Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vaccines Against H.I.V., Malaria and Tuberculosis Unlikely, Study Says

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 64 posts

Re: Vaccines Against H.I.V., Malaria and Tuberculosis Unlikely, Study Says

#41

Post by rdl »

kadendogthing wrote: post #40
rdl wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if AIDS went away overnight, there would still be a whole range of other diseases spread particularly through male homosexual sex, IV drug use, and high-partner count or professional sex. I wonder at what point hepatitis actually becomes more of a problem in rich first world cities than HIV.

>there would still be a whole range of other diseases spread particularly through male homosexual sex Like what?

Hepatitis, especially correlated with HIV fear being reduced due to PReP, and decreased use of condoms.

I believe a lot of other STDs and diseases caused by STDs (anal cancer from HPV) are prevalent in certain communities at higher rates. It is a good argument for increased targeted education and health resources for those communities, both to help them and to reduce spread.

Re: Vaccines Against H.I.V., Malaria and Tuberculosis Unlikely, Study Says

#42

Post by AnthonBerg »

ItsMe000001 wrote: post #29
AnthonBerg wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s $0.5 per person.

That's great in a single-variable universe, but in ours unfortunately there are a million other "it's (only) $0.5 per person" things. It's like letting the public choose what students have to learn - "but this is sooo important!" (and this, and this, and this,...). I don't understand that kind of argument. You have to choose the right level of scale for what you are looking at. I would not trust an architect (of buil…

It’s both a lot of money and also much less. I find it important / useful for myself to put it into context.

For me the takeaway is that I went and calculated how many times richer than the average and therefore what my share of $0.5 per person would be. It still wasn’t a lot. And probably more affordable to me than the person at the middle of the income scale even then.

But yes! I see the “what about all the other things” element too.

Re: Vaccines Against H.I.V., Malaria and Tuberculosis Unlikely, Study Says

#43

Post by thomasfedb »

yborg wrote: post #15
thomasfedb wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For some science, the baseline is very high. You can't do X-ray crystallography of organic compounds, for example, without a synchrotron.

DNA's structure was deduced from X-ray crystallography using a conventional X-ray tube, most laboratory protein crystallography doesn't require a synchrotron light source. Here's a typical unit: https://www.rigaku.com/en/products/protein/micromax007

Sorry, I meant lipid-phase organics. In any case, it is true that some science has huge initial investment cost - synchrotrons, space telescopes, etc

Re: Vaccines Against H.I.V., Malaria and Tuberculosis Unlikely, Study Says

#44

Post by kadendogthing »

rdl wrote: post #41
kadendogthing wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>there would still be a whole range of other diseases spread particularly through male homosexual sex Like what?

Hepatitis, especially correlated with HIV fear being reduced due to PReP, and decreased use of condoms. I believe a lot of other STDs and diseases caused by STDs (anal cancer from HPV) are prevalent in certain communities at higher rates. It is a good argument for increased targeted education and health resources for those communities, both to help them and to reduce spread.

>Hepatitis

This isn't limited to homosexual activity and is far more prevalent in exclusively heterosexual "populations." In fact, there isn't a correlation between any kind of sexual spectrum (though there are sexual activities that increase risk of infection, male or female partners). It just is. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1195276/

Where are you getting your information from?

>HIV fear being reduced due to PReP, and decreased use of condoms.

As a Western homosexual (there are more heterosexuals in the world with HIV than homosexuals), this is a concern. But it's largely about HIV resurgence. Condoms can help prevent a whole host of STI's/STD's so it's always just good practice, and one that's been waning lately due to lack of education, community reinforcement because of the former, and people thinking everyone is on PReP. And of course, HIV isn't the death sentence it once was.

As far as other STD's go, you'll need to provide some data in regards to those diseases specifically impacting the homosexual community.

