Jump to content

Rumored: There is a Herpes Virus Cure...

sour grapes

Recommended Posