Hiv Defeated?

OmegamanOmegaman Members Join Date: 2004-01-11 Member: 25239Posts: 1,829
New drug with almost no side effects...
http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asahi/...0507070204.html

QUOTE
A durable new drug that prevents HIV from entering human cells and causes almost no side effects has been developed by a team of researchers at Kumamoto University.

The new drug, code named AK602, was reported by the research team's leader, Hiroaki Mitsuya, at the International Congress on AIDS in Asia and the Pacific in Kobe on Tuesday.

The drug's main feature is that it shuts out the AIDS virus at the point when it tries to intrude into a human cell.

Current AIDS medicines can lose their effectiveness in a few days when the virus changes and develops a resistance to those drugs. But AK602 is different because it reacts to human cells instead of attacking the virus, Mitsuya said.

He said the drug sticks to a protein called CCR5 that acts as an entrance into human cells for the AIDS virus. When the new drug becomes attached to the protein, it can prevent HIV from entering, and thus stop the virus from spreading.

The researchers conducted clinical tests on 40 AIDS patients in the United States.

AK602 not only proved effective against viruses that had become resistant to other drugs, but it also caused almost no side effects, the team said.(IHT/Asahi: July 7,2005)




HOORAY FOR RISK-FREE SEX! =D =D =D
«1

Comments

  • Quantum_MooseQuantum_Moose Members Join Date: 2005-03-05 Member: 43643Posts: 318
    QUOTE (Omegaman! @ Jul 8 2005, 08:35 PM)
    HOORAY FOR RISK-FREE SEX! =D =D =D

    Ha, wasn't expecting that...
    user posted image
  • NeonSpyderNeonSpyder "Das est NTLDR?" Members Join Date: 2003-07-03 Member: 17913Posts: 1,603 Advanced user
    Ah, about time.


    I was getting tired of all that risky sex.
  • Dirty_Harry_PotterDirty_Harry_Potter Members Join Date: 2002-11-21 Member: 9500Posts: 1,725
    though, one might say it's more exciting when it's more dangerous tounge.gif
    user posted image
    this is the 44 Wand, the most powerful Handwand in the world, so did i fire 5 or 6 fireballs? now you got to ask yourself one question pal, do i feel lucky? well do ya punk.
  • DOOManiacDOOManiac Worst. Critic. Ever. Members, NS1 Playtester Join Date: 2002-04-17 Member: 462Posts: 8,596
    I'm filing this under 'too good to be true' category till it undegoes clinical trials.

    If it is true then it'll be terrific news for the entire world
    Russell 'DOOManiac' Weed


    [email protected]

  • kill4thrillskill4thrills Members, Constellation Join Date: 2004-06-24 Member: 29506Posts: 511
    there are other stds to worry about besides AIDs. i don't think it's safe to go around having unprotected sex with all your friends just yet. AIDs might be sure to kill you, but the other STDs burn your privates
  • DragonMechDragonMech Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow Join Date: 2003-09-19 Member: 21023Posts: 6,778 Fully active user
    edited July 2005
    QUOTE
    If it is true then it'll be terrific news for the entire world
    QFT. If this is true, then these people deserve nobel prizes for their work.


    [EDIT] And I'm such a geek - I thought the title said "Hive defeated" >_> tounge.gif
    I see custom titles. <_< >_>

    QUOTE (DOOManiac @ Jul 10 2005, 07:00 PM)
    I for one can't imagine downloading several gigs of pornography from a typewriter.
  • SwiftspearSwiftspear Custim tital Members Join Date: 2003-10-29 Member: 22097Posts: 7,018
    QUOTE (kill4thrills @ Jul 8 2005, 08:49 PM)
    there are other stds to worry about besides AIDs. i don't think it's safe to go around having unprotected sex with all your friends just yet. AIDs might be sure to kill you, but the other STDs burn your privates

    tpyo, cue pictures!
    O_O image
  • [WHO]Them[WHO]Them You can call me Dave Members, Constellation Join Date: 2002-12-11 Member: 10593Posts: 2,813 Fully active user
    edited July 2005
    wow.gif

    Let's just hope God doesn't respond with fast-acting airborn superAIDS.
    image
    Zoc.php FTW
    "Build a tent and say the world is dry." -Tay Zonday
  • 2_of_Eight2_of_Eight Members Join Date: 2003-08-20 Member: 20016Posts: 2,511
    QUOTE (DOOManiac @ Jul 8 2005, 09:45 PM)
    I'm filing this under 'too good to be true' category till it undegoes clinical trials.

