do, how about we just forego judgement on this woman?

Re:One question

[Lord Lemur]

But that isn't really what the article outlines. What it does say is that normally upon cesation of retrovirals that the HIV Infection comes back in weeks. It shows that they posted they came to their conclusion that the child might be cured about 16 months ago. When the child would have been 3. After the child re-emerged from the 18 month black out. It never states in there that a Doctor said anything nearly as unfounded or reackless as, "Inspite of this never happening before in the history of human endevor, we are pretty sure your 18 month old is cured." One would expect that they would have been informed that retrovirals are for life, they are not a cure they are a treatment.

Only after the irrational cessation of treatment, and then the followup testing later was there cause to think, how ever fleeting, that she was cured.

Re:One question

[Algae_94]

Back to the point of a possible breast feeding reinfection. If the doctors believed the child was cured at 3 years of age, there is very little reason for a 3 year old child to be breast feeding.

Not to mention that DNA analysis indicates it is from the original in utero infection.

Inserted in her DNA

[Anonymous Coward]

Its well known that HIV inserts itself into the host's DNA. So it can't be removed and can become activated whenever.

At least you can survive Ebola.

Re:Inserted in her DNA

[Sique]

It is wellknown that every retrovirus does this, and still the most of them can be removed (mostly by the immune system killing off the cells it has infected). But you would still get antibodies pointing to the existance of the virusDNA.

Re: Inserted in her DNA

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to imagine that all of the cells in your body become infected simultaneously, or that there is one master copy of DNA that once tampered with causes instantaneous and irreversible damage. Either understanding is completely flawed.

Every cell in your body is a little bundle of DNA, separate from all the others.

Simplistically, HIV attaches to individual cells. Those cells are infected and become capable of infecting other cells. The number of infected cells is a function of time.

It's because of this that PEP has such a high success rate: early intervention provides the highest probability that you kill off any and all of the infected cells before you reach critical mass beyond which full eradication appears impossible (due to the virus's ability to hide in wells that aren't the bloodstream).

The answer is simple!

[Anonymous Coward]

The little girl's mom RE-INFECTED her!

Re:The answer is simple!

[Suiggy]

This. The mother was jealous her daughter escaped her own fate.

dumb clickbait article

[beltsbear]

Why is this at all surprising? We know how HIV works and that it can hide in cells. So when someone is 'cleared' of it you can never be sure. The longer the drugs are taken increases the chances of clearing any dormant HIV (when it emerges). One can statistically figure out the best time to stop the treatment and many people could be free from reinfection for life but it is not a 100% certainty.

The only news is that a mother stopped the drugs too early.

Re:dumb clickbait article

[Sockatume]

It's surprising because she wasn't clear of the disease before she went off her medication, and then went two years without a relapse.

Re:dumb clickbait article

[wonkey_monkey]

Why is this at all surprising?

Who says it's surprising? "Surprising" is not a necessary property for a story to make the news.

Re:dumb clickbait article

[interkin3tic]

The initial finding of "baby cured of HIV" was surprising for the reasons you just mentioned. You're suggesting the story shouldn't be updated because it's not surprising? Well, unfortunately, you'll get your wish. I'm pretty sure people will forget this "Nevermind, no miracle after all" and will use the initial story as a reason to go off their meds.

Re: dumb clickbait article

[Anonymous Coward]

The mother didn't know, or wasn't on therapy at the time of the child's birth. The mother's viral load was high enough to infect the child during the birthing process (ie when there was a lot of blood around).

Re:dumb clickbait article

[Anonymous Coward]

If she wasn't clear when she went off her medication, and she has the disease now, I'd be looking for any cause which could have made the cured period nothing more than a misunderstanding. Lab sample switch?

Answer is obvious.

[Anonymous Coward]

The child is gay and was smote by our loving God.

News?

[StikyPad]

The more shocking part of this article isn't that the patient wasn't cured of a disease for which we have no cure, but that anyone thought she was in the first place.

Re:News?

[Tx]

Umm, they couldn't find any trace of the HIV virus, or specific antibodies to it. It seems reasonable to hope that someone is cured of a disease if you can't find any trace of said disease in their body. And it's not like they jumped the gun on it, she was supposed to be on anti-viral drugs because they weren't sure the virus was gone.

Re:News?

[Anonymous Coward]

So which is it? If they are unsure if the virus is gone, then she isn't cured. If they are sure she's cured, then the virus isn't gone!

Or, is the medical treatment in Mississippi so good that you can be cured without the virus being gone?

Re:News?

[petermgreen]

They thought she had been cured because treatement had stopped and the virus had not returned as expected.

Turns out they were wrong, the virus just took longer to return than expected.

She didnt relapse, it came back

[Gothmolly]

There's a difference. Given that the human body sucks at fighting HIV, its not as if she did something and 'relapsed', the virus merely came back out of hiding from wherever it lurks (marrow, lymph, spleen, etc).

It's like how animals don't "evolve", rather then ones who DONT change simply die. No animal DECIDES to suddenly grow fins or stripes.

