HIV Vaccine Trial Shows 90% Immune Response 386
fergus07 writes "Researchers at the Spanish Superior Scientific Research Council (CSIC) have successfully completed Phase I human clinical trials of a HIV vaccine in which 90% of volunteers developed an immunological response against the virus. The MVA-B vaccine draws on the natural capabilities of the human immune system and 'has proven to be as powerful as any other vaccine currently being studied, or even more,' says Mariano Esteban, head researcher from CSIC's National Biotech Centre."
awesome (Score:5, Funny)
Natural? (Score:2)
"The MVA-B vaccine draws on the natural capabilities of the human immune system"
Isn't that how *all* vaccines work?
first post-HIV-cure realization (Score:3)
Oh yeah, they never did cure Herpes, did they? :(
Re: (Score:3)
Oh yeah, they never did cure Herpes, did they? :(
Too profitable.
Imagine the crushing damage to the medical industry if they ever cured the common cold?
Re: (Score:2)
There are a lot of drugs for HIV suppression, too. So why wouldn't HIV also be "too profitable" to develop a vaccine for?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
To be honest.. once they've tackled HIV, if they start refocusing on the lesser STD's, I wonder if they'll just fall like a house of cards. I mean HIV is pretty advanced. It shouldn't be too hard to take out the remain ones should it? Or am I being too naive?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Which makes me suspicious. The can make a vaccine for the variant of Herpes (Chicken Pox) that has one outbreak, and that is the end of it, but they can't make a vaccine for the variant that has reoccurring outbreaks for the the persons entire life. For that variant, they can only come up with on going treatment to suppress the symptoms.
Think about it... The vaccine works the same way actually getting Chicken Pox works from the immune system's memory's point of view. The fact that you tend to only get chicken pox a few times in your life (if you include shingles) is why there can be so effective a vaccine. The fact that the immune system can't keep some other herpes in check as well is why a vaccine is less effective for those variants.
I think people forget this (Score:5, Insightful)
Vaccines against viruses work because they train the immune system to attack the virus. They introduce something that gets it going. Can be a dead virus, can be a live but weakened virus, but whatever the case it trips off the immune system which produces a tailor made response. The immune system can then use that to kill any future invasions from that virus.
This is the same thing that happens when someone gets sick. However in that case, the live (in so far as a virus is alive) and fully active so it overwhelms the body for awhile until the body can formulate the response and fight back. All the vaccine does is make that process easier and safer.
The flip side of that is if it is the sort of thing the immune system fights off, but then it comes back, well a vaccine won't work, at least not a vaccine in the classical sense. If the immune system can't develop an effective repeating method to kill the virus, then a vaccine won't help.
Really this shit is not a big medical conspiracy, it is just how things work. What's more, the more things we cure, the harder the things are that remain. We fixed the things that were easy to fix long ago. We are getting to the hard shit now.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, silly of them putting the money into finding a cure for a disease that kills people instead of one that makes people's crotch itch.
Your righteous indignation would be more impressive if it had anything to do with what I said. I never said nor did I imply anything of the sort. Outside of your head, that is.
Free love baby! Groovy! (Score:2)
I wonder if a vaccine against AIDS will result in a sexual revolution as happened in the '60s with the advent of birth control pills.
And yes, I do know there's more then one STD out there, but that didn't stop them in the 60's either.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably not.
Most people realized that people do want relationships more then just blind sex for most people.
AIDS didn't put a stop to it. It was on its way out before AIDS but AIDS did give the opponents extra reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
Most people realized that people do want relationships more then just blind sex
if by 'most people' you mean female yes. Most men still want random gratuitous sex as often as they can get it for the better part of their teens and 20s. It's genetic mostly but also nicely reinforced by societal stereotypes.
Re: (Score:3)
What I believe will *really* launch the next sexual bonanza is a simple 5 minute 'blood test on a chip' for the various STDs. Don't have to cure it, just know if the person you're going to humpty-hump with is likely clean.
And that really can't be that far off in the future me thinks. Testing for the existence of a disease is infinitely simpler than curing it.
Science 1000000001, god 0 (Score:3, Funny)
Looks like the big, homophobic Guy in the Sky takes another one in the 'nads from our friends in the medical research community.
I wonder what Pat Robinson's got to say about this. He's been remarkably quiet since all those tornadoes ripped through the Bible Belt, sucking up true believers like a vaccuum cleaner on meth.
Re:Science 1000000001, god 0 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
i actually lol-ed...
Re:Science 1000000001, god 0 (Score:5, Insightful)
Southpark Cure (Score:2)
Immunological response? (Score:5, Insightful)
HIV vaccine in which 90% of volunteers developed an immunological response against the virus.
This is an absolutely meaningless measure; seroconversion against HIV is easy to achieve, and typically worthless. The elicited antibodies end up being targeted to highly variable regions, and have little long-term neutralizing power.
Although a handful of unusual broadly neutralizing antibodies have been found among "elite controllers", it is extremely rare for typical individuals to generate them. There's been some speculation it might be possible to create an effective vaccine by directing the response away from decoy regions, and towards the handful of areas targeted by such elite antibodies. Thus far, nobody has managed such a feat, unfortunately.
Immune response immunity (Score:2)
warning! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's an Aeonity blog hosting Goatse via a bit.ly link. Telnet comes in handy sometimes.
I also took the opportunity to add a few more AdBlock Plus filters.
||bit.ly^$third-party
slashdot.org#a(href*=/boredgeek)
Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (Score:5, Insightful)
Healthy relationships would kill HIV 100%, not 90.
Meanwhile, back in reality....
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And don't ever get sick enough to need a blood transfusion.
Oh, and don't ever work in the health industry or volunteer anywhere that you could accidentally come in contact with infected blood.
Are you trolling or just that naive?
Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
In the US there has been one known HIV transmission through blood transfusion in the last 8 years the chances of getting HIV from a blood transfusion are 1 in 1,500,000. 1 in 400 people who get stuck with a needle or cut with a sharp from a person with HIV contract the virus there have been 57 cases of health care workers getting HIV at work there are 12,000,000 health care workers. Getting HIV is not that easy mostly bad decisions have to be made to get HIV. The chances that you get HIV from a source besides sex and sharing needles is too small to consider 0.000002% you have a better chance of dieing from constipation.
So, still not 100% then?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What the hell does any of this have to do with the US? The vaccine from the original article wasn't even developed in the US. HIV isn't an epidemic "in the US", but that doesn't mean it's not worth pursuing a vaccine.
If you want to quote statistics - in Africa the estimate is 250-500 people a DAY contract HIV from unsafe (either contaminated blood or equipment) transfusions. Some 3rd world countries in Asia are almost as bad. And since there is such a higher rate of HIV and such poor health care conditi
Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (Score:5, Insightful)
Because HIV infected individuals have a large glowing neon sign attached to their foreheads saying "I HAVE HIV!"
Re: (Score:3)
It is not "100% effective" because sexual intercourse is not the only transmission vector.
It is unrealistic because we have a very strong instinct to reproduce, and that generally involves at least one other person/orangutan whose HIV status we don't really *know* except perhaps a short period immediately after they are tested.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't understand why the concept is so difficult. There is a 100% effective way to prevent catching HIV. Don't have sex with someone who has it! Why is that so unrealistic?
Perhaps it's unrealistic because it's not true. For example,
Contaminated haemophilia blood products [wikipedia.org]
Blood transfusions
Transmission from mother to child [wikipedia.org]
Needlestick injuries to health workers [wikipedia.org]
It's also theoretically possible to get it from tattoos and piercings although no known cases have been documented.
Re:90% chance that prostitue won't kill you (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that was sarcasm. I know it's hard to tell with some of the idiots out there on this topic.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Make sure her leash doesn't reach to the doorway and install a good security system, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not the way vaccines work. If the prostitute is also vaccinated (very likely) probabilities compound and you have 90%*90% = 99% chance that prostitute won't kill you.
Re: (Score:3)
So, you're saying you can have sex with 100 vaccinated prostitutes and only get HIV once...
