New strain of HIV identified.....

www.scientificamerican.com...

A new strain of HIV has been identified and there are 2 approaches towards this.

Do we go the old way and conserve the contamination and prevent it from spreading.

Or do we go the new progressive liberal way, and believe that having these people travel to more modern countries where they can afford and treat the disease is a better option?

So far it looks like they are going with option 2 as its racist to travel ban and contain deadly diseases.

We need a goood plague to be honest. Traffic and parking is doing my head in.


a reply to: Bloodworth

a reply to: Bloodworth

1 - already a thread on this

too - why the political wingnuttery ???

originally posted by: Bloodworth
www.scientificamerican.com...

A new strain of HIV has been identified and there are 2 approaches towards this.

Do we go the old way and conserve the contamination and prevent it from spreading.

Or do we go the new progressive liberal way, and believe that having these people travel to more modern countries where they can afford and treat the disease is a better option?

So far it looks like they are going with option 2 as its racist to travel ban and contain deadly diseases.

Well.

Actually there are [non-racist] laws already on the books.

Or does that not fit the narrative?

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Bloodworth

1 - already a thread on this

too - why the political wingnuttery ???

Because damn near everything is spun in a pro conservative anti-liberal way here. It's shall we say, popular.

He even used the word conserve out of context when contain was the word to use. Politics on the brain.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Bloodworth

1 - already a thread on this

too - why the political wingnuttery ???

Wanted to add comedy into such a depressing news story...?

a reply to: Bloodworth

From the OP source

A research group at the medical devices and health care giant Abbott has discovered a new strain of human immunodeficiency virus, or HIV—the first to be identified in 19 years. Abbott continues to look for potential new HIV strains to ensure that diagnostic tests for blood screening and detecting infectious diseases remain up to date...

I'll admit to doing a quick skim of the article, but I couldn't figure out a way to fit this into a political framework.

originally posted by: dogstar23
a reply to: Bloodworth

From the OP source

A research group at the medical devices and health care giant Abbott has discovered a new strain of human immunodeficiency virus, or HIV—the first to be identified in 19 years. Abbott continues to look for potential new HIV strains to ensure that diagnostic tests for blood screening and detecting infectious diseases remain up to date...

I'll admit to doing a quick skim of the article, but I couldn't figure out a way to fit this into a political framework.

Easy do you vote for a more conservative approach to contain the disease?

Or a more liberal approach and let what happens happens and if people want to come America with HIV so be it , the country is well equipped and has enough money?

a reply to: Bloodworth

The cure for AIDS has been found years ago but it hasn't made it to the market because AZT is too profitable:

HIV's crystal keyThis is G o o g l e's cache of
www.nj.com... as retrieved on
Jun 30, 2005 02:48:28 GMT.
G o o g l e's cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we
crawled the web.
The page may have changed since that time. Click here for the
current page without highlighting.
This cached page may reference images which are no longer available.
Click here for the cached text only.
To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url:
www.google.com...:gOw4NYY3ImEJ:www.nj.com/news/ledger/stories/1212hiv2.html+star+ledger+cure+aids+rutgers+%2Bcrystal&hl=en&start=1< br />

Google is not affiliated with the authors of this page nor
responsible for its content.
These search terms have been highlighted: star ledger aids
rutgers crystal
These terms only appear in links pointing to this page: cure