Re: Vaccines Against H.I.V., Malaria and Tuberculosis Unlikely, Study Says

#45

Post by bilbo0s »

jayalpha wrote: post #37
rdl wrote: post #25

AIDS/HIV seems largely containable through PReP. I don’t know if long term pervasive but not universal use of PReP by those at risk would eventually lead to resistance to the medications used, though. Malaria probably can be eliminated for single digit millions of dollars through gene drive against specific species of mosquitoes which carry it. TB scares me, mainly due to high risk populations and XDR variants.

This are some amazing buzz words your have learned. "Malaria probably can be eliminated for single digit millions of dollars through gene drive against specific species of mosquitoes which carry it." Probably. And to throw a mutagenic chain reaction against evolutionary pressure, what possibly could go wrong? And why does this not work in the lab and why do mosquitoes develop resistance against gene drive after a few…

It never ceases to amaze me how easy people like HN User "rdl" believe fixing Malaria is. They think we can just wave a magic wand, and all of a sudden the world would be rid of Malarial disease. Do they think idiots have been working on this problem for the past 2 or 3 hundred years? Malaria is one of the most savagely cunning bugs around. Given the history of our fight against it, to imply that we are going to get rid of it with a bit of genetic pixie dust is just astoundingly naive.

Re: Vaccines Against H.I.V., Malaria and Tuberculosis Unlikely, Study Says

#46

Post by rdl »

bilbo0s wrote: post #45
jayalpha wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This are some amazing buzz words your have learned. "Malaria probably can be eliminated for single digit millions of dollars through gene drive against specific species of mosquitoes which carry it." Probably. And to throw a mutagenic chain reaction against evolutionary pressure, what possibly could go wrong? And why does this not work in the lab and why do mosquitoes develop resistance against gene drive after a few…

It never ceases to amaze me how easy people like HN User "rdl" believe fixing Malaria is. They think we can just wave a magic wand, and all of a sudden the world would be rid of Malarial disease. Do they think idiots have been working on this problem for the past 2 or 3 hundred years? Malaria is one of the most savagely cunning bugs around. Given the history of our fight against it, to imply that we are going to get…

Just like we got rid of smallpox with (initially) cowpox pixie dust? Or are very close to getting rid of polio with vaccine pixie dust? (Massive amounts of work to deploy each of these to the entire affected populations, but at core the technology is what makes it possible.)

Re: Vaccines Against H.I.V., Malaria and Tuberculosis Unlikely, Study Says

#47

Post by rdl »

kadendogthing wrote: post #44
rdl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hepatitis, especially correlated with HIV fear being reduced due to PReP, and decreased use of condoms. I believe a lot of other STDs and diseases caused by STDs (anal cancer from HPV) are prevalent in certain communities at higher rates. It is a good argument for increased targeted education and health resources for those communities, both to help them and to reduce spread.

>Hepatitis This isn't limited to homosexual activity and is far more prevalent in exclusively heterosexual "populations." In fact, there isn't a correlation between any kind of sexual spectrum (though there are sexual activities that increase risk of infection, male or female partners). It just is . https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1195276/ Where are you getting your information from? >HIV fear being redu…

There of course isn't one global homosexual community, but SF public health and other targeted information is what I see the most of. It may be biased just because it's pretty well funded and relatively well executed, but as someone without particular interest in STDs, it's what I see the most information about.

e.g. https://josephsciambra.com/increasing-rates-of-all-stds-amon...

https://www.sfdph.org/dph/files/reports/StudiesData/STD/SFST...

http://www.sfcityclinic.org/providers/PromotingSexualHealth_...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4034619/

Re: Hepatitis: https://www.cdc.gov/msmhealth/viral-hepatitis.htm

In general total number of infected persons is probably not as meaningful a metric in terms of transmission risk for a member of the population as rate per 100k or rate of new infections per year per 100k in a group. There are a lot more heterosexuals, non-IV-drug-users, and non-professional-sex-workers in the world. It's also possibly worth normalizing rates based on age cohort or number of sexual partners, relationship status, etc.; a monogamous gay couple of 20 years is essentially certainly of lower STD risk than a heterosexual with multiple new partners per year. But as a population, certain populations do tend to engage in a constellation of riskier behaviors, and have higher incidence of disease and of new infection.

