At last HIV Vaccine and no fear of death if you have it.

New HIV vaccine could turn deadly condition into 'minor infection like herpes'!

After many decades at last scientist have found a vaccine to make sure you donтАЩt get HIV and makes those who have already got it, have no more fear of dying as you would if you caught incurable herpes is on the horizon.

Many people who was worried about all the money that was being thrown at scientific groups to search for ways to cure HIV was being abused, because with the chance of acquiring so many millions they did not want it to end, so they never found a cure. But now a scientific group in Spain has started to test a new vaccine to break the trend of look but donтАЩt find, even though the person who dose find the answer of curing HIV will be in for billions in revenue, but so much of it gets put back in experimentations.

The virus claimed the lives of a host of stars including Freddie Mercury, pictured, and Kenny Everett, Rock Hudson.

Did you know if Freddy Mercury had lived another year, he would still be alive now as the new cocktail of drugs they had in the early 1990s were just about to come on line, after a trial as has to happen with all new drugs.

A new HIV vaccine could turn the once deadly condition which has killed millions of people into a 'minor chronic infection' like herpes, say scientists.
The first human tests found nine-in-ten volunteers developed an immune response against the virus, with 85 per cent maintaining immunity for at least a year.
If bigger clinical trials are as successful the virus that claimed the lives of a host of stars including Freddie Mercury and Kenny Everett would no longer cause a disease and be much less contagious.

The success of the vaccine, known as MVA-B, is based on the ability of the human immune system to learn how to react over time against virus particles and infected cells.
Professor Mariano Esteban, of the Spanish Superior Scientific Research Council (CSIC) in Madrid, said: 'MVA-B vaccine has proven to be as powerful as any other vaccine currentlybeing studied, or even more.
'
It had already been successful in experiments on mice and monkeys and is based on a vaccine used to treat smallpox, with the addition of four HIV genes that are not able to self-replicate, guaranteeing safety.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/artic ... erpes.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2042942/HIV-vaccine-MVA-B-turn-deadly-condition-minor-infection-like-herpes.html)

[bucknaway]

The other day I saw on the DrudgeReport that HIV will soon be looked at as a minor infection. They are making many advances.

The other day I saw on the DrudgeReport that HIV will soon be looked at as a minor infection. They are making many advances.
along with this post and mothers i would think all doctors would still recomend covering up.. this is probably not the first time something has been discovered that could be false!!
also unless you like extremly large needles up your butt as well as other large things .. h.i.v. is not the only thing you can catch.
i think reports like this are as good as they are bad in the fact they could give some people/slags a reason to go barebacking all over the place

[bucknaway]

No one is suggesting that anyone should have unprotected sex. This post is about the advances made on the HIV virus.

[danny99]

New HIV vaccine could turn deadly condition into 'minor infection like herpes'!
the new cocktail of drugs they had in the early 1990s were just about to come on line, after a trial as has to happen with all new drugs.


Whilst I lost a few friends in the late 80's and early 90's to AIDS, and had to watch their slow deterioration, sallow cheeks and frail bodies at the end I also have another friend who was diagnosed with AIDS late 90's and he is still incredibly fit and well some 17 years later, still working and travelling the world. So the current 'cocktail of drugs' work to keep you alive though at the expense of many body parts which have become permanently dead. But then he is under the supervision of Dr. Prof. David Cooper the Sydney St. Vincents Immunologist considered to be a world leader in that field.

[bao-bao]

No one is suggesting that anyone should have unprotected sex. This post is about the advances made on the HIV virus.
bucknaway's point is worth repeating, and although space doesn't permit here it's worth repeating a million times: unprotected sex is not safe sex.

Please continue to pass the message along to anyone you feel may think otherwise: there are incurable diseases associated with barebacking, and the only protection is protection - used by anyone (or everyone) involved.

[Hmmm]

After many decades at last scientist have found a vaccine to make sure you donтАЩt get HIV and makes those who have already got it, have no more fear of dying as you would if you caught incurable herpes is on the horizon.

There is no evidence that this vaccine has any therapeutic effect in the already-infected.

After many decades at last scientist have found a vaccine to make sure you donтАЩt get HIV and makes those who have already got it, have no more fear of dying as you would if you caught incurable herpes is on the horizon.

There is no evidence that this vaccine has any therapeutic effect in the already-infected.

