A Vaccination that may prevent HIV?

[Hexx]

I have to agree with Curjos here, if developed countries keep offering those types of handouts, those in charge of said third-world countries will only keep being lazy and not doing anything for their people. Hows that saying go, "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day; teach a man to fish, and feed him for a lifetime"? I'm not saying let them die of starvation, but if its the disease that is killing them off and they have yet to learn from this, then providing food, education, and other social programs would be a good thing, but providing a "Get out of AIDS free" card would only make things worse.

Hali, nature as a whole is alive, its an ecosystem that we are a part of. Once the toll becomes too much to bear, nature finds ways to eliminate or at least stem the threat of over-population. You say we are nowhere near it, but remember that just because theres space, doesnt mean theres the resources to accomodate a larger population.

 

[Rorschach]

Who knows, that "method" might be even worse, and even more contagious, than AIDS.

Haven't you seen that documentary about the future with Sylvester Stallone and Westley Snipes? Like Sandra Bullock said: "After AIDS there was NRS and after NRS there was UBT" So in the future we have to put on Cerebro so we can all get it on without having out respective genitals falling off.

Now all we have to do is wait for Taco Bell to win the "franchise wars" or w/e it was called.

 

[Hexx]

Haven't you seen that documentary about the future with Sylvester Stallone and Westley Snipes? Like Sandra Bullock said: "After AIDS there was NRS and after NRS there was UBT" So in the future we have to put on Cerebro so we can all get it on without having out respective genitals falling off.

Now all we have to do is wait for Taco Bell to win the "franchise wars" or w/e it was called.

LOL it was my intention to quote that part of "Demolition Man" but I didnt remember the acronyms for those diseases! Virtual rate up for you Rorschach =P

 

[Celvantes]

Until a cure is found for AIDS, theres no way to eliminate the disease short of finding every single last person who has it, and kill them. And scientists are doubtful they'll ever find a cure for AIDS.

IIRC, the way smallpox and polio were destroyed was by vaccinating as many people as possible and aggressively isolating anyone infected. When any new outbreak happened, it was contained and everyone geographically surrounding it were vaccinated. The idea was to give the disease nowhere to jump and no opportunity to reproduce.

Granted, recognizing HIV is a hell of a lot harder than detecting smallpox, but with enough financial support internationally, and aggressive screening, I think it could be done.

It took us, collectively, almost two hundred years to get rid of smallpox, but that was working with nineteenth century technology at the start. With our capabilities today, I think we could stop a much more difficult disease like AIDS in fifty years, provided the vaccine is effective and we'd be fully allowed to quarantine infected people.

I know quarantine sounds brutal, but wouldn't it be worth it to be able to announce the worldwide eradication of HIV?

 

[Zephayra]

I think it is interesting no one is actually talking about the research done on this vaccination.

I don't think an HIV vaccination is going to come out anytime soon, because it's too controversial. I mean, look at this study.

" New infections occurred in 51 of the 8,197 given vaccine and in 74 of the 8,198 who received dummy shots. That worked out to a 31 percent lower risk of infection for the vaccine group. Two of the infected participants who received the placebo died."

First, it says that 51 with the vaccination got the virus, and 74 with the dummy shot got it as well. That is a very, very small difference in my mind. Not even enough to show real progress with the vaccination. It's saying that out of 8000 people who went on business as usual without the vaccination, 0.09% were infected. Those with the vaccination.. 0.06% afected. That's a 0.03% difference! Insignificant kinda when you look at it.

This study makes it look like the vaccination really doesn't do that much for you when you look at the stats.

Second, I find it almost impossible for them to prove it works. Those in the study were given condoms and sex talks. How many of the 16000 had unproected sex? How many of them had unprotected sex with someone who was HIV positive? How many of them had unprotected sex with someone who was HIV positive and virally shedding? How many of them had unprotected sex with someone who was HIV positive, virally shedding and a had a huge viral load?

HIV is a virus and it has to have the right conditions to infect. HIV is a blood borne disease, meaning it has to get into the bloodstream. It gets into the blood stream through intercourse because there is tearing of the tissues, in the vagina and in the anal canal, where infected body fluids can get directly into the bloodstream. This is why condoms are so effective. However, the virus has to be shedding in order to infect as well.

Contracting HIV other than sex is pretty low as well. In the health care occupational exposure, the percentage of contracting HIV are this: The risk of acquiring HIV from a needle-stick injury is less than 1%, and the risk of infection from exposure not involving a puncture or a cut (such as a splash of body fluid onto the skin or the mucous membrane) is less than 0.1%. The risk of HIV infection from a human bite is between 0.1% and 1%.

So as tragic it is that people get AIDS, it's not exactly THAT easy to get HIV. However, it is still a risk, and you further increase your risk for every time you have unprotected sex with someone who is of unknown status.

Back to the study.. the only way for sure to know how potent the vaccination is, is to observe people who have unprotected sex with HIV positive partners, who are virally shedding. But who is going to do that? Who is going to willingly put their life on the line and chance getting a deadly disease all in the name of helping the rest of the world? I imagine it'd be pretty hard to find individuals.

To me, this study only reinforces the need for safe sex, knowing your partners status, knowing your own status, and understanding the risks you take when you share your body.

 

[Skaw]

I'm glad you're not in charge of foreign policy. Forgiving debt, I can understand. Standing back and letting everyone die of starvation and disease when you have the power to do something about it? No.

Shouldn't you be glad he isn't in charge of domestic policy too, for the very same reasons?

Lucky for me, being smug isn't considered a pre-existing condition, yet.