Re: (Score:2)
90% * 90% = 81%. This is the chance that two events with 90% probability will occur at the same time independent of each other. I think what you're trying to say is 90% + (90% * 10%) = 99%.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, yeah, aside from tainted transfusions, blood contact from sports injuries, at dentists, unlicensed back-alley tattoo shops, or giving first aid to an infected person, as well as the small (some tiny nonzero) possibility of contracting HIV through hard surfaces such as toilet seats, as well as contracting HIV from the mother (yes, there are babies born with HIV) - and let's not forget idiots who shoot up and even more moronically share needles. Aside from those few? Sure, healthy relationships will p
Re: (Score:2)
Not taking a side but you did ask for numbers. CDC Published numbers for 2009
Estimated Number of Diagnoses of HIV Infection, 2009
Male-to-male sexual contact 23,846
Injection drug use 3,932
Male-to-male sexual contact and injection drug use 1,131
Heterosexual contact 12,860
Other 76
There are the 2009 numbers.
BTW, in a Healthy relationship Men and Women cheat and do not tell there partner! The percentages of cheaters among men and women were 52% and 66% respectively.
Re: (Score:2)
I realize that nobody ever decides to catch it, but 99.8% of those cases COULD have been avoided.
Re: (Score:3)
I think your percentage is off. 30%+ are Heterosexual contact. You are assuming that all of that is from unhealthy relationships where in reality an unknown percentage is contact within a healthy relationship.
Remember, in a normal and healthy relationship men and women will cheat 52% and 66% respectively.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Since people *do* cheat, you can't prevent what you don't know about, since cheating is quite frequently...secret. So all the long term stable partners of 'cheaters' who caught HIV couldn't do anything to prevent infection.
Injection drug use - insulin is a legal form of this and certainly
Re: (Score:2)
How can insulin have anything to do with HIV? I know lots of diabetics and none of them are sharing needles. Spreading HIV through drug use should be 100% preventable. I thought drugs were expensive? Why share a cheap IV needle? Most people wouldn't share a toothbrush!
Re: (Score:2)
If only there were any evidence of that. Lifetime monogamy is not necessarily a healthy relationship. There are lots of reasons for that, not least of which being that people change, and not always positively. Moreover you are pretending the only transmission vector is sex, which is just absurd given how the pathogen actually spreads.
Re: (Score:2)
Healthy relationships would kill HIV 100%, not 90.
Have you heard of the saying about not throwing "pearls" before swine? Worldly people don't like to think of the consequences of their actions or think of relationships in terms of emotional entanglements.
I agree with you 100% but many people just don't seem to get that STDs exist as a deterrent for certain types of behaviours.
Re: (Score:2)
If you know how monogamous hetero relationships can prevent transmission from non-sexual activities could you pass that along to the proper authorities?
Re: (Score:3)
Synerg1y wrote:
Clearly you've never heard of rape. While it doesn't fall under the category of healthy relationships, it can still affect people who would otherwise only engage in healthy relationships. For that matter, a person might believe themselves to be in a healthy relationship and be deceived. The arrogant presumption implicit in your post that HIV only strikes moral degenerates is quite incorrect.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not prevalent enough to be much of an issue. What you're forgetting is that rape only spreads HIV in a subset of cases where one party has HIV already. And HIV would almost certainly have died out years ago if rape was the primary driver of new infections.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Great (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Great (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Great (Score:5, Funny)
It'll work fine if people teach it to their kids, grandkids, great grandkids and so on.
Re: (Score:2)
If there was ever a bigger whoosh....
Re:Great (Score:5, Insightful)
Abstinence will actually extinguish the whole human race from the face of the earth in only a few decades, if used widely.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Abstinence, combined with existing anti-retroviral therapies might actually extinguish HIV from the face of the earth in only a few decades, if used widely.
If you want to discuss fairy tales, similarly probable is that quantum mechanics will allow all the HIV to tunnel its way off the planet at the same moment.
Re: (Score:2)
This is slashdot... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This *is* Slashdot, so likely all three...
Re:Great (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Forced sterilization of everyone with genetic diseases pretty much means sterilization of the entire species since there is always some genetic disease in a person, hiding as a recessive gene. Just remember that when they start their little crusade to wipe out diseases.
(Disclaimer: I have Hemophilia B, Osteochondroma, and genetic predispositions to various mental disorders, which means I'm near the top of the list of peeps who'll get sterilized.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Same here.
Aunt has epillepsy, mom and uncle have hypoglycemia and type 1 diabetes respectively, dad has 3 of 4 genes for hematochromatosis (a reasonably rare condition causing the body to sequester lethal levels of iron), my sister has S protien deficiency, and my brother is sterile and has dislexia.
