Monday, November 24, 2008
Micro-chipping HIV+ Patient's Dangerous
Micro chipping HIV+ patients in ANY country is a dangerous !!If goverments start doing this,WHO will want to be tested for HIV-AIDs?This can & will set the whole movement back 20 yrs.We have made huge strides in finding meds to fight the hiv virus.Sure we still have a very long way to go,but,we must keep our faith strong & our hope alive,Trust in GOD & we will survive & thrive!Being HIV+ myself,not only is this AGAINST my religeon & beliefs,(666=number of the beast hand or forhead)but i believe this is setting a dangerous precedent.We MUST NOT allow micro-chipping of anyone,let alone those suffering from HIV-Aids.Where is the compassion here?Empathy?Peoples living with hiv are our sisters & brothers,fathers,mothers,aunts & uncles,grandpa's & grandma's!Will we wage WAR on them just because they smoke weed to help stop the nasea,vomiting,pain & generally make life alot easier to live with HIV-AIDs.PEACE N LOVE NOT WARS N WALLS EH FOLS!!!
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Monday, November 10, 2008
Potential CURE For HIV-AIDs???
A First Step Toward a Cure for AIDS? Novel Procedure Appears to Have Eliminated HIV
By Jeffrey Laurence, M.D.
November 5, 2008—We need a cure for AIDS. We can’t treat our way out of this epidemic. Anti-HIV therapy is a lifelong commitment, accompanied by many life-altering and some potentially life-threatening side effects. And for every person placed on treatment, two to three are newly infected. In 2007 alone there were 2.7 million new infections, and only 31 percent of those who needed treatment received it. Viral reservoirs—cells and tissues in which HIV remains dormant, beyond the reach of anti-HIV drugs but poised to grow at any moment—persist for the life of an infected person. And while all currently available anti-HIV drugs suppress the virus, they cannot eliminate it.
Given this context, a brief report in February 2008 by a group of physicians from Germany appeared to change everything when presented as a poster at the annual Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections in Boston. It described a 40-year-old man—an American working in Berlin—whose HIV had been under good control for several years using a typical cocktail of drugs known as HAART. Then he developed acute leukemia.
In an attempt to cure the leukemia, he underwent a course of radiation therapy and chemotherapy in preparation for a stem cell transplant. But in his case, rather than simply using the best match among available stem cell donors, his physicians did something very clever. They also screened potential donors for a natural mutation known as delta32 CCR5. CCR5 is the primary means by which most types of HIV infect cells. Individuals lacking this CCR5 receptor—the 1.5 percent of the Caucasian population in America and Europe with the delta32 mutation—are completely resistant to infection by the most common forms of HIV.
The patient’s stem cell transplant was a success, although relapse of his leukemia required a second transplant using the same donor. Now off all anti-HIV drugs for almost two years, the patient continues to show no detectable signs of HIV in his blood, bone marrow, lymph nodes, intestines, or brain. To the limits of our ability to detect HIV, it appears that the virus has been eradicated from his body. At the very least this patient represents a functional cure: he is off all anti-HIV meds, has a normal T-cell count, and exhibits no evidence of virus.
amfAR quickly called together 10 experts in clinical AIDS, stem cell transplantation, and HIV virology for a two-day think tank at the MIT Endicott House to evaluate these data. The patient’s physician, Gero Hutter, presented details of the case, which were closely scrutinized by all. In a summary statement, attendees indicated that this case does indeed represent at least a functional cure. Dr. Hutter agreed to ask his patient to provide additional blood samples so that scientists attending the amfAR meeting could perform even more sensitive tests to attempt to further document that the virus has been erased from the patient. amfAR is coordinating distribution of these samples.
But amfAR’s involvement doesn’t end there. It is possible that the patient may have been cured of HIV/AIDS. But the cost of such a stem-cell transplant procedure can run up to $250,000. It is associated with a relatively high death rate from infectious and immunologic complications, and the number of delta32-CCR5 donors of appropriate tissue type would be very small. Here further research may yield key answers.
For example, it is unknown whether the use of a delta32-CCR5 donor is essential. Perhaps the transplant procedure itself was the most important element. The potential to genetically engineer stem cells to remove CCR5 from a patient’s own stem cells also exists, and strategies to do so were discussed at the think tank. These and related issues will serve as topics for an upcoming amfAR grant cycle.
Dr. Laurence is amfAR’s senior scientific
By Jeffrey Laurence, M.D.
November 5, 2008—We need a cure for AIDS. We can’t treat our way out of this epidemic. Anti-HIV therapy is a lifelong commitment, accompanied by many life-altering and some potentially life-threatening side effects. And for every person placed on treatment, two to three are newly infected. In 2007 alone there were 2.7 million new infections, and only 31 percent of those who needed treatment received it. Viral reservoirs—cells and tissues in which HIV remains dormant, beyond the reach of anti-HIV drugs but poised to grow at any moment—persist for the life of an infected person. And while all currently available anti-HIV drugs suppress the virus, they cannot eliminate it.
Given this context, a brief report in February 2008 by a group of physicians from Germany appeared to change everything when presented as a poster at the annual Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections in Boston. It described a 40-year-old man—an American working in Berlin—whose HIV had been under good control for several years using a typical cocktail of drugs known as HAART. Then he developed acute leukemia.
