# New drug blocks HIV from entering cells



## Stevo (Jul 10, 2005)

source

i thought this possibly to be of interest here.....



> *New drug blocks HIV from entering cells
> 07/07/2005
> 
> The Asahi Shimbun
> ...


~Stevo


----------



## DT4EMS (Jul 10, 2005)

Man just think of what that could do......

What an incredible claim. I wonder why it hasn't made mainstream news yet?


----------



## Jon (Jul 10, 2005)

This could be a step towards a "cure."

It could also not work.

Still intresting, and time will tell of its results.


Jon


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Jul 11, 2005)

You know why I dont want a cure or simple vaccination for HIV?

because then it would just become another STD out there, that a little trip to the health department could fix. It is about the only tool out there that helps to limit the unsafe sex, needle sharing, etc. Not to mention the guaranteed mutations of the disease once it becomes common as a cold. Its sad that fatal deterrents are the only thing that works to prevent stupidity. Look how many people contract this disease as it is due to unsafe behaviour. It sux about the unitntentional exposures that can result in HIV, but it would be worse to see the retalliation mother nature deals us if we beat one of her most powerful weapons against the plague of humans that threaten her existence.


----------



## usafmedic45 (Jul 11, 2005)

Another patented grossly insensitive remark from SHP (and you guys thought I was a *******)...... 

Too bad being grossly insensitive isn't a way to catch this lethal disease, because if it were I'm sure everyone's favorite member here would have a different take on this.


----------



## TTLWHKR (Jul 11, 2005)

> _Originally posted by usafmedic45_@Jul 11 2005, 01:21 AM
> * I'm sure everyone's favorite member *


 Please, don't make me laugh, I may hurt myself.

Preach to us, Short, tell us why it's good that people die from mistakes. We all make mistakes in life, some people pay for it immediately, and some people pay for it for the rest of their short lives. If someone could reverse that mistake, sure to never make it again, why prevent that?

I'm sure a lot of people do contract HIV from unsafe sexual behavior. But it doesn't always happen with a complete stranger. Many people will have it for a long time, as will their partner, and not know it. You are saying that people deserve to suffer with what they are dealt with in life. I disagree. What about health care workers that are accidently stuck with a needle?

In ten years as an employee of EMS, I've been stuck once; my partner was stuck twice. He has hep C, I was lucky. I got off scot-free, but the medications necessary in the months prior to final testing are a punishment alone. You don't know if it will prevent what you may have contracted, or may not have. In this case, the patient was not HIV positive, but refused to release that information. A nurse left sharps in the bed sheets, and threw a wad of them to me. I strongly dislike her for that... The medication is not friendly, especially to me as a diabetic. The side effects make you very, very ill, from many directions. I hope you have never had to deal with that. I can't fathom the personal horror of someone who goes through all the medication rounds and testing, only to later be diagnosed with a disease that is fatal. 

I certainly hope that this new medication is a sign that modern medicine has the edge on this disease. It will be great for our industry, so many obstacles are in our way as prehospital providers. I will support anyone, and any idea that will make our jobs easier; or more safe. Think of what good that could come out of a discovery like this; maybe a vaccination for pregnant mothers to prevent them from passing HIV/AIDS onto their unborn child. This will open up a whole new field of research for finding a cure for AIDS. And if they can make this an extinct disease, what would be next, cancer? heart disease? 

You have your opinion, and I respect that, no matter how seemingly cruel it is. The more I read your ideas and concerns, short, the less I see you as a health care provider.


----------



## usafmedic45 (Jul 11, 2005)

*claps* Well said Whacker.


----------



## Wingnut (Jul 11, 2005)

Bravo whacker! I couldn't have put it more eloquently than that. I agree with you verbatim.


