Using HIV to attack itself
January 21, 2013
HIV virus (credit: Wikimedia Commons)
A Queensland Institute of Medical Research (QIMR) Associate Professor David Harrich has developed a way to use HIV to beat HIV in the laboratory.
He has determined how to modify a protein in the virus, creating the the “Nullbasic” protein, which provides strong, lasting protection from infection by stopping the virus from replicating in a lab environment. Animal trials are due to start this year.
“If this research continues down its strong path, and bear in mind there are a many hurdles to clear, we’re looking at a cure for AIDS,” he said. “You would still be infected with HIV, it’s not a cure for the virus. But the virus would stay latent, it wouldn’t wake up, so it wouldn’t develop into AIDS. With a treatment like this, you would maintain a healthy immune system.”
The successful development of this type of one-off treatment would also have economic implications. HIV patients currently take a regime of drugs for the rest of their lives, which can be a significant financial burden.
Harrich has been researching HIV for thirty years, since starting as a research assistant at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) in the early 1980s when the first cases of HIV/AIDS emerged.
The research is funded by an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship.
Comments (18)
by egore
If you look into big Pharma , you will find they almost all have been sued for Billions of dollars by the Government for illegal actions. This is almost normal way for them to do business.
by W.
See this movie (The Emperor’s New Virus):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Li9MO3RfCQ
Is it true that nobody has isolated HIV virus so far? If you do, you probably win the Nobel Prize! Is this article above credible at all?
by Klaatu
Ever have the feeling many comments are kinda fake
and like these boards are being “seeded”? You think you are
seeing 2 points of view with both sides looking too
simplistic to be true. Nice typing though.
by Dr. X
QUOTE: “Soon robots and AI will obliterate the old way. ”
I would be among the first to welcome AI with intelligence comparable to humans. No human should be forced to clean washrooms or even serve hamburgers in fast food. I fail to see how such jobs could be fulfilling and satisfying. And AI that is comparable to PhD and work 24/7/365 – gosh, it is so hard to find skilled workforce around! Such AI would truly be awesome.
Nevertheless singularity is coming. It will happen way sooner then most think.
by John J.
“Little point to the exercise if you then allow big pharma to monopolize it through patents.”
While I think there’s perfectly valid concerns about what is patentable and for how long, I will point out that the profit motive for this (or any) development is super important. I would much rather live in a world where the rich can afford first treatment than one where treatments never exist at all. The second world is “more fair”, but screw that. Fairness isn’t the goal, health is.
by Amit
John,
No point in engaging in a theoretical discussion on this. Unless you are afflicted with a condition whose treatment you cannot pay for, you will live in this la-la land of “screw fairness”. Then, when you fact the same situation as hundreds of millions of poor people worldwide, you will see the light of day pretty quickly, I assure you.
by Amit
For your information, most research such as this is done by scientists who are not very well paid, for public research bodies that do not work for profit. There have been a spate of patent infringement cases in recent times where universities have sued pharma companies and asked for injunctions, as these companies use public IP which they then take on-stream and block access to the rest of the scientific world. It is not INNOVATION, it is ROBBERY.
by Mark
If Pharma replaces it’s $2000/month treatments with a ‘cure’ like this, how much will they charge for it?
by deadalus
pretty much… it fits in perfectly, its not a cure it just stops it from going full blown, still will need lifetime drugs to keep the hiv under control.. poO! ahwell lives saved are lives saved, maybe they can just live long enough to ditch the meat-bag shells and escape that way lol gotta stay positive right! im speaking for all incurable illnesses here of course…
by Amit
Little point to the exercise if you then allow big pharma to monopolize it through patents. It will then be denied to the people who need it most – poor people in Africa and Asia. Time we dismantled the big pharma racket that denies healthcare to the world’s poor.
by Dr. X
Exactly this attitude leads to to lower profit of biotech industry. pharmas are robbed dozens of billions $$$ each year through the means of “generic” drug and outright stealing of idea and technology.
That is directly leading to lower R&D spending, and MUCH lower investments into industry. Why would investor(like me) spend his own hard earned money if intellectual property at the end would be stolen by unrelated parties? This prevents many new drugs from being developed, lower competition leading to higher prices for existing drugs, and prevent multiple cures from being developed.
Ideally with you logic we should screw pharmas/biotech to the point that no drugs are developed…
by Bri
Ah yes there it is. The two competing and opposed lines of thinking. It’s a really thorny issue to think through. It’s been argued since the bogging of money. The haves and the have nots. Somebody wins, but that means that others have to lose. It automatically relegates humans into classes. A caste system of sorts. To tell you the truth it’s always been that way. If you have money you can make lots more. If you don’t, have money your options are very limited. Soon robots and AI will obliterate the old way. A classic short to ground. Can’t have a radio or TV if the electrons just short to ground. Whether we like it or not this bull fight is coming to a close. The sword is drawn and poised to strike. La fuersa brutal in all it’s glory. With blood everywhere. Yes, who will be king of the hill? Who will be superior and be the one making the killing in the bull market?
by Amit
Dr. X,
With your sort of mindset, I don’t know what you are doing here. You are clearly a “scarcity” minded person, who understands only winner-takes-all dynamics. I have nothing else to say to you.
by Editor
FYI, KurzweilAI welcomes all viewpoints and opinions, but we do block personal attacks.
by Amit
So your answer to personal attacks is fascism. Bravo.
by Barbara Blackcinder
And with your mindset corporate Pharma would hold back flu vaccine until it became profitable, no matter who it killed.
by Klaatu
Bravo to that. Straight from “Winner Take All Politics”
offering context to explain *Mr Bain* who lost b/c
“he really wasn’t interested in being president”
& also b/c the backward low information Republican
voter base forced him to lie more than usual.
by Barbara Blackcinder
dozens of billions?, and just where did the hundreds of billions go that corporate Pharma has sucked out of the rest of the world?