    What I'm thinking - but praying that I'm totally wrong.
  • KGB_GaralKGB_Garal Members Join Date: 2005-06-09 Member: 53476Posts: 215
    Awesome smile-fix.gif And of course it was made by Asian scientists..
    -[KGB]- Garal TheGreat

    01001001001000000110100001100
    10101100001011100100111010000
    10000001000011011010000111001
    00110100101110011011101000110
    1001011011100110000100101110
  • CondizzleCondizzle Members Join Date: 2004-10-05 Member: 32107Posts: 918
    Yay! Rampant risk-free pre-marital SEX!
    dsf
  • baconflapsbaconflaps Members Join Date: 2004-02-09 Member: 26314Posts: 391
    Yeah there aren't a ton of other STDs to contract nope.
  • KGB_GaralKGB_Garal Members Join Date: 2005-06-09 Member: 53476Posts: 215
    QUOTE (baconflaps @ Jul 8 2005, 06:52 PM)
    Yeah there aren't a ton of other STDs to contract nope.

    Don't tell them that.. let them get sick then maybe all the idiots will die off ;p

    AFTER THIS DRUG IS OUT IN CIRCULATION THERE IS NO RISK OF CONTRACTING ANY STD'S THEREFORE IF YOU THINK THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE A STD YOU ACTUALLY DON'T.. SO DO NOT SEEK MEDICAL ATTENTION. Thx.
    -[KGB]- Garal TheGreat

    01001001001000000110100001100
    10101100001011100100111010000
    10000001000011011010000111001
    00110100101110011011101000110
    1001011011100110000100101110
  • GundamCLGundamCL Members Join Date: 2003-08-03 Member: 18786Posts: 107
    This better not be a prank...
    One would make soo much money distrubuting this wonder drug...
  • Cold_NiTeCold_NiTe Members Join Date: 2003-09-15 Member: 20875Posts: 6,072
  • CondizzleCondizzle Members Join Date: 2004-10-05 Member: 32107Posts: 918
    QUOTE (baconflaps @ Jul 8 2005, 09:52 PM)
    Yeah there aren't a ton of other STDs to contract nope.

    /me bleeds on Bacon's food.
    dsf
  • baconflapsbaconflaps Members Join Date: 2004-02-09 Member: 26314Posts: 391
    QUOTE (Condizzle @ Jul 8 2005, 09:25 PM)
    QUOTE (baconflaps @ Jul 8 2005, 09:52 PM)
    Yeah there aren't a ton of other STDs to contract nope.

    /me bleeds on Bacon's food.

    Seriously con you are flipping stupid.
  • AegeriAegeri Members Join Date: 2003-02-13 Member: 13486Posts: 1,150
    Firstly, we've seen such 'wonder' treatments before (fused headed antibodies to HIV for example) that have in the long run rather fallen flat. The first problem with the drug is that it doesn't do anything that is particularly new (binding CCR5 has been an idea for a while). Secondly, it would have to be given prophylactically becaue HIV doesn't spend all its time binding CCR5, it changes eventually to attack CXCR4. The problem inherent with simply blocking CCR5 is that macrophages and dendritic cells act as a 'trojan horse', picking up HIV particles and moving them intracellularly as they would anything else they think is interesting. Unfortunately in the case of HIV this is exactly what the virus wants and it gets a free ride to the cells it is really interested in, T-cells, which as I alluded to, express CXCR4 and not CCR5.

    I also question their clinical trial. How long was this trial? Did they monitor T-lymphocyte counts and did they extract and analyse peripheral blood macrophages/langerhans cells to see if they had picked up HIV particles (rendering this treatment rather irrelevant, because HIV can transfer directly cell->cell). Did they investigate if this can actually effectively gain entry into lymph nodes (where T-cells hang out).

    For that matter, I also wonder if they have investigated this in an animal model for its toxicological and pharmacological effects? Looking through the literature currently, I've not been able to find anything about trials they have conducted or the methodology they used to investigate if it is even working.

    Going to the media and not bothering to go through normal publication routes makes me think something suspicious is up.
    QUOTE
    “I’ve not read it word for word myself,” confessed board member Kathy Martin in an ill-fated attempt to salvage the credibility of the witnesses.
  • NeonSpyderNeonSpyder &quot;Das est NTLDR?&quot; Members Join Date: 2003-07-03 Member: 17913Posts: 1,603 Advanced user
    QUOTE (Aegeri @ Jul 8 2005, 10:54 PM)
    Firstly, we've seen such 'wonder' treatments before (fused headed antibodies to HIV for example) that have in the long run rather fallen flat. The first problem with the drug is that it doesn't do anything that is particularly new (binding CCR5 has been an idea for a while). Secondly, it would have to be given prophylactically becaue HIV doesn't spend all its time binding CCR5, it changes eventually to attack CXCR4. The problem inherent with simply blocking CCR5 is that macrophages and dendritic cells act as a 'trojan horse', picking up HIV particles and moving them intracellularly as they would anything else they think is interesting. Unfortunately in the case of HIV this is exactly what the virus wants and it gets a free ride to the cells it is really interested in, T-cells, which as I alluded to, express CXCR4 and not CCR5.