HIV's crystal key
The AIDS virus is a quick-change artist that copies itself at lighting speed.
But a team of scientists at Rutgers believes it can outsmart the killer.
Sunday, December 12, 2004
BY KITTA MacPHERSON
Star-Ledger Staff
To change the world, Eddy Arnold has always tried to think small.
For nearly 20 years, the Rutgers University chemist has obsessively dismantled
the AIDS virus to untangle its deadly submicroscopic machinery.
And it is there, in the complex world of the minuscule, he believes he finally
has found a magic bullet that stops AIDS in its tracks.
GRAPHICS
• How HIV works/Resistance and DAPY compounds (PDF)
• X-ray crystallography(PDF)
Arnold and his coterie of researchers have developed what they regard as three
revolutionary AIDS drugs, each part of a family they call DAPY (which rhymes
with happy).
The drugs, they believe, can destroy HIV, the deadly virus that causes AIDS.
To do this, the drugs do as HIV does when it devours immune systems: They change
shape. Put another way, DAPYs are a master key that can fit any strand of the
virus, regardless of how it tries to disguise itself.
As Arnold says: "We're onto something very, very special."
Understanding and controlling this flexibility in a treatment is crucial because
HIV's biggest challenge to science and medicine has been its ability to
consistently mutate, outrunning any drug or vaccine custom-designed to quash it.
And unlike other treatments that focus on blocking HIV from entering healthy
cells or from containing contaminated ones, DAPYs literally douse a lit
firecracker by interfering with any of the 20,000 steps HIV takes to copy itself
at warp speed.
At the core of this discovery is reverse transcriptase -- the villain in this
story and a submicroscopic protein not normally found in healthy human cells.
The team believes RT is the ideal protein to disable because it offers so many
opportunities to be blocked.
The most promising of the three DAPY drugs in the family is a new supercompound
known as R278474.
Because DAPYs can be delivered in just one pill instead of the present drug
cocktail taken by millions of AIDS patients, Arnold and others believe, they are
another step toward the goal of creating a cheaper, more effective way to stay
ahead of the epidemic.
So far, tests conducted internally at New Brunswick-based Johnson & Johnson
indicate the drug is a snap to synthesize, is easily absorbed with minimal side
effects and shows promise as a once- daily, low-dose oral treatment.
For researchers on the front line, R278474 and its cousins may be that magic
bullet.
"This could be it," said Stephen Smith, a physician/scientist who directs the
department of infectious disease at St. Michael's Medical Center in Newark.
"We're all looking for the next class of drugs."
Smith manages dozens of clinical trials testing AIDS treatments and said the
idea underlying the new RT inhibitors makes sense.
"Reverse transcriptase is very important in the biology of AIDS," Smith said.
"If you can really inhibit reverse transcriptase, you can stop AIDS."
This is the story of how a team of AIDS researchers remained true to their
instincts about reverse transcriptase during nearly 20 years of painstaking
research -- even when the rest of the scientific world was spinning in another
direction.
THE CHALLENGE
It will take an extraordinary remedy to beat AIDS for good. After being held in
check for 17 years -- first by workhorse medications such as AZT, introduced in
1987, and then by drug cocktails, available since 1996 -- the disease now is
becoming resistant to long- held treatments.
Worldwide, AIDS has killed 20 million people since appearing in the United
States in 1981. And 40 million now live with the disease, according to United
Nations statistics.
In New Jersey, more than 32,000 people suffer from AIDS, ranking the state fifth
in the country. In the developing world, where many cannot afford generic
versions of AIDS medications, the virus kills people during their most
productive years and decimates regions.
It also has been an expensive fight. Government funding for research, prevention
and assistance was more than $14.7 billion in 2002.
Eddy Arnold thinks he can solve some of these problems.
Known to faculty and students on Rutgers University's Busch Campus in Piscataway
as a sweet- natured scientist, Arnold, 47, studies the structure of biological
molecules -- the proteins that are the beating heart of HIV.
He does this through X-ray crystallography, an increasingly popular technique
used in chemistry and biology to determine the structure of molecules -- the
smallest particles of an element or compound that can exist and still retain all
the same characteristics.
Arnold, whom you might find in a shirt and bolo tie one day and a rock'n'roll
band's T-shirt the next, always has enjoyed complex puzzles. Growing up in
Pittsburgh, at age 3 he was completing 500-piece jigsaw puzzles. By 10, he was
up to 2,000-piece sets.
Even now, when Arnold sits in his book-lined office, deep in the cavernous
Center for Advanced Biotechnology and Medicine, he can close his eyes and see
thousands of atoms that make up RT.
Reverse transcriptase is composed of two coiled chains of amino acids, the same
building blocks found in egg whites, milk, blood and meat. The protein is
minuscule; if laid lengthwise on a ruler, you could fit about 2.5 million RTs
within one inch.
Though easily mistaken for a tangled piece of confetti, RT is a highly complex
machine. Composed of chains containing combinations of 20 amino acids, it is
folded in unpredictable ways. Scientists believe there are patterns in these
ribbons, but no one has deciphered them.
RT inhibitors interfere with an enzyme that HIV needs to copy itself. If the
enzyme fails to function, HIV cannot insert itself into a human host cell and
will die.
Compared with HIV's other proteins, protease and integrase, RT is monstrous and
complex, a lethal Rube Goldberg device seeking conquests at warp speed. People
like Arnold see it as the puzzle to beat all puzzles.
BUILDING THE TEAM
Arnold established his lab at Rutgers in 1987 with his biologist wife, Gail

Oh wow. A new strain of a man made/laboratory designed disease.

Didn’t see that coming

originally posted by: FlyingSquirrel

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Bloodworth

1 - already a thread on this

too - why the political wingnuttery ???

Because damn near everything is spun in a pro conservative anti-liberal way here. It's shall we say, popular.

He even used the word conserve out of context when contain was the word to use. Politics on the brain.

Liberals want to help people in need based on love.

Conservatives value self-reliance. And besides it's their own fault for having gay sex.

originally posted by: JPtruther
Oh wow. A new strain of a man made/laboratory designed disease.

Didn’t see that coming

www.whatreallyhappened.com...

