HIV Cured By Stem Cell Transplant

sternThe first person ever successfully cured of HIV, thanks to the miracle of stem cells? Aidsmap reports:

Doctors who carried out a stem cell transplant on an HIV-infected man with leukaemia in 2007 say they now believe the man to have been cured of HIV infection as a result of the treatment, which introduced stem cells which happened to be resistant to HIV infection.

The man received bone marrow from a donor who had natural resistance to HIV infection; this was due to a genetic profile which led to the CCR5 co-receptor being absent from his cells. The most common variety of HIV uses CCR5 as its ‘docking station’, attaching to it in order to enter and infect CD4 cells, and people with this mutation are almost completely protected against infection.

The “Berlin patient,” Timothy Ray Brown, a US citizen who lives in Berlin, was interviewed this week by German news magazine Stern.

His course of treatment for leukaemia was gruelling and lengthy. Brown suffered two relapses and underwent two stem cell transplants, as well as a serious neurological disorder that flared up when he seemed to be on the road to recovery.

The neurological problem led to temporary blindness and memory problems. Brown is still undergoing physiotherapy to help restore his coordination and gait, as well as speech therapy.

Friends have noticed a personality change too: he is much more blunt, possibly a disinhibition that is related to the neurological problems.

On being asked if it would have been better to live with HIV than to have beaten it in this way he says “Perhaps. Perhaps it would have been better, but I don’t ask those sorts of questions anymore.”

Timothy Brown is now considering a move from Berlin to Barcelona or San Francisco, and, reports Stern magazine, enjoying a drink and a cigarette.

Stern also interviewed Dr Gero Hütter, who was in charge of Timothy Brown’s treatment. Dr Hütter told Stern that as a scientist he was “in the right place, at the right time” and that “for me it is important to have overthrown the dogma that HIV can never be cured.  Something like this is the greatest thing one can achieve in medical research”.

If a cure has been achieved in this patient, it points the way towards attempts to develop a cure for HIV infection through genetically engineered stem cells.

The German researchers and San Francisco-based immunologist Professor Jay Levy believe that the findings point to the importance of suppressing the production of CCR5-bearing cells, either through transplants or gene therapy.

Scientists were sufficiently intrigued by the Berlin patient that they met in Berlin in 2009 to discuss how they could coordinate efforts to identify CCR5-delta32 homozygous donors and expand the supply of stem cells from these donors, for example through sampling blood cells from the umbilical cord of babies born to mothers who are homozygous for CCR5-delta32, in order to eventually facilitate stem-cell therapy.

Gene therapy techniques which can transform stem cells – and all their descendents – into cells resistant to HIV entry may be a more practical option than looking for matching donors.

Several US research groups announced in October 2009 that they had received funding to explore techniques for engineering and introducing CCR5-deficient stem cells.

If these approaches prove successful they will be expensive, so in the early stages it is likely that they would be reserved for people with no remaining treatment options or a cancer requiring bone marrow or stem cell transfer.

As Timothy Brown’s experience shows, curing HIV infection through ablative chemotherapy, immunosuppressive drugs and stem cell transfer is not a course of treatment for the faint-hearted. It has required courage, determination and a lot of support to become the first person to be pronounced `cured` of HIV infection.

, , , ,

  • The_girl_who_ate_waffles

    so does he have lukemia or HIV?

    • Golchab

      wth?

      • Quad-Zilla

        Thhh… obviously, you’re not a golfer…

        Ironaddict06 actually knows what AIDS is. I’m willing to bet that most people can hear the word AIDS and not know at all what it actually does to you (small, negligible diseases can run their terrifying natural course because of the HIV virus’ ability to ruin an immune system beyond repair)…

        Most people think AIDS is somehow a different disease, apart from the HIV that causes it. They hear “It’s HIV, but not AIDS yet.”, and think they are two different things, instead of a natural progression toward what the HIV virus does.

        Better description and education in schools, ect. is what’s needed.