----------



## Stevo (Jul 11, 2005)

2nd that

I'm reminded of the sanitarium mentaility that ruled the lives of those afflicted from consumption.....

or the _'devil made them do it' _mentality of the KKKristians whom one one hand preach abstinence, yet have the highest rates of abortion, child abuse, etc (check the dumber blue states stats if you doubt me)

it's all too easy to blame the afflicted isn't it? the responder, the kids, whomever is  either knocked up, has an STD, or whatever creepy disease...

the sad fact is, prophylactic's in general are socially unacceptable, we saw this in our own sleepy hamlet when a sex ed teach demonstrated proper condom usage, and certain seletboard members had a cow

_sad that..... _you know it just wouldn't fly if our hero's like James Bond had one of thier romantic interludes broken up by that Trojan Man would it? 

social engineering dictates otherwise in the closet _'don't ask don't tell'_ mentality of our public ...

~S~


----------



## TTLWHKR (Jul 11, 2005)

I like the ones that glow in the dark.


----------



## Wingnut (Jul 11, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Stevo_@Jul 11 2005, 03:42 PM
> *
> 
> the sad fact is, prophylactic's in general are socially unacceptable, we saw this in our own sleepy hamlet when a sex ed teach demonstrated proper condom usage, and certain seletboard members had a cow
> ...


 What's even sadder is how random/casual sex is romaticized. I'm not one to censor things aired on tv. I can turn it off if it bothers me or change the channel if I don't want my children watching something, but so many times I see these long romantic interludes in movies and this is what inexperienced people base thier standards on for sex. It's supposed to be long, passionate, romantic, perfect, no funny noises, no need of protection (because like Stevo said above it would ruin the mood). Since when has it ever been like that? Once we tried the candle wax thing... HA, instead of sex, we spent 2 hours picking the wax off my husband who was itching like hell from it pulling on his chest hair. I think this is where people get the idea that all should be perfect and wonderful and this and that. The truth is, the best sex in the world is when you have had the same partner long enough for him/her to know what you want and like and the couple can communicate fantasy, etc..and intergrate that into the "sessions." Unfortunatley some people don't understand this aspect and go all over looking for something and end up getting sick or hurt from it. I only wish I could relay to people the rewards and benefits of monogamy.

Ok I'm off my soap box for now


----------



## Stevo (Jul 11, 2005)

yeah Wingnut, these fellas should all be dead of STD's... butcha know you just can't preach monogomy to those will sorts, they're going to do what they like.

best to have them work for planned parenthood , and maybe do those corny trojan man commercials _(you know, the ones with the dude that shows up just before the couple does the wild thang , with odd horse sounds in the background?) _


~S~


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Jul 13, 2005)

Apparently, none of you who responded are capable of non sheepish thought, as I did not say that anyone should suffer.  I stated if a cure, or vaccination were to arise that would negate the extreme consequenses of this disease, the fear associated with it would no longer be incentive to avoid the behaviour that can ultimately lead to its contraction, it would become something fixable, so the fear would be gone and the protective behaviours would lax more than they have already.  

I also mentioned that the disease would ultimately mutate, as it continually does until it became resistant to the treatments availabe, as mother nature is a mean old *****, and will win. Only at that point the fear would be gone from the disease, the behaviours would have returned, only now the virus people contract will be much more resiliant.

A family member of mine contracted the disease, luckily he died from other causes before it progressed into all its splendor. Do I feel bad for him for getting it? No, it was his behaviour that caused him to contract it. I would have, on the other hand, felt sorry for him when the progression had left him looking like death, but I would hope that his image in comparison to his former self would have served as a reminder to those who knew him that his behaviour is what brought this about. If he had taken a pill to get rid of it, then no lesson would be learned. What a waste it was that he could not have had the opportunity to help prevent others from contracting the disease in his suffering before he died.


