|
|
Post by Shamino Warhen Ph.D on Oct 31, 2007 20:20:12 GMT 1
With the latest advances in treatment, doctors have discovered that they can successfully neutralize the HIV virus. The so-called ‘combination therapy’ prevents the HIV virus from mutating and spreading, allowing patients to rebuild their immune system to the same levels as the rest of the population. To date, it represents the most significant treatment for patients suffering from HIV. Professor Jens Lundgren from the University of Copenhagen, together with other members of the research group EuroSIDA, have conducted a study, which demonstrates that the immune system of all HIV-infected patients can be restored and normalised. The only stipulation is that patients begin and continue to follow their course of treatment. HIV attacks the body’s ability to counteract virusesViruses are small organisms that have no independent metabolism. Consequently, when they enter the body they attack living cells and adopt their metabolism. The influenza virus occupies cells in the nose, throat and lungs; the mumps attaches itself to the salivary glands of the ear; while the Polio virus plays on the intestinal tract, blood and salivary glands. In all these instances, our immune system attacks and eliminates the invading virus. HIV is so deadly because the virus attaches itself to a crucial part of the immune system itself: to the so-called CD4+T lymphocytes, which are white blood corpuscles that help the immune system to fight infections. The Hi-virus forms and invades new CD4+T-lymphocytes. Slowly but surely, the number of healthy CD4+T lymphocytes in the blood fall, while HIV relentlessly weakens the body’s ability to defend itself from infection. Finally, the immune system erodes to such an extent that the infected patient is diagnosed with AIDS. The Hi-virus mutates constantly as it forms and this is why, scientists face a constant battle to find a cure or a vaccine. Combination therapy knocks out HIVCombination therapy prevents the virus from forming and mutating in human beings. When the virus is halted in its progress, the number of healthy CD4+T cells begins to rise and patients, who would otherwise die from HIV, can now survive. The immune system is rejuvenated and is apparently able to normalise itself, providing that the combination therapy is maintained. The moment the immune system begins to improve, the HIV-infected patient can no longer be said to be suffering from an HIV infection or disease, already declining in strength. Findings from the study are published in the medical journal The Lancet - Vol. 370, Issue 9585, 4 August 2007, Pages 407-413 EuroSIDA Copenhagen HIV PROGRAMME Institute for Othopedics and Internal Medicine/University of Copenhagen www.ku.dk/english/news/?content=http://www.ku.dk/english/news/hiv_eurosida.htm |
|
|
|
Post by Auroth on Oct 31, 2007 22:04:46 GMT 1
OMG!
BY THE VIRTUES OF SCIENCE! WE HAVE CURED ANOTHER DEADLY DISEASE!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by kai on Oct 31, 2007 23:20:26 GMT 1
Too bad only the ultra-rich will get any of the cure.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Smith on Nov 1, 2007 0:13:30 GMT 1
Let's be pessimestic about this!!! Totally awesome style there Kai...
Small notice: Since this was developed in Denmark (I believe I read that somewhere?) then the hospitals in Denmark might get it quickly. And we got a free health care system here. So, it's free for everyone. Yay!
Humanity: 1: Aids/HIV: 5123^12
We're kicking its ass!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by victor on Nov 1, 2007 0:35:23 GMT 1
Okay, I'm a little skeptical on this. HIV is difficult enough of a disease. Chances are in our lifetime the best we will be able to achieve is being able to catch the disease in it's earliest stages and prevent the virus from developing any further so that the patient can still live a full life and die a natural death, but they would have to take medication and/or get regular therapy to maintain the virus in it's frozen state.
And even if this stuff does work Shamino, what if the treatment causes some harmful side affect in the long run? We don't know if it would be minor or severe, so it would be risky for everyone with HIV to just try this.
Also, the page says it won't be displayed for some reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Smith on Nov 1, 2007 0:58:07 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by Leon Loire on Nov 1, 2007 0:59:27 GMT 1
If I had a choice between suffering death by the results of AIDS and to take a risk and beat HIV before it becomes AIDS, I think there would be no question in my head; I'm gonna take that risk, because if there is a greater consequence, at least I'll have done something.
And Combination Therapy has been around for quite a long while now, and it's become open to those who are Middle Class citizens across the Industrialized world. It's been the reason why the death of AIDS has declined in those who are diagnosed. And now that it might be possible that it could actually defeat HIV, I think that's a great piece of information.
I was starting to wonder where all that money was going... glad to see it was worth it.
In any case, while this doesn't solve Africa's problem, this certainly saves someone. So to hell with the cautiousness and the pessimism, I'm glad to see some bit of good news is floating around these days.
|
|
|
|
Post by victor on Nov 1, 2007 1:19:41 GMT 1
Very good point Leon. Now we just need to worry about finding a way to raise enough funding and find enough people so we can extend the treatment to Africa, and I'm being serious on that.
|
|
Vince
Dreamer
Junior
Posts: 117
|
Post by Vince on Nov 1, 2007 1:56:11 GMT 1
Or you know, tell them to stop spreading a disease that they could easily contain.
