So this is why lesbians don't get AIDS

[Surlethe]

Is it inconceivable that a drug could be made that temporarily suppresses production of this protein? I mean, aside from the fact that drug companies won't be up for researching it if there's no profit, nobody gives a shit about Africa, etc.

[Lusankya]

How is it strange? It has one of the fastest mutation rates of any virus, in just 20 years it has diverged into six different taxonomic groups, each one specializing on a different type of transmission.

Hitching a ride on semen is hardly surprising.

Do you have a source for this? I feel that this fact may be useful in an argument soon.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Is it inconceivable that a drug could be made that temporarily suppresses production of this protein? I mean, aside from the fact that drug companies won't be up for researching it if there's no profit, nobody gives a shit about Africa, etc.

A male birth control pill could, theoretically, do so by suppressing the production of semen itself.

[Adrian Laguna]

A male birth control pill could, theoretically, do so by suppressing the production of semen itself.

We should let the pharma companies know about this. It would probably encourage them to increase funding toward making one.

[Aorus]

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:
A male birth control pill could, theoretically, do so by suppressing the production of semen itself.

We should let the pharma companies know about this. It would probably encourage them to increase funding toward making one.

I would think that any male birth control pill would focus on stopping sperm production/viability, which is in fact what some companies are developing. Stopping production of semen is something completely different.

[Alyrium Denryle]

How is it strange? It has one of the fastest mutation rates of any virus, in just 20 years it has diverged into six different taxonomic groups, each one specializing on a different type of transmission.

Hitching a ride on semen is hardly surprising.

Do you have a source for this? I feel that this fact may be useful in an argument soon.

It was from a public lecture I would need to find the source paper.

[Alyrium Denryle]

A male birth control pill could, theoretically, do so by suppressing the production of semen itself.

We should let the pharma companies know about this. It would probably encourage them to increase funding toward making one.

Well, they function in theory by inhibiting either sperm production, maturation, or motility. The proteins would be harder to inhibit because those are automatically manufactured by the various accessory glands in the male reproductive tract. male gamete production is hormone mediated, much easier to control.

[Enigma]

Any cure would have to attack the human side of the equation, which evolves much more slowly. Probably by whacking the CD4 protein.

How about whacking people in the head until they a) wear condoms, or b) stop having sex and decide to just rot quietly for awhile?

Or if they refuse then there is option C) whack them until they stop twitching and crying.

[Justforfun000]

Aly Wrote:

as for HIV itself, people talk about a cure or vaccine and i start laughing...

It's that bad is it? Would you venture to guess that eventually the human immune system will just learn how to cope with it so it becomes a chronic infection and no longer fatal? Obviously this happened with simians. I read something about trim 5-alpha being their natural protection but ours is not developed as effectively. Will this follow their lead?

Besides the human body's own coping efforts, is there anything even remotely plausible in theory that can effectively block viral replication totally or possibly eradicate all traces of the virus and infected cells?

Doesn't HIV have any completely distinguishing components that could somehow be tracked down by a 'smart' drug and targeted without harming other healthy cells? What about the idea of piggybacking this kind of treatment to another virus?

Just thought I'd throw some ideas out to you there. I'm expecting to be disappointed...but oh well.

[Alyrium Denryle]

It's that bad is it? Would you venture to guess that eventually the human immune system will just learn how to cope with it so it becomes a chronic infection and no longer fatal? Obviously this happened with simians. I read something about trim 5-alpha being their natural protection but ours is not developed as effectively. Will this follow their lead?

Maybe. Our only chance is to evolve resistance like simians did. The problem is, they have been engaged in an evolutionary arms race for many many simian generations. They have co-evolved to attack, defend, and counter-attack eachother for a good long while

To put it in human military terms

Its like the british empire and continental europe. There had been a number of wars over the centuries and the pretty much everyone had technological parity as a result. Now the british empire sets its eyes on a less technologically advanced culture... And even if logistics and a very stalwart defense can keep the british at bay for a while, the trifecta of rum sodomy and the lash is going to win every time.

