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

From MIT, a cure for all viruses?

process.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 115 posts

Re: From MIT, a cure for all viruses?

#31

Post by Symmetry »

meow wrote: post #23
lell wrote: post #21

I read the plos article when it came out. Basically, when a cell realises it is infected with a virus sometimes it will try to kill itself. There are a bunch of checks it does to make sure killing itself is a good idea. Many viruses try to counter these checks. DRACO works by short circuiting the detection -> kill self pathway. It's a great idea. But sometimes a large proportion of cells can get infected when you hav…

So is DRACO itself a kind of virus ? How does it visit all the cells...

DRACO is a drug, and travels through the body by diffusion the same way other drugs do.

Re: From MIT, a cure for all viruses?

#32

Post by DRACOMALFOA »

Well, sad thing is humans have been creating most of the diseases that have been released into the wild for the past 50 years...

Lyme disease, H1N1(now H1N5-X), etc...

The reason they do NOT cure diseases is because, overpopulation would explode. Cancer isn't cured for this reason but, they certainly love money for a whole bunch more research. The same can be said with HIV/AIDS.

You may think its absurd or wrong in concept but, do the math for yourself...

You think 10-billion people by 2020 is a large number...

If they cured even a single major disease(like cancer), 10-billion would be 20-billion by 2030...

It's an interesting thing to know that humans are responsible for killing ourselves only because, they won't fund technologies for space travel & transforming.

Enjoy being slaves on this watery rock.

;-)

Re: From MIT, a cure for all viruses?

#33

Post by ohashi »

caycep wrote: post #22

its interesting although one potential twist is that viruses may be more the communications vector for genetic material than the actual disease causing process itself (which is the payload). if this gets widely used in the field, will it disrupt "good" things - evolutionary processes, symbiotic infections, etc? Will it disrupt the ability of manmade viruses (i.e. gene therapy) from working?

I have no idea but I am curious as well. The one thing that did stick out was he said it only lasted 48 hours in the body. So presumably, if you were doing something after it left the body, it would have no effect (assuming it works as intended).

Re: From MIT, a cure for all viruses?

#35

Post by uncoder0 »

DRACOMALFOA wrote: post #32

Well, sad thing is humans have been creating most of the diseases that have been released into the wild for the past 50 years... Lyme disease, H1N1(now H1N5-X), etc... The reason they do NOT cure diseases is because, overpopulation would explode. Cancer isn't cured for this reason but, they certainly love money for a whole bunch more research. The same can be said with HIV/AIDS. You may think its absurd or wrong in c…

Your reply is surely in jest.However, if it was not, the Iceman who lived 5,000 years had Lyme disease.

"Perhaps most surprising, researchers found the genetic footprint of bacteria known as Borrelia burgdorferi in his DNA—making the Iceman the earliest known human infected by the bug that causes Lyme disease."[1]

[1]http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/11/iceman-autopsy/hal...

Re: From MIT, a cure for all viruses?

#36

Post by wvenable »

syntaxide wrote: post #5
Tzunamitom wrote: post #2

Wow, is that real? How is this not front page news on every network? This would be as big as the discovery of antibiotics.

This appeared on reddit a few days ago, and the answer to your question is twofold. First, this has not yet undergone human testing. In the history of pharmaceuticals, there have been many drugs that performed favorably in animal testing yet failed in human testing. It is simply too early to tell if this drug will be successful in humans. Secondly, was the idea that eliminating all viruses, as this seems to do, is no…

The drug kills the cell but the not virus -- your body still has to do that. Given the way that vaccines work, this is probably not going to have a big effect on immunity.

Re: From MIT, a cure for all viruses?

#37

Post by [deleted] »

DRACOMALFOA wrote: post #32

Well, sad thing is humans have been creating most of the diseases that have been released into the wild for the past 50 years... Lyme disease, H1N1(now H1N5-X), etc... The reason they do NOT cure diseases is because, overpopulation would explode. Cancer isn't cured for this reason but, they certainly love money for a whole bunch more research. The same can be said with HIV/AIDS. You may think its absurd or wrong in c…

[deleted]

Re: From MIT, a cure for all viruses?

#38

Post by Symmetry »

caycep wrote: post #22

its interesting although one potential twist is that viruses may be more the communications vector for genetic material than the actual disease causing process itself (which is the payload). if this gets widely used in the field, will it disrupt "good" things - evolutionary processes, symbiotic infections, etc? Will it disrupt the ability of manmade viruses (i.e. gene therapy) from working?

Viruses do indeed communicate genetic material between bacteria and contribute to their evolution. Generally humans don't want evolution occurring within our non-gamete cells, when that happens its usually a cancer. Some people have hypothesized that there might be other sorts of symbiotic viruses in humans, but none have been observed so far. On the the other hand we do know of some animals that do have actual symbiotic relationships with viruses[1].

Generally, I imagine that if we give someone manmade viruses we wouldn't give them this drug at the same time.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polydnavirus SFW, but don't read the text if you have a weak stomach.

Re: From MIT, a cure for all viruses?

#39

Post by firefoxman1 »

jerf wrote: post #24
lell wrote: post #21

I read the plos article when it came out. Basically, when a cell realises it is infected with a virus sometimes it will try to kill itself. There are a bunch of checks it does to make sure killing itself is a good idea. Many viruses try to counter these checks. DRACO works by short circuiting the detection -> kill self pathway. It's a great idea. But sometimes a large proportion of cells can get infected when you hav…

"Someone might get in a lot of trouble if all their infected cells instantly died." This was directly addressed in the linked article.

Sounds like a perfect beginning to a real "I am Legend" scenario. Imagine someone releasing a virus that could cross the blood-brain barrier (modified Rabies?) that just infects the cells and causes some minor symptoms that appear to be a standard cold. But anyone who takes this drug will have those brain cells self-destruct right?
Post reply on HN