Jump to content

Antibodies found that prevent HIV from causing severe AIDS


magekillr

Recommended Posts

After nearly two decades of futile searching for a vaccine against the AIDS virus, researchers are reporting the tantalizing discovery of antibodies that can prevent the virus from multiplying in the body and producing severe disease.

 

 

 

They do not have a vaccine yet, but they may well have a road map toward the production of one.

 

 

 

A team based at the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla reports today in the journal Science that they have isolated two so-called broadly neutralizing antibodies that can block the action of many strains of HIV, the virus responsible for AIDS.

 

 

 

Crucial to the discovery is the fact that the antibodies target a portion of HIV that researchers had not considered in their search for a vaccine. Moreover, the target is a relatively stable portion of the virus that does not participate in the extensive mutations that have made HIV able to escape from antiviral drugs and previous experimental vaccines.

 

 

 

"This is opening up a whole new area of science," said Dr. Seth F. Berkley, president and chief executive of the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, which funded and coordinated the research.

 

 

 

At least 33 million people worldwide are infected with HIV, and at least 25 million have died from AIDS, according to the World Health Organization. Two large trials of experimental vaccines have failed -- the most recent, in 2007, because the vaccine apparently made people more susceptible to infection.

 

 

 

To find the neutralizing antibodies, researchers collected blood samples from more than 1,800 people in Thailand, Australia and Africa who had been infected with HIV for at least three years without the infection proceeding to severe disease. Such individuals are most likely to produce antibodies that interfere with the replication of the virus.

 

 

 

Researchers at Monogram Biosciences in South San Francisco studied the samples most resistant to infection, then a team from Theraclone Sciences in Seattle isolated the antibodies responsible for the resistance.

 

 

 

They ultimately isolated two antibodies, called PG9 and PG16, from one African patient. The antibodies were able to block the activity of about three-quarters of the 162 separate strains of HIV they tested it against.

 

 

 

Immunologist Dennis Burton of Scripps and his colleagues then showed that the antibodies bind to regions of two proteins on the surface of the virus, called gp120 and gp41, that help the virus invade cells. These regions had never before been considered as targets for vaccines.

 

 

 

Researchers still have a long way to go to produce a vaccine, however.

 

 

 

The antibodies themselves could potentially be used as a treatment for infected patients who develop severe disease.

 

 

 

But the long-term hope is to find molecules, either synthetic or natural, that can stimulate the body to produce the broadly neutralizing antibodies. Such molecules could potentially be the basis for a successful vaccine.

 

 

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld ... 0223.story

 

 

 

I'm not sure what this means, how much is being sensationalized and stuff, but this sounds like a really big deal at face value. I'll await the talk over at scienceblogs.com .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd hope it would work. It's been too long since any real headway was made on this issue. I do remember a really great solution for the AIDS problem in Africa though: Stop screwing so much. :P

This website and its contents are copyright © 1999 - 2010 Jagex Ltd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all technicality, we all have the ability to fight the HIV virus, and thus, we could stop AIDs. Unfortunately though, HIV is a constantly evolving virus, and for our body to make an antibody for it, is rather impossible cause once it comes up with a solution, the virus changes.

mergedliongr0xe9.gif

Sig by Ikurai

Your Guide to Posting! Behave or I will send my Moose mounted Beaver launchers at you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should also remember that AIDS is primarily a behavior driven disease. There are many ways to reduce your exposure to HIV.

 

 

 

Maybe we should ask magic Johnson how he did it because he's a decade plus with HIV and still looks great?

This website and its contents are copyright © 1999 - 2010 Jagex Ltd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In simpler words: people are going nuts (again) about an HIV vaccine possibility. As we all know, HIV is constantly mutating and thus no single vaccine could eradicate the disease &c. So scientists look for a common trait found in every strain of the disease and try targeting it. I thought of this when I was 14, yet people think these scientists are geniuses for thinking "out of the box". Why do people go "OMG I WOULD NEVER HAVE THOUGHT OF TARGETING A NON FATAL PART OF THE STRAIN" when that's a perfectly logical thing to do? If someone is pointing a gun at you, you don't necessarily have to hit the gun out of his hands - you can shoot/stab/kick a non lethal part of him like his legs or something. People go wild when they hear scientists look for a cure for HIV found originally in Nature, and wonder how scientists could ever have thought doing such a thing "it's so smart!". Yet there's an entire freaking field of science (bio mimicry) that does exactly that. If I know all this stuff, surely scientists worldwide should too? I'm sure these scientists have been looking for a cure and finding one, just like the one found in the above article, for decades. Then the media labels it as a new type of cure when it's just the same [bleep]ing thing over and over and over again. Oh, you found an antibody that naturally resists AIDS? DURP DURP DURP NO [cabbage]. IT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE, GENIUSES

 

 

 

i'll stop now. i'm just hot and angry. I stop making sense when I start swearing anyways.

hiccup.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an auto-immune disease which are always nasty and rarely have any good treatment for them. And I don't think there are actually *cures* to any auto immune disease.