----------



## Stevo (Jul 13, 2005)

> *I stated if a cure, or vaccination were to arise that would negate the extreme consequenses of this disease, the fear associated with it would no longer be incentive to avoid the behaviour that can ultimately lead to its contraction, it would become something fixable, so the fear would be gone and the protective behaviours would lax more than they have already.
> *



well shorty, first off many fixable diseases have thier consequenses and leave thier mark when cured. for instance i don't see a whole lot of CHF'ers looking for thier next triple bypass asking for a greaseburger at the fast food joints....

and as much as i could go on about _fear _selling many a prophalactyic protocall ,protective measure, or magic widget, one has to lend creedence to plain common sense here.  

Nobody , aside from Masochistic or possibly munchenhausen afflicted, wishes to be ill , even in this pill poppin' nation 

[





> *If he had taken a pill to get rid of it, then no lesson would be learned. *


indeed spoken like a Pfizer shareholder with a consience?  I will acknowledge that they are the biggest (and well politically connected) cartel around, makes anything from Columbia look like a dime bag street corner gig

this is an interesting conversation initself for anyone keen to the medico-politico aspects that have had us gravitate towards most a 'senior junkie' status, in fact one of the first leading Q's is _"Have you had a change in your meds"_



> *I also mentioned that the disease would ultimately mutate, as it continually does until it became resistant to the treatments availabe, as mother nature is a mean old *****, and will win. Only at that point the fear would be gone from the disease, the behaviours would have returned, only now the virus people contract will be much more resiliant*



we could do a thread on the antibiotic paradox and argue the validity of your sentiment here....

 or those nasty filiovirus's that have , iirc, mutated to transmit bettween man and animal, gawd help they become airbourne....



> *Do I feel bad for him for getting it? No,*


 i'll asssume promiscuity , not  immunilogical resistance to be what your pissed off about. Yet harboring ill will toward's the promiscuous via a death penalty is just cold man....

~S~


----------



## TTLWHKR (Jul 13, 2005)




----------



## Luno (Jul 14, 2005)

Okay, I guess I'll step into this one, I agree with Short Haired Punk's opinion, that the cure won't solve anything.  But I disagree with his premise that fear of the disease prevents anyone from doing something stupid that they wouldn't have anyway.  I would also argue that Short Haired Punk's opinion regarding promiscuous behaviour is compareable to the arguement that a woman who wears a short skirt is "asking" to be raped.  While to say that it plays no part, would be naive, but to say that it plays a significant enough part to justify the act would be rediculous.  

For short haired punk, nothing will stop people from doing stupid things, period.

Wingnut, are you serious?  Okay, maybe that's too harsh, but your opinion is the "truth" to you.  For me?  No where close.  Are there risks from having multiple partners over your lifetime?  Absolutely.  Are there risks from having one partner your entire life?  Absolutely.  That's why it's called trust, if there is no risk, there is no need for trust.  The only way to mitigate risk is to have no partners.  Personally, for me, things get old, relationships, etc... whatever.  No matter what I/we do, or don't do, in love or otherwise, for me, it gets old, and eventually needs to be eliminated or replaced.  I embrace the our temporary existence.  Are there risks to that, yes, but I accept them knowingly.  But as the saying goes, everyone's got their opinions, and their right to be right, even if it is only to themselves. 

Stevo, my socially minded brother.  Yes, corporations are doing terrible things, but again, a corporation is just a non-nationalized form of government.  Rules, constitutions, by laws, leaders, etc...  However, the AIDs cure, I think we disagree on that, only because I don't believe that we can save everyone.  We as a world society have been so focused on saving people, that we create more then we destroy.  That being said, population control will have to become a factor.  Be it disease, famine, tsunami, whatever, the earth can't sustain our growth rate.  Taking it out further, the universe can't sustain our growth rate.  We try to kill virii for procreating, when we are an ever changing, always adapting virus.  At some point the herd must be culled, or we all will die.  This discussion is purely philosophical between us though, because as an old partner of mine said once "we stand firmly in the way of natural selection."  

just my thoughts, luke


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 14, 2005)

Wow...I think that's the most you've ever said here, Luno.


----------



## Stevo (Jul 14, 2005)

oh i'd like to see a cure for aids, and while we're at it cancer too.  personally i'm just as sick of seeing people shrivel up and die by inches as the rest of you here...

but would i take up smoking if cancer wasn't a question? or would i engage in tawdry sexual behavior if there was no std's....doubtful because i like my health and have a shred of pride _(allbet it a tad more shiney when sober..)_

what i do know is there is a deep and dark politico-medico relationship that has insiduously crept into our lives, rendering jugdements that conflict with the hypocratic oath, while mesmerizing us into false security dazzling us with many technological cha cha's 

that's why i keep pointing to the social engeneering , subliminal to most, yet apparent to those tuned into it simply listening to subordinates parrot away at what they are told

take for instance the AMA at the turn of the century conducting a witch hunt , and eventually erradicating any alternate medicine.  this was the start of the good ol' boys club who's mindset was constrained to a sole criterior, quite imperical in fact

but they got greedy resulting in thier grip loosening , and the options they had held back for decades began to appear

they could no longer convince the public they were the gods of medicine when thier doctrine was confronted by these sorts that produced results , and second opinions became common fare

that's just one example i can think of right now, i do find the politics behind medicine rather a battle bettween the self serving , and those that would like to serve, oh _the threads we could have _here eh?

another day my mates, sleep becons....

~Stevo~


----------



## Wingnut (Jul 14, 2005)

Yup Luno I'm dead serious. Maybe I'm just lucky. Without delving deep into my own sex life, I have been with the same man for 6 years and it is far from boring. But maybe we're more open than most, communicate well, or like I said are just lucky. I know several people that feel the way you do, and I'm certainly not saying there's anything wrong with it, but in my own experiences I wouldn't give up what I have now even if I was promised there'd be no consequences for having as much variety as I wanted (and trust me, I have a list). But I think a lot of people are turned off by the mere thought of only being with one person, I just like to shed a little light on the subject when I can. There are risks to both but you have to admit there is significantly more risk to the promiscuous. 

And Stevo, you're right, if we got into the politics of medicine, the thread would never end.


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Jul 15, 2005)

sex isnt the only way to contract it, theres multiple other ways including tatoos, iv drug use, DUI (what happens if you wreck, resulting in the need of a transfusion, though the supply is much better protected now), EMS refusing to use BSI, Opening a biohazard container to empty and reuse it even though youre not supposed to, etc.

And yes the disease does prevent the risky behaviour, in the 80s, before the whole HIV thing became mainstream, what were Trojans gross earnings in comparison to today? Why are there needle exchange programs out there? I guarantee you HIV is a major contributing factor in the limited growth of IV drug use (this is from personal experience, so dont even bother thinking youre more educated on street drug use because you read some book), BSI alone speaks for itself, why are tatoo parlors becoming more sterile, the list of evidence that the disease contributes to the self protective behavior goes on and on, it is undeniable, and undisputable under any rational argumentative term.

for reference, my family member got it from tatoos recieved in a much les than sterile environment, it is very hard for a heterosexual man to contract the disease in the course of normal sexual behaviours.


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Jul 15, 2005)

" really don't care what they do in prison, we pay taxes anyway, as long as they are out of society. The only idea I liked for Gee-Dubbya was the prison camps where they lived in tents and only ate bologna sandwiches every day. Sure some can be reformed, and I'm all for that. But people who kill, who continue to commit crimes after they were "put through the system". Lock em up and throw away the key. Free Labor, if ya want, clean roads, hell put em on a chain gang for all I care, as long as they aren't out in the world making it a worse place to live. " --TTLWHKR


"Preach to us, Short, tell us why it's good that people die from mistakes. We all make mistakes in life, some people pay for it immediately, and some people pay for it for the rest of their short lives. If someone could reverse that mistake, sure to never make it again, why prevent that?" --TTLWHKR

The sheepish difference in response is astounding. So accourding to youre line of thought, they should only get the vaccine or treatment once? after that they should get the disease for keeps? Spreading HIV isnt making the world a worse place to live?


----------



## Luno (Jul 15, 2005)

Wingnut, sometimes that may just be the case.  Good for you.  I think that I looked for that for a while, maybe you just found the "one."

Stevo, we could go on for ever, regarding social engineering.  I find it amusing that the talking heads on both side of the political spectrum think that this is "something" new.  If you take the Judeo-Christian viewpoint, there was social engineering in effect from the time there were three points of view, i.e. God, Adam, and Eve.  If you take the Evolutionary viewpoint, social engineering has been present farther down the evolutionary chain than we have recorded history.  Either way, nothing changes, just more of the same old, same old.

Shorthairedpunk, I would definitely be open to statistics proving your viewpoints, i.e. "I guarantee you HIV is a major contributing factor in the limited growth of IV drug use," and "it is very hard for a heterosexual man to contract the disease in the course of normal sexual behaviours."  However, I firmly believe that to have a productive discussion, I must both understand and respect the opposing view point.  So at this point, I see no reason to continue this discussion.

FF, hey man, I lurk alot, I just don't really say much, well, usually, hey, next time I go to E. WA, you want me to pick up your boards at the view? 

luke


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Jul 15, 2005)

XXYOure right about that, you have no respect for others views.XX Reread his statement, disregard, this part

The evidence I have regarding the choice not to use needles is from extensive personal history of drug use (insert ignorant replies here). There are two major reasons that needles are avoided, the first is psychological in that alot of needle drug users get addicted to the needle itself, the sensation of injection, the second is contracting HIV, its amazing how many people are not scared of many of the othe diseases, even hepatitis, its fairly managable and not as socially unacceptable, but HIV concerns is the main reason that heroin has become so popular to smoke or snort verse inject even though the high is much more intense with injection, cocaine follows suit, though injection just isnt as popular. There are other reasons why people chose not to, but the fear of HIV is probably the top. (fear of needles is a big one too)

The peole who do these risky things anyway, are the same peole who would do stupid things regardles of how obviously ignorant they are, so no matter what is there to deter them they would have done it anyway.

As for the second thing you want numbers on, give me some time for the data


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 15, 2005)

> _Originally posted by shorthairedpunk_@Jul 14 2005, 10:38 PM
> *YOure right about that, you have no respect for others views.
> 
> *


Better read his post again, because that's not what he said.

You're personal experiences may shape your viewpoint about what happens in society around you, but for us to even attempt to understand it you need to have something more than 





> *I guarantee you HIV is a major contributing factor in the limited growth of IV drug use (this is from personal experience, so dont even bother thinking youre more educated on street drug use because you read some book)*



I have no doubt that HIV is a contributing factor to the limited growth of IV drug use (along with Hep C and a few other nasties out there), but for you to state that it is a MAJOR contributing factor is going to require you to show us some proof.

Also, just because you may or may not have used some street drugs in your past does NOT make you an expert on them any more than the rest of us that have to read books to understand them.




> *FF, hey man, I lurk alot, I just don't really say much, well, usually, hey, next time I go to E. WA, you want me to pick up your boards at the view?*



Luno, you ever make it out to YTC as part of your training?  I start work there with the WMD next week.  PM me if you do head out that way.


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Jul 15, 2005)

Out of curiousity, how many drug users, not a couple hits off a joint, but actual hard core drug users, have you sat and talked to, gotten to know, discussed things other than "how much did you take?" or "do you know who stabbed you?"

me? hundreds if not thousands

the problem with books, is that the majority of them are inaccurate in their depictions, due to the fact that they are mostly written by peole who have only studied the drug cultures, not actually been a part of them. Thats not a bad thing on the authors part, but they can only make assumptions and educated guesses, the information they obtain from users alot of the time is false because of the lack of trust or that the user is there because they are forced to be there, honesty isnt realy a big factor in responses to "the man".

Ive come to find out, that for the most part drug treatments are a farce, all their glamorous ideas are mainly sugar pills that is all the person needed. Im not saying they dont help, im just saying that they dont help in the way they think they are helping. And they understand this in the fact that at one point they will all tell a client I cant help you if you dont help yourself.

That said, go to places like erowid.org and read the publications presented through the various links. Most arent medical texts. Look back in this thread about mainsteam medicine ousting all other forms of medicine, then think about the books you have read, and who wrote them, then tell me you still think all that compiled data to be accurate


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 15, 2005)

> _Originally posted by shorthairedpunk_@Jul 14 2005, 11:18 PM
> * Out of curiousity, how many drug users, not a couple hits off a joint, but actual hard core drug users, have you sat and talked to, gotten to know, discussed things other than "how much did you take?" or "do you know who stabbed you?"
> 
> *


 Three to five a day, for two years when I worked at a hospital.  Security would be involved from the beginning, and we would spend hours talking to the patients in an effort to avoid fighting them.


----------



## Stevo (Jul 15, 2005)

maybe we need a pop quiz ?

source

~S~


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Jul 15, 2005)

http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats.htm#exposure


Exposure Category Estimated # of AIDS Cases, Through 2003 
                                                   Male          Female          Total 
Male-to-male sexual contact        440,887            -            440,887 
Injection Drug Use                      175,988        70,558       246,546 
Male-to-male sexual contact 
and injection drug use                 62,418             -               62,418 
Heterosexual contact                    56,403          93,586      149,989 
Other*                                        14,191            6,535        20,726 


"At the end of 2003, an estimated 1,039,000 to 1,185,000 persons in the United States were living with HIV/AIDS, with 24-27% undiagnosed and unaware of their HIV infection.1"

"Heterosexual contact                    56,403          93,586      149,989"  shows heterosexual behaviour poses less risk to males than females 



I trust CDC number much more than others


----------



## TTLWHKR (Jul 15, 2005)

> _Originally posted by shorthairedpunk_@Jul 15 2005, 12:18 AM
> * " really don't care what they do in prison, we pay taxes anyway, as long as they are out of society. The only idea I liked for Gee-Dubbya was the prison camps where they lived in tents and only ate bologna sandwiches every day. Sure some can be reformed, and I'm all for that. But people who kill, who continue to commit crimes after they were "put through the system". Lock em up and throw away the key. Free Labor, if ya want, clean roads, hell put em on a chain gang for all I care, as long as they aren't out in the world making it a worse place to live. " --TTLWHKR
> 
> 
> ...


 There is a vast difference between knowingly committing a crime, and unknowingly contracting a disease. Your opinion is that people with AIDS should die to learn a lesson, my opinion is that they should not. 

Your opinion is that people go to jail to be reformed, I agree, but I believe that people who are released and continue to break the law should be locked up.. 

I didn't say anything about AIDS, you just can't let it go.


----------



## TTLWHKR (Jul 16, 2005)

> _Originally posted by shorthairedpunk_@Jul 15 2005, 12:18 AM
> * " really don't care what they do in prison, we pay taxes anyway, as long as they are out of society. The only idea I liked for Gee-Dubbya was the prison camps where they lived in tents and only ate bologna sandwiches every day. Sure some can be reformed, and I'm all for that. But people who kill, who continue to commit crimes after they were "put through the system". Lock em up and throw away the key. Free Labor, if ya want, clean roads, hell put em on a chain gang for all I care, as long as they aren't out in the world making it a worse place to live. " --TTLWHKR
> 
> 
> ...


 There is a difference between knowingly committing a crime, and unknowingly contracting a disease.

You're just trying to egg on a fight!


----------