When it comes to the genetic lottery, I pretty much lost. (While never diagnosed, I also exhibit many signs of having fairly pronounced aspergers, but I don't feel that it inhibits my daily life. I just think ot
Re: (Score:2)
Abstinence would also... extinguish humanity from the face of the earth within only a few decades, if used widely, too!
Or did you forget that:
1) not everybody contracts aids from sex, and so it will still be able to spread via IV drug use, perinatal transmission, and nonsexual contact with the blood of infected people;
2) humans reproduce using sex;
Or did you have data to share that demonstrates that the sole cause of AIDS is losing your virginity outside of marriage?
Re: (Score:3)
IV drug use is something that people can avoid. And it's pretty unusual for folks that aren't working as EMTs, military personnel or similar to come into contact with random blood. And in the case of the military, having HIV is automatic grounds for not being allowed to enlist. I would assume that it's grounds for discharge.
As for reproduction, it's not an issue, you only need to have sex with one person for that to happen. And ultimately, if everybody did have sex with precisely one partner or had the appr
Re: (Score:2)
I would assume that it's grounds for discharge.
In 1998 in the US the answer is No. HIV is not grounds to be discharged. Heck, in the 90's you'd probably have even made it though enlistment and be HIV positive. They did make sure that they were in non critical jobs. The med requirment to keep it in check basically means you cant put them on front line duty. The GOP had a big argument about it in the 90's about trying to force the military to discharge them. I don't know what ultimatly became of that or if their rules currently apply. You're free to
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Reminded me of : "There are no more elephants. There is also no more unethical treatment of elephants." Flight of the Conchords
Re: (Score:2)
Abstinence, combined with existing anti-retroviral therapies might actually extinguish HIV from the face of the earth in only a few decades, if used widely.
Abstinence, whether-or-not combined with existing anti-retroviral therapies, might actually extinguish humanity from the face of the earth in only a few decades, if used widely enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Abstinence, if used widely enough would also wipe humans from the face of the earth in less than 10 decades.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
He's not lying. Sex with his wife is great!
Re:Great (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Can I be the one who injects people with HIV (the virus that causes AIDS) to test out their immune response?
Re: (Score:2)
popU-LAytion conTROLL (Score:2)
Why, are you a member of the world health organization?
Uncivilization! [darklyrics.com]
Re: (Score:2)
No, no, it's different than, not dufferent than.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's okay to be a little dufferent sometimes.
Re: (Score:2)
Meh, I don't care, even an AIDS epidemic can't possibly be worse than Miracle Day.
Re:10% (Score:5, Interesting)
turns out, they are not looking for you to not/get the disease, they are looking for you to develop successful antibodies. (which they can test by taking a blood sample, and infecting it and watching under a microscope).
Additionally, 90% seems to be the benchmark for a useable vaccine. For example, the final tests for some of the Polio vaccines resulted in 90%ish of the test subjects developing antibodies. After that, its basically a war of attrition on the disease.
If 90% of a population becomes immune, the chances of the disease spreading within it diminishes accordingly. Eventually, all live carriers die of old age or the disease, and no new carriers are produced, thus eliminating the disease from the population. Heck, even a 55 % successful vaccine could do this, it would just take longer.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought the "inert version of the virus" was the vaccine?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Development of MVA-B is based on the insertion of four HIV genes in a previously used vaccine (MVA) for smallpox. When injected with the vaccine, a healthy immune system can react against the MVA, whilst the HIV genes are incapable of self-replicating. This guarantees a safe clinical trial for HIV free volunteers. Furthermore by trialing the vaccine on healthy patients, the immune system can learn how to detect and combat the HIV virus components. "It is like showing a picture of the HIV so that it is able to recognize it if it sees it again in the future", says Esteban.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
It's 1/500, and the more it's studied the worse it gets. well, it's not getting worse, the number is just getting more accurate.
As an example, in 1988, they where saying 1 in 5 billion chance if you used a condom
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/04/22/us/researchers-list-odds-of-getting-aids-in-heterosexual-intercourse.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm [nytimes.com]
while other STDs have anywhere from a 10% to 50% transmission rate, AIDS is still a sexual transmitted disease.
"You probably have to have an open wound, scratch, or op
Re: (Score:3)
Thanks for that correction. "Per encounter" really does change the nature of the risk.