Man "beats" HIV virus

[Bobby Hogg]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4432564.stm

Interesting story.

It's true that no virus will kill 100% of people who are exposed to it, even HIV. I remember reading that one of the strategies to tackle the disease was to look at people who continually expose themselves to the virus but fail to ever become seriously ill because of some natural immunity or ability to defeat the infection.

 

[Gato_Solo]

I'm not surprised. It was bound to happen sooner or later.

 

[greenfreak]

While it would be a great thing if it's true,

"You have to be rock-solid sure that both samples came from the same person, no mix-up in the laboratory, no mistakes in the testing, etc."

Call me a pessimist but I'd be more likely to believe a false positive than someone who cured themselves.

 

[Dave]

A statement from the trust said: "This is a rare and complex case. When we became aware of Mr Stimpson's HIV negative test results we offered him further tests to help us investigate and find an explanation for the different results.

"So far Mr Stimpson has declined this offer."

i think this is the much more telling statement. why not? is he waiting for money? is it a hoax?

"I've come across many anecdotal reports of this kind of thing happening in Africa, some quite recently, but it's difficult to verify them," he told BBC News 24.

then why arent the health organizations and drug companies doing more to find and verify these cases? its not like this is something new and nobody has anyone in the area following cases. sounds to me like a much more promising avenue to persue than just trial and error in a lab somewhere.

 

[Bobby Hogg]

How do you verify it without directly exposing someone with HIV and checking them later?

This is only recorded because the man was tested HIV positive, then negative. In Africa, the records may not be so reliable.

 

[Dave]

right.
what i'm asking is why the health organizations already in place arent doing more to find and document these cases. they have ancedotal reports. i would think that they would want to explore that avenue till it proves to be a dead end. i think that the monies spent to find that .01% that have beaten the virus is much more worthwhile than random testing in a lab setting. i would think that having a living person that has cleared the virus would be better than sitting around a lab saying "ok...lets try this." narrows it down quite a bit.
granted, it may be like trying to buy a winning lottery ticket but it may prove more fruitful than the current method which is akin to sifting through the trash looking for a discarded winner.

 

[Luis G]

There have been cases of newborns that "kill" the virus.

 

[Bobby Hogg]

right.
what i'm asking is why the health organizations already in place arent doing more to find and document these cases. they have ancedotal reports. i would think that they would want to explore that avenue till it proves to be a dead end. i think that the monies spent to find that .01% that have beaten the virus is much more worthwhile than random testing in a lab setting. i would think that having a living person that has cleared the virus would be better than sitting around a lab saying "ok...lets try this." narrows it down quite a bit.
granted, it may be like trying to buy a winning lottery ticket but it may prove more fruitful than the current method which is akin to sifting through the trash looking for a discarded winner.

What makes you think that is how research works?

Do you think businesses and organisations sanction huges amounts of money for research based on a whim? If lab research were a case of trying things randomly, we'd hardly have all of those protease inhibitors that are currently prolonging HIV-sufferers lives.

Again, how do you document and verify a case without exposing a person to HIV yourself?

 

[Winky]

Remember a guy named Magic Johnson?

He was supposed to have AIDS in 91?

yeah money cures all that ails ya

 

[Dave]

What makes you think that is how research works?

Do you think businesses and organisations sanction huges amounts of money for research based on a whim? If lab research were a case of trying things randomly, we'd hardly have all of those protease inhibitors that are currently prolonging HIV-sufferers lives.

Again, how do you document and verify a case without exposing a person to HIV yourself?

i never said that i know how reasearch works. i was mearly stating that to find a cure it seems logical to find the few individuals that have cleared the disease any go from there. the current cocktail of meds doesnt work towards curing the disease. it only, as you mentioned, prolongs the life of the person.

you wouldnt have to purposely expose anyone. mearly document the positive results and recheck. if someone already exposed and testing positive suddenly comes up negative... bingo.

 

[MrBishop]

Remember a guy named Magic Johnson?

He was supposed to have AIDS in 91?

yeah money cures all that ails ya

Magic was HIV positive in 91... he founded the Magic Johnson AIDS foundation

Not sure if it progreesed into AIDS or not...but if money can't sure AIDS, it can sure help ya afford the meds to keep you healthy enough to go on.

 

[Bobby Hogg]

i never said that i know how reasearch works. i was mearly stating that to find a cure it seems logical to find the few individuals that have cleared the disease any go from there. the current cocktail of meds doesnt work towards curing the disease. it only, as you mentioned, prolongs the life of the person.

you wouldnt have to purposely expose anyone. mearly document the positive results and recheck. if someone already exposed and testing positive suddenly comes up negative... bingo.

And it has been attempted to find people resistant to the virus. I can remember hearing about screening of African prostitutes who have been continually exposed to the disease but not contracted it.

In this case, the man has so far refused to allow himself to be further tested to confirm his HIV negative status, never mind help with research. All he has done so far is sell his story to British tabloid newspapers, then go silent on the matter.

 

[rrfield]

Magic was HIV positive in 91... he founded the Magic Johnson AIDS foundation

Not sure if it progreesed into AIDS or not...but if money can't sure AIDS, it can sure help ya afford the meds to keep you healthy enough to go on.

He's had "undetectable" HIV since at least 1997. Still there, just can't see it anymore.

I don't care too much for money, but money gets rid of AIDS.

 

[Bobby Hogg]

Money works until a drug-resistant strain eventually emerges in your body. Then there is not much that can be done.

 

[MrBishop]

He's had "undetectable" HIV since at least 1997. Still there, just can't see it anymore.

Kinda like Herpes... in this case, relapses due to medical intervention, instead of it being cyclical.