    I also question their clinical trial. How long was this trial? Did they monitor T-lymphocyte counts and did they extract and analyse peripheral blood macrophages/langerhans cells to see if they had picked up HIV particles (rendering this treatment rather irrelevant, because HIV can transfer directly cell->cell). Did they investigate if this can actually effectively gain entry into lymph nodes (where T-cells hang out).

    For that matter, I also wonder if they have investigated this in an animal model for its toxicological and pharmacological effects? Looking through the literature currently, I've not been able to find anything about trials they have conducted or the methodology they used to investigate if it is even working.

    Going to the media and not bothering to go through normal publication routes makes me think something suspicious is up.

    You're too smart for our forums.
  • PetcoPetco Members, Constellation Join Date: 2003-07-27 Member: 18478Posts: 1,721
    edited July 2005
    QUOTE (DOOManiac @ Jul 8 2005, 06:45 PM)
    I'm filing this under 'too good to be true' category till it undegoes clinical trials.

    Yeah me too, good thing pudgy.gif s are immune(or don't cause it) to HIV and AIDS...
    IPB Image
  • AegeriAegeri Members Join Date: 2003-02-13 Member: 13486Posts: 1,150
    QUOTE (NeonSpyder @ Jul 8 2005, 10:56 PM)
    QUOTE (Aegeri @ Jul 8 2005, 10:54 PM)
    Firstly, we've seen such 'wonder' treatments before (fused headed antibodies to HIV for example) that have in the long run rather fallen flat. The first problem with the drug is that it doesn't do anything that is particularly new (binding CCR5 has been an idea for a while). Secondly, it would have to be given prophylactically becaue HIV doesn't spend all its time binding CCR5, it changes eventually to attack CXCR4. The problem inherent with simply blocking CCR5 is that macrophages and dendritic cells act as a 'trojan horse', picking up HIV particles and moving them intracellularly as they would anything else they think is interesting. Unfortunately in the case of HIV this is exactly what the virus wants and it gets a free ride to the cells it is really interested in, T-cells, which as I alluded to, express CXCR4 and not CCR5.

    I also question their clinical trial. How long was this trial? Did they monitor T-lymphocyte counts and did they extract and analyse peripheral blood macrophages/langerhans cells to see if they had picked up HIV particles (rendering this treatment rather irrelevant, because HIV can transfer directly cell->cell). Did they investigate if this can actually effectively gain entry into lymph nodes (where T-cells hang out).

    For that matter, I also wonder if they have investigated this in an animal model for its toxicological and pharmacological effects? Looking through the literature currently, I've not been able to find anything about trials they have conducted or the methodology they used to investigate if it is even working.

    Going to the media and not bothering to go through normal publication routes makes me think something suspicious is up.

    You're too smart for our forums.

    D:
    QUOTE
    “I’ve not read it word for word myself,” confessed board member Kathy Martin in an ill-fated attempt to salvage the credibility of the witnesses.
  • GwahirGwahir Members, Constellation Join Date: 2002-04-24 Member: 513Posts: 4,270
    a friend of mine was involved with the creation of a virus that caused cells to generate mirror image RNA of HIV that would then bind to the other RNA. I'm told that these mirror image RNA strands are recognised by the body and destroyed. Cellular trials looked good.
    QUOTE
    Sanity is just a weird form of madness.
  • Cold_NiTeCold_NiTe Members Join Date: 2003-09-15 Member: 20875Posts: 6,072
    QUOTE (Aegeri @ Jul 8 2005, 10:59 PM)
    QUOTE (NeonSpyder @ Jul 8 2005, 10:56 PM)
    QUOTE (Aegeri @ Jul 8 2005, 10:54 PM)
    Firstly, we've seen such 'wonder' treatments before (fused headed antibodies to HIV for example) that have in the long run rather fallen flat. The first problem with the drug is that it doesn't do anything that is particularly new (binding CCR5 has been an idea for a while). Secondly, it would have to be given prophylactically becaue HIV doesn't spend all its time binding CCR5, it changes eventually to attack CXCR4. The problem inherent with simply blocking CCR5 is that macrophages and dendritic cells act as a 'trojan horse', picking up HIV particles and moving them intracellularly as they would anything else they think is interesting. Unfortunately in the case of HIV this is exactly what the virus wants and it gets a free ride to the cells it is really interested in, T-cells, which as I alluded to, express CXCR4 and not CCR5.