It is also worth noting that trials still have a very long way to go before something such as this is made available, if it ever is. On a good note it is well known that the advances with HIV medications and knowledge about the various forms of the HIV strain are fantastic considering where the world was a decade or so ago.

Bao-bao and bucknaway's point is well worth repeating a thousand times over "unprotected sex is not safe sex".

[Beachlover]

This is great! The most promising news for years.

But even if a vaccine and cure are found, it won't change much. HIV's just one of MANY deadly blood-bourne STDs you can get. There's still Hep B and others.

I'll add to what Bucknaway, Bao Bao and Combat have said... Anyone who has unprotected anal sex with a casual hook up in Thailand or anywhere else is a moron.

[Beachlover]

It's worth clicking on the link to read the article in its original form: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/artic ... erpes.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2042942/HIV-vaccine-MVA-B-turn-deadly-condition-minor-infection-like-herpes.html)

Unfortunately, what LMTU/Mothersruin presents as being drawn from article is almost dangerously inaccurate and misleading.


After many decades at last scientist have found a vaccine to make sure you donтАЩt get HIV and makes those who have already got it, have no more fear of dying as you would if you caught incurable herpes is on the horizon.
No, what the article states is the new vaccine can't remove the virus from the body once there. So even if successful, it'll be no use to someone who has "already got it" in its current form.

Quoted from the article:
"MVA-B is not capable of removing HIV from the body but meets the requirements for a 'promising HIV vaccine...'"

"Injecting the vaccine into a healthy person is intended to train the immune system to detect and learn how to combat the virus. Prof Esteban said: 'It is like showing a picture of the HIV so that it is able to recognise it if it sees it again in the future.'"

[francois]

Does anyone remember the "successful" HIV vaccine tested in Thailand in 2009? That one was tested on 16,000 volunteers. This "new" vaccine was tested on 30 persons.

Does anyone remember the "successful" HIV vaccine tested in Thailand in 2009? That one was tested on 16,000 volunteers. This "new" vaccine was tested on 30 persons.

Francois there has never been a successful vaccine developed to beat or protect from HIV. Read more here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV_vaccine

[lukylok]

And anyway before this vaccine is available, accepted by the various health agencies, it will be at least five years.

[bucknaway]

I was too quick to post. That was not the story I read.

:: Edit ::

[francois]

Does anyone remember the "successful" HIV vaccine tested in Thailand in 2009? That one was tested on 16,000 volunteers. This "new" vaccine was tested on 30 persons.
Francois there has never been a successful vaccine developed to beat or protect from HIV. Read more here:=
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV_vaccine

I understand Combat. I was being facetious in my above post. Not sure why the OP is trying to hype this vaccine on such flimsy evidence.

I understand Combat. I was being facetious in my above post. Not sure why the OP is trying to hype this vaccine on such flimsy evidence.

Yes I realised that francois, but wanted to reiterate as HIV is still a very dangerous virus. I would be very surprised if the OP had bothered to read the article thoroughly before jumping to conclusions which of course is by the bye.

[cameroncat]

I have several friends that have been HIV+ for over 20 years. They take one pill a day now to keep the virus at bay. They are healthy, happy and don't have any "Dead Parts" as another poster stated.

[Beachlover]

I would be very surprised if the OP had bothered to read the article thoroughly before jumping to conclusions...
That's why I suggested everyone click on the original article to read it. What the OP wrote was completely wrong and misleading.

I agree that he is hyping it but there's a difference between hyping and being completely misleading and he is also doing the latter.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/artic ... erpes.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2042942/HIV-vaccine-MVA-B-turn-deadly-condition-minor-infection-like-herpes.html)


The OP, which he will no doubt deny, is saying between the lines of his post that it is now perfectly OK to go out and behave irresponsibly towards casual sex.
Yep, totally agree... what a stupid thing to do.

Even if (big if) the vaccine is successful, there's no suggestion it'll do anything for those who already have HIV. The article specifically suggests the vaccine can't do anything once the virus is there.

Not sure why the OP is trying to hype this vaccine on such flimsy evidence.

Are you new here or what?
everyone else here knows he's the original nutter that hypes EVERYTHING
l[/quote]

The OP, which he will no doubt deny, is saying between the lines of his post that it is now perfectly OK to go out and behave irresponsibly towards casual sex.