        • Quad-Zilla

          Oh and stem cells, apparently…

        • Ironaddict06

          Thank you Quad-Zilla. I try to offer facts.

    • 5by5

      He las leukimia that is the result of HIV weakening his immune system.

      • Ironaddict06

        Right. People with AIDS die from leukimia, pneumnoia, or other diseases the body would naturally be able to fight off. AIDS kills the white blood cells faster than the body can produce them. As this article shows AIDS is a defect of the DNA-spefically the CCR5 gene. So the cure is through gene therapy, which at this time only people with money can afford.

  • The_girl_who_ate_waffles

    so does he have lukemia or HIV?

  • Golchab

    wth?

  • radiac

    Clearly the Devil’s work.

  • radiac

    Clearly the Devil’s work.

  • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

    Wow…its amazing what science and medicine can accomplish…when they aren’t handcuffed by the followers of a Bronze Age collection of fairy tales.

  • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

    Wow…its amazing what science and medicine can accomplish…when they aren’t handcuffed by the followers of a Bronze Age collection of fairy tales.

  • 5by5

    This is an absolutely wonderful discovery. A triumph of science in the 21st Century.

    Now watch the batshit crazies in the Republican Congress try to roll back stem cell research so they can protect a glob of goo over a fully born and breathing human being.

    Because that’s hitting three birds with one stone for them — they get to attack women’s reproductive freedom with this kind of flank attack claiming goo is “life” because it has a soul no one can prove exists (thus pissing off atheists and secular humanists), and more importantly, this way, more gay people will die. Which to them is a good thing.

  • 5by5

    This is an absolutely wonderful discovery. A triumph of science in the 21st Century.

    Now watch the batshit crazies in the Republican Congress try to roll back stem cell research so they can protect a glob of goo over a fully born and breathing human being.

    Because that’s hitting three birds with one stone for them — they get to attack women’s reproductive freedom with this kind of flank attack claiming goo is “life” because it has a soul no one can prove exists (thus pissing off atheists and secular humanists), and more importantly, this way, more gay people will die. Which to them is a good thing.

    • Alex

      This discovery has it all: stem cells, AIDS and Germans. This must be final proof for the fundies that scientific progress is a plot by gay Nazi abortionists. At least in the long run natural selection will work against them.

  • 5by5

    He las leukimia that is the result of HIV weakening his immune system.

  • Ironaddict06

    Right. People with AIDS die from leukimia, pneumnoia, or other diseases the body would naturally be able to fight off. AIDS kills the white blood cells faster than the body can produce them. As this article shows AIDS is a defect of the DNA-spefically the CCR5 gene. So the cure is through gene therapy, which at this time only people with money can afford.

  • Fiver

    Whatever your opinions on Bronze Age deities, their associated fairy tales, and their followers, the life cycle of every sexually reproducing creature begins when sperm and ova meet. This goes for raccoons and lizards and us too. The product of that union may be “goo” for some time and it may not be a person in the fullest sense of the word.

    But it is a human being.

    Whatever other opinions you and I have on the subject, abortion kills innocent human beings. I’m not even sure what to say about the harvesting or use of embryonic stem cells does, because frankly I don’t know that much about the processes surrounding the technology.

    I think it is ironic that the liberal tradition has been one that can usually be characterized by giving voice to the voiceless. Not in this case. Here, the folks clamoring for “reproductive rights” (let’s take away the ideology behind that and see what biology has to say about controlling reproduction) and the use of embryonic stem in medical procedures are squarely on the side of they can’t talk and they’re buried inside another person, so they’re beneath moral consideration.

    Except of course when y’all get up on your “let’s make sure every baby is wanted” high horse. You’re all so full of love, you should really be applauded. *hugs*

    Don’t worry, market forces are on your side on this one. People will pay well for the empty promise of escaping mortality. And history is on your side too, for that matter. As far as I know, human beings have always found a way to rid themselves of unwanted children. I don’t expect anyone will be simply harvesting aborted fetuses, but this is just one more nail in the coffin of the idea that there are uses to which human beings should not be put.