Or we could raise lots of money and help them instead of having them help themselves.
What's that phrase about teaching someone to fish instead of giving them a fish?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kazuki Akimoto on Nov 1, 2007 2:04:37 GMT 1
$10'000 for treatment to negate life-threatening virus.
$2 in bar bathroom for condom.
....
The choice, my friends, is yours.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shamino Warhen Ph.D on Nov 1, 2007 2:33:06 GMT 1
There is a group of people dedicated to spreading HIV to homosexual and heterosexual men and women for the sole purpouse of ruining their lives. A lot of people get HIV by bad blood donations, donating blood, third world hygiene (lack of it) etc etc.. Its not just a STD.
Its 16 years too late in my opinion, Freddy Mercury's already dead.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kei on Nov 1, 2007 3:26:25 GMT 1
If I had a choice between suffering death by the results of AIDS and to take a risk and beat HIV before it becomes AIDS, I think there would be no question in my head; I'm gonna take that risk, because if there is a greater consequence, at least I'll have done something. Well said. -- Its 16 years too late in my opinion, Freddy Mercury's already dead. Ow. That actually got me a little down, bro. -- It's always a good thing when a progression in medicine is made, and I hope that it'll only soar to positive heights. Only thing concerning me now is this "superbug" going around this area (Staff disease I think it's called?)... but that's for another time. ~Manuel |
|
|
|
Post by Kazuki Akimoto on Nov 1, 2007 3:40:58 GMT 1
A lot of people get HIV by bad blood donations, donating blood, third world hygiene (lack of it) etc etc.. Its not just a STD. Y'see, the third world issue, I accept that given the stats on that, however.... Bad transfusions are remarkably rare. The odds of it are so slim these days it's almost negligible as a result of all the infections people freak out about. (In the developed world anyway) Donating blood, the risk of contracting is virtually minimal from a reputable clinic. Hermetically sealed needles are about as safe as you get, and again, because of the paranoia regarding the virus, 99.9% of places use them. Not to beat the old adage that 'gays=AIDS' (partly because it's a horrible thought-pattern), but it's a sad fact that nearly half of HIV cases are transmitted from male-male sexual contact. Hetero contact (in high risk conditions i.e multiple partners, no pre-emptive measures) only accounts for around 17%, and less than a single percent from blood donations. Before anyone starts a flame, my info comes from North America, not Africa. I've already acknowledged that the virus is much more easily spread there through blood. |
|
|
|
Post by victor on Nov 1, 2007 3:44:30 GMT 1
Even more sad is how people who are anti-gay use the whole HIV thing that Taiku pointed out to bash gays and say how homosexuality is wrong. Great, now I'm depressed...
|
|
|
|
Post by Shamino Warhen Ph.D on Nov 1, 2007 5:08:52 GMT 1
Homosexuals shouldn't take crystal meth and have unprotected sex with random guys.
Its easy not to get HIV if you're a homosexual- have your partner tested, or wear protection no matter what. Don't go into clubs and fuck any gay guy you can find.
|
|
|
|
Post by Director Troutman on Nov 2, 2007 0:25:03 GMT 1
Homosexuals shouldn't take crystal meth and have unprotected sex with random guys Fix'd. |
|
|
|
Post by Shamino Warhen Ph.D on Nov 2, 2007 2:49:42 GMT 1
Homosexuals shouldn't take crystal meth and have unprotected sex with random guys Fix'd. Not really. Young homosexuals are proven to be more prone to the drug crystal meth, and far more prone to HIV than ever. The party scene is ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Post by victor on Nov 2, 2007 4:13:21 GMT 1
What I'm curious about is how HIV and AIDS came to be. True, the only way to get HIV is through sex, sharing needles, or sharing blood (among other ways), but where did the whole thing start so long ago? The disease had to have come up somewhere in history before somebody had sex and passed it on to another, right? How did it just pop up?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dain Gavyns on Nov 2, 2007 4:31:10 GMT 1
What I'm curious about is how HIV and AIDS came to be. True, the only way to get HIV is through sex, sharing needles, or sharing blood (among other ways), but where did the whole thing start so long ago? The disease had to have come up somewhere in history before somebody had sex and passed it on to another, right? How did it just pop up? Tee hee. Anyway, this looks like a job for WIKIPEDIA!!!!! (but i'm on a cell phone whilst in the bathroom, so someone else look it up.) |
|
|
|
Post by Shamino Warhen Ph.D on Nov 2, 2007 4:50:37 GMT 1
What I'm curious about is how HIV and AIDS came to be. True, the only way to get HIV is through sex, sharing needles, or sharing blood (among other ways), but where did the whole thing start so long ago? The disease had to have come up somewhere in history before somebody had sex and passed it on to another, right? How did it just pop up? Its expected the disease came to America in the very late 1950's from Haiti, and the person whom had it was actually an employee from Africa (which was common in Haiti during the time). HOW that person gave to another no one knows for sure. |
|