This is like finding the 1956 Congressional testimony on the funding request for the AIDS virus biological weapon funding:

SYNTHETIC BIOLOGICAL AGENTS
There are two things about the biological agent field I would like to mention. One is the possibility of technological surprise. Molecular biology is a field that is advancing very rapidly and eminent biologists believe that within a period of 5 to 10 years it would be possible to produce a synthetic biological agent, an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired.
MR. SIKES. Are we doing any work in that field?
DR. MACARTHUR. We are not.
MR. SIKES. Why not? Lack of money or lack of interest?
DR. MACARTHUR. Certainly not lack of interest.
MR. SIKES. Would you provide for our records information on what would be required, what the advantages of such a program would be. The time and the cost involved?
DR. MACARTHUR. We will be very happy to. The information follows:
The dramatic progress being made in the field of molecular biology led us to investigate the relevance of this field of science to biological warfare. A small group of experts considered this matter and provided the following observations:
1. All biological agents up the the present time are representitives of naturally occurring disease, and are thus known by scientists throughout the world. They are easily available to qualified scientists for research, either for offensive or defensive purposes.
2. Within the next 5 to 10 years, it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease-causing organisms. Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon when we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease.
3. A research program to explore the feasibility of this could be completed in approximately 5 years at a total cost of $10 million.
4. It would be very difficult to establish such a program. Molecular biology is a relatively new science. There are not many highly competent scientisis in the field., almost all are in university laboratories, and they are generally adequately supported from sources other than DOD. However, it was considered possible to initiate an adequate program through the National Academy of sciences - National Research Council (NAS-NRC, and tentative plans were made to initiate the program. However decreasing funds in CB, growing criticism of the CB program., and our reluctance to involve the NAS NRC in such a controversial endeavor have led us to postpone it for the past 2 years.

Here's the weapon: Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon when we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease.

originally posted by: Bloodworth

originally posted by: dogstar23
a reply to: Bloodworth

From the OP source

A research group at the medical devices and health care giant Abbott has discovered a new strain of human immunodeficiency virus, or HIV—the first to be identified in 19 years. Abbott continues to look for potential new HIV strains to ensure that diagnostic tests for blood screening and detecting infectious diseases remain up to date...

I'll admit to doing a quick skim of the article, but I couldn't figure out a way to fit this into a political framework.

Easy do you vote for a more conservative approach to contain the disease?

Or a more liberal approach and let what happens happens and if people want to come America with HIV so be it , the country is well equipped and has enough money?

So, we just disregard the legal authority that already exists (that I posted in direct response to your OP)?

Got it.

a reply to: Bloodworth

That's the thing with viruses- find effective treatments and/or cures and the little buggers mutate and come back stronger than ever with the mutated strains more often than not being immune to treatments that were effective with former strains. I never saw any reason why HIV would be any different than any other virus. Now we know.

All politics aside the best known way to contain any viral outbreak is through isolation (quarantine).

originally posted by: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk
a reply to: Bloodworth

That's the thing with viruses- find effective treatments and/or cures and the little buggers mutate and come back stronger than ever with the mutated strains more often than not being immune to treatments that were effective with former strains. I never saw any reason why HIV would be any different than any other virus. Now we know.

All politics aside the best known way to contain any viral outbreak is through isolation (quarantine).

Some say the flu vaccine is a never ending battle with each year the virus mutating causing the makers to tweak the vaccine as well.

a reply to: dogstar23

There is none, OP just roped politics into it.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Here's the thing, HIV infects other animals too. Man made? Nah. I think more along the lines of "tailored". Apes have their version of HIV which leads to AIDS for apes.

Modify THAT to affect humans. Going from apes to humans is one hell of a leap..

Also, alot of that testimony is taken WAY outta context. I know because I started looking up some of the documents and yea, it was put together with the intention of you not checking it's citation..

Ooooh....AIDS FOR APES! APE AID! Wheres Bob Geldoph!!!!!




a reply to: cenpuppie

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: FlyingSquirrel

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Bloodworth

1 - already a thread on this

too - why the political wingnuttery ???

Because damn near everything is spun in a pro conservative anti-liberal way here. It's shall we say, popular.

He even used the word conserve out of context when contain was the word to use. Politics on the brain.

Liberals want to help people in need based on love.

Conservatives value self-reliance. And besides it's their own fault for having gay sex.

HIV is almost entirely something you catch from risky behavior. That risky behavior is unprotected male gay sex. The other risk factor is intravenous drug use (sharing needles).

Yes, a hetero man / women can catch it but it almost always is because they had sex with someone engaging in the risk factors above.

Progressives have tried to mask the facts to make it seem like anyone can catch HIV and act like you just wake up one morning and find you are HIV positive. No, you are packing fudge with men, using drugs, and engaging in risky behavior with high risk individuals. It is that simple.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: FlyingSquirrel

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Bloodworth

1 - already a thread on this

too - why the political wingnuttery ???

Because damn near everything is spun in a pro conservative anti-liberal way here. It's shall we say, popular.

He even used the word conserve out of context when contain was the word to use. Politics on the brain.

Liberals want to help people in need based on love.

Conservatives value self-reliance. And besides it's their own fault for having gay sex.

HIV is almost entirely something you catch from risky behavior. That risky behavior is unprotected male gay sex. The other risk factor is intravenous drug use (sharing needles).

Yes, a hetero man / women can catch it but it almost always is because they had sex with someone engaging in the risk factors above.

Progressives have tried to mask the facts to make it seem like anyone can catch HIV and act like you just wake up one morning and find you are HIV positive. No, you are packing fudge with men, using drugs, and engaging in risky behavior with high risk individuals. It is that simple.

Bulls#it

I know a girl who got it from a tattoo gun that wasn't properly sanitized, by the time she figured out she had it, she had passed it on to her boyfriend through vaginal intercourse.

Take your hate somewhere else.