Anyone following this advice needs to be recommended for the ' Clown of the year award 2011. '[/quote]



May be you think what the Daily Mail has printed is hype, that your view of it, I see it as a wonderful future for any young guys who could catch this horrendous disease, *** see below***......as your see, it is an entirely different way of looking at a vaccine by tricking the bodyтАЩs immune system in taking action when it see a virus invading the body, you may not think this is good news, but I and the Daily Mail readers do, we all have our different views and some can be negative, but sometimes itтАЩs better to be positive, especially when comes to a potential night mare Infection like HIV.

You say, тАЬEveryone else knows IтАЩm a nuttier, for giving the readers the latest Info about Gay Thailand or the latest innovations of a possible vaccine to stop many people catching HIV,тАЭ No itтАЩs not me whose the nutter, itтАЩs you thinking you speak for everyone, you should see my mail box you would eat your words. If I gave out force information about any gay Business or In this case an article from the newspaper if it was not true then I would understand your silly of the cuff quip, to try make yourself look clever, and disrespect me, but I can assure you as soon as if I wrote anything a potentual customer thought was bad, when they went to see any where I have been to and wrote about, and thought it was good, they would soon write here and tell everyone, but in all the years I have been writing since 1997 not one person has, unless itтАЩs just a bit of a joke post, my famous "footsteps from the beach: (as they use to say about my Hotel in the UK ) of the VENUE GAY RESORT, tell me what would be the point of saying anything is good, if itтАЩs bad and that is what IтАЩm known for, saying many Gay Businesses should do better, like Niddys Nook when I brought this to the attention of the gay visitors, saying how bad it was and thousands upon thousands, wrote about it and still visited it, they still could not get it right.

Kevin of course you knowтАЭ I would disagree with you, saying I agree with any one practicing Unsafe sexтАЭ, I have read my post twice now, for the life of me, I canтАЩt see where IтАЩm condoning unsafe sex and I donтАЩt! As a person who has contracted a sexual Illness and fortunate to be treated by a Professor who specializes in HPV ORAL Tumors and Cancers, he was telling me many guys who have throat cancers and tumors, really have HPV as I was diagnosed with, but they are never tested for it, as the treatment if you catch it early with any cancer now days, is the same as any oral cancer at the moment, but that will change, the more they are concentrating on it now, I was fortunate I caught it early or I could have had my voice box cut out or even worst, the base of my tongue, to which would be my whole tongue. HPV has nothing to do with HIV apart from catching it from sexual contact. mainly sucking and licking.

"HPV, the virus that causes cervical cancer, is also linked to throat cancer, and oral sex is a major risk factor for both men and women, new research shows. Having multiple oral sex partners topped the list of practices associated with an increased risk of developing oropharyngeal cancer, according to the study published in the May 10 issue of The New England Journal of Medicine."

So do you really think I would then go on to advise others to suck or lick someone, without protection or not use protection for any sexual encounter at all, No I donтАЩt think so. As you already know.... but are trying to hype up your post.
http://www.rdoc.org.uk/hpv.html


***Prof Esteban said: 'It is like showing a picture of the HIV so that it is able to recognize it if it sees it again in the future.'
The 'soldier' cells in charge of detecting the foreign substances in the body and sending the right coordinates to destroy them are immune cells known as lymphocytes T and B.

Prof Esteban said: 'Our body is full of lymphocytes, each of them programmed to fight against a different pathogen. Training is needed when it involves a pathogen, like the HIV one, which cannot be naturally defeated.'

He said MVA-B is not capable of removing HIV from the body but meets the requirements for a 'promising HIV vaccine.'
Prof Esteban said: 'If the virus enters the body and tries to develop in a cell, the immune system is ready to inactivate the virus and destroy the infected cell'.

The researchers said: 'If this genetic cocktail passes Phase II and Phase III future clinic trials, and makes it into production, in the future HIV could be compared to herpes virus nowadays'.

The virus would not cause a disease anymore and would become a minor chronic infection, which would only show its effects in a low defense scenario, with a much lower contagious profile.

[Beachlover]

Mothersruin... Kquill is right. Nothing in your incoherent and mostly irrelevant rambling reply above changes the fact that your original post was completely misleading.

What you posted is NOT what the article said at all.

You said...

vaccine... makes those who have already got it, have no more fear of dying
Anyone who has HIV may reads your post and think it refers to a potential cure. But article says nothing about a cure. It specifies the vaccine "is not capable of removing HIV from the body". It only talks about the possibility this vaccine may be able to prevent HIV infections if people are vaccinated first.