    I also question their clinical trial. How long was this trial? Did they monitor T-lymphocyte counts and did they extract and analyse peripheral blood macrophages/langerhans cells to see if they had picked up HIV particles (rendering this treatment rather irrelevant, because HIV can transfer directly cell->cell). Did they investigate if this can actually effectively gain entry into lymph nodes (where T-cells hang out).

    For that matter, I also wonder if they have investigated this in an animal model for its toxicological and pharmacological effects? Looking through the literature currently, I've not been able to find anything about trials they have conducted or the methodology they used to investigate if it is even working.

    Going to the media and not bothering to go through normal publication routes makes me think something suspicious is up.

    You're too smart for our forums.

    D:

    Yeah I agree. Too smart for this thread.
  • AegeriAegeri Members Join Date: 2003-02-13 Member: 13486Posts: 1,150
    QUOTE (Gwahir @ Jul 8 2005, 11:13 PM)
    a friend of mine was involved with the creation of a virus that caused cells to generate mirror image RNA of HIV that would then bind to the other RNA. I'm told that these mirror image RNA strands are recognised by the body and destroyed. Cellular trials looked good.

    Yes, these have some promise because cells are naturally able to defend themselves against double stranded RNA (they cut it up with enzymes).

    The main point I would suggest with these sorts of press releases is to remember that HIV has been cured several times now by 'miracle' new treatments. There is at least 4-5 miracle HIV treatments that promise to 'end' the disease every year or so. None of these ever manage to go anywhere in particular and never seem to appear again. Scientists seem to have an awfully bad track record for miracle HIV cures :/
    QUOTE
    “I’ve not read it word for word myself,” confessed board member Kathy Martin in an ill-fated attempt to salvage the credibility of the witnesses.
  • NuketheplaceNuketheplace Members Join Date: 2002-09-02 Member: 1266Posts: 432
    Interesting fact, Asahi is a beer company. They make almost all the cheep beer in Japan and most of the sodas over there as well.

    I agree with whats been said on this thread. It sounds to good to be true, but if it is, great.
    QUOTE (UZi))
    it's sex on a stick. and the stick is asian. you getting the idea?
  • RatonetwothreetwooneRatonetwothreetwoone Members Join Date: 2004-03-23 Member: 27504Posts: 1,831
    edited July 2005
    APRIL FOOLS OOL!!!1 AM I RITE?!?!11
    user posted image
  • AegeriAegeri Members Join Date: 2003-02-13 Member: 13486Posts: 1,150
    Haha, case in point:

    http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index....topic=64071&hl=

    I knew I'd seen a topic like this earlier.
    QUOTE
    “I’ve not read it word for word myself,” confessed board member Kathy Martin in an ill-fated attempt to salvage the credibility of the witnesses.
  • RustySpoonRustySpoon Members Join Date: 2003-07-10 Member: 18069Posts: 994
    QUOTE (T h e m @ Jul 8 2005, 09:29 PM)
    wow.gif

    Let's just hope God doesn't respond with fast-acting airborn superAIDS.

    "Argh! How didn't they die this time? Must be time for a new plague."
    IPB Image
  • moultanomoultano Creator of ns_shiva. Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts Join Date: 2002-12-14 Member: 10806Posts: 4,219 Advanced user
    QUOTE (Aegeri @ Jul 8 2005, 10:54 PM)
    Firstly, we've seen such 'wonder' treatments before (fused headed antibodies to HIV for example) that have in the long run rather fallen flat. The first problem with the drug is that it doesn't do anything that is particularly new (binding CCR5 has been an idea for a while). Secondly, it would have to be given prophylactically becaue HIV doesn't spend all its time binding CCR5, it changes eventually to attack CXCR4. The problem inherent with simply blocking CCR5 is that macrophages and dendritic cells act as a 'trojan horse', picking up HIV particles and moving them intracellularly as they would anything else they think is interesting. Unfortunately in the case of HIV this is exactly what the virus wants and it gets a free ride to the cells it is really interested in, T-cells, which as I alluded to, express CXCR4 and not CCR5.

    I also question their clinical trial. How long was this trial? Did they monitor T-lymphocyte counts and did they extract and analyse peripheral blood macrophages/langerhans cells to see if they had picked up HIV particles (rendering this treatment rather irrelevant, because HIV can transfer directly cell->cell). Did they investigate if this can actually effectively gain entry into lymph nodes (where T-cells hang out).

    For that matter, I also wonder if they have investigated this in an animal model for its toxicological and pharmacological effects? Looking through the literature currently, I've not been able to find anything about trials they have conducted or the methodology they used to investigate if it is even working.

    Going to the media and not bothering to go through normal publication routes makes me think something suspicious is up.

    <3
Sign In or Register to comment.