Re:She didnt relapse, it came back

[Anonymous Coward]

It's like how animals don't "evolve", rather then ones who DONT change simply die. No animal DECIDES to suddenly grow fins or stripes.

This is as saying "no apple falls, it gets accelerated by gravity."

Re:She didnt relapse, it came back

[MBGMorden]

It's like how animals don't "evolve", rather then ones who DONT change simply die.

Untrue - some (many) mutations are bad, and the ones that change are the ones that die.

Evolution occurs when a mutation is a) beneficial and b) significant enough that it allows an animal to survive longer than those without that mutation. Being alive longer means they breed more. Breeding generally passes on the mutation.

It really is quite random, and there is no guarantee that the animals that change are better. Indeed for an animal that's particularly well suited to an environment that hasn't changed in a long time there could be very little room for evolution to occur. Certain types of fish (like gar and bowfin) for example have survived for tens of millions of years with relatively minor evolutionary changes.

Re:She didnt relapse, it came back

[gigaherz]

IIRC, there's proof that the cells can purposefully activate or deactivate certain genes, and those activations become more permanent in the offspring. So animals DO have some level of "purposeful" evolution over their lives, not just over thousands of generations and natural selection.

Re:She didnt relapse, it came back

[Anonymous Coward]

This is as saying "no apple falls, it gets accelerated by gravity."

Which would be correct, and popular understanding of science would be much improved if people spoke correctly.

Re:She didnt relapse, it came back

[Anonymous Coward]

This is as saying "no apple falls, it gets accelerated by gravity."

Which would be correct, and popular understanding of science would be much improved if people spoke correctly.

I beg to differ. The apple neither falls nor is accelerated by gravity. It and the Earth merely follow the curvature of spacetime.

Re:She didnt relapse, it came back

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually Earth doesn't. Well, the center does. But not the ground. The ground is propped up by the masses below it. Which is why the ground hits the apple.

Re:She didnt relapse, it came back

[Khashishi]

There's a difference? What is the difference? You didn't explain the difference; you just gave some weird analogy.

Re:Get it back from mom

[myoparo]

Yeah except HIV is not communicable via saliva, sorry.

He must have picked up that needle again...

[Anonymous Coward]

Or hopped back on the pogo stick?

Of course.

[gelfling]

It's not voodoo. It's science. When you stop doing what works, bad things happen again.

Windows

[Tablizer]

That sounds more like Microsoft Windows

Re:Windows

[The MAZZTer]

Yup, if you disable Windows Update and refuse to keep your PC up to date with the latest security fixes, you are going to get malware.

Re:Windows

[Anonymous Coward]

Drops the OS zealotry. This is seriously bad news for Torvalds. Once he had hope for a cure... now this.

Re: Windows

[Anonymous Coward]

My virtual machines prefer bareback.

Most likely..

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the mother's fault, again.
She probably hurt herself, her infected blood touched a wound on the child.. and there you go, you have HIV.

Re:Sorry, kid

[I'm New Around Here]

Hello!! Spoiler alert!

Asshole.

Once infected, always infected.

[drew_92123]

There is no cure, and likely never will be.

The only thing that people who are already infected have to look forward to are better and easier treatments, bi-weekly or monthly dosing may soon be possible instead of the daily dosing now required. Maybe somebody they'll come up with a implant that provides constant meds for 5 years... but a cure? Not likely...

Was she cured?

[MouseTheLuckyDog]

Seems to me stupid to say a person is cured if they have to keep taking meds to prevent a relapse.
By that standard insulin is a cure for diabetes.

Re:Was she cured?

[compro01]

Seems to me stupid to say a person is cured if they have to keep taking meds to prevent a relapse.
By that standard insulin is a cure for diabetes.

They thought she might have been cured as she went two years without the meds without suffering a relapse. Typically, a relapse occurs within weeks of discontinuing the medication.

But that ended up bring wrong, as she eventually did relapse, so now they need to figure out why it took so long for that to happen.

:( What a bummer.

[jjn1056]

I don't have anything else to add...

under the gop system pre existing conditions

[Anonymous Coward]

So the relapse will not be covered

Sure It's The Original?

[Greyfox]

It's not like you can't get the HIV again once you've been cured of it. Are we going to rule that out just because we don't want to think about how a 4 year old might contract HIV again after being cured of it?

Re:Sure It's The Original?

[Reziac]

I had the thought that yeah, since mom is infected it could be a re-infection, but not necessarily through what I suspect you're thinking. Any accidental exchange of bodily fluids can suffice. Did mom have a cold sore and kiss the child on the lips? (Remember kids have potential breaks in the mouth due to new teeth) Might be enough.

HIV CURE

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello everybody i am so happy to share this testimony on how Dr Okun was able to heal me from HIV Disease, well i was detected positive on 23th may 2013, and ever since i have been looking for a way to treat and cure this disease from me, but all ways i try there was no solution, few weeks ago i saw a testimony of some people on how Dr Okun was able to cure them from HIV disease, still on i heard about it on media when a young lady also gave her testimony about this same Dr, well left with no hope i message Dr Okun telling him all my problem, he told me what we where going to do, that he was going to send me a portion which i am going to take, and after which i took this herb portion he sent to me, he told me to go back to the hospital for check up and after i have done that i should come and tell him the good news result, at first when i saw the message i was so shock and still did not believed i will be cured, well friend to make my story short i am HIV negative now after many time of sorrow, i am Negative, and my sickness are gone, i thank God for leading me to this man, he email address is (okunspelltemple@outlook.com) or call him at +2348051129648 he can be of help to you if you have any problem..
Sir may God Bless You.

