Researchers Discover Gene That Blocks HIV 333
stemceller writes to tell us that a team of researchers at the University of Alberta claims to have discovered a gene capable of blocking HIV thereby preventing the onset of full blown AIDS. "Stephen Barr, a molecular virologist in the Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, says his team has identified a gene called TRIM22 that can block HIV infection in a cell culture by preventing the assembly of the virus. 'When we put this gene in cells, it prevents the assembly of the HIV virus," said Barr, a postdoctoral fellow. "This means the virus cannot get out of the cells to infect other cells, thereby blocking the spread of the virus.'"
Can you say "Nobel Prize"? (Score:4, Interesting)
What?!? (Score:2, Interesting)
Press releases are useless. (Score:3, Interesting)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WXR-4KCGHS0-3&_user=18704&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000002018&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=18704&md5=f922f45405809276e69864f01d98ef4c [sciencedirect.com]
According to this study, TRIM22 is one of most ineffectual TRIM proteins.
Re:Press releases are useless. (Score:2, Interesting)
http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.ppat.0030197
Re:Holy crap! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Premature Congratulations (Score:5, Interesting)
You'd be a good person to ask this one of, then.... is there any truth to the theory that over time, humans will develop a natural immunity to HIV in the same way that cats have largely developped immunity to Feline Leukemia and FIV?
Is healthcare a right? (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's compare healthcare to food, for instance. In the civilized world, it's a nearly universal agreement, that people should have enough food to survive. Hence, the different forms of welfare programs, food stamps, etc... We provide people who are poor, with enough money or money equivalents, to obtain sufficient sustenance. We don't, however, provide them with 5-course chef-prepared meals every night.
The problem is, however, that people who flame the government and "corporations" for not providing medication for everyone, are essentially suggesting that we provide full healthcare for everyone... which equates to giving out filet mignon welfare, given the costs of many cutting edge drugs and treatments. Now I don't have a problem with the concept of this "filet mignon welfare"... except that I cannot personally afford it... and neither can you.
So as a society, we will at some point have to face the realization that we cannot provide the highest quality healthcare to every member of our society, no matter how hard we try. I wish I had the solution to this problem, but I do not. If I come up with one, I promise to share it with the world, as there is nothing more I'd like to see, than a world where the only diseases people die of, are ones for which cures and treatments haven't been discovered yet. But that's not a world of today, nor do I envision such a world in the near future.
Re:Holy crap! (Score:4, Interesting)
mnb Re:Premature Congratulations (Score:1, Interesting)
A larger but weaker campaign? (Bush)
A smaller but stronger campaign? (Clinton)
Of course the answer is "C" - a larger and unhandicapped campaign - and hopefully in twelve months we'll see one.
Re:Holy crap! (Score:5, Interesting)
We only have a small problem
Let's say it's this way. We have a patch for a flaw in your windows. Except it's on paper. And the computers won't boot until the patch is applied, so we need to take out the hard drive and *manually* change the bits on it. We have an electron microscope that *sometimes* has been used to change some random bits on the harddrive, which has once or twice resulted in a "mostly" correct change. Oh yes, and we have a billion computers, all of which still need to be operational after the change.
That's where we are. We know what to change (or so we hope), it's just
Re:Delta 32 gene marker is a natural immunity alre (Score:2, Interesting)
2. You need two copies of CCR5 delta 32 for it to truly protect someone,
3. There is evidence [sciencedaily.com]that bubonic plague could not produce the selective pressure necessary to spread CCR5 delta 32 widely, and smallpox is implicated instead.
Re:Holy crap! (Score:4, Interesting)
So you can imagine the interest in TRIM genes and proteins. Just Pubmed TRIM5alpha and you'll see many articles. TRIM22 is probably a homologue of TRIM5alpha. The article does not seem to mention anything about TRIM5alpha probably because it makes it seem like their work has already been done. See below for the original finding:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14985764?ordinalpos=110&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum [nih.gov]
Re:Fundies unite! (Score:1, Interesting)
I personally believe all sickness is a punishment on mankind for original sin, for we were immortal and perfect in the beginning. Just my belief, you may have your own.
To suggest that a human would try to block the research of a cure/vaccine for HIV because they believe it is punishment on homosexuals is absurd. That person isn't a fundamentalist, they are retarded.
Given unlimited time, human intelligence would reach GOD-like proportions. Just read the first couple chapters of Genesis. Satan told Eve just enough truth to get her to believe a lie. If we don't nuke ourselves off the map first, we will eventually cure/stop HIV.
However, history/evolution/biblical teaching all suggest that if and when we do so, another sickness will eventually arrive on the scene that is just as deadly or worse.
Re:Holy crap! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Holy crap! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Holy crap! (Score:4, Interesting)
I shouldn't have to point out the multitude of issues brought up by creating a new 'race' of humans that are immune to HIV; there are so many other things that could go wrong with slice-and-dicing the human genome that we probably won't see the tangible results of this early experiment for many, many years to come. Despite this, it is a reassuring step forward in the fight against HIV/AIDS.
Re:Is healthcare a right? (Score:0, Interesting)
Allocation of any particular resource is simply a special case of the general capital allocation problem.
So this is how it works. There's two ways to allocate resources: both have been thoroughly tested across multiple economies with wide ranges of GDP:
(1) In the first case, a central planning committee allocates available capital across research and production projects. After providing some small benefit to the effective managers who produced the profit capital, profits are then returned to the central planning committee for re-allocation.
There are two sub-cases regarding how the central planning committee allocates capital: (a) The capital is allocated with rigorous oversight with the single-minded goal of maximizing return, meaning essentially that effective managers get more capital to manage, while weak managers get less. This is controllable and highly efficient for society, and describes the massive centrally planned economies of Singapore and IBM, for example. Or (b) the capital is allocated according to some social ideology about "what is fair". This results in weak managers who adhere to ideology being rewarded, while effective managers who produce profits regardless of ideology are penalized or at best tolerated. This is highly inefficient and devastating for society. This describes the economies of Cuba and the former USSR, for example.
(2) In the second case, individual owners of capital allocate it across research and production projects with the single-minded goal of maximizing return. This results in the most effective investors getting more capital to invest, while weak investors get less. This is controllable and highly efficient for society, and incidentally is the only mechanism that can lead to the efficient centrally planned economies of (1)(a) above. This describes the economies of the USA or Western Europe, for example.
I suggest you learn the pattern: capital allocation to maximize return is efficient, and benefits society. Capital allocation for some arbitrary sense of "fairness" results in widespread poverty and despair, and is, as a rule, only suggested by those who are themselves utterly incompetent.
Cheers,
-Andrew