Scientists announce baby born with HIV is CURED

Scientists announce baby born with HIV is CURED

customwire .ap.org

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A baby born with the AIDS virus appears to have been cured, scientists announced Sunday, describing the case of a child from Mississippi who's now 2 1/2 and has been off medication for about a year with no signs of infection.
There's no guarantee the child will remain healthy, although sophisticated testing uncovered just traces of the virus' genetic material still lingering. If so, it would mark only the world's second reported cure.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Wow! Now they just need to determine exactly WHY this child was able to be cured. The child has been off medication for about a year with no signs of infection. Apparently the doctors (being that it was a baby, gave it more medicine than usually given. This RUSH of medication apparently got into the babies blood quick enough, so that the virus could not find places to hide. So are we just talking about a dosage issue here? Maybe these SUPER doses are needed in order to be effective?

customwire .ap.org
(visit the link for the full news article)

Pretty good news for sure.

Our bodies have always been in a weapons race with nature..viruses and bacteria evolve to defeat out immune system and our immune system evolves and adapts to them.. with HIV they basically had the opportunity to build the viral nuclear bomb and our bodies haven't been able to create a functional defense..

reply to post by thesmokingman


Babies do not sero convert until 1-2 years of life. The reason for this is because if you test the newborn for hiv, or even Hep A, or Hep C, the baby will show the mother's antibodies.

From a few other articles I've read.. the baby isn't exactly cured but is in a remission where the virus isn't making copies of itself.. it's not a total cure as with the "Berlin" patient who has apparently been entirely cured.

This is what they referred to as a "functional" cure in that the infant no longer needs to take medications right now.. there's the risk that the HIV could re-emerge at some other time because it's not been eradicated from it's body.

So "cured" is not correct in the strictest term

www.reuters.com...

The child's story is the first account of an infant achieving a so-called functional cure, a rare event in which a person achieves remission without the need for drugs and standard blood tests show no signs that the virus is making copies of itself.

But it's encouraging that in the three tests they ran they only found a single copy of the virus RNA so it could very well be that the child has no problems for the rest of it's life.

Originally posted by miniatus
Pretty good news for sure.

Our bodies have always been in a weapons race with nature..viruses and bacteria evolve to defeat out immune system and our immune system evolves and adapts to them.. with HIV they basically had the opportunity to build the viral nuclear bomb and our bodies haven't been able to create a functional defense..

I think an EMP would be a better analogy but I get where you are coming from. HIV is so damning to the human body, because it actually infects our immune system and shuts it down. Using Anti-body producing cells to reproduce itself, eventually leading to AIDS which itself doesn't really directly kill you. With out a healthy immune system, most sufferers end up dying, or becoming extremely ill due to minor bacteria or viruses that are nothing more than unpleasant to healthy individuals. It's really sad, and because the disease inhabits and destroys immune cells it's really hard to cure. You can't just eliminate all the immune cells in the body, because then bacteria in our bodies that is normally healthy would consume us

reply to post by thesmokingman


Here we are, revealing just some of what viral gene therapy has in store. You can bet your ass if this kid developed an immunity that scientists will be extracting the mutated virus and the mutated protein that kid has to wip up a batch of cures for themselves.

reply to post by miniatus


Kind of like the stage Magic Johnson is in. He has been HIV pos for twenty plus years!! Interesting....

Apparently the treatment was just the standard cocktail fo drugs - but started at a very early stage of life:

In 2007, Timothy Ray Brown became the first person in the world believed to have recovered from HIV.

His infection was eradicated through an elaborate treatment for leukaemia that involved the destruction of his immune system and a stem cell transplant from a donor with a rare genetic mutation that resists HIV infection.

In contrast, the case of the Mississippi baby involved a cocktail of widely available drugs already used to treat HIV infection in infants.

It suggests the treatment wiped out HIV before it could form hideouts in the body.

These so-called reservoirs of dormant cells usually rapidly re-infect anyone who stops medication, said Dr Persaud.

And so perhaps it actually is a "proper" cure - albeit not one that anyone reading this can actually use!!

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Apparently the treatment was just the standard cocktail fo drugs - but started at a very early stage of life:

In 2007, Timothy Ray Brown became the first person in the world believed to have recovered from HIV.

His infection was eradicated through an elaborate treatment for leukaemia that involved the destruction of his immune system and a stem cell transplant from a donor with a rare genetic mutation that resists HIV infection.

In contrast, the case of the Mississippi baby involved a cocktail of widely available drugs already used to treat HIV infection in infants.

It suggests the treatment wiped out HIV before it could form hideouts in the body.

These so-called reservoirs of dormant cells usually rapidly re-infect anyone who stops medication, said Dr Persaud.

And so perhaps it actually is a "proper" cure - albeit not one that anyone reading this can actually use!!

edit on 3-3-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)

I love being right. I'm planning on being a biologist/scientist. I think i could have a lot to offer to the community of humanity. I kind of am understanding all of this on some levels im not seeing in articles and such. I find all this stuff so fascinating and i do plenty of research into the topic myself. I won't be surprised when i up a biology book in about a year. I should know A lot about this and should breeze through this stuff. Gunna catch up on chemistry as well.

reply to post by CrypticSouthpaw


Sory - what is it you are congratulating yourself on being right about??

