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

New HIV vaccine shows unprecedented success in preclinical study

lji.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 325 posts

Re: New HIV vaccine shows unprecedented success in preclinical study

#301

Post by someguydave »

tonnydourado wrote: post #157
RGS1811 wrote: post #3

While HIV vaccine research is an exciting field, it's worth pointing out that halting HIV transmission is, practically speaking, a solved problem with oral and injectable reverse transcriptase inhibitors. The ongoing loss of life and health due to HIV could be stopped if we cared enough to invest resources in wide-scale PrEP availability and public health education. Waiting for an HIV vaccine is the domain equivalent…

Transportation was a solved problem with horses, doesn't mean the car isn't a good idea. Same for internal combustion and EVs. A vaccine is an objectively better solution than PrEP, just because of the time scale, PrEP needs discipline on a daily or x-monthly basis. A vaccine could last for years. Although, realistically, it's more likely to end up requiring yearly updates like COVID, because HIV is also a mutating s…

In the meanwhile everyone infected with HIV should be permanently quarantined like in Cuba

Re: New HIV vaccine shows unprecedented success in preclinical study

#302

Post by est31 »

rsynnott wrote: post #299
kstrauser wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That all makes sense. A couple things I’m still not clear on: * If someone has a negative test after treatment, but that’s not counted as “cured”, does that imply it could (or maybe will ) come back if treatment is stopped? * What’s the importance of the distinction between HIV+ vs AIDS, from a public health or human perspective? We don’t talk about influenza+ vs “has the flu”, at least as far as I know. Does HIV+ ca…

> What’s the importance of the distinction between HIV+ vs AIDS, from a public health or human perspective? We don’t talk about influenza+ vs “has the flu”, at least as far as I know. Does HIV+ carry less stigma than AIDS? Generally if you have the influenza virus, you’ll also have the disease that that virus causes. This is true of most viruses. I’m not sure any other virus does the “undetectable and untransmissible…

HIV virus inserts itself into the DNA of long lived cells in your organism, and it stays around as long as those cells stay around, which is (unless u have blood cancer and your doctors decide to kill those cells) your entire life.

That constant low level stream of HIV viruses in your body can cause the virus to return at any moment you stop the therapy. So you have to take daily pills for the rest of your life to stop that stream from exponential growth and killing all of your immune system.

The last part is what is referred to as AIDS: your immune system is so weak that even the simplest pathogens can kill you, which they usually do once you reach AIDS stage.

There are a couple of viruses that can lay dormant in you and cause problems later on. Many of them insert themselves into the DNA of long living cells.

Without therapy, HIV will progress to AIDS in a couple of years in basically 99.9% of patients. Some very rare cases are known where HIV patients survive without getting AIDS and therapy, via broadly neutralizing antibodies. But again, less than a tenth of a percent. Everyone else would die without a therapy.

Being HIV positive isn't a death sentence, if you take your meds (and started taking them early after HIV infection) you can live for as long as someone who isn't HIV positive. In fact studies show that the effect of regularly going to a doctor and getting your blood checked actually improves your life chances. HIV positive people can do 99% of the things normal people can, although they are not allowed to donate blood (for good reason).

Having AIDS though is a major impairment and you are on your way to death at that stage (1-3 years to live). So it makes sense to distinguish the two.

Re: New HIV vaccine shows unprecedented success in preclinical study

#303

Post by mannanj »

seattle_spring wrote: post #196
mannanj wrote: post #164

There's non-vaccine treatments and holistic therapies that work great for HIV too. Though if you talk about this you get labeled woo or an enemy to science. If people could make more money off those alternatives though I think it would be more acceptable to discuss.

Which treatments specifically are you referring to?

I'm actually not referring to any treatments at all. There's no evidence to suggest that anything I said exists, or works, and it causes vaccine hesitancy so I think that I may be killing people and taking lives by even talking about it.

This is a real likeness of a reply I received during COVID when I shared my vaccinated parents used treatments like Ivermectin to manage COVID.

