There are PLENTY of other diseases and disorders going on in the medical community that a beneficial virus would not cause any concern about profits. Consider the number of rhinoviruses known currently, approximately 350-how much money would that make if we were able to design an "anti-virus" to each one, not to mention the number of mutants that would evolve (let's not even consider the possibly hundreds/thousands of HIV variants). I'd love to have a slice of THOSE profits...give me a break on the cause of side-effects. The FDA doesn't even allow horrific side-effect drugs on the market, if bad only for a short time until a better one becomes available. Do you think there's a hidden conspiracy here among scientists (these are usually broader-minded people) to develop drugs that give you more disease so they make more profit? You've been reading too much fiction. Too much funky issues happen naturally, for humans to better that portion of experimentation with drugs.
Of course! This and other uses for viruses are in the future. What about packaged therapeutic genes in a viral particle to transport to correct genetic disorders? Or a virus specifically targeted to a certain type of bacteria that'll wipe out a plaque. Researching viruses to do what we want them to do is so important. They are our own worst enemies but what about manipulating them to be our best friends? Transposons (viral genes that can jump from one genome to another) have been to known to be evolutionarily important to our species. Once we figure these nasties out it's just a matter of data analysis and experimentation to find out how we can use them. They may be more of a problem because of control (they're not cellular) and contamination but who knows?
Slashdot Mirror
There are PLENTY of other diseases and disorders going on in the medical community that a beneficial virus would not cause any concern about profits. Consider the number of rhinoviruses known currently, approximately 350-how much money would that make if we were able to design an "anti-virus" to each one, not to mention the number of mutants that would evolve (let's not even consider the possibly hundreds/thousands of HIV variants). I'd love to have a slice of THOSE profits...give me a break on the cause of side-effects. The FDA doesn't even allow horrific side-effect drugs on the market, if bad only for a short time until a better one becomes available. Do you think there's a hidden conspiracy here among scientists (these are usually broader-minded people) to develop drugs that give you more disease so they make more profit? You've been reading too much fiction. Too much funky issues happen naturally, for humans to better that portion of experimentation with drugs.
Of course! This and other uses for viruses are in the future. What about packaged therapeutic genes in a viral particle to transport to correct genetic disorders? Or a virus specifically targeted to a certain type of bacteria that'll wipe out a plaque. Researching viruses to do what we want them to do is so important. They are our own worst enemies but what about manipulating them to be our best friends? Transposons (viral genes that can jump from one genome to another) have been to known to be evolutionarily important to our species. Once we figure these nasties out it's just a matter of data analysis and experimentation to find out how we can use them. They may be more of a problem because of control (they're not cellular) and contamination but who knows?