HOW A POWERFUL CURE ME

[Anonymous Coward]

Am Beatrice mark.I was HIV/AIDS positive for 3 years and i have been contacting fake Doctors who ran away with my hard earn money i felt hopeless, until i saw a testimony of how the lord spiritual has been
healing people suffering from HIV and other diseases,i decided to give him a try by contacting him and today am free.i want to express a heart felt
appreciation to the LORD SPIRITUAL for healing me. I have directed people with Cancer, Barren women,
and those with different problem to him and he favored them differently.I have not seen any one as powerful as the
lord spiritual. Just put him to test and see what he can do. (Seen is believing).for more information contact me on beatricemark0032@gmail.com.
I vowed to testify of what he has done. For any problem just contact or email him on LORDSPIRITUAL@OUTLOOK.COM

HOW I WAS HEALED FROM MY ILLNESS

[Anonymous Coward]

Am Beatrice mark.I was HIV/AIDS positive for 3 years and i have been contacting fake Doctors who ran away with my hard earn money i felt hopeless, until i saw a testimony of how the lord spiritual has been
healing people suffering from HIV and other diseases,i decided to give him a try by contacting him and today am free.i want to express a heart felt
appreciation to the LORD SPIRITUAL for healing me. I have directed people with Cancer, Barren women,
and those with different problem to him and he favored them differently.I have not seen any one as powerful as the
lord spiritual. Just put him to test and see what he can do. (Seen is believing).for more information contact me on beatricemark0032@gmail.com.
I vowed to testify of what he has done. For any problem just contact or email him on LORDSPIRITUAL@OUTLOOK.COM.

hiv cure

[Anonymous Coward]

My Name is Elizbeth Lawson from united states ...HIV has been ongoing in my family for long..I lost both parents to HIV and it is so much pain has not been able to get over. As we all know medically, there is no solution or cure for HIV and the cost for Medication is very expensive. Someone introduced me to a man (Native Medical Practitioner). I showed the man all my Tests and Results and I told him have already diagnosed with HIV and have spent thousands of dollars on medication. I said I will like to try him cause someone introduced me to him. He asked me sorts of questions and I answered him correctly. To cut the story short, He prepared some herbal medicine for me and he thought me how am going to use them all. At first I was skeptical but I just gave it a try. I was on his Medication for 3 days and I used herbal medicine according to his prescription. That he will finish the rest himself. And I called him 3 days after, I arrived and I told him what is the next thing he said, he has been expecting my call. He told me to visit my doctor for another test. Honestly speaking, i never believe all he was saying until after the test when my doctor mention the statement that am, HIV negative and the doctor started asking me how do I do it....Am telling this story in case anyone may need this man’s help. He is the Great Dr EFE here is via email address drefesolutiontemple@gmail.com
Thanks Regard....

ciara smith

[Anonymous Coward]

I am Mrs ciara, i live in tex
[READ MY STORY. ON HOW I GOT MY AIDS CURED].
Truthfully, i was tested HIV + positive last 3years. I keep on managing the drugs i usually purchase from the health care agency to keep me healthy and strenghtful, i tried all i can too make this disease leave me alone, but unfortunately, it keep on eating up my life, this is what i caused myself, for allowing my fiance make sex to me unsecurely without protection, although i never knew he is HIV positive. So last few 4days i came in contact with a lively article on the internet on how this Powerful Herbal Healer get her well and healed. So as a patient i knew this will took my life 1 day, and i need to live with other friends and relatives too. So i copied out the Abram ajar the traditional healer's email id: Abramajarrosejujuspell@gmail.com, and I mailed him immediately, in a little while he mail me back that i was welcome to his temple home wereby all what i seek for are granted. I was please at that time. And i continue with him, he took some few details from me and told me that he shall get back to me as soon as he is through with my work. I was very happy as heard that from him. So Yesterday, as i was just coming from my friends house,Abram ajar called me to go for checkup in the hospital and see his marvelous work that it is now HIV negative, i was very glad to hear that from him, so i quickly rush down to the nearest hospital to found out, only to hear from my hospital doctor called Browning james that i am now HIV NEGATIVE. I jump up at him with the test note, he ask me how does it happen and i decide to tell him all i went through with Abram ajar . I am now glad, so i am a gentle type of person that need to share this testimonies to everyone who seek for healings, because once you get calm and quiet, so the disease get to finish your life off. So i will advice you contact him today for your healing at the above details: Email ID:Abramajarrosejujuspell@gmail.com CONTACT HIM NOW TO SAVE YOUR LIFE:Abramajarrosejujuspell@gmail.com AS HE IS SO POWERFUL AND HELPFUL TO ALL THAT HAVE THIS SICKNESS...