Official Soldat Forums
Misc => The Lounge => Topic started by: Centurion on May 18, 2010, 03:09:23 pm
-
Afaik you are already able to cut the DNA into pieces and put in other pieces of DNA, too. It has been developed for ages now to fight HIV.
Sorry Esp, I just had to reply to this.
Well, they can cut DNA into pieces and match them with other pieces but I guess they're not successful at implanting it in a fetus, I doubt there are babies who are born with modified DNA.
It might be possible to create cure for HIV by using that method but you can't really create super soldiers with modified DNA, yet?
-
The problem with HIV is that it's highly adaptive. I doubt we will be able to cure HIV with something that doesn't constantly adapt to counter HIV as it mutates. The problem with that is that the cure then has the potential to be as, or more dangerous than the affliction. A wolf that has run out of deer to eat will go for man.
We do not have sufficient knowledge of the Human genome to know how to produce enhanced traits. Even if we did, it's a huge ethical issue to produce such an enhanced Human.
-
There are already individuals who naturally suppress HIV and therefore never develop AIDS, scientists have also already identified the genes responsible for this change. Gene therapy (in which someone is given genes after birth) and other forms of genetic engineering (in which genes are changed in an egg before birth) have also been successful. But there are still many problems and, as yet, nobody has used genetic engineering to cure AIDS (afaik).
There is a different form of therapy for HIV that is being explored, though. All it takes is a bone marrow transplant from an HIV-immune individual to someone with HIV.
-
I reckon genetic enhancements will be part of our reality before too long, like it or not. It has absolutely huge potential, and it seems obvious that those who can afford it will take advantage of it, once it becomes a viable and risk free option. I would.
That being said, we've reached a level of scientific know-how that I personally think we'd be better served without. Genetic enhancement is no different, but we have no choice but to roll with it. Give your kid an increased mind for math, or enable him to have a better understanding of language. Increase his IQ, his physical adaptation, his resistance to stress or sickness, or even the value of his sperm.. all this before he or she is even born. Who can fight such a landscape?
-
There are already individuals who naturally suppress HIV and therefore never develop AIDS, scientists have also already identified the genes responsible for this change. Gene therapy (in which someone is given genes after birth) and other forms of genetic engineering (in which genes are changed in an egg before birth) have also been successful. But there are still many problems and, as yet, nobody has used genetic engineering to cure AIDS (afaik).
There is a different form of therapy for HIV that is being explored, though. All it takes is a bone marrow transplant from an HIV-immune individual to someone with HIV.
I stand corrected. That's pretty fantastic.
Do you have links or stuff I can do follow up reading on this [HIV suppression]?
-
Google "HIV marrow transplant".
-
There are already individuals who naturally suppress HIV and therefore never develop AIDS, scientists have also already identified the genes responsible for this change. Gene therapy (in which someone is given genes after birth) and other forms of genetic engineering (in which genes are changed in an egg before birth) have also been successful. But there are still many problems and, as yet, nobody has used genetic engineering to cure AIDS (afaik).
There is a different form of therapy for HIV that is being explored, though. All it takes is a bone marrow transplant from an HIV-immune individual to someone with HIV.
I stand corrected. That's pretty fantastic.
Do you have links or stuff I can do follow up reading on this [HIV suppression]?
except that bone marrow transplants aren't safe, since your body can reject it, and thus you die...
I think atleast ;o
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_denialism
HIV is a lie ^_^
-
I don't think so.
-
except that bone marrow transplants aren't safe, since your body can reject it, and thus you die...
I think atleast ;o
You should really think more; HIV kills. I'd much rather take the chance to be cured than be afraid of the possible complications that might occur and die sick after some time.
-
except that bone marrow transplants aren't safe, since your body can reject it, and thus you die...
I think atleast ;o
You should really think more; HIV kills. I'd much rather take the chance to be cured than be afraid of the possible complications that might occur and die sick after some time.
Do you even know a difference between HIV and AIDS? HIV can't kill :-S
And btw it's possible to live your whole life with HIV and nothing will happen... :-S
Visit a link I posted.
-
Yeah I do know that one of them leads to another and the latter is fatal. Apparently I got mixed up with ze names but my point still stands.