Same thing with HIV, our generation times are too slow, and our cellular mutation rates are not high enough to keep up with HIV's mutation rate and heavy selective pressure.

Besides the human body's own coping efforts, is there anything even remotely plausible in theory that can effectively block viral replication totally or possibly eradicate all traces of the virus and infected cells?

No. Drug therapies are chemically very specific, and a big problem with HIV is that its mutation rates gives it a HUGE amount of standing genetic variation to work with, so even the reverse transcriptase is not the same even in viral particles emerging from the same host cell. There are drugs that blovk reverse transcriptase, but even those eventually lose effectiveness.

oesn't HIV have any completely distinguishing components that could somehow be tracked down by a 'smart' drug and targeted without harming other healthy cells? What about the idea of piggybacking this kind of treatment to another virus?

Nope. The surface antingens change constantly... There might be a way to do it with another virus but as far as I know there is no way tio make it only target infected cells and it will kill the host cell... which means the side effect will be almost as bad as the disease being treated. immunosupression.

[Justforfun000]

So what you are saying is that barring some unexpected new technology or revolutionary theory, our current understanding is that the chances of defeating HIV is impossible?

If true, that's a pretty horrible mess the world is going to be in...they will NEVER be able to prevent all new infections. Of all things, the worse means of transmission is sex. It will never be 'controlled' perfectly. It's just too personal which leads to non-disclosure for many people, the head in the sand idea that if they don't get a test they'll be fine, etc.

Bad tidings...

[The Duchess of Zeon]

The best bet, of course, is for a major wave of diseases in conjunction with world economic collapse to rapidly kill off most people with AIDS (who will be vulnerable to secondary infections much more readily, and suffer disproportionately), therefore limiting the threat considerably.

[Alyrium Denryle]

So what you are saying is that barring some unexpected new technology or revolutionary theory, our current understanding is that the chances of defeating HIV is impossible?

If true, that's a pretty horrible mess the world is going to be in...they will NEVER be able to prevent all new infections. Of all things, the worse means of transmission is sex. It will never be 'controlled' perfectly. It's just too personal which leads to non-disclosure for many people, the head in the sand idea that if they don't get a test they'll be fine, etc.

Bad tidings...

maybe not impossible but damn unlikely. Maybe if we start genetically engineering people we may be able to grant immunity, or at least high resistance. But there is no guarantee that the virus will not adapt to that faster than we can engineer solutions... Natural selection is a bitch, it is better than our engineers... Pretty damn good for an unthinking natural process.

But yeah... HIV is a bitch. STDs in general are sneaky sneaky viruses. They are asymptomatic for long periods and they take perfect advantage of the drive to reproduce...

[Justforfun000]

likely

But yeah... HIV is a bitch. STDs in general are sneaky sneaky viruses. They are asymptomatic for long periods and they take perfect advantage of the drive to reproduce...

However from what I've been reading, the most likely solution to the problem will be enhancing our immune system enough to keep it under control as a chronic infection and potentially making it as relatively benign as say herpes to our actual survival. It already seems to be doing this since it was FAR more virulent when it first struck. The percentage of people that progressed from infection to AIDS in a short time frame was far higher. Now it's become somewhat expected to be 10+ years for most, and countless others have been going on 20+.

I just read the other day about a company starting phase 2 trials that are relaively unique. They are enhancing individual immune systems in a specific way that is unique and tailor made to fight the infection based on their own bodies capabilities.

Or something like that....let me see if I can find a link.

ahh here: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/95892.php

HEY, I just found another article that describes how a drug has been discovered that apparently can stop HIV from hiding out in viral reservoirs. If this works well then eradication could be a possibility, no?

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/95921.php

Let me know what you think after you've had a peek at those.

[Alyrium Denryle]

HEY, I just found another article that describes how a drug has been discovered that apparently can stop HIV from hiding out in viral reservoirs. If this works well then eradication could be a possibility, no?