Re: Vaccines Against H.I.V., Malaria and Tuberculosis Unlikely, Study Says

#48

Post by rdl »

ekianjo wrote: post #19
aussieguy1234 wrote: post #8

There is already prep, a once a day pill that if taken consistently, is over 95% effective at stopping HIV infection, I've heard some sources say it's 100% effective. While it's not medically considered to be a vaccine, most vaccines for other conditions have a lower effectiveness rate. There is work being done to turn prep into an injectable chip in the arm, like long term contraceptives, but for HIV prevention.

Can you point us to a source regarding this pill? Is it in clinical trials?

In the US it is marketed as Truvada (https://www.truvada.com/) which is the combination of drugs used. Approved by FDA in 2004.

Re: Vaccines Against H.I.V., Malaria and Tuberculosis Unlikely, Study Says

#49

Post by classichasclass »

ezequiel-garzon wrote: post #12

The title of the article seems to suggest no vaccines are available for these diseases, but at least in the case of tuberculosis there is one [1]. The article does refer to it: “The foundation still hopes to show that booster doses of BCG, a century-old childhood tuberculosis vaccine, can protect adolescents and that a vaccine candidate it is developing with GlaxoSmithKline, the pharmaceutical company, will stop late…

BCG has its own issues, though. Immunity wanes after awhile, the protection is incomplete and it seems to be more effective at preventing extrapulmonary disease than pulmonary.

This by no means says it's useless. It has probably greatly diminished pediatric tuberculous meningitis in at-risk counties, which can be devastating (one of my nightmare cases was a two-year-old who lost part of his occipital lobe to contaminated dairy). In low-prevalence countries, however, where pulmonary TB is the primary concern, its utility is questionable.

https://www.cdc.gov/tb/publications/factsheets/prevention/bc...

Re: Vaccines Against H.I.V., Malaria and Tuberculosis Unlikely, Study Says

#50

Post by kadendogthing »

rdl wrote: post #47
kadendogthing wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Hepatitis This isn't limited to homosexual activity and is far more prevalent in exclusively heterosexual "populations." In fact, there isn't a correlation between any kind of sexual spectrum (though there are sexual activities that increase risk of infection, male or female partners). It just is . https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1195276/ Where are you getting your information from? >HIV fear being redu…

There of course isn't one global homosexual community, but SF public health and other targeted information is what I see the most of. It may be biased just because it's pretty well funded and relatively well executed, but as someone without particular interest in STDs, it's what I see the most information about. e.g. https://josephsciambra.com/increasing-rates-of-all-stds-amon... https://www.sfdph.org/dph/files/repor…

Of course a decrease in condom use would most likely yield an increase in STD rates in any community. I'm having trouble discerning which source supports this:

>are prevalent in certain communities at higher rates.

You then seem to switch your perspective in the comment I'm replying to:

> total number of infected persons is probably not as meaningful a metric in terms of transmission risk

Which I would agree with, but you're not even addressing it. And of course the obvious needs to be said, the total number of people effected is needed to to ascertain which STD's "are prevalent in certain communities at higher rates." I'm still trying to figure out which STD's (besides HIV in the Western hemisphere), you're talking about.

Also if you're going to source stuff could you be bothered to not link to opinion pieces that are just a collection of cherry-picked quotes? There was no data or real scientific hypothesis involved. It was an opinion piece from an author who has quite the record on fighting LGBT+ rights. In fact there are two authors who clearly have a religious context to their arguments, a context that is detrimental to any rational conversation about this subject. It's well understood that such attitudes affect care and treatment, and the willingness to seek out care and treatment for young LGBT+ people. At best it's just non-sense, at worst such authors are actively helping the problem stay around.

Post reply on HN