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

A very real, though slightly impractical, cure for AIDS

online.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–17 of 17 posts

Re: A very real, though slightly impractical, cure for AIDS

#11

Post by kylec »

rms wrote: post #10
hugh wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm no expert either, but I think the problem is that suitable donors are extremely rare -- and most of them would prefer not to give up their bone marrow to some random stranger, thanks very much. update: Oh, and a bone marrow transplant is a horrible procedure which kills 30% of recipients.

Yeah... for it to work you basically have to completely destroy the immune system of the transplant target and they recover in a bubble.

The way I see it AIDS will do that on its own, so you might as well give it a shot.

Re: A very real, though slightly impractical, cure for AIDS

#12

Post by rms »

kylec wrote: post #11
rms wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah... for it to work you basically have to completely destroy the immune system of the transplant target and they recover in a bubble.

The way I see it AIDS will do that on its own, so you might as well give it a shot.

AIDS perhaps, but anyone that could afford to pay for a treatment like this is unlikely to have progressed past HIV, as they could surely afford the best current treatments.

Re: A very real, though slightly impractical, cure for AIDS

#13

Post by tel »

mleonhard wrote: post #8

I bet the first designer babies will all have this CCR5 mutation and will be immune to HIV.

I doubt it. It's effectiveness relies on the fact that CCR5 isn't so common as to force microevolution. Like antibiotics, something like this needs to be applied very carefully.

Re: A very real, though slightly impractical, cure for AIDS

#14

Post by ComputerGuru »

hugh wrote: post #9
tocomment wrote: post #7

What makes it so impractical? Isn't a bone marrow transplant just an injection with the new cells? It doesn't even require surgery right? Disclaimer: I don't know what I'm talking about.

I'm no expert either, but I think the problem is that suitable donors are extremely rare -- and most of them would prefer not to give up their bone marrow to some random stranger, thanks very much. update: Oh, and a bone marrow transplant is a horrible procedure which kills 30% of recipients.

Also, unlike other kinds of donations, bone marrow transplants are a bit more taxing on the donor.

It's a painful procedure that requires a hospital stay for donor and recipient, and it's really complicated.

To put things in perspective, it's physically easier to donate a kidney than bone marrow.

Re: A very real, though slightly impractical, cure for AIDS

#17

Post by ingenium »

tel wrote: post #13
mleonhard wrote: post #8

I bet the first designer babies will all have this CCR5 mutation and will be immune to HIV.

I doubt it. It's effectiveness relies on the fact that CCR5 isn't so common as to force microevolution. Like antibiotics, something like this needs to be applied very carefully.

Sure, it may evolve around it, as there already exist some strains that infect directly via the CXCR4 receptor and bypass CCR5 receptors all together. However, this isn't reason to not include the mutation in "designer babies". It will still be effective, and provides resistance to diseases other than HIV (though it also makes you slightly more susceptible to others). In other words, there really isn't any reason to NOT include it, especially since there is a definite benefit achieved by including it.
Post reply on HN