Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shingles can be very nasty - my mother had it after I had chickenpox. It was across her face and eyes - she was hospitalised and was on morphine for the pain.
I had it when I was younger, and I heard it only gets worse if you get it when you're older. It was pain unlike anything I've experienced since, I can't imagine what it felt like for her.
Promising HIV vaccine passes phase one human trials with 90% success rate
91–100 of 103 posts
Re: Promising HIV vaccine passes phase one human trials with 90% success rate
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
While it won't probably kill you, it isn't exactly harmless. It can reemerge as shingles. There are cases of herpes causing death. For example, in an infant infected by his mohel, and a laboratory researcher killed after exposure to monkey feces. ( http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00056008.htm )
Shingles can be very nasty - my mother had it after I had chickenpox. It was across her face and eyes - she was hospitalised and was on morphine for the pain.
The reason medical professionals recommend parents let their children catch chickenpox is because it the symptoms get worse the older you are. In your later years it can even be life-threatening. Never underestimate the chickenpox!
Re: Promising HIV vaccine passes phase one human trials with 90% success rate
#93how do you sign up people to be infected with HIV?
In this case, they seem to be testing the blood for markers that should indicate an ability to repulse an HIV infection. Not the most scientifically informative experiment one can imagine, but also pretty straightforward ethically.
Re: Promising HIV vaccine passes phase one human trials with 90% success rate
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, circumcision is a proven way to reduce infection rates that doesn't involve behavior. Though, as one might imagine, it can be a tough sell in cultures where that isn't the norm.
Then why does the USA have the highest rate of circumcision and also the highest rate of HIV infection of developed countries? I don't think the claim holds up under scrutiny here. [EDIT: wording]
Re: Promising HIV vaccine passes phase one human trials with 90% success rate
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shingles can be very nasty - my mother had it after I had chickenpox. It was across her face and eyes - she was hospitalised and was on morphine for the pain.
My aunt had nearly the same thing happen to her--it left her with no visible scars (at least none that she told me about), but blind in one eye. The reason medical professionals recommend parents let their children catch chickenpox is because it the symptoms get worse the older you are. In your later years it can even be life-threatening. Never underestimate the chickenpox!
Re: Promising HIV vaccine passes phase one human trials with 90% success rate
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shingles can be very nasty - my mother had it after I had chickenpox. It was across her face and eyes - she was hospitalised and was on morphine for the pain.
My aunt had nearly the same thing happen to her--it left her with no visible scars (at least none that she told me about), but blind in one eye. The reason medical professionals recommend parents let their children catch chickenpox is because it the symptoms get worse the older you are. In your later years it can even be life-threatening. Never underestimate the chickenpox!
Re: Promising HIV vaccine passes phase one human trials with 90% success rate
#97My father is an infectious disease specialist who has spent the last 30 or so years working on HIV in research, patient treatment, and education. The following thought comes from my casual conversations with him, and probably does not represent his professional opinion. It certainly does not reflect his specific thoughts in regards to this trial, as we haven't yet discussed it. The progress in treating HIV since it f…
Re: Promising HIV vaccine passes phase one human trials with 90% success rate
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm confused by the statement that a vaccine would not be a game changer in terms of worldwide infection. Right now, the only way to reliably prevent HIV infection is through changing behavior , which is extremely difficult. But widespread use of a vaccine would just require a one-time injection, which is relatively easier. I'm further confused by your polio reference, because that sort of effort would only be possib…
Actually, circumcision is a proven way to reduce infection rates that doesn't involve behavior. Though, as one might imagine, it can be a tough sell in cultures where that isn't the norm.
Re: Promising HIV vaccine passes phase one human trials with 90% success rate
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is both scientifically inaccurate and potentially murderous. Rejecting science when it comes to things like evolution is an annoying tic, but whatever. What you're saying, though, is a stance that's literally killing millions of people in Africa. Before you say these things lightly, think about it for a few minutes.
Two answers to your post: i) Here is a recent analysis of existing evidence: http://hivskeptic.wordpress.com/2008/01/15/hiv-has-never-bee... . ii) A prize of $100.000 "was officially offered to anybody who would demonstrate HIV particles in the blood of allegedly high viral load patients". It has not been claimed yet. So far, there is ground for a reasonable scientific doubt regarding claiming that HIV causes AIDS. T…
Kind of funny that people with AIDS tend to, you know, live, when HIV-targeting drugs are administered.
Just one of those weird coincidences, I guess.
Re: Promising HIV vaccine passes phase one human trials with 90% success rate
#100Many in the scientific community claim there is no evidence HIV is actually causing AIDS. Hence, even if this is a successful vaccine, there is no guarantee it will protect from AIDS.
"What you're saying, though, is a stance that's literally killing millions of people in Africa. Before you say these things lightly, think about it for a few minutes."
"This claim is made by a discredited minority."
I don't think there is anything wrong with not believing, but rather questioning and examining a scientific assumption. Also when it is held by the majority.
And to attack people directly, making them look stupid, evil or irresponsible is certainly no going to convince them.
I found this text [1] which encourages to question orthodoxy, but also shows very clearly why in the case of AIDS/HIV there is overwhelming evidence for causation. It makes clear note that there is not a proof.