Can someone knowledgeable provide more details about the "tri-specific" nature of the attack and what effects this might have on the selective resistance of the remaining strains? (e.g. is it something that would take three simultaneous mutations to overcome, thus being much less likely than any resistance that only takes one, due to HIV's incredibly high mutation rate, though those that do achieve all three would still be resistant?)
New antibody attacks 99% of HIV strains
41–50 of 256 posts
Re: New antibody attacks 99% of HIV strains
#42So does chloride.
Re: New antibody attacks 99% of HIV strains
#43Well, 99% means eradication of the virus very quickly. People won't become totally sexually irresponsible after the preventive shot, because there are many other hard to cure STDs now, especially as antibiotics are not as potent as they use to be, so i think there is no threat of 1960s style of unprotected sex wave.
I disagree. I (annedoctally) heard several times stories about how today's youth (~20yo) doing more unprotected sex than my generation (~35yo) only because HIV "does not kill anymore" . If AIDS is actually curable, I would bet that all other STD would explode in the short term
There is also a sort-of vaccine for HIV called PrEP or something like that. I'm not sure how you get it but I've seen mention of people using it prophylactically (which is what its designed for). And really without HIV, there isn't too much to be afraid of. HPV has a vaccine for many of the dangerous strains, and the other strains infect the vast majority of the populace anyway so even calling them a 'disease' is arguable. Same with herpes. It's for life, but almost everyone has it. Gonorrhea, chlamydia, etc, are easily treatable except for the antibiotic resistant forms which are (thankfully) very isolated in their spread.
Aiming for 'less sexual activity' is a very bad goal. Abstinence is harmful. The tremendous health benefits of sexual activity are myriad. The amount of research backing up the idea that modern society is dangerously sexless is huge. One of my favorites was a study of ALL men, across all ages, socioeconomic groups, everything, of an entire town I believe somewhere in northern Scotland (maybe Ireland?)... those who had the most frequent orgasms had a 50% lower chance of having died of any cause over the 15 year period of their study. They also had very significantly reduced incidence of heart disease, cancer, and other health problems. But, of course, such things get reported as 'health benefits of sex' and not 'health dangers of abstinence' because they assume people are abstinent by default which is ludicrous. We'll know if public sentiment is changing when the headlines change.
Re: New antibody attacks 99% of HIV strains
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People won't become totally sexually irresponsible after the preventive shot, because there are many other hard to cure STDs now, especially as antibiotics are not as potent as they use to be, so i think there is no threat of 1960s style of unprotected sex wave. The way you've phrased this, it sounds like you are casting "other hard to cure STDs" as a protective measure against the "threat of 1960s style of unprote…
[deleted]
[deleted]
Re: New antibody attacks 99% of HIV strains
#45Well, 99% means eradication of the virus very quickly. People won't become totally sexually irresponsible after the preventive shot, because there are many other hard to cure STDs now, especially as antibiotics are not as potent as they use to be, so i think there is no threat of 1960s style of unprotected sex wave.
Even at 100% eradication would be very difficult. As far as I am aware, smallpox is the only disease we have successfully eradicated. If you count non-human diseases, this number climbs to 2 with rinderpest. This is assuming that we can get the vaccine to everyone. In first world countries with developed and trusted this is mostly possible, but would still be a massive undertaking.
We were VERY close with Polio... but the CIA absolutely destroyed that when they ran a fake polio vaccination scam in Pakistan to get info on Bin Laden. Now it's making a comeback and doctors get shot trying to vaccinate.
Re: New antibody attacks 99% of HIV strains
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. I (annedoctally) heard several times stories about how today's youth (~20yo) doing more unprotected sex than my generation (~35yo) only because HIV "does not kill anymore" . If AIDS is actually curable, I would bet that all other STD would explode in the short term
My friends weren't wrapping it when I was in uni 6-10 years ago because every girl was on birth control.
The other big factor people don't like to use condom is that it greatly reduced the sensation, regardless how the condom companies have been advertising it.
Re: New antibody attacks 99% of HIV strains
#47Well, 99% means eradication of the virus very quickly. People won't become totally sexually irresponsible after the preventive shot, because there are many other hard to cure STDs now, especially as antibiotics are not as potent as they use to be, so i think there is no threat of 1960s style of unprotected sex wave.
Not really, no. Modern antiretrovirals are exceptionally effective, and for those with access[1] HIV/AIDS has become a chronic illness, with nearly-similar lifespans (due mostly to chronic inflammation). We still haven't come close to "eradicating" or curing HIV/AIDS; the issue lies in the virus' insidious biology. HIV is a retrovirus, meaning it incorporates into the target cell's genome, specifically CD4+ T-cells.…
>"an infected person produces billions of virus particles every single day... The oft-cited rule of the thumb is that every base of the viral genome is mutated every day"
Isn't it pretty weird that, despite this massive diversity, infections seem to be only caused a single, or sometimes a few, distinct virus particle(s):
>"we show that 78% of infections involved single variant transmission and 22% involved multiple variant transmissions (median of 3)" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19193811
To me that means something is horribly wrong with our understanding of HIV.
Re: New antibody attacks 99% of HIV strains
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. I (annedoctally) heard several times stories about how today's youth (~20yo) doing more unprotected sex than my generation (~35yo) only because HIV "does not kill anymore" . If AIDS is actually curable, I would bet that all other STD would explode in the short term
My friends weren't wrapping it when I was in uni 6-10 years ago because every girl was on birth control.
That's horrible, and nonsensical for the time period. With the amount of advocacy, and information available. Why would ANYONE consider not using a condom in uncommitted relationships?
Re: New antibody attacks 99% of HIV strains
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the 1960's unprotected sex wave was more a symptom of ignorance of STDs. People used to see condoms as primarily for birth control, and not really a sanitary measure. Remember, the birth control pill came out in the 1960s! Even then, knowledge of condoms wasn't widespread like it is now. My grandmother was super-pissed-off when my grandfather told her about them after she was pregnant for 18 months straight!…
Ignorance of STDs was okay in 1960s, because antibiotics worked really great back then and just about every STD was easily curable.
Doesn't seem likely. Do you have data on this?
Re: New antibody attacks 99% of HIV strains
#50Well, 99% means eradication of the virus very quickly. People won't become totally sexually irresponsible after the preventive shot, because there are many other hard to cure STDs now, especially as antibiotics are not as potent as they use to be, so i think there is no threat of 1960s style of unprotected sex wave.
"sexual responsibility" is quite an odd concept, it should be defined more precisely.
Children are the property of their fathers. Preserving the value of that property through preserving the virginal status of females is the responsibility of both sons and daughters. For a son to have sex with the daughter of another man, both the daughter and that boy have committed a property crime against the girls father. If she gets pregnant, he will never be able to get as big of a dowry when he sells her into marriage.
At least, that's where the idea of tying sexuality to economic considerations like 'responsibility' and phrases like 'saving yourself' come from.