  • Fiver

    Whatever your opinions on Bronze Age deities, their associated fairy tales, and their followers, the life cycle of every sexually reproducing creature begins when sperm and ova meet. This goes for raccoons and lizards and us too. The product of that union may be “goo” for some time and it may not be a person in the fullest sense of the word.

    But it is a human being.

    Whatever other opinions you and I have on the subject, abortion kills innocent human beings. I’m not even sure what to say about the harvesting or use of embryonic stem cells does, because frankly I don’t know that much about the processes surrounding the technology.

    I think it is ironic that the liberal tradition has been one that can usually be characterized by giving voice to the voiceless. Not in this case. Here, the folks clamoring for “reproductive rights” (let’s take away the ideology behind that and see what biology has to say about controlling reproduction) and the use of embryonic stem in medical procedures are squarely on the side of they can’t talk and they’re buried inside another person, so they’re beneath moral consideration.

    Except of course when y’all get up on your “let’s make sure every baby is wanted” high horse. You’re all so full of love, you should really be applauded. *hugs*

    Don’t worry, market forces are on your side on this one. People will pay well for the empty promise of escaping mortality. And history is on your side too, for that matter. As far as I know, human beings have always found a way to rid themselves of unwanted children. I don’t expect anyone will be simply harvesting aborted fetuses, but this is just one more nail in the coffin of the idea that there are uses to which human beings should not be put.

    • Orbitalspryness

      are you high or just retarded?

      • Kink

        I know it’s like he admits that s/he doesn’t know how stem cell research works, admits that history and commerce are both on the side of this issue, thinks that it won’t be a case of people simply “harvesting” foetuses, and that “human beings have always found a way to rid themselves of unwanted children”, so what really is the point of the comment? And the anit-liberal venting?

        • Kink

          *anti*

          • Fiver

            No worries, Kink, I’m not the kind of guy who calls people out on accidentally misspelling a word. Especially when I so frequently misspell and just plain forget words myself.

            Anti-liberal venting. Sure. I’ve read disinfo.com for several years now and I am depressed by the lack of diversity of opinion I so often see on a site whose readership probably tends to think of itself as intellectually and politically independent.

            As for fucking off, no, I enjoy the stories here. :-)

      • Fiver

        You’re free to make up your own mind on the subject.

        The stories that people make up about us are often more entertaining than the truth anyway. :D

        • Orbitalspryness

          us?!

          HOLY SHIT! STEM CELLS CAN TYPE!

          • Fiver

            HOLY SHIT?!?! I’M A STEM CELL?!?! AND ALL THIS TIME I THOUGHT I WAS JUST HIGH!!! :D

    • Kink

      Thanks for that Fiver.

      “I’m not even sure what to say about the harvesting or use of embryonic stem cells does, because frankly I don’t know that much about the processes surrounding the technology.”

      Well fuck off then.

    • hypnos

      The question isn’t whether or not the “goo” is alive, it is at what point does the rights of the goo trump the rights of the woman carrying it.

      But the article is about stem-cells, not abortion. Anyone claiming cells have rights is working with a poor understanding of biology -and- politics.

      • Fiver

        Hypnos, I’m not the first person to conflate the two issues of abortion and embryonic stem cell research. I don’t think I was even the first to do so in the comments on this article.

        As for my poor understanding of politics and biology, I’m guilty as charged. (And I didn’t take your comment as a personal attack or even about me in particular. It’s just true.) However, my experience has been that we just have to do the best we can with what we’ve got. When do the less than perfectly informed on a subject get to have an opinion? For too many people the answer is an implicit “Their ignorance gets a pass when it agrees with my expert opinion.”