I can tell you, maybe look into frequency therapies & managing what frequencies are around you, look at inflammation reduction activities, and try cleansing like diets. I remember hearing also, with no evidence to support this conclusion of course, as I am not making any claim to remedy or cure any disease nor am I an FDA licensed practitioner, that classes of probiotics and bacteria and connected substances work great too. Edit: there's no evidence to suggest that 10 years of personal obsession and experience reversing my own diabetes (said to be incurable) and working with cutting edge scientists, doctors and researchers makes me qualified to make any sort of claim about this. I am not really certain what qualifies as evidence though, maybe you can help me understand who decides that.

Re: New HIV vaccine shows unprecedented success in preclinical study

#304

Post by JumpCrisscross »

wavemode wrote: post #225
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I obviously don't know the future Nor the past. Seatbelt requirements did result in riskier driving. It also, on the net, saved lives. Same for every other vaccine, or e.g. birth control in respect of teenage and unwanted pregnancies. Also, PreP exists and works.

> Seatbelt requirements did result in riskier driving. It also, on the net, saved lives. Okay? This seems unrelated. A better analogy would be if they had invented airbags and then people stopped wearing seatbelts. (like taking a 44% effective vaccine and then stop using PreP) > Same for every other vaccine, or e.g. birth control in respect of teenage and unwanted pregnancies. Also unrelated. Birth control is highly…

> This seems unrelated

It's the exact effect you're describing. Seatbelts aren't 100% efffective. When they were mandated, a common criticism was that this would increase risky driving. It did, a bit. But not enough to negate the significant safety effects of wearing a seatbelt.

> My issue is the poor effectiveness of this vaccine

One, it's still preclinical. We don't know its effectiveness in humans. But two, your argument is still historically invalid. Vaccines have been effective at the community level without being totally effective individually. And again, your concerns would apply more to PreP than the vaccine.

Your hypothesis wasn't a bad instinct. But you could have followed up on it or, when confronted with evidence against it, chosen not to double down.

Re: New HIV vaccine shows unprecedented success in preclinical study

#305

Post by wavemode »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #304
wavemode wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Seatbelt requirements did result in riskier driving. It also, on the net, saved lives. Okay? This seems unrelated. A better analogy would be if they had invented airbags and then people stopped wearing seatbelts. (like taking a 44% effective vaccine and then stop using PreP) > Same for every other vaccine, or e.g. birth control in respect of teenage and unwanted pregnancies. Also unrelated. Birth control is highly…

> This seems unrelated It's the exact effect you're describing. Seatbelts aren't 100% efffective. When they were mandated, a common criticism was that this would increase risky driving. It did, a bit. But not enough to negate the significant safety effects of wearing a seatbelt. > My issue is the poor effectiveness of this vaccine One, it's still preclinical. We don't know its effectiveness in humans. But two, your a…

I can't tell if you're arguing in bad faith or if you just don't actually understand anything I've been saying.

> Your hypothesis wasn't a bad instinct. But you could have followed up on it or, when confronted with evidence against it, chosen not to double down.

...huh? What solitary point of evidence has even been presented? First it was pointed out to me that I'm not a psychic, which is true but is not evidence of anything. Then it was pointed out to me that seatbelts save lives and contraception prevents pregnancy, which are also true statementsnbut are also not evidence of anything, given that both are highly effective at what they do.

If you want to present evidence of something, why don't you start by presenting evidence of this:

> Vaccines have been effective at the community level without being totally effective individually.

Let's start with, what historical vaccine had 44% effectiveness? Then, let's move on to, what historical vaccine had 44% effectiveness and was released to the public despite there already existing a 99% effective prophylactic drug for the same disease? And what was the outcome there?

If you still don't get the point I'm making, then nothing will change this and we should just end the exchange.