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/95921.php

that will certainly be interesting to see play out. It is possible though that HIV may exploit other parts of the same or a similar apoptosis inhibiting pathway. It also causes birth defects... should be interesting.

Even so, I dont think it will lead to eradication. For the same reason otehr drugs have not, even though in theory they should have

As for the patient specific one... We'll see. Though i will point out that the journal they published in was utter shit...

[Justforfun000]

that will certainly be interesting to see play out. It is possible though that HIV may exploit other parts of the same or a similar apoptosis inhibiting pathway. It also causes birth defects... should be interesting.

The drug does you mean? Damn. Well...hopefully it isn't too harmful to the person being treated. IF it really works in the long term.

Even so, I dont think it will lead to eradication. For the same reason otehr drugs have not, even though in theory they should have

Eh? And what is that reason?

As for the patient specific one... We'll see. Though i will point out that the journal they published in was utter shit...

Do they look like a reputable organization though?

[Alyrium Denryle]

Eh? And what is that reason?

because a cell has redundant growth control pathways and apoptosis inhibiting pathways that HIV can exploit if it mutates properly, or it can inhibit another part of the same pathway

Do they look like a reputable organization though?

I am not sure about the authors or company they work for, but the journal they published in has very low standards. And I am not a clinician so I am not qualified to review it myself

[Justforfun000]

because a cell has redundant growth control pathways and apoptosis inhibiting pathways that HIV can exploit if it mutates properly, or it can inhibit another part of the same pathway

Goddamn it. For a little piece of simple genetic code, it can be quite a fucker can't it? You'd swear the damn thing was truly 'alive' and malevolent.

Ok, the thing I'm curious about is why is HIV so damn special in comparison to others? I mean we have Herpes virus, chicken pox, even SMALLPOX is not 100% fatal and people have beat it and become immune.

How the hell can people have a virus 10 to 20 years and not engender a way to fight it once and for all? It's so aggravating.

[Alyrium Denryle]

because a cell has redundant growth control pathways and apoptosis inhibiting pathways that HIV can exploit if it mutates properly, or it can inhibit another part of the same pathway

Goddamn it. For a little piece of simple genetic code, it can be quite a fucker can't it? You'd swear the damn thing was truly 'alive' and malevolent.

Ok, the thing I'm curious about is why is HIV so damn special in comparison to others? I mean we have Herpes virus, chicken pox, even SMALLPOX is not 100% fatal and people have beat it and become immune.

How the hell can people have a virus 10 to 20 years and not engender a way to fight it once and for all? It's so aggravating.

Last I checked, none of those are RNA retroviruses. RNA is more mutation prone. Also, most of those dont target what amount to the directors of the immune system. It is not HIV that kills remember, it is the opportunistic infections that exploit the weakened immune system.

[Coop D'etat]

because a cell has redundant growth control pathways and apoptosis inhibiting pathways that HIV can exploit if it mutates properly, or it can inhibit another part of the same pathway

Goddamn it. For a little piece of simple genetic code, it can be quite a fucker can't it? You'd swear the damn thing was truly 'alive' and malevolent.

Ok, the thing I'm curious about is why is HIV so damn special in comparison to others? I mean we have Herpes virus, chicken pox, even SMALLPOX is not 100% fatal and people have beat it and become immune.

How the hell can people have a virus 10 to 20 years and not engender a way to fight it once and for all? It's so aggravating.

Last I checked, none of those are RNA retroviruses. RNA is more mutation prone. Also, most of those dont target what amount to the directors of the immune system. It is not HIV that kills remember, it is the opportunistic infections that exploit the weakened immune system.

Adding to your point, another factor is that they're not just RNA viruses but RNA retroviruses which gives the bug additional bad ju-ju by being able to hid in host genomic DNA. This means that you can wipe out every virus particle in the host and HIV can still come back for round two.

