First-Ever Effective HIV Vaccine Announced

candybrowneyes

Active Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
1,357
Reaction score
5
SCIENTISTS have for the first time succeeded in protecting people from HIV infection by means of a vaccine, a development that has stunned researchers worldwide and transformed prospects for combating the deadly virus.

The experimental vaccine cut the risk of becoming infected with HIV by 31 per cent, according to results released from the world's largest AIDS vaccine trial of more than 16,000 volunteers in Thailand.

Although the degree of protection is substantially less than would normally be considered enough to warrant rolling out a vaccine, the result has enthused researchers still demoralised over a succession of recent calamitous failures.

One trial of a previous vaccine even appeared to make people who were inoculated with it more, rather than less, likely to become infected with HIV, a result that dumbfounded experts and left some questioning whether an HIV vaccine would ever be possible.

Announcing the latest results yesterday, Colonel Jerome Kim, who helped lead the study for the US Army, said it was "the first evidence that we could have a safe and effective preventive vaccine".

The trial of the vaccine -- in fact, a combination of two earlier test vaccines that had each failed to protect patients when tested separately in earlier trials -- was sponsored by the US Army and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

The institute's director, Anthony Fauci, warned that this was "not the end of the road", but said he was surprised and very pleased by the outcome.

"It gives me cautious optimism about the possibility of improving this result" and developing a more effective AIDS vaccine, Dr Fauci said.

Even a marginally helpful vaccine could have a big impact. Every day, 7500 people worldwide are newly infected with HIV; two million died of AIDS in 2007, the UN agency UNAIDS estimates.

Australian experts also welcomed the development. John Kaldor, professor of epidemiology at the National Centre in HIV Epidemiology and Clinical Research at the University of NSW, said the finding was "extremely significant".

"A 30 per cent protection rate is on the low side of efficacy that would make a vaccine helpful from a public health point of view," Professor Kaldor said.

"From a perspective of understanding the science of how to prevent HIV infection by immunological means, this must be considered to be a very important finding."

He said the trial result was "the first step along the way to showing that a vaccine strategy can work". As such, he said, it was many times more important than a recent discovery of two broadly neutralising antibodies capable of disabling HIV.

He added that more information would be required before anyone could judge whether the new vaccine deserved to be rolled out to some people, despite its low efficacy rate. That would depend on factors such as how long-lasting the protection was, what the vaccine cost and whether people given the product might negate any protection by behaving in more risky ways.

Details of the $105 million study will be given at a vaccine conference in Paris next month.

This is the third big vaccine trial since 1983. In 2007, Merck & Co stopped a study of its experimental vaccine after seeing it did not prevent HIV infection. Later analysis suggested the vaccine might even raise the risk of infection in certain men. The vaccine itself did not cause infection.

In 2003, AIDSVAX failed with two large trials.
 
I read a different version of this news. Some people still got AIDS from this vaccination but compare to those who had a placebo type, the percentage of those who got the vaccination was lower than those who got the placebo. So it isn't 100% effective.
 
I read a different version of this news. Some people still got AIDS from this vaccination but compare to those who had a placebo type, the percentage of those who got the vaccination was lower than those who got the placebo. So it isn't 100% effective.

It reduces risk by more than a third. Given that until just recently, it was believed that it was not possible to create a vaccine that lowered risk for HIV, this is great news, and most definately a step in the right direction. I hope they get the research dollars behind it to refine and improve it.
 
It reduces risk by more than a third. Given that until just recently, it was believed that it was not possible to create a vaccine that lowered risk for HIV, this is great news, and most definately a step in the right direction. I hope they get the research dollars behind it to refine and improve it.


Yes! It is great news. But I hope this news does not defer people from using condoms.

With this vaccine and condoms. It should greatly reduce the risk of contracting HIV.
 
Yes! It is great news. But I hope this news does not defer people from using condoms.

With this vaccine and condoms. It should greatly reduce the risk of contracting HIV.

I agree! I do think of children's future, not just only my kids and every kids that i want all of children to have good healths.
 
