M.I.T's Draco anti virus questions

[Pharmaceutical International via BioPortfolio]

US researchers have developed a single drug with the potential to treat almost all viral infection types, including common colds and influenza.

Pioneered at MIT, the drug could change current viral treatment methods and it's already been proven as an effective nullifier of 15 different virus types.

Penicillin and other antibiotics are a standard bacterial treatment approach but have little effect in tackling common colds, flu and other viruses. The new MIT drug, named DRACO (Double-stranded RNA-Activated Caspase Oligomerizer) targets infected cells and kills them, specifically working only on one particular RNA found in them.

This double-stranded RNA is essentially like a tag, attached to signify the presence of infection.
MIT DRACO Drug

"DRACO has the potential to revolutionize the treatment and prevention of virtually all viral diseases, including everything from the common cold to Ebola", Doctor Todd Rider, who established and leads the MIT DRACO drug research team, explained.

"Because the antiviral activity of DRACO is so broad-spectrum, we hope that it may even be useful against outbreaks of new or mutated viruses, such as the 2003 SARS [severe acute respiratory syndrome] outbreak."

DRACO is a selectively-targeting drug, in the sense it focuses solely on cells harbouring the virus, leaving healthy tissue in the area safe from significant harm.
All-Virus Drug

MIT's all-virus drug development programme has been funded by several sources, including the New England Regional Center of Excellence for Biodefense and Emerging Infectious Diseases and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Earlier funding was supplied by other organisations including the Defense Threat Reduction Agency and DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency).

Doctor Rider headed a team comprised of five other experts and details of the research appear in the PLoS One publication.

This all-virus drug research remains at an early stage but has already involved mouse-based trials. For the future, tests involving larger animals are forecast, ultimately followed by clinical trials with human participants.

Original Article: MIT’s DRACO Drug Could Kill Nearly All Viruses

Now here is a crazy video about viruses and our DNA I guess the question i trying to ask is whats the difference between RNA and DNA. Because if it effects DNA, then in theory it could make everyone sterile. If its safe, Is this a good thing? or is this halting the progression of our species seeing as how we know there are positive traits some of these viruses give us.

reply to post by pcrobotwolf


Yay! Another thing that will make our race weaker! I personally believe that we are going to hit a wall soon with all those drugs that are altering our cells on the market right now.

Great find.

Peace out

reply to post by pcrobotwolf


I'm really starting to dislike ATS. I would get more reply's if i posted OMG I'm so scared a 5.9 earth quake happened and it broke my priceless Walmart set of dale Earnhardt jr china. Granted its not information I personally found out and posted before anyone else but i think its a good question. Lol MIT creates a drug that cures all viruses and people want to talk about a 5.9 earth quake that killed nobody and maybe did a couple million in damages.

I remember an article that I gave to friends and passed around about how some scientist basically found the cure for cancer. People just moved on with their day. You NEVER hear about that topic anymore....

Here's the link

Cure For Cancer

reply to post by Absco


Thank you absco and bigwig also if your reading my thread check out absco's thread about the cure for cancer as well

because unless it's on cnn or jay leno confirms it, americans don't give a flying f.

that's giving to much credit. it has to be on facebook or twitter so people will believe it, then cnn has to talk about it so they can mention facebook and twitter 87 times, then it will be real.

until then good luck.

reply to post by pcrobotwolf


Already done

2nd line added for entertainment purposes only. Reader's discretion advised.

My comment and links aside, I really like what you explained here. I showed my friend and he's totally hooked to this info.

go and watch "I Am Legend" will smith movie 2007 and then ask is it safe. For we have good virus, and bad, make you sick virus. A"kill all" anti virus is not a good one.

reply to post by bekod


I forgot about "Legend". What about that new movie Contagion?

I dont think ill be eating that pill. Humanity has lived for thousands of years healing themselves with natural medicines, why change now?. When it comes to stuff like this KEEP IT NATURAL!


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by Absco
have not seen that one yet, might be a SK "the Stand" spin off? "28 days later" is one that comes to mind.

reply to post by pcrobotwolf


Well people are probably tired of responding to this in the other HUGE thread about it.

Not that having two identical threads on the subject is a bad thing.

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by pcrobotwolf

 

Well people are probably tired of responding to this in the other HUGE thread about it.

Not that having two identical threads on the subject is a bad thing.

Actually if you read the other thread it goes into religious teachings and conspiracy theory based on reptilian aliens who what to take over the planet.

My thread is asking a question about RNA and DNA also i give scientific reason for concern then i questioned if this is a good idea for the human race or if it would make people sterile I added a video to make it easy for people. Also you can add in the fact that the other thread isn't huge it has 3 pages but the topic on the east coast earth quake was 43 pages the last time i looked.