You took the article, changed the facts and used it to post a completely false and inaccurate thread... why did you do that?

Mothersruin... Kquill is right. Nothing in your incoherent and mostly irrelevant rambling reply above changes the fact that your original post was completely misleading.

What you posted is NOT what the article said at all.

You said...

vaccine... makes those who have already got it, have no more fear of dying

You took the article, changed the facts and used it to post a completely false and inaccurate thread... why did you do that?


I canтАЩt see how by saying if and when this new way of treating HIV is a cure,, I have said you would not have to worry about dying as it would be no more serious than Herpes, even though certain strains of that, can be quite serious.

But then again you can read negative things into anything if you want to. also no matter how you read it at no time am I also saying IтАЩm giving any one Cart Blanch not to use safe sex, I do wonder what was behind that wind up '

Failing that, you don't have to take any notice what I say, I gave the link to read for yourself, exactly what they mean, unless you are blind IтАЩm sure you can understand that. Sorry if anyone is confused and is reading deeper in to what I meant, compared to what they want to read into it.

By the way thanyou for debating this serious suject, like a Normal human being.

[Beachlover]

I canтАЩt see how by saying if and when this new way of treating HIV is a cure,, I have said you would not have to worry about dying as it would be no more serious than Herpes, even though certain strains of that, can be quite serious.

But then again you can read negative things into anything if you want to...
No, it's not about reading into it positively or negatively. It's about facts.

The fact is you made a completely false statement to mislead people. You stated the vaccine would treat "those who have already got it" which is not true. If you're too stupid to comprehend this (or the article you posted) don't bother replying...

No way does it say this new vaccine will cure any one, because it wonтАЩt, but what it does do, it teaches cells of the immune system. The vaccine is safe, because the inserted genes are incapable of self-replicating, unlike the HIV virus itself. "MVA-B vaccine has proven to be as powerful as any other vaccine currently being studied, or even more," said Esteban.

It reduces, Once a patient has been infected with HIV, to a disease not as serious as herpes, the vaccine's developers envision a time when it will render such infections little more than a nuisance; a manageable infection that causes little long-term damage. Said one researcher: "If this genetic cocktail passes Phase II and Phase III future clinic trials, and makes it into production, in the future HIV could be compared to herpes virus nowadays.

[jinks]

Beachy and LMTu Take this disagreement elsewhere. -

Thank You on behalf of our non medical posters who too can read and MAKE THEIR OWN MINDS UP.

[kittyboy]

Read the article carefully and read up on the results from other sources and the picture that emerges as pointed out by other posters is not a fantastic as the OP makes them out to be.

Again echoing other posters the trial was very very small. The results are encouraging but I recall other HIV vaccine trails that had promising results but went no where.

Second, this article and other information sources make very clear that the vaccine produced 'an immune response', which is much different that producing immunity from HIV. Whether or not the vaccine is effective in preventing HIV transmission will be determined in larger clinical trails.

It is encouraging that work is still being conducted on HIV vaccines but this one still has a long long way to go before it can be determined if it is an effective vaccine against HIV.

I would also like to point out that the HIV drugs that people take are very toxic and have a number of side effects and the drugs are not effective in all cases. People still die of HIV both here in Asia and in the West. I have mentioned before that I was an HIV counselor for many years before I moved to Asia and we saw an uptick in HIV cases after the new class of HIV drugs was introduced. However, I still went to the odd funeral for HIV positive individuals who did not respond to the new treatments.

Use condoms gentlemen, ladies and those who fall into other categories.

One of the perils of the internet is the way untruths and half-truths get spun and repeated with lightening speed, often in good faith.

With something as important as HIV, it is essential to check back the source data to peer-reviewed research papers.

The problem with this approach is that a) this standard of information is not routinely published free-to-view on the 'net, and b) unless you're well practised at reading these papers, they can be very heavy going.

I think the notion that the research companies are more interested in getting research grants than finding a cure to HIV is an urban myth - the pharma industry just doesn't work that way, and a route to curing and preventing viral infections (in general) is the holy grail of the pharma industry's research teams.

HIV was (to be blunt) the ruin of my early sex life, although I suppose I should be grateful to have escaped infection. I hate condoms with a passion, as I rarely get off with one on. But would I have anal sex bareback? No, never..