Re: New HIV vaccine shows unprecedented success in preclinical study

#306

Post by everforward »

attila-lendvai wrote: post #251
everforward wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tuberculosis is different, in a very dark, utilitarian way. 4% of new TB cases are multi-drug resistant (19% of recurrences). Once it’s multi-drug resistant, if you’re poor then you get an incredibly depressing choice. Rich countries pay for expensive drug resistance testing. Poor countries have to answer an impossible question. You either do nothing and see if they live, or you try to guess what drugs will work and…

> TB is also shockingly infectious let's keep HN as a place where people usually do at least a cursory research before they state things with such confidence... or inject a few words of doubt to signal that you haven't done the homework. if you feel the urge to fight this: i lived with someone infected with TB. e.g. measles is shockingly infectious. TB is not.

Depends heavily on whether we're measuring in practical terms, or in "no medical intervention" terms.

If we're measuring in a vacuum without medicine, then absolutely, the measles is dramatically more infectious.

If we're measuring in the real world where medicine exists, the measles has a safe, cheap and effective vaccine. New case rates dropped 76% between 2000 and 2018 due to extensive vaccination campaigns, and new cases of the measles globally sits a hair below TB right now. The WHO has a plan to eradicate it (and rubella) just like polio.

Meanwhile TB is now the leading cause of infectious death in the world, and the WHO estimates 1 in 4 people globally have either active or latent TB. Despite having similar new case numbers, TB kills 13 people for every 1 person the measles does.

I would describe a disease that 1 in 4 people globally have and is the world's leading cause of death as "shockingly infectious". I doubt it is the most infectious, but I think shockingly infectious is apt.

> i lived with someone infected with TB.

If they were latent, no one would expect you to have contracted TB. Latent TB isn't infectious. If they had active TB, I would personally get tested for latent TB. Not showing symptoms isn't dispositive of contracting TB, it can lay dormant for a long time or forever. I'm not saying you would definitely have contracted it enough, but the odds are high enough and risks serious enough that I'd want it treated before it became active.

Re: New HIV vaccine shows unprecedented success in preclinical study

#307

Post by M95D »

Melatonic wrote: post #194
mrguyorama wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HIV isn't the only virus that generates decoys to trick antibody development, so having techniques that bypass that decoy strategy is very useful.

What else does this?

All single-stranded RNA viruses do that. But it's being done to them is the more correct term. A single strand of RNA is unstable and prone to mutations due to enviromental factors.

Re: New HIV vaccine shows unprecedented success in preclinical study

#308

Post by gib444 »

wat10000 wrote: post #199
gib444 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't move the conversation goalposts (and we don't do "gotchas" here, as you well know) And AIDS is not considered a death sentence btw. It's not the 1980s

This subthread is specifically about better HIV treatments leading to an increase in other STIs. Did you forget about what you were replying to?

When I reply to a comment, it's a reply to that comment. Which I don't think you even read

Re: New HIV vaccine shows unprecedented success in preclinical study

#309

Post by wat10000 »

gib444 wrote: post #308
wat10000 wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This subthread is specifically about better HIV treatments leading to an increase in other STIs. Did you forget about what you were replying to?

When I reply to a comment, it's a reply to that comment. Which I don't think you even read

So we’re supposed to ignore all the context leading up to it? What did I supposedly not read, then? Some other comment that’s no longer relevant here?

Re: New HIV vaccine shows unprecedented success in preclinical study

#310

Post by pazimzadeh »

Fire-Dragon-DoL wrote: post #255
pazimzadeh wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here’s a fun read on that arms race The acquired immune system: a vantage from beneath https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15539148/ Basically saying our immune systems ensure that microbes get ever more devious However there’s ways that we counter that, like mucus that basically slowly feeds and tames your bacteria. Doesn’t work on viruses though

Everything I hear is about bacterias though. I wish we found more about viruses.

viruses and transposons are a major source of creativity in life. the adaptive immune system of jawed vertebrates like us, which defends against viruses, only exists because the RAG transposon inserted itself into the gonads of our fish ancestors 500 million years ago

Origin of immunoglobulins and T cell receptors: A candidate gene for invasion by the RAG transposon

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40614193/

Post reply on HN