0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
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.
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.
Quote from: VijchtiDoodah on May 18, 2010, 05:54:37 pmThere 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
Quote from: -Major- on May 19, 2010, 05:59:02 amexcept that bone marrow transplants aren't safe, since your body can reject it, and thus you die...I think atleast ;oYou 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.
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.
Does it matter? Get the back on topic, guys!
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
Quote from: Dusty on May 19, 2010, 02:08:37 pmYeah 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.
Quote from: Neosano on May 19, 2010, 04:09:39 pmQuote from: Dusty on May 19, 2010, 02:08:37 pmYeah 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.
acquired immunodeficiency syndrome
The name, however, is very misleading: acquired immunodeficiency syndrome -- it makes it sound as if it's the only one.
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.
Do you really think that modern medicine works that way?
Quote from: VijchtiDoodah on May 22, 2010, 06:46:09 pmDo you really think that modern medicine works that way?Yep.
Quote from: Neosano on May 23, 2010, 03:45:51 amQuote from: VijchtiDoodah on May 22, 2010, 06:46:09 pmDo 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.
Quote from: VijchtiDoodah on May 24, 2010, 02:56:17 amQuote from: Neosano on May 23, 2010, 03:45:51 amQuote from: VijchtiDoodah on May 22, 2010, 06:46:09 pmDo 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
being called ignorant when it's plain the opposite way
What in that article convinced you that doctors would let an immunodeficient person die because an HIV test gave a false-negative?
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 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 oldYet millions of people around the world die from AIDS and Denialists cannot answer the question how AIDS can spread around the world without 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".