        • Hypnos1

          “When do the less than perfectly informed on a subject get to have an opinion? For too many people the answer is an implicit “Their ignorance gets a pass when it agrees with my expert opinion.” ”

          I think that’s a great start actually. When there are two opposing viewpoints to an issue, and one is based on scientific evidence and the other is based on a limited interpretation of an ancient text, I would hope the law will side with the former.

          Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion, from the informed, to the “less an perfectly informed” to the completely ignorant. However, that entitlement to opinion should never been mistaken for entitlement to set a legislative agenda.

    • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

      I’ll cheer for the end of abortion as an option on the same day that the rightwing fundies suddenly shift gears and cry out for sex education and prevention for pregnancies that doesn’t involve scary stories aimed at teens and lies about condoms.

      Microscopic blastuli may have ‘value’…but if I can’t see it with the naked eye…it doesn’t get the same, identical level of consideration I’d give to the woman stuck carrying to term because the paperwork to get rid of it takes so long to finish that she might be legally trapped into forced birth because of red tape. I won’t apologize for my sanity and rationality…but I will pity you for your lack of it.

      “Oh if only cell clusters could talk…then we’d feel differently”…which is the fallback claim of morons…because guess what…they don’t talk, they’ll never talk, and there is no magical invisible Sky King to punish the wicked people after they die and reward the faithful. It’s bunk…because a certain percentage of people either intellectually disadvantaged or developmentally and morally stunted will fall for it rather than face the existential fear and angst of a cosmos with meaning that may well be entirely non-discernable and nonsensical in any terms we could fashion and employ to define it.

      There’s one difference between the right and the left on this issue. The left seems to be willing to cannibalize the already dead and make use of infinitesimally tiny parts to make life better for the people actually living…the right cannibalizes the living while promising that the afterlife will make it all okay. One cares about what is…the other cares about what might be. My eyes are clear, my feet are on the ground, and my compassion is for the living and breathing…not for microscopic cell clusters. So by all means…enjoy rationalizing away your contempt for the living by wallowing in fake histrionics over a cell cluster…I’ll be rationalizing my contempt for…well…pretty much just you and yours.

      • Fiver

        VoxMagi, you say you have pity and contempt for me and mine (I assume you mean the morally stunted and intellectually disadvantaged) . You know, there’s a funny thing about me. I like it when people think well of me. Even strangers on the internet. But I can live without it.

    • gil

      The real problem with abortion isn’t that it is killing human beings; it’s that it is killing beings. You and I are worth no more than an amoeba or, if you will go along with me on this, a zygote. That’s one thing that’s essentially wrong with the logic you present.

      That being said, this might sound like I’m attacking you, but that’s not what I’m doing. It really is just an analogy (a simple and maybe not really comparable one, but try to see where I’m actually going with it). And it goes like this:

      Someone once said something like “I do not agree with what you’re saying, but I defend your right to say it to the death.” This is, I think, the main issue with the “popular” abortion problem.

      You see; beings are killed every single second of every single day all throughout the world. You’re possibly, right now, considering killing a gnat or fly or some insect or arachnid. This is, quite unfortunately, a fact of life. So unless you are willing to be against the death of ALL and ANY living creature – which I would absolutely not hold against you –, I do not accept this argument against legal abortion.
      Lots of tiny little cells are dying inside your own body as I type and then also as you read. Your rationality, your conscious self, as it is, is most likely to blame for many of these deaths, in some way or another. And I do not go around telling you “stop drinking that beer, you’re killing innocent beings” or “a bacteria in your intestine is going to die just because you ate that”. I allow you the right – which is in fact yours from the get go (so this is silly, that one should allow another to have something which is inherently his/hers) – to do whatever you wish to what we call “your own body”, even though I could, in fact, positively argue that it is as much yours as it is mine or even that this concept of ownership we hold is silly and fundamentally wrong. I’m just accepting the state of things, the prevailing conventions we hold: we think of bodies as belonging to the conscious, abstract, mental beings which they carry/which carry them.