All in all you'd be hard pressed to come up with a more difficult virus to deal with. HIV has the mutational speed of an RNA virus (helped by a low fidelity reverse transcriptase and RNA polymerase) with the latency that you get from Herpes-type DNA viruses. Long incubation period means hosts are infectious for years before they die and attacking the CD4 (helper) T cell the immune system itself is compromised.

[Mayabird]

How is it strange? It has one of the fastest mutation rates of any virus, in just 20 years it has diverged into six different taxonomic groups, each one specializing on a different type of transmission.

Hitching a ride on semen is hardly surprising.

Do you have a source for this? I feel that this fact may be useful in an argument soon.

My source for that (yeah, I know I'm not him, but we studied the same basic thing, being bio nerds the both of us) was my textbooks. The reason for its high mutation rate (which may be THE fastest, but definitely one of the fastest), is that its replication is extremely sloppy. It's absolutely terrible at replicating itself well, which means that mutations pop up all the time. Sure, a lot of them suck (though to be fair, some of the sucky ones end up being the ones that lead to drug resistance - they're not so good at taking up certain chemicals that they need, but those are the ones the drugs were exploiting - that's how AZT resistance occurs), but we're talking about trillions of 'em.

It's kinda funny in a twisted fashion that HIV is damn near the perfect virus from a "it won't go away" standpoint because it's so bad at reproducing itself. I'm just glad it hasn't come across a mutation to become more hardy - the virus is fragile. As someone else here put it (sorry I don't remember who), it'll break if you look at it sideways. If it did get hardier, then it might be able to go airbourne. And that would just be terrifying.

[Alyrium Denryle]

How is it strange? It has one of the fastest mutation rates of any virus, in just 20 years it has diverged into six different taxonomic groups, each one specializing on a different type of transmission.

Hitching a ride on semen is hardly surprising.

Do you have a source for this? I feel that this fact may be useful in an argument soon.

My source for that (yeah, I know I'm not him, but we studied the same basic thing, being bio nerds the both of us) was my textbooks. The reason for its high mutation rate (which may be THE fastest, but definitely one of the fastest), is that its replication is extremely sloppy. It's absolutely terrible at replicating itself well, which means that mutations pop up all the time. Sure, a lot of them suck (though to be fair, some of the sucky ones end up being the ones that lead to drug resistance - they're not so good at taking up certain chemicals that they need, but those are the ones the drugs were exploiting - that's how AZT resistance occurs), but we're talking about trillions of 'em.

It's kinda funny in a twisted fashion that HIV is damn near the perfect virus from a "it won't go away" standpoint because it's so bad at reproducing itself. I'm just glad it hasn't come across a mutation to become more hardy - the virus is fragile. As someone else here put it (sorry I don't remember who), it'll break if you look at it sideways. If it did get hardier, then it might be able to go airbourne. And that would just be terrifying.

Yeah, that is when we have to start using forced quarantine and basically cut off all trade and travel to some areas...

[The Grim Squeaker]

I'm just glad it hasn't come across a mutation to become more hardy - the virus is fragile. As someone else here put it (sorry I don't remember who), it'll break if you look at it sideways. If it did get hardier, then it might be able to go airbourne. And that would just be terrifying.

We're almost as damn lucky that the antibodies in mosquito bodies neutralize it.
It being transmitted by mosquitos or fleas would be a miniature version of the black plague for Africa. (Although some might argue that's what it needs, in terms of resource and population mitigation)

[montypython]

A better understanding of epigenetics and proteomics may present additional factors for study that might not exist currently, allowing for new approaches for HIV treatment.

[houser2112]

A male birth control pill could, theoretically, do so by suppressing the production of semen itself.

We should let the pharma companies know about this. It would probably encourage them to increase funding toward making one.

The whole point of birth control is removing the reproductive consequences of male sexual response. If there's no ejaculation, there's no response (or is there? I'm not entirely sure on this point), and no man would be willing to frustrate himself in such a way.