-
except that bone marrow transplants aren't safe, since your body can reject it, and thus you die...
I think atleast ;o
Yep. The mortality rate is about one in ten. This: "All it takes is a bone marrow transplant..." was sarcasm. :)
-
Yeah I do know that one of them leads to another and the latter is fatal. Apparently I got mixed up with ze names but my point still stands.
Nope, you don't know. HIV is a virus, AIDS is a syndrome. Usually AIDS is not caused by HIV.
AIDS is curable.
-
OK
In that case I have been horribly misinformed and am now much wiser than I was five hours ago. The finest part, however, is that I am both AIDS and HIV free.
-
Does it matter? Get the back on topic, guys!
-
except that bone marrow transplants aren't safe, since your body can reject it, and thus you die...
I think atleast ;o
You should really think more; HIV kills. I'd much rather take the chance to be cured than be afraid of the possible complications that might occur and die sick after some time.
Well, not really. You'll live more 20+ years. If you wouldn't take any medicines HIV can go away.
That's in case if it exists.
But really I'd suggest to go and check if you have anything else. Candidiasis, Salmonellosis, HERPES, Lymphoma, cancer (only cervix one I guess, lol). That's only a part, is there a list of everything that can cause HIV positive test?
From: May 19, 2010, 04:31:12 pm
Does it matter? Get the back on topic, guys!
And what's the topic?
Allow to cure nonexistent virus or not? :D
Definitely not.
-
Oh, my bad. I thought the thread was on gene enhancement as a concept, with HIV not being a sub topic. Carry on, gents, though I doubt it'll take you anywhere.
-
What we known for a fact is that we are moving forward, and through this progression I'm sure that a cure for AIDS, and HIV will come. Hell, they are already talking cancer by using nanobots, well, at least in progress that is.
Here is an article from 2005, and I'm sure they are perfected this method since.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4734507.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4734507.stm)
-
What we known for a fact is that we are moving forward, and through this progression I'm sure that a cure for AIDS, and HIV will come. Hell, they are already talking cancer by using nanobots, well, at least in progress that is.
Here is an article from 2005, and I'm sure they are perfected this method since.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4734507.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4734507.stm)
umm.. not sure if you can classify nanotubes as nanobots Oo
-
Yeah I do know that one of them leads to another and the latter is fatal. Apparently I got mixed up with ze names but my point still stands.
Nope, you don't know. HIV is a virus, AIDS is a syndrome. Usually AIDS is not caused by HIV.
AIDS is curable.
Yes, HIV is a virus. Yes, AIDS is a syndrome. But AIDS is always caused by HIV. Only a very few people will ever have an HIV infection without developing AIDS, but the vast majority will die from it. On average you're expected to last about 10 years without treatment, 20 years with it. Once you develop AIDS, you'll die within a year if you don't get treatment.
There is also no cure for AIDS. There are treatments that will make you live longer, but they are expensive and you are still likely to have horrible symptoms.
-
Yeah I do know that one of them leads to another and the latter is fatal. Apparently I got mixed up with ze names but my point still stands.
Nope, you don't know. HIV is a virus, AIDS is a syndrome. Usually AIDS is not caused by HIV.
AIDS is curable.
Yes, HIV is a virus. Yes, AIDS is a syndrome. But AIDS is always caused by HIV. Only a very few people will ever have an HIV infection without developing AIDS, but the vast majority will die from it. On average you're expected to last about 10 years without treatment, 20 years with it. Once you develop AIDS, you'll die within a year if you don't get treatment.
There is also no cure for AIDS. There are treatments that will make you live longer, but they are expensive and you are still likely to have horrible symptoms.
OK. True.
But tell me please, what is the damn difference between Immunodeficiency and AIDS?
AIDS is immunodeficiency, but caused only by HIV?... I was sure that immunodeficiency and AIDS are same, but AIDS is not inborn :-S
Damn.
Anyway, HIV was "discovered" in 1981. Some HIV positive people (from 1981 year and a bit later) are still alive. Some of them are not HIV positive anymore... Strange :-S
Btw, some "anti-AIDS drugs" are killing your immune system, which is strange too :-S
-
Immunodeficiency refers to any condition in which your immune system is unable to protect you from infection. There are many different conditions that lead to immunodeficiency, among them are certain cancers, malnutrition, a variety of genetic diseases, and AIDS. AIDS is only one of the many conditions that lead to immunodeficiency.
Immunodeficiency is divided into two broad groups: primary immunodeficiency, essentially meaning that you're born with it, and acquired immunodeficiency, meaning that you became immunodeficient some time later. AIDS is again only one of many syndromes that lead to acquired immunodeficiency. The name, however, is very misleading: acquired immunodeficiency syndrome -- it makes it sound as if it's the only one.
All of this is on Wikipedia: Immunodeficiency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immunodeficiency), AIDS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS).
-
acquired immunodeficiency syndrome
mind = blown. I had no idea that's what it stood for. That's why I quite like some of these forum debates.. I learn new things I never knew I didn't know. ..or summing.
-
The name, however, is very misleading: acquired immunodeficiency syndrome -- it makes it sound as if it's the only one.
Yea, that's what mixed my brains :-S
hmhm...
Okay. How do they make an AIDS diagnose and not immunodeficiency? What's the difference between AIDS and acquired immunodeficiency (in simptoms).
-
The typical AIDS test includes an HIV test first then a different test to count CD4+ T cells (immune cells). If the T cell count is below a certain threshold and the person is infected with HIV, that indicates AIDS. If the T cell count is below a certain threshold but the person is not infected with HIV, they probably have some other disease of the immune system.
Again, this is all on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aids#Diagnosis).
-
The typical AIDS test includes an HIV test first then a different test to count CD4+ T cells (immune cells). If the T cell count is below a certain threshold and the person is infected with HIV, that indicates AIDS. If the T cell count is below a certain threshold but the person is not infected with HIV, they probably have some other disease of the immune system.
Again, this is all on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aids#Diagnosis).
HIV tests are wrong sometimes.
So if someone is HIV positive(stupid tests), and they find immunodeficiency - they'll let him die, instead of healing him :]
-
Do you really think that modern medicine works that way?
-
Do you really think that modern medicine works that way?
Yep.
-
Do you really think that modern medicine works that way?
Yep.
Generally conspiracy theorists aren't the best place to get your information from
-
Do you really think that modern medicine works that way?
Yep.
You don't understand. That was a subtle way of telling you to research the subject so that you can save yourself from embarrassment.
This is my not-so-subtle way of letting you do the same, but now to show us that you aren't willfully ignorant, that you're capable of finding information for yourself.
You can't expect people to correct every misconception you have. People are stupid -- they'd rather wallow in pitiable ignorance than learn how the world works. You're smarter than that.
-
Do you really think that modern medicine works that way?
Yep.
You don't understand. That was a subtle way of telling you to research the subject so that you can save yourself from embarrassment.
This is my not-so-subtle way of letting you do the same, but now to show us that you aren't willfully ignorant, that you're capable of finding information for yourself.
You can't expect people to correct every misconception you have. People are stupid -- they'd rather wallow in pitiable ignorance than learn how the world works. You're smarter than that.
Nah, I did a research.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_denialism
-
That's one point of the story. It has been thoroughly rejected with a reason, mate.
-
Only a dumbs**t would believe in the denialism of aids. HIV and AIDS are different. HIV is a virus, and AIDS is the syndrome. HIV causes the AIDS and then you immune system goes to zero.
It's not f**king hard to understand. It's the way biology works.
-
Actually Neosano knows this stuff and maybe more than you do, but he's a little bit ignorant considering the fact that he actually believes into something that has been rejected so thoroughly and understandable that it hurts to listen to this (we had a discussion on MSN) and being called ignorant when it's plain the opposite way :P
To sum it up: The major arguments for the AIDS Denialism are
-HIV tests are inaccurate
-People probably die from cancer or an other disease
-HIV is only 30 years old
Yet millions of people around the world die from AIDS and Denialists cannot answer the question how AIDS can spread around the world without HIV.
-
Do you really think that modern medicine works that way?
Yep.
You don't understand. That was a subtle way of telling you to research the subject so that you can save yourself from embarrassment.
This is my not-so-subtle way of letting you do the same, but now to show us that you aren't willfully ignorant, that you're capable of finding information for yourself.
You can't expect people to correct every misconception you have. People are stupid -- they'd rather wallow in pitiable ignorance than learn how the world works. You're smarter than that.
Nah, I did a research.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS_denialism
What in that article convinced you that doctors would let an immunodeficient person die because an HIV test gave a false-negative?
-
being called ignorant when it's plain the opposite way
To be an AIDs denialist you basically have to be ignorant about everything but the denialist argument
-
What in that article convinced you that doctors would let an immunodeficient person die because an HIV test gave a false-negative?
HIV test cannot be false-negative. They can be only false-positive. But HIV tests don't find HIV itself, they're just tests for antibodies.
Imagine that you're a doctor. You have a patient with HIV positive test and acquired immunodeficiency. What would you think about? AIDS.
2DarkCrusade, well. These ones are not major ones. Unluckily English version of AIDS denialism page is very small. For example russian one has all the points listed.
Another good article to read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duesberg_hypothesis
I'll try to translate some major points and post here. Just a bit busy now ;)
-
"Antibody tests may give false negative (no antibodies were detected despite HIV being present) results during the window period, an interval of three weeks to six months between the time of HIV infection and the production of measurable antibodies to HIV seroconversion."
HIV tests can give a false negative. In fact, you are more likely to get a false negative than a false positive.
Doctors also perform the test twice, so false positives are rare:
"...the use of repeatedly reactive enzyme immunoassay followed by confirmatory Western blot or immunofluorescent assay remains the standard method for diagnosing HIV-1 infection...With confirmatory Western blot, the chance of a false-positive identification in a low-prevalence setting is about 1 in 250 000 (95% CI, 1 in 173 000 to 1 in 379 000)."
Even in the very rare instances in which someone with immunodeficiency gets a false positive on an HIV test (which will be less than 1 in 250 000), a doctor will not simply let someone die. Most likely they will continue to monitor the case and, when the patient shows symptoms that are inconsistent with AIDS, the doctor will realize that the patient has some other medical condition.
That being said, it's entirely possible that mistakes will be made. But only very rarely when the tests are done properly. This does not make the tests "stupid".
-
Actually Neosano knows this stuff and maybe more than you do, but he's a little bit ignorant considering the fact that he actually believes into something that has been rejected so thoroughly and understandable that it hurts to listen to this (we had a discussion on MSN) and being called ignorant when it's plain the opposite way :P
To sum it up: The major arguments for the AIDS Denialism are
-HIV tests are inaccurate
-People probably die from cancer or an other disease
-HIV is only 30 years old
Yet millions of people around the world die from AIDS and Denialists cannot answer the question how AIDS can spread around the world without HIV.
I know enough to understand that AIDS is caused by HIV.
-
"Antibody tests may give false negative (no antibodies were detected despite HIV being present) results during the window period, an interval of three weeks to six months between the time of HIV infection and the production of measurable antibodies to HIV seroconversion."
HIV tests can give a false negative. In fact, you are more likely to get a false negative than a false positive.
Doctors also perform the test twice, so false positives are rare:
"...the use of repeatedly reactive enzyme immunoassay followed by confirmatory Western blot or immunofluorescent assay remains the standard method for diagnosing HIV-1 infection...With confirmatory Western blot, the chance of a false-positive identification in a low-prevalence setting is about 1 in 250 000 (95% CI, 1 in 173 000 to 1 in 379 000)."
Even in the very rare instances in which someone with immunodeficiency gets a false positive on an HIV test (which will be less than 1 in 250 000), a doctor will not simply let someone die. Most likely they will continue to monitor the case and, when the patient shows symptoms that are inconsistent with AIDS, the doctor will realize that the patient has some other medical condition.
That being said, it's entirely possible that mistakes will be made. But only very rarely when the tests are done properly. This does not make the tests "stupid".
Nice post :]
I always wonder how are they counting it.
Anyway, I guess it doesn't count situations when HIV tests are positive because of another disease.