      So while you might be against some person’s abortion on the grounds of whatever it is, I definitely will not accept that you will negate them the right to do as they please with what is, essentially and according to the current and prevailing world-view and zeitgeist, theirs. Their body, part of their body; they shall have the birth-right to do to it what they will, as do you and I.

      So you do have the right to be against abortion [even though I will argue with you that I find being “against” something always fundamentally wrong and pretty much counter-productive, even though I am not against it (thank you very much)], but you do not have the right to make it impossible or illegal for anyone else to have the choice. It’s essentially something which each person should decide by themselves. And beyond that, you certainly have the right to try and show them how they should decide this or that way, although I would urge you to be completely logical with your arguments and act accordingly and appropriately so as not to incur in doing not what you preach (which, as I’ve tried to demonstrate, you will).

      And as long as I’m on it, I’ll say something else: the problem with, for instance, stoning women to death, is not a problem of women’s rights, either; it’s one of people’s rights. Or, if you all will so kindly permit me, one of beings’ rights. If we keep on talking about “men this” and “women that”, we’ll never get anywhere, because everybody will always essentially think and assume these are very different and separate things, when, in fact, they essentially are not.

  • Orbitalspryness

    are you high or just retarded?

  • Kink

    Thanks for that Fiver.

    “I’m not even sure what to say about the harvesting or use of embryonic stem cells does, because frankly I don’t know that much about the processes surrounding the technology.”

    Well fuck off then.

  • Kink

    I know it’s like he admits that s/he doesn’t know how stem cell research works, admits that history and commerce are both on the side of this issue, thinks that it won’t be a case of people simply “harvesting” foetuses, and that “human beings have always found a way to rid themselves of unwanted children”, so what really is the point of the comment? And the anit-liberal venting?

  • Kink

    *anti*

  • Alex

    This discovery has it all: stem cells, AIDS and Germans. This must be final proof for the fundies that scientific progress is a plot by gay Nazi abortionists. At least in the long run natural selection will work against them.

  • Alex

    This discovery has it all: stem cells, AIDS and Germans. This must be final proof for the fundies that scientific progress is a plot by gay Nazi abortionists. At least in the long run natural selection will work against them.

  • Anonymous

    The question isn’t whether or not the “goo” is alive, it is at what point does the rights of the goo trump the rights of the woman carrying it.

    But the article is about stem-cells, not abortion. Anyone claiming cells have rights is working with a poor understanding of biology -and- politics.

  • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

    I’ll cheer for the end of abortion as an option on the same day that the rightwing fundies suddenly shift gears and cry out for sex education and prevention for pregnancies that doesn’t involve scary stories aimed at teens and lies about condoms.

    Microscopic blastuli may have ‘value’…but if I can’t see it with the naked eye…it doesn’t get the same, identical level of consideration I’d give to the woman stuck carrying to term because the paperwork to get rid of it takes so long to finish that she might be legally trapped into forced birth because of red tape. I won’t apologize for my sanity and rationality…but I will pity you for your lack of it.

    “Oh if only cell clusters could talk…then we’d feel differently”…which is the fallback claim of morons…because guess what…they don’t talk, they’ll never talk, and there is no magical invisible Sky King to punish the wicked people after they die and reward the faithful. It’s bunk…because a certain percentage of people either intellectually disadvantaged or developmentally and morally stunted will fall for it rather than face the existential fear and angst of a cosmos with meaning that may well be entirely non-discernable and nonsensical in any terms we could fashion and employ to define it.

    There’s one difference between the right and the left on this issue. The left seems to be willing to cannibalize the already dead and make use of infinitesimally tiny parts to make life better for the people actually living…the right cannibalizes the living while promising that the afterlife will make it all okay. One cares about what is…the other cares about what might be. My eyes are clear, my feet are on the ground, and my compassion is for the living and breathing…not for microscopic cell clusters. So by all means…enjoy rationalizing away your contempt for the living by wallowing in fake histrionics over a cell cluster…I’ll be rationalizing my contempt for…well…pretty much just you and yours.