Yes! It is great news. But I hope this news does not defer people from using condoms.

With this vaccine and condoms. It should greatly reduce the risk of contracting HIV.

Yep. And if the states would adopt a clean needle program, we could really put a big dent in the transmission rates.
 
Well, do you remember the first AIDS vaccine study? It declared a "failure" but what they did not tell you was that Asians showed some protection while offering no protection for whites?

Because it would be IMPOSSIBLE to make it 30% when administering to people who are mostly white or black, they decided to do the same study in Thai.

That would make the results TOTALLY different and seems unethical to me.

I am NOT saying that Asians shouldn't get vaccine. I am ALL for it. Anything to cut down helps.

But it's disgusting that when the SAME vaccine was called a "failure" yet used it again this time, only with Asians KNOWING that Asians would be more likely to be protected and declare it a "success!" when in reality, it's likely only marginally successful for Asians and not successful for non-Asians.

Brian Deer on VaxGen's AidsVax - vaccine flops in clinical trial
 
they also say that circumcised male are less likely to get HIV than uncircumcised male, although in homosexuals, It hardly offer any protections either way. I think it is because they are more likely to have contact with blood.
 
You know.......I know I'm going to get attacked for this.......but I do think that in order to help stop the spread of AIDS, we need to a) do mass screenings.....and b) identify and somehow stop those people who are most at risk for spreading AIDS. It does seem like there are some "Typhoid Marys" who just totally irresponsibaly spread the virus. It irritates the crap out of me that a 100% preventible virus is still a major health concern.
 
My guts were right. The recent study may be simply a fluke and not effective.

"The promising results of a six-month clinical trial of an AIDS vaccine have been called into question, according to two published accounts on Science magazine’s Web site and in The Wall Street Journal."

Doubts About Promising Results Of AIDS Vaccine - Health News - redOrbit

Although their doubts are based on statistical fluke, mine is based on different responses of different racial populations. I bet if they replicate with whites, it'll find nothing.
 
If they were to ever make it effective, this could lead to an increase in unprotected sex. :roll:
 
I'd be curious to see how this is played out, if it were to hit the public; provided that it is safe and effective with no fail. But, as we all know, not every ONE vaccine are perfect. It helps, yes but I just hope this is not one foolproof plan to make others think "Ok, I've got the vaccine. I'm fine. I'm not worried about getting these sexual dieases".

It's scary to think such thing like this.
 
I won't be surprised if that leads to a new kind of STD.

Remember Demolition Man? ;)

I don't know that movie. Could you give me (and others) a quick explaination of what the movie is about. I won't be surprised if there is a new STD in the future because HIV/AID was new in 1980's.
 
I don't know that movie. Could you give me (and others) a quick explaination of what the movie is about. I won't be surprised if there is a new STD in the future because HIV/AID was new in 1980's.
The movie is about a cop named Spartan (Sylvester Stallone) who captures a criminal named Phoenix (Wesley Snipes), but for some reason... both are found guilty and sentenced to being frozen "for life". 36 years later, Phoenix escapes during a parole hearing and roams free in a so-called perfectly crime-free society where everything is clean, no one swears, and there is no violence. When Phoenix begins to disrupt the peaceful society, they thaw Spartan to stop him since he's the only "old fashioned cop" that can stop an "old fashioned criminal".

Anyways, during the course of the movie... Spartan meets an attractive female cop named Huxley. After a night out, both agree to have sex. They end up having virtual sex to which Spartan is immediately turned off from and wants the real thing.

Here's a quote that Huxley says in response to having real sex...

Huxley: Vir-sex produces high alpha waves during transference of sexual energies.

Spartan: Let's do it the old-fashioned way.

Huxley: Disgusting! You mean... fluid transfer?

Spartan: No, I mean boning, the wild mambo.

Huxley: That is no longer done. Do you know what the exchange of bodily fluids leads to?

Spartan: Kids, smoking, desire to raid the fridge.

Huxley: Rampant exchange of bodily fluids was a major cause of society's downfall. After AIDS, there was NRS, then there was UBT.
 
Back
Top