This website and its contents are copyright © 1999 - 2010 Jagex Ltd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In simpler words: people are going nuts (again) about an HIV vaccine possibility. As we all know, HIV is constantly mutating and thus no single vaccine could eradicate the disease &c. So scientists look for a common trait found in every strain of the disease and try targeting it. I thought of this when I was 14, yet people think these scientists are geniuses for thinking "out of the box". Why do people go "OMG I WOULD NEVER HAVE THOUGHT OF TARGETING A NON FATAL PART OF THE STRAIN" when that's a perfectly logical thing to do? If someone is pointing a gun at you, you don't necessarily have to hit the gun out of his hands - you can shoot/stab/kick a non lethal part of him like his legs or something. People go wild when they hear scientists look for a cure for HIV found originally in Nature, and wonder how scientists could ever have thought doing such a thing "it's so smart!". Yet there's an entire freaking field of science (bio mimicry) that does exactly that. If I know all this stuff, surely scientists worldwide should too? I'm sure these scientists have been looking for a cure and finding one, just like the one found in the above article, for decades. Then the media labels it as a new type of cure when it's just the same [bleep] thing over and over and over again. Oh, you found an antibody that naturally resists AIDS? DURP DURP DURP NO [cabbage]. IT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE, GENIUSES

 

 

 

i'll stop now. i'm just hot and angry. I stop making sense when I start swearing anyways.

 

 

 

I figured as much, and I know this topic has been reported on here before in the past. Thus, I figured I'd go back to that can of worms to see if this was actually anything different/waiting for someone over at the blogs to dissect it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well it's definitely interesting, I'm going to read up about it, but it's been done before. My problem is that the media keeps saying it's a new discovery and that there is finally hope for a cure, and shove that down everyone's throat. They talk about how scientists are thinking out of the box when their minds have been inside for decades. Every new approach reported has probably been tested before... the scientists studying AIDS for the past decade weren't just standing around picking their noses.

hiccup.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an auto-immune disease which are always nasty and rarely have any good treatment for them. And I don't think there are actually *cures* to any auto immune disease.
An auto-immune disease is when the immune system of an organism goes berzerk and attacks the organism's own tissue. Being infected with a virus that kills of your immune system so a common cold kills you ain't quite the same thing. The fact that viral infections are by and large untreatable via chemicals - anti-virals are nowhere near as awesome in their killing power as penicillin on bacterial infections - still makes viral infections very dangerous, but uncureable is a bit of a stretch.

-This message was deviously brought to you by: mischief1at.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In simpler words: people are going nuts (again) about an HIV vaccine possibility. As we all know, HIV is constantly mutating and thus no single vaccine could eradicate the disease &c. So scientists look for a common trait found in every strain of the disease and try targeting it. I thought of this when I was 14, yet people think these scientists are geniuses for thinking "out of the box". Why do people go "OMG I WOULD NEVER HAVE THOUGHT OF TARGETING A NON FATAL PART OF THE STRAIN" when that's a perfectly logical thing to do? If someone is pointing a gun at you, you don't necessarily have to hit the gun out of his hands - you can shoot/stab/kick a non lethal part of him like his legs or something. People go wild when they hear scientists look for a cure for HIV found originally in Nature, and wonder how scientists could ever have thought doing such a thing "it's so smart!". Yet there's an entire freaking field of science (bio mimicry) that does exactly that. If I know all this stuff, surely scientists worldwide should too? I'm sure these scientists have been looking for a cure and finding one, just like the one found in the above article, for decades. Then the media labels it as a new type of cure when it's just the same [bleep] thing over and over and over again. Oh, you found an antibody that naturally resists AIDS? DURP DURP DURP NO [cabbage]. IT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE, GENIUSES

 

 

 

i'll stop now. i'm just hot and angry. I stop making sense when I start swearing anyways.

 

I'm sure scientists with PhDs know much much more than some kid on a runescape forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In simpler words: people are going nuts (again) about an HIV vaccine possibility. As we all know, HIV is constantly mutating and thus no single vaccine could eradicate the disease &c. So scientists look for a common trait found in every strain of the disease and try targeting it. I thought of this when I was 14, yet people think these scientists are geniuses for thinking "out of the box". Why do people go "OMG I WOULD NEVER HAVE THOUGHT OF TARGETING A NON FATAL PART OF THE STRAIN" when that's a perfectly logical thing to do? If someone is pointing a gun at you, you don't necessarily have to hit the gun out of his hands - you can shoot/stab/kick a non lethal part of him like his legs or something. People go wild when they hear scientists look for a cure for HIV found originally in Nature, and wonder how scientists could ever have thought doing such a thing "it's so smart!". Yet there's an entire freaking field of science (bio mimicry) that does exactly that. If I know all this stuff, surely scientists worldwide should too? I'm sure these scientists have been looking for a cure and finding one, just like the one found in the above article, for decades. Then the media labels it as a new type of cure when it's just the same [bleep] thing over and over and over again. Oh, you found an antibody that naturally resists AIDS? DURP DURP DURP NO [cabbage]. IT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE, GENIUSES

 

 

 

i'll stop now. i'm just hot and angry. I stop making sense when I start swearing anyways.