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Maybe the standard HIV drugs, plus infusion of stem cells were the key factor.

Perhaps the stem cells (babies have lots) determined chemically that there wasn't enough immune system cells due to them being hijacked by HIV..and morphed, as they do, into what was needed?

Originally posted by MysterX
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Maybe the standard HIV drugs, plus infusion of stem cells were the key factor.

No stem cells were used with the infant.

Perhaps the stem cells (babies have lots) determined chemically that there wasn't enough immune system cells due to them being hijacked by HIV..and morphed, as they do, into what was needed?

Maybe you could read the article and see what they ascribe the success to??

Since they used 'highly sensitive tests" I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss this.

I'm speaking as someone who has argued tirelessly against HIV/AIDS denialists or dissidents on certain threads.
But the fact is that we don't know everything about human history with this virus.
Several mainstream scientific documentaries have shown that a small number of people are immune or less affected.
Once infected it hasn't been shown to be reversible yet, but anything is possible.
Most facilities are only now moving where millions of people are actually infected (rather than studying a few thousand in northern countries).

I'd tentatively agree with the above posters that are skeptical, but human resilience has surprised us before, and cases like this might hold an important key to future treatments.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by MysterX
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Maybe the standard HIV drugs, plus infusion of stem cells were the key factor.

No stem cells were used with the infant.

Perhaps the stem cells (babies have lots) determined chemically that there wasn't enough immune system cells due to them being hijacked by HIV..and morphed, as they do, into what was needed?

Maybe you could read the article and see what they ascribe the success to??

edit on 3-3-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)

No no...you misunderstand...the infant already has an abundance of it's OWN stem cells...more at it's age, than at any future point in it's life.

I'm talking about natural stem cells, not those brought in from outside the body, that's why i said '(babies have lots)', when i said 'an infusion of stem cells' i meant the HIV drugs, being aided by his own cells.

reply to post by MysterX


i donno about that mang. The codes are already there, Stem cells only convert into whats already there into newer cells. Not by my understanding does a stem cell carry the new rna packages that a virus has. As far as i know. Stem cells are the basic. HIV is a complicated organism. It has antigenic shift and a number of other things that only a couple viruses have. So that being said.

To think stem cells can just rewrite a viruses rna sequences... i doubt it.

Such things only happen when a person has the right codes. Think of dna like a piano with the seperation of the white and black notes. Not everyone's dna will be exactly the same. But roughly the sequences of black black white black are closely related. But the slight changes are the updates from viruses. Imagine a virus's code is every black key. If your *barcode* is not the like the new updated thats been installed. Then the cell has an error and corrupts. The trick is fixing these codes in viruses to make them work for us. And as far as i can tell this was a complex procedure that involved the anti-biotics and such. But my point is if this kid is Immune You can bet they will try to find that new sequences left by the virus, isolate the protein, Exract rna then put it in a virus and data. A huge step closer to eliminating the death rates of HIV, but not the infection.


Viruses are bio updates. And yes once you get HIV and conquer you you have it for life. Because it mutates in you. But since your proteins are accustomed to it it just injects and does a copy paste over data thats already the same. So no effect, only a small number of cells would be corrupted.

A baby born with the AIDS virus appears to have been cured

AIDS is not a virus its a syndrome..HIV is a virus!

They cant even get the opening sentence correct

Originally posted by MysterX

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by MysterX
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Maybe the standard HIV drugs, plus infusion of stem cells were the key factor.

No stem cells were used with the infant.

Perhaps the stem cells (babies have lots) determined chemically that there wasn't enough immune system cells due to them being hijacked by HIV..and morphed, as they do, into what was needed?

Maybe you could read the article and see what they ascribe the success to??

edit on 3-3-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)

No no...you misunderstand...the infant already has an abundance of it's OWN stem cells...more at it's age, than at any future point in it's life.

Indeed - but your post said "an infusion of stem cells" - an infusion is not the infants own stem cells - it is introduction from the outside.

Perhaps you miswrote that??

I'm talking about natural stem cells, not those brought in from outside the body, that's why i said '(babies have lots)', when i said 'an infusion of stem cells' i meant the HIV drugs, being aided by his own cells.

OK - well that makes more sense and perhaps it was just an unfortunat choice of words in the post I eplied to?

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


LOL what? stem cells are from aborted babies. Not living babies. The term stem cell is used because its the building blocks of all cells. Starts in the wome.

Stem cells have nothing to do with how the baby fought off the disease. The child would need to have proteins, the correct ones that would create the antigens needed to produce the anti-bodies to fight them off. But beyond that the other codes offer other things as well besides immunity to one disease. This is what people need to understand and realize. He did not just gain immunity. But possible increased intelligence, perhaps a different pharamon smell. Hormone level. All of these can be effected by such programming. And thats just the basics, We can get into full on psychic powers and godhood with these paths.

This is great news. It's just too bad that the Government introduced this virus to begin with.