Sorry i gave The topic of a cure all virus killer that MIT actually created some realistic incite instead of making a thread about space aliens lizard people and getting all hung up on the name Draco. But then again the devil is in the details and i wouldn't want to make you actually read what i wrote no no no that would be too hard

Hey you were the one whining why no one is reading your post and I just pointed out the possible reason why. Don't get mad at the messenger, go argue with them about it.

Hi, to start off answering your question, there are a few differences between DNA and RNA, including but not limited to their chemical makeups, functions, and (especially important here) the tendency for DNA to exist in a double stranded helix where RNA exists in a single strand (except in a few viruses or inside cells affected by viruses as noted in your quoted article on DRACO above).

By the way, you may read the original artical on DRACO here.

While both DNA and RNA are formed by building blocks called nucleotides, the building blocks differ slightly with RNA using the sugar ribos, whereas DNA contains deoxyribose, which as one less oygen atom than ribose.

In general, DNA is the molecule that stores all the information a living thing needs to make the proteins that make an organism what it is. RNA carries information from the DNA to the sites where proteins are manufactured in cells. There it directs and participates in the actual assembly of proteins.

The relationship between DNA and RNA is that DNA templates make RNA molecules which then go off and make proteins (to put it in the most general and simple form.)

DNA makes RNA which makes protein.

DNA, and by extension, RNA can pretty much create anything you've seen in a living thing. It is possible for RNA to make everyone sterile just as it's possible for RNA to, as Carl Zimmer says in the video you embedded, to create an opening in the placental wall that allows mammals to be born.

RNA can be safe or not safe depending on what it does. Obviously, our species is progressing due to the virus/RNA/Gene that creates the protein that makes the opening in the placental wall. So we can't possibly answer that RNA is always detrimental. On the other hand, viral RNA causes cancer, which is obviously detrimental to the progression of the species. So we can't answer that RNA is always progressive.

As for the DRACO project, it kills infected cells (if the researchers are correct in what they've said so far. We may need to wait for peer review to confirm their findings). An infected, cancerous cell is no good to the body, so I can't see the problem with this RNA designed by Todd Rider of MIT.

Do you see any potentially harmful side effects to killing infected cells?

reply to post by bigwig22


Excuse me bigwig22, but how would a drug effective against viral infection weaken the human race?

reply to post by KingAceSuited


no i do not see harmful side effects in killing harmful cells but I'm wary of the targeting system that has the potential to harm helpful viruses in our dna. Plus the fact that mutations are a natural progression of our species as shown in the video without them we would have died off a long time ago. Funny someone posted a cancer cure on this thread I'm not sure if its the one on neo-peptides or not, I should go over the article again.

The truth is everyone is so worried about them self's they fail to see where progress in happening and how slowly it happens. If a million people had to die so that a new evolutionary stage is completed so be it, if its for the betterment of our species. Maybe just maybe we are in the in between stage of evolution and cancer is the result because we are not ready yet and the transition isn't complete. Ps this isn't a pro cancer speech but i know our government they will make children take this drug to attend classes.

If this was a step in progress we just killed it so it should only be for terminally ill children and adults who have already had children and suffer from some type of virus that will turn into cancer later not just for the damn flu.

reply to post by Absco


You can't just stumble upon the cure for cancer. Plus, cancer is a very wide range of diseases and they are all different in nature. You wont find a magic bullet that cures all forms of cancer

I posted in that thread you linked a few times when it was active; DCA is currently being researched by scientists. This process can take anywhere from 10 to 15 years, and most of the drugs that are being researched never make it to the end stage (typically 1 or 2 out of 5,000 drugs will)

Also, you should be aware that it has been shown to increase the risk of liver cancer in mice and has also been linked to neuropathy

To the OP:

I guess the question i trying to ask is whats the difference between RNA and DNA.

The main difference between DNA and RNA is the sugar present in the molecules. While the sugar present in a RNA molecule is ribose, the sugar present in a molecule of DNA is deoxyribose. Deoxyribose is similar to ribose, except that the former has one more OH.

Another difference between the two is the base pairs that they use; DNA uses A,T,C,G - RNA uses A,U,C,G

reply to post by pcrobotwolf


I see your concern and be assured that the targeting system as they've described it would not hurt helpful viruses in our DNA. This is for two reasons:

1. The helpful viruses in our DNA such as those described in the video in the OP do not cause our cells to produce double stranded RNA, which is the target of DRACO.

2. DRACO would never be administered to a healthy person, so if a new virus entered the body which didn't hurt the body then the body would either a) not produce double stranded RNA or b) if it did cause the body to produce double stranded RNA but never caused negative symptoms, the person would never go in for treatment. Eventually the new virus would incorporate itself into DNA and the body would stop producing double stranded RNA.