 

I'm sure scientists with PhDs know much much more than some kid on a runescape forum.

 

Don't flame down his argument when you can't prove anything yourself kiddo. He knows more than you do.

My relaxation method involves a bottle of lotion, beautiful women, and partial nudity. Yes I get massages.

 

ojdv.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure scientists with PhDs know much much more than some kid on a runescape forum.

 

He has his point and it's strongly fueled by the fact that the media blows stuff out of proportion for viewers. If any of you actually read any top science magazines/journals, you'd realize the amount of crap that the media chooses to and not to publicize. It's ridiculous, and disgusting.

 

 

 

As well, it asks me why they didn't try this 'part' of the virus, by now I'd have hoped everything about the virus had been detailed. Media skips part of the story again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In simpler words: people are going nuts (again) about an HIV vaccine possibility. As we all know, HIV is constantly mutating and thus no single vaccine could eradicate the disease &c. So scientists look for a common trait found in every strain of the disease and try targeting it. I thought of this when I was 14, yet people think these scientists are geniuses for thinking "out of the box". Why do people go "OMG I WOULD NEVER HAVE THOUGHT OF TARGETING A NON FATAL PART OF THE STRAIN" when that's a perfectly logical thing to do? If someone is pointing a gun at you, you don't necessarily have to hit the gun out of his hands - you can shoot/stab/kick a non lethal part of him like his legs or something. People go wild when they hear scientists look for a cure for HIV found originally in Nature, and wonder how scientists could ever have thought doing such a thing "it's so smart!". Yet there's an entire freaking field of science (bio mimicry) that does exactly that. If I know all this stuff, surely scientists worldwide should too? I'm sure these scientists have been looking for a cure and finding one, just like the one found in the above article, for decades. Then the media labels it as a new type of cure when it's just the same [bleep] thing over and over and over again. Oh, you found an antibody that naturally resists AIDS? DURP DURP DURP NO [cabbage]. IT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE, GENIUSES

 

 

 

i'll stop now. i'm just hot and angry. I stop making sense when I start swearing anyways.

 

I'm sure scientists with PhDs know much much more than some kid on a runescape forum.

 

Don't flame down his argument when you can't prove anything yourself kiddo. He knows more than you do.

 

My point is the scientists working on combating HIV know 1000x more than anyone here so that massive essay about how he figured out how to cure HIV was pointless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wtb career where I get paid 180k a year to soak up private funds and then release faint promises of hope whenever my contract is up?

Untitled.png

My heart is broken by the terrible loss I have sustained in my old friends and companions and my poor soldiers. Believe me, nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won. -Sir Arthur Wellesley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wtb career where I get paid 180k a year to soak up private funds and then release faint promises of hope whenever my contract is up?

 

Oh and this too.

 

 

 

So let's see what's the motivation behind trying to find a cure:

 

 

 

Well most are funded by private companies, aka as pharmaceutical companies. How many conspiracies there?

 

 

 

So back to the money, what happens when the thousands of scientists trying to find a cure finally don't need to anymore? Where does this large mass of biology majored scientists go? Pretty much nowhere.

 

 

 

I can see why there may be 'delays' in the progress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So back to the money, what happens when the thousands of scientists trying to find a cure finally don't need to anymore? Where does this large mass of biology majored scientists go? Pretty much nowhere.

 

 

 

I can see why there may be 'delays' in the progress.

 

To cure other diseases? Ridiculous conspiracy theory

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure scientists with PhDs know much much more than some kid on a runescape forum.

 

I'm definitely sure they know more than me. And I'm not angry at scientists... i'm angry at the media. Maybe read my post again...? I don't see why you're getting all hostile on me.

 

 

 

Anyways, it's not the scientists' fault there has been no cure to AIDs yet. If a post-doc wants a grant, they need to convince whoever they're asking for money that their plan will work and support further research. Anybody with a "sort of good idea" that could work, but the idea would be too out of the box to get funds. It pretty much kills off any creative ideas being brought to the table by post-docs (the youngest scientists).

hiccup.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We talked about this in my Bioethics class on Friday.

 

 

 

Frankly, I don't get my hopes up on HIV/AIDS breakthroughs anymore. There seems to be a "major break" in the area every year and it always turns out to be a flop or you never hear an update on it again.

 

 

 

I do hope that one day a cure is found, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

sig2-1.png

Last.Fm

 

My Bloggy

 

Proud to have served on Tip.it Crew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.