In an attempt to cure the leukemia, he underwent a course of radiation therapy and chemotherapy in preparation for a stem cell transplant. But in his case, rather than simply using the best match among available stem cell donors, his physicians did something very clever. They also screened potential donors for a natural mutation known as delta32 CCR5. CCR5 is the primary means by which most types of HIV infect cells. Individuals lacking this CCR5 receptor—the 1.5 percent of the Caucasian population in America and Europe with the delta32 mutation—are completely resistant to infection by the most common forms of HIV.
The patient’s stem cell transplant was a success, although relapse of his leukemia required a second transplant using the same donor. Now off all anti-HIV drugs for almost two years, the patient continues to show no detectable signs of HIV in his blood, bone marrow, lymph nodes, intestines, or brain. To the limits of our ability to detect HIV, it appears that the virus has been eradicated from his body. At the very least this patient represents a functional cure: he is off all anti-HIV meds, has a normal T-cell count, and exhibits no evidence of virus.
amfAR quickly called together 10 experts in clinical AIDS, stem cell transplantation, and HIV virology for a two-day think tank at the MIT Endicott House to evaluate these data. The patient’s physician, Gero Hutter, presented details of the case, which were closely scrutinized by all. In a summary statement, attendees indicated that this case does indeed represent at least a functional cure. Dr. Hutter agreed to ask his patient to provide additional blood samples so that scientists attending the amfAR meeting could perform even more sensitive tests to attempt to further document that the virus has been erased from the patient. amfAR is coordinating distribution of these samples.
But amfAR’s involvement doesn’t end there. It is possible that the patient may have been cured of HIV/AIDS. But the cost of such a stem-cell transplant procedure can run up to $250,000. It is associated with a relatively high death rate from infectious and immunologic complications, and the number of delta32-CCR5 donors of appropriate tissue type would be very small. Here further research may yield key answers.
For example, it is unknown whether the use of a delta32-CCR5 donor is essential. Perhaps the transplant procedure itself was the most important element. The potential to genetically engineer stem cells to remove CCR5 from a patient’s own stem cells also exists, and strategies to do so were discussed at the think tank. These and related issues will serve as topics for an upcoming amfAR grant cycle.
Dr. Laurence is amfAR’s senior scientific
Thursday, November 06, 2008
HIV Criminalization WRONG Aproach-Scaring Folks on Getting Tested!
HIV is a fearsome virus, and its effects are potentially deadly. Therefore, the justification is that public officials should be able to invoke any available and effective means to counter its spread. African lawmakers and policy-makers, in particular, have good reason to look for strong remedies. Many African countries face a massive epidemic with agonising social and economic costs and therefore reversing the spread of HIV is vital. However, I believe these reasons are entirely counter-productive and they need to be challenged, rationally, powerfully and systematically. 1. Criminalisation is ineffective as in the majority of cases, the virus spreads when two people have consensual sex, neither of them knowing that one has HIV. 2. Criminal prosecutions are a misguided substitute for measures that really protect those at risk of contracting HIV. The focus should be on ending deaths, stigma, discrimination, and suffering. 3. Far from protecting women, criminalisation victimises, oppresses and endangers them. In Africa most people who know their HIV status are female. The material circumstances in which many women find themselves – especially in Africa – make it difficult and often impossible for them to negotiate safer sex, or to discuss HIV at all. These provisions will hit women hardest, and will expose them to assault, ostracism and further stigma. They will become more vulnerable to HIV, not less. 4. Criminalisation is often unfairly and selectively enforced. Prosecutions and laws single out already vulnerable groups – like sex workers, men who have sex with men and, in European countries, black males. 5. Criminalisation places blame on one person instead of responsibility on two. For nearly three decades the universal public information message has been that no one is exempt from it. So the risk of HIV (or any sexually transmitted infection) must now be seen as an inescapable facet of having sex. It is inappropriate and unfair to place all the blame on the person with HIV. 6. Such laws are difficult and degrading to apply. This is because they intrude on the intimacy and privacy of consensual sex. No one suggests that a person knowing they have HIV, who sets out intending to infect another, and achieves their aim, ought to escape prosecution. But in cases where there is no deliberate intention, the categories and distinctions of the criminal law become fuzzy and incapable of offering clear guidance. 7. Many of these laws in existence are extremely poorly drafted. Partly because it is difficult to prove an offence that involves consensual sex, and because of the difficulties of applying the categories of the criminal law, many of these laws end up being a ‘hodge-podge’ of confused legislative intent and bad drafting. 8. Criminalisation increases stigma. It is stigma that makes those at risk of HIV reluctant to be tested; it is stigma that makes it difficult, often impossible, for them to speak about their infection; and it is stigma that continues to hinder access to the life-saving ARV therapies that are now increasingly available. Such laws and prosecutions in turn only add fuel to the fires of stigma. 9. Criminalisation is a blatant deterrent to testing. Across Africa, the life-saving drugs that suppress the virus and restore the body to health are becoming increasingly available. But why should any woman in Kenya want to find out her HIV status, when her knowledge can only expose her to risk of prosecution? The laws are not just a war on women. They are a war on all people with HIV, and they constitute an assault on good sense and rationality in dealing with the epidemic. 10. Criminalisation assumes the worst about people with HIV, and in doing so it punishes vulnerability. Evidence shows that countries with human rights laws that encourage the undiagnosed to test for HIV do much better at containing the epidemic than those that have adopted punitive, moralistic, denialist strategies, including those relying on the criminal law as a sanction. In light of all of this, the clear goal should be to fight against stigma, against discrimination, and against criminalisation – and to fight for justice, good sense, effective prevention measures and for access to treatment. HIV is a virus, not a crime. That fact is elementary, and all-important. Law-makers and prosecutors overlook it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
