Some VERY Interesting AIDS News

[Tuckerfan]

The first is they’re trying to use bacteria to combat it.

Scientists have genetically modified bacteria living in the human body to produce chemicals that block HIV infection.

Although the research is still at an early stage, they hope it could eventually lead to a practical and cost effective new way to combat the virus.

As of December 2004, there are 39.4 million people living with HIV/AIDS.

The research, by the US National Cancer Institute, is published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Most HIV transmission occurs on the surfaces of the gut and reproductive areas which are normally coated with a layer of bacteria.

The researchers modified one of these bacteria - a form of E.coli - so that it began to secrete proteins that block HIV from infecting its target cells.

Certainly not a perfect solution to the problem, but a glimmer of hope, none the less.

The second may be a little too good to be true.

Doctors are planning further tests on a British man whose body has reportedly cured itself of HIV.

Two Sunday newspapers report that Andrew Stimpson, 25 and from London, was diagnosed as HIV-positive in 2002 but found to be clear in October 2003.

Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust, which carried out the tests, has asked him to undergo more. Mr Stimpson did not take any medication for HIV.

HIV experts say his case could help to reveal more about the disease.

I hope that this isn’t a case of fraud or a mistake made on the part of the testing labs. Still, if one person has beaten the disease, then there’s hope for others. I’ve lost one friend to AIDS, known a few others in passing who’ve died from it, and have two friends who are currently HIV+ (that I know of), so I know not only what it’s like to lose someone because of this crap, but also have an idea of what it’s like to live with it. I really hope that they find a cure for it soon.

[ZebraShaSha]

The second story sounds more like a story of a false positive taken at face value. Later on, when more tests are done, it is then revealed that he never really had the disease.

Hopefully I am wrong, of course, but it is the simpler of the two arguments based on the information given in the story.

[Helen_s_Eidolon]

I don’t even know if that’s possible. Isn’t the HIV test a test for antibodies? Even if he did completely rid his body of the virus, the antibodies would remain.

[Sensibility]

If accurate it sounds like a real leap forward doesnt it! (though I imagine he will have more tests than anyone ever before if he HAS someohow rid himself of the disease.

Its the headline on the homepage of MSN if anyone wants to go read the details.

It seems he was tested back in 2002 and the results showed that his body was producing antibodies for HIV (which it seems is the test result which says you are positive for the HIV virus), then, i think it said in 2003 and 2004 he was given further tests - which said there were none in his system? I can only assume that once the virus is fought and combatted, the body doesnt need to and therefore stops producing antibodies to fight it? (not medically minded at all - can you tell? )

The Chelsea NHS (London) say the tests are his, and that the results are categorically correct and accurate on both occasions - lets hope thats true!

[Otto]

@LaurAnge

I don’t even know if that’s possible. Isn’t the HIV test a test for antibodies? Even if he did completely rid his body of the virus, the antibodies would remain.

It could just be the reporter phrased it clumsily. Yes, the test is for antibodies, but viral load (number of viruses in the body) can also be determined. Some of the newer “cocktail” treatments can reduce viral load to undetectable levels, but that doesn’t mean there is no virus left in the body. The body can house “reservoirs” of virus which, if the patient goes off the meds, can resurge and mutate into a drug-resiatant strain. We know this guy wasn’t on any meds, but without clarification it’s hard to know exactly what’s going on with him.