  • Quad-Zilla

    Thhh… obviously, you’re not a golfer…

    Ironaddict06 actually knows what AIDS is. I’m willing to bet that most people can hear the word AIDS and not know at all what it actually does to you (small, negligible diseases can run their terrifying natural course because of the HIV virus’ ability to ruin an immune system beyond repair)…

    Most people think AIDS is somehow a different disease, apart from the HIV that causes it. They hear “It’s HIV, but not AIDS yet.”, and think they are two different things, instead of a natural progression toward what the HIV virus does.

    Better description and education in schools, ect. is what’s needed.

  • Quad-Zilla

    Oh and stem cells, apparently…

  • Quad-Zilla

    Oh and stem cells, apparently…

  • Fiver

    Hypnos, I’m not the first person to conflate the two issues of abortion and embryonic stem cell research. I don’t think I was even the first to do so in the comments on this article.

    As for my poor understanding of politics and biology, I’m guilty as charged. (And I didn’t take your comment as a personal attack or even about me in particular. It’s just true.) However, my experience has been that we just have to do the best we can with what we’ve got. When do the less than perfectly informed on a subject get to have an opinion? For too many people the answer is an implicit “Their ignorance gets a pass when it agrees with my expert opinion.”

  • Fiver

    VoxMagi, you say you have pity and contempt for me and mine (I assume you mean the morally stunted and intellectually disadvantaged) . You know, there’s a funny thing about me. I like it when people think well of me. Even strangers on the internet. But I can live without it.

  • Fiver

    You’re free to make up your own mind on the subject.

    The stories that people make up about us are often more entertaining than the truth anyway. :D

  • Orbitalspryness

    us?!

    HOLY SHIT! STEM CELLS CAN TYPE!

  • Fiver

    No worries, Kink, I’m not the kind of guy who calls people out on accidentally misspelling a word. Especially when I so frequently misspell and just plain forget words myself.

    Anti-liberal venting. Sure. I’ve read disinfo.com for several years now and I am depressed by the lack of diversity of opinion I so often see on a site whose readership probably tends to think of itself as intellectually and politically independent.

    As for fucking off, no, I enjoy the stories here. :-)

  • Fiver

    HOLY SHIT?!?! I’M A STEM CELL?!?! AND ALL THIS TIME I THOUGHT I WAS JUST HIGH!!! :D

  • Anonymous

    y’know,… not all stem cells come from abortions. There’s also abandoned frozen embryos.

  • Anonymous

    y’know,… not all stem cells come from abortions. There’s also abandoned frozen embryos.

  • samthor

    y’know,… not all stem cells come from abortions. There’s also abandoned frozen embryos.

  • Ironaddict06

    Thank you Quad-Zilla. I try to offer facts.

  • Ironaddict06

    Thank you Quad-Zilla. I try to offer facts.

  • Ironaddict06

    Thank you Quad-Zilla. I try to offer facts.

  • Ironaddict06

    Thank you Quad-Zilla. I try to offer facts.

  • gil

    The real problem with abortion isn’t that it is killing human beings; it’s that it is killing beings. You and I are worth no more than an amoeba or, if you will go along with me on this, a zygote. That’s one thing that’s essentially wrong with the logic you present.

    That being said, this might sound like I’m attacking you, but that’s not what I’m doing. It really is just an analogy (a simple and maybe not really comparable one, but try to see where I’m actually going with it). And it goes like this:

    Someone once said something like “I do not agree with what you’re saying, but I defend your right to say it to the death.” This is, I think, the main issue with the “popular” abortion problem.

    You see; beings are killed every single second of every single day all throughout the world. You’re possibly, right now, considering killing a gnat or fly or some insect or arachnid. This is, quite unfortunately, a fact of life. So unless you are willing to be against the death of ALL and ANY living creature – which I would absolutely not hold against you –, I do not accept this argument against legal abortion.
    Lots of tiny little cells are dying inside your own body as I type and then also as you read. Your rationality, your conscious self, as it is, is most likely to blame for many of these deaths, in some way or another. And I do not go around telling you “stop drinking that beer, you’re killing innocent beings” or “a bacteria in your intestine is going to die just because you ate that”. I allow you the right – which is in fact yours from the get go (so this is silly, that one should allow another to have something which is inherently his/hers) – to do whatever you wish to what we call “your own body”, even though I could, in fact, positively argue that it is as much yours as it is mine or even that this concept of ownership we hold is silly and fundamentally wrong. I’m just accepting the state of things, the prevailing conventions we hold: we think of bodies as belonging to the conscious, abstract, mental beings which they carry/which carry them.

    So while you might be against some person’s abortion on the grounds of whatever it is, I definitely will not accept that you will negate them the right to do as they please with what is, essentially and according to the current and prevailing world-view and zeitgeist, theirs. Their body, part of their body; they shall have the birth-right to do to it what they will, as do you and I.

    So you do have the right to be against abortion [even though I will argue with you that I find being “against” something always fundamentally wrong and pretty much counter-productive, even though I am not against it (thank you very much)], but you do not have the right to make it impossible or illegal for anyone else to have the choice. It’s essentially something which each person should decide by themselves. And beyond that, you certainly have the right to try and show them how they should decide this or that way, although I would urge you to be completely logical with your arguments and act accordingly and appropriately so as not to incur in doing not what you preach (which, as I’ve tried to demonstrate, you will).

    And as long as I’m on it, I’ll say something else: the problem with, for instance, stoning women to death, is not a problem of women’s rights, either; it’s one of people’s rights. Or, if you all will so kindly permit me, one of beings’ rights. If we keep on talking about “men this” and “women that”, we’ll never get anywhere, because everybody will always essentially think and assume these are very different and separate things, when, in fact, they essentially are not.

  • http://www.genericviagrarx.net/ Rx Viagra

    Guys !!!!! Have we stumbled upon a possible medical breakthrough ?? This might be globe turning event, if it indeed proves to be true and not a freak event. I mean, we have always heard about scientists going ga ga over the numerous benefits Stem cell therapy would have on us. Stem Cell research has been going on for a long time but this is the first instance I am coming across. A cure would be great. And that too of all the diseases, it is HIV. Now that’s something to feel good about. Millions could be saved from this cure and going by the process mentioned in the news, it sure seems probable. I hope this wonderful discovery proves accurate so that one day AIDS would only be a long forgotten dream, just like any other dreaded diseases of the yore.

  • Hypnos1

    “When do the less than perfectly informed on a subject get to have an opinion? For too many people the answer is an implicit “Their ignorance gets a pass when it agrees with my expert opinion.” ”

    I think that’s a great start actually. When there are two opposing viewpoints to an issue, and one is based on scientific evidence and the other is based on a limited interpretation of an ancient text, I would hope the law will side with the former.

    Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion, from the informed, to the “less an perfectly informed” to the completely ignorant. However, that entitlement to opinion should never been mistaken for entitlement to set a legislative agenda.

  • Anonymous

    Your blog seems very intense but is very detailed and neatly written, which keeps me drawing to this blog time and again. No other blog explains this concept like yours did.
    http://www.mynetpharma.com/

  • Anonymous

    Wow…I think you are amazing. I agree on most of the information you have shared with us to a large extent. But at some points our views really differ. Nevertheless…I must say your work is inspiring and I would try to share such work with you…

    Generic Viagra
    Kamagra

  • http://www.raymeds.com/ generic viagra pharmacy

    This is pretty interesting site. I glad to find this site. Every time I got some thing new and interesting information here. I must appreciate your blog site. Good job! Keep posting.

    Regards
    sharon baker, NY

  • Anonymous

    good post

  • Anonymous

    nice post

  • Anonymous

    Nice post, I would like to request you to one more post about that Keep it up

21