Vaccines Against H.I.V., Malaria and Tuberculosis Unlikely, Study Says • Hacker News Board

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

#61

Post by kadendogthing » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 12:36 AM UTC

rdl wrote: post #52

kadendogthing wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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, bu…

1) "About 10% of new Hepatitis A and 20% of all new Hepatitis B infections in the United States are among gay and bisexual men" (CDC, https://www.cdc.gov/msmhealth/viral-hepatitis.htm ) -- that's a much higher number than the incidence of gay and bisexual men in the overall population of the US (2-5%?). 2) "Gay and bisexual men and other men who have sex with men have the highest prevalences of gonorrhea, chlamydia,…

>that's a much higher number than the incidence of gay and bisexual men in the overall population of the US (2-5%?)

1) A valid insight, but misdirected. The prevalence rate is still higher in heterosexuals. You'll find a common point in many medical texts that a lot of what happens in the homosexual community, disease wise, is due to how small it is. A smaller network makes it easier/faster for every node to get the message.

>Gay and bisexual men and other men who have sex with men have the highest prevalences of gonorrhea, chlamydia, and early syphilis.

2) Right, in San Francisco. Not world wide.

>Men who have anal sex with men (MSM) are more likely to get anal HPV than men who only have sex with women.

3) This isn't surprising, since homosexuals definitely have more anal sex than heterosexuals. You should compare this to general HPV rates.

I am still awaiting support for your original claim about homosexual sex.

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

#62

Post by subcosmos » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 2:20 AM UTC

rdl wrote: post #46

bilbo0s wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)

Don't bother arguing with these trolls .... they seem woefully ignorant of just how fast things are moving in the lab, particularly with the sudden explosion of genomics and high throughput screening.

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

#63

Post by jayalpha » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 3:42 AM UTC

subcosmos wrote: post #62

rdl wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)

Don't bother arguing with these trolls .... they seem woefully ignorant of just how fast things are moving in the lab, particularly with the sudden explosion of genomics and high throughput screening.

Dude, I possible working with HTS before you were born.

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

#64

Post by DoreenMichele » Mon, Sep 17, 2018, 3:53 AM UTC

I will note that since these are "diseases of the poor," a valid approach would be to eliminate poverty instead of assuming it will always be with us.

You can't ever eliminate relative poverty, which is about "keeping up with the Joneses". But you can make real progress on absolute poverty. This is a fundamental difference between developed and developing countries.

We need to do this anyway to address the growing issue with antibiotic resistant infections.