Rumored: There is a Herpes Virus Cure...

[sour grapes]

I've from heard from some reliable sources within... that the CDC has and always had a cure, but will not release it to the global public because of big pharma corporations tend to loose billion and trillions of $$$... Sad, if its true GREED, yet they tend to gain billions and trillions of $$$ in the long-run if the masses (public) is healthy and stress-free!

Edited March 11, 2017 by sour grapes

[Hansje]

Reliable sources?

[Unrequited]

It wouldn't be a cure as there is no tech which can achieve that YET. They may have a vaccine, as in one of the big pharma companies, and have witheld it, but it is speculation, and if there are billions are at stake. You'd just end up dying mysteriously if you could prove it or classed as a conspiracy theorist. 

It could easily be that one of the vax's which never made it past clinical trials worked, just was dropped by pharma due to potential killing of profits on anti-virals. I make 'ransom' deals all the time in my job, plenty of times, we just sit on things and get paid millions, or vice versa. Gaining control, or not disrupting someone elses control has huge value and big business will pay to either get it, and sometimes do nothing with it. Sad but true.

As people have mentioned, a vaccine is still pretty much big business. So there definately is incentive for another pharma company to develop it. Especially with todays tech, so many market entrants and transparency, its unlikely it would be covered up these days. Seeing as most of the antivirals patents are expiring.

There's also the big push from the WHO etc.

However it does make you think... gen-003 is pretty terrible for 2017... and all the sub units over the years.... when a live vaccine would have been pretty simple in the first place.

[HarryAUS]

Hi sour grapes. Welcome to the forum.

I don't mean to be rude but your 'reliable sources' are anything but. This is complete conspiratorial nonsense that makes no sense whatsoever.

Let's break it down: A US government agency whose mandate is to control and prevent diseases ('Saving Lives. Protecting People') has acted in secret to illegally prevent the release of an effective HSV vaccine that could have prevented tens of millions of Americans contracting HSV. Why? To protect the profits of a particular corporation that invented it? But wait a minute, as we all know, HSV infection is at pandemic levels (there are more people who carry the herpes virus than don't). An effective vaccine would be worth billions of dollars to its inventor. But the CDC are sitting on it at the direction of a big-pharma company to 'protect' its profits? A company that spent hundreds of millions on (what must be secret) trials of this 'successful' vaccine, because they wanted to shelve it and deny its existence when it proved effective?? Or if the CDC is doing the bidding of other companies to thwart this vaccine's release, why haven't the inventors of the successful vaccine spoken about it or published their successful trial results or sought fast track approval in another jurisdiction? Did the CDC have them murdered or jailed?

Most (all?) HSV antivirals are off-patent, which means the corporations that invented the compound on which they are based no longer have a monopoly on the sale of it. While the market for antivirals is large, because of generic versions of the drug, no single company is gobbling up the majority of these (now much diminished) profits. Aciclovir for example came off-patent in the early 1990s. Relatively cheap generic versions of the drug have been available for more than two decades. Valaciclovir (Valtrex) came off patent in 2009 and much cheaper generic versions of the drug have been available since then.

The reality is that an effective HSV vaccine would net its inventor billions of dollars. This is very good news for us because it means there is an enormous financial incentive for pharmaceutical companies to invest in HSV vaccine development and overcome the scientific hurdles to make it a reality. Antivirals are not the super-profitable product line they once were when they were on patent (although the market is still large). There is absolutely no reason why a profit seeking pharmaceutical company would sit on a multibillion dollar medical breakthrough for which they had the exclusive right to market and sell for 20 years (that may have cost them up to $4 billion to develop).

Why they would be aided and abetted in doing this by a US Government health agency is anybody's guess.

 

Edited March 12, 2017 by HarryAUS

[Malcolm]

I wish the big pharma conspiracy theory would die. It's distracting, and some members on here become very ideological and twisted.

Firstly, the stockholder of any pharmaceutical company that releases a herpes cure will never have to work again, nor will their children. There's a reward of $4 billion a year for 20 years. The margins being made on anti-virals are minimal since the drug is available generically.  The original drug designer of valacyclovir GlaxoSmithKline now competes with numerous other vendors. The market is primed to reward the development of a cure.

Secondly, investors and executives suffer from herpes too. They want a cure as much as you or I, even if not for the financial reward.

It's simply a technological hurdle, not one of market failure. The reason we don't have a herpes cure is akin to why we aren't getting around in flying cars. We just don't have the technology yet that accounts for the infrastructure, safety, efficiency, and cost requirements, even though it's possible in theory.

Edited March 13, 2017 by Malcolm

[Evaluate]

Well put.  The big one for me is knowing that out of all pharama executives, some of them statistically have to have HSV or know someone who is impacted by HSV.  Therefore, it's a virus that touches so many people.