Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Canada Medicine Science

HIV Vaccine Approval For Human Trials 365

Posted by Soulskill
from the who's-feeling-lucky dept.
An anonymous reader writes with news that researchers from the University of Western Ontario have been given approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to begin testing an HIV vaccine in humans. From the article: "The vaccine is the first based on a genetically modified killed whole virus, [researchers said.] ... a clinical trial on 40 HIV-positive volunteers will begin next month. That phase will last a year, after which 600 HIV-negative volunteers will see how the vaccine impacts their immune systems. A final phase, which will take about three years, will involve about 6,000 HIV-negative volunteers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

HIV Vaccine Approval For Human Trials

Comments Filter:
  • by burning-toast (925667) on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @05:23PM (#38441126)

    I hope this vaccine is as effective as the smallpox and polio vaccines have been. The world would do well to be rid of this particularly crafty and deadly virus. It is also a whole lot easier to introduce vaccination programs into third world countries (which counts as medicinal treatment) which would otherwise have severe religious problems with contraceptives like condoms (which counts as interfering with "God's work").

    - Toast

    • by Desler (1608317) on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @05:25PM (#38441164)

      But it might cause autism in Jenny McCarthy's future kid!

      • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @05:43PM (#38441414)

        That whole boondoggle is the perfect example of why you shouldn't take your kids to a doctor with an ax to grind. It turns out that after they took her kid to a real doctor, they found out he had Landau-Kleffner syndrome [wikipedia.org]. Even she doesn't claim that vaccines cause autism anymore, now it is just a general "we need to study vaccines for safety" and "we need to study causes and treatments of autism." Of course, that news didn't get anywhere near the attention the idea that it did cause autism got because it doesn't fit the loons message.

        • by Zemran (3101) on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @10:55PM (#38444220) Homepage Journal

          If you are offered a drug that has a 90% chance of saving your life and a 1% chance of giving you a life threatening side affect, would you take it? I do think that with these things we should be given the choice. If I am in a strong loving relationship, would I want to take the 1% risk with an AIDS vaccine? My choice, do I really trust my partner? If I am playing around, would I want to risk not taking the vaccine...

          All drugs have a risk as does all surgery. If you get taken into hospital next month for a life saving operation, there is a very small chance that the surgery will kill you. If the chance that not having the surgery will kill you is greater then you have the surgery.

          The MMR vaccine has risks associated with it but the benefits far outweigh those risks and in my opinion those parents who do not vaccinate their children are not responsible parents.

      • by medv4380 (1604309) on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @05:44PM (#38441430)
        Can it be modified to cause autism in Jenny McCarthy?
      • by arthurpaliden (939626) on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @09:36PM (#38443666)
        She has now admitted that her kid never really had autism. He is being treated for what he really has and is responding well. Funny that when this came out it never got much press.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Don't worry, once HIV goes the was of Smallpox and Polio, there will be an even more deadly infectious disease to fill the void. People keep forgetting that mother nature isn't just sitting on her ass while our scientists are working hard coming up with vaccines. SARS and Swine Flu where probably some of her clinical trials for her new disease. =P

    • by Guppy (12314)

      I hope this vaccine is as effective as the smallpox and polio vaccines have been.

      It's a technically sophisticated piece of work. But as someone who has previously worked on an HIV vaccine, I don't see any indications they've solved the fundamental problems that have dogged all previous attempts. With the exception of a very small number of "elite controller" individuals, the adaptive immune system just simply does not seem to be capable of handling this particular virus.

  • by Rix (54095) on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @05:27PM (#38441200)

    You can even have another Toronto paper [thestar.com] if you like.

  • A brighter future? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by willaien (2494962) on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @05:29PM (#38441226)

    Good to hear that this is going forward. Hopefully, this will lead to a brighter future for Africa.

    I worry about the health of the participants, but, HIV isn't a death sentence anymore. I would volunteer for the trial, assuming that, in the worst case, they cover my medical expenses and anti-retrovirals to control it.

    It would be worth it.

    • by SuricouRaven (1897204) on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @05:32PM (#38441254)
      HIV isn't a death sentence for the well-off. Treating it requires a cocktail of antivirals, all of them very expensive, plus frequent tests to see when the drugs need swapping out as the virus evolves. The drugs themselves have some unpleasant side effects too.
    • by geekmux (1040042)

      Good to hear that this is going forward. Hopefully, this will lead to a brighter future for Africa.

      I worry about the health of the participants, but, HIV isn't a death sentence anymore. I would volunteer for the trial, assuming that, in the worst case, they cover my medical expenses and anti-retrovirals to control it.

      It would be worth it.

      Ah, if you think covering your medical expenses while toying with an unproven vaccine is your "worst case" here, then perhaps you should really sit back and re-think this, no matter where your ethics lie.

      Trust me, I commend you for stepping forward for the betterment of all mankind, but realistically your life is on the line here, not your bills. In theory you could end up better...or worse, and any "controls" put in place would likely be questionable at best.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @05:32PM (#38441258)

    This isn't just positive news, its HIV positive.

  • Just curious (Score:5, Insightful)

    by iceaxe (18903) on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @05:34PM (#38441280) Journal

    Why does a Canadian University need approval from the U.S. FDA?

    • Re:Just curious (Score:5, Insightful)

      by gman003 (1693318) on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @05:44PM (#38441428)

      I assume it's because they want to run the trials in the United States. I imagine there's practical reasons for that - the US is a pretty significant pharma market, and anything denied there is quite likely to be blocked in other countries, whereas Canada is a smaller country (11% the size of the US by population) that's not as critical for a pharmaceutical company to sell in.

      • by iceaxe (18903)

        That makes sense too, given that there's really no distinction between University research and corporate R&D. The ethics of that situation is another topic altogether.

      • by TubeSteak (669689)

        I assume it's because they want to run the trials in the United States. ... and anything denied there is quite likely to be blocked in other countries

        Say what now?
        There are plenty of trials that are run in Europe or Asia (India) to test out drugs that make their way to the US market.
        More relevant to the discussion are the large number of drugs that are approved in Europe and banned in the USA.

        The FDA has historically been criticized for not approving many drugs and it's only this year that the FDA has sped things up.
        The medical device industry has been especially critical of the FDA & has been focusing more on Europe where regulatory approval is fast

    • by zill (1690130)
      Probably because the clinical trial will be conducted in the US.

      A Korean pharmaceutical company developing a vaccine in its Canadian subsidiary and then conducting clinical trial in the US.
    • by mark-t (151149) <markt@l y n x . b c .ca> on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @06:28PM (#38442066) Journal
      Canadians are smart enough to not volunteer for something like this. [duck]
  • by geekoid (135745) <`moc.oohay' `ta' `dnaltropnidad'> on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @05:49PM (#38441504) Homepage Journal

    delivers the goods.

    Seeing aids go from you are going to die, to testing a vaccine in 25 years is freaknig awesome.

  • "Well, none of them got HIV, if that's what you're asking."
  • Killed whole virus means whole virus if mistakes are made. I had a co-worker who spent several weeks in the hospital several decades ago that got shot with a still "hot" vaccine. Oops.

Nothing happens.

Working...