Re: New vaccine type

June 12, 2005

HIV avoidable? What about been infected through blood transfusions?

In some countries I have heard that HIV and aids is rife and children

are born with it - what has the baby ever done wrong?

> I have just read a story about a new method of vaccination.

Actually it has

> been around for a while, but I suppose that they are just now

getting around

> to working out the bugs. That has been developed is an injector

that uses

> compression to fire the vaccine unde the skin. This particular

version fires the

> vaccine just under the skin and not down into tha layer of nerves,

so it

> should be painless. Another point about this method is that the

vaccines

> themselves would not need refridgeration or preservatives.

>

> I do question the wisdom of these peopel though. The first two

vaccines they

> are working on for their device are for influenza and HIV. I can

see

> influenza but HIV is pointless. Not only is HIV almost totally

preventable in the

> first place, but the application of it is very small. That is,

there is only a

> small market for it, and that being certain segments of the

sexually active

> and drug using classes of people. I for one would refuse a vaccine

for it: my

> likelihood of exposure is minimal at best so why should I get a

vaccine for

> something as easy to avoid as HIV? It would be better if they made

vaccines for

> all the childhood vaccines that are needed now. They'd have a much

larger

> market and the lack of preservative in those vaccines might

actually help

> people.

>

June 12, 2005

,

A few people did get HIV through blood transfusions. However, that was over a decade ago and was caused by a combination of poor screen and corrupt officials. The poor screening took place first and was before effective HIV tests were developed for testing people and the donated blood. In Canada, some officials deliberately allowed contaminated blood to be released for use. The same happened in a certain US state where prisoners were virtually being farmed for their blood. Both of these cases were isolated incidents though. Since then the blood supply is much safer, though it is still recommended that if you know you are going to have surgery to go ahead of time and donate some blood for yourself.

It is true that HIV can infect babies if the mother has the disease. However, because of the blood seperation in the placenta (the mother's blood and the fetus's blood do not come into contact, probably to prevent the mother's system from attacking the fetus) so most infections come during birth. There already is a treatment for this that has proven successful.

As for the main cause of spread of the disease, it is primarily irresponsible behavior on the part of adults and poor education about HIV. For example, in parts of Africa, having sex with a virgin is considered a way to cure yourself. Unless things have changed recently, the South African government has even refused to acknowledge that HIV is caused by a virus at all. There are countries in Africa that have had good success using a combination of education and preventative measures. Their rates of HIV have at least stabilized or declined.

Yes it is unfortunate that some people or babies get infected by this horrible disease. However, I still believe that most people, especially in the developed world, do not need a vaccine. The problem is those people who revel in irresponsible sexual encounters. Giving them a vaccine would only encourage them and leave them open to infection by other diseases. I think it is better to try to educate them and if they still persist, they should foot the bill for their own treatment.

June 12, 2005

Inger,

You do have a point but then so do I. If people would behave themselves then HIV and the other "social diseases" wouldn't be a problem at all. I think all these new medicines aimed at those diseases only encourages that kind of behavior. As a result, medical costs will rise as people have to get treated for these things and may eventually catch some of the real nasty stuff.

I just saw a news story today about another vaccine that really is needed. Appearantly the illegals coming into the US are bringing drug resistant tublerculosis. TB had been all but eliminated in the US for about 20 years or more. Now these people are bringing the nastied version ever of it to this country. We could one day have an epidemic of this stuff and it would kill lots of people. The course of treatment for this strain of TB takes about 18 months and costs $1.2 million dollars per person. That's just crazy! We need to get a vaccine up and running and close the border and only allow legal people in. When that epidemic does come, those politicians and NGOs who fought against closing the border had better run and hide because I'll bet my bottom dollar there would be one heck of a backlash against them.

June 12, 2005

, I think you vastly underestimate how big a segment of the population is sleeping around. And the number growing all the time, as lifelong monogamy customs are laxed all over the world.

Now, if the HIV virus is really the true cause of AIDS, that's another matter altogether. As far as I'm concerned, the jury is still out on that one. But IF it is, I'd say the market for a vaccine against it would be astronomical.

Inger

New vaccine type

I have just read a story about a new method of vaccination. Actually it has been around for a while, but I suppose that they are just now getting around to working out the bugs. That has been developed is an injector that uses compression to fire the vaccine unde the skin. This particular version fires the vaccine just under the skin and not down into tha layer of nerves, so it should be painless. Another point about this method is that the vaccines themselves would not need refridgeration or preservatives.

I do question the wisdom of these peopel though. The first two vaccines they are working on for their device are for influenza and HIV. I can see influenza but HIV is pointless. Not only is HIV almost totally preventable in the first place, but the application of it is very small. That is, there is only a small market for it, and that being certain segments of the sexually active and drug using classes of people. I for one would refuse a vaccine for it: my likelihood of exposure is minimal at best so why should I get a vaccine for something as easy to avoid as HIV? It would be better if they made vaccines for all the childhood vaccines that are needed now. They'd have a much larger market and the lack of preservative in those vaccines might actually help people.

FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship, support and acceptance. Everyone is valued. Don't forget, there are links to other FAM sites on the Links page in the folder marked "Other FAM Sites."

June 12, 2005

Inger,

The HIV drugs are fairly toxic and very expensive. It also does not stop the progression of the disease but merely slows it a for a while. During this time they remain infectious. Another downside about these drugs has been their appearant success. HIV rates had been going down in the US for some time but they have started on the upswing again. Much of the reason for that is the people think that they can just get on the drugs and be OK. They also think a cure is just around the corner, so they can do what they want. We had one man like that in our city who had HIV and was on the Meds but stayed very promiscuous. Even the little town in Alabama had a local who got HIV, knew it and was on the meds, but again stayed promiscuous and gave to at least 12 people out of a population of 500. No telling how much farther it spread.

I just think is is dangerous bordering in irresponsible to let people with HIV/AIDS and drug resistant TB to remain loose. In the old days they would put them in hospitals or colonies where they couldn't spread it any farther. We'll probably come back to that one day, but not until we have a major outbreak that hurts a lot of the population.

June 12, 2005

The AIDS epidemic doesn't get a great deal of publicity, but it is

very much with us (worldwide), especially bad in Africa, where it has

reduced the avg. life expectancy in some countries to below 40, and

increasing steadily in many Asian countries, including India and

China. I guess anyone who wants to see the world population thinned

out might feel encouraged, but the silent devastation is horrifying.

The problem is swept under the rug by governments who want to put on a

happy face. Of course, the other problem with AIDS is that victims

suffer opportunistic infections, such as TB, which is contagious and

becoming increasingly drug resistant.

As the American folk singer, Huddy Ledbetter sang, " We're in the same

boat, brother, and if you shake one end, you're gonna rock the other. "

Ken

> , I think you vastly underestimate how big a segment of the

population is sleeping around. And the number growing all the time, as

lifelong monogamy customs are laxed all over the world.

>

> Now, if the HIV virus is really the true cause of AIDS, that's

another matter altogether. As far as I'm concerned, the jury is still

out on that one. But IF it is, I'd say the market for a vaccine

against it would be astronomical.

>

> Inger

>

> New vaccine type

>

> I have just read a story about a new method of vaccination. Actually

it has been around for a while, but I suppose that they are just now

getting around to working out the bugs. That has been developed is an

injector that uses compression to fire the vaccine unde the skin. This

particular version fires the vaccine just under the skin and not down

into tha layer of nerves, so it should be painless. Another point

about this method is that the vaccines themselves would not need

refridgeration or preservatives.

>

> I do question the wisdom of these peopel though. The first two

vaccines they are working on for their device are for influenza and

HIV. I can see influenza but HIV is pointless. Not only is HIV almost

totally preventable in the first place, but the application of it is

very small. That is, there is only a small market for it, and that

being certain segments of the sexually active and drug using classes

of people. I for one would refuse a vaccine for it: my likelihood of

exposure is minimal at best so why should I get a vaccine for

something as easy to avoid as HIV? It would be better if they made

vaccines for all the childhood vaccines that are needed now. They'd

have a much larger market and the lack of preservative in those

vaccines might actually help people.

>

> FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship,

support and acceptance. Everyone is valued.

>

> Don't forget, there are links to other FAM sites on the Links page

in the folder marked " Other FAM Sites. "

>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

June 12, 2005

Inger, if HIV is not primarily responsible for AIDS, it's hard to

explain the dramatic impact of the protease inhibitor drugs on

survival. They interfere with HIV action, and have changed AIDS from a

death sentence to mainly a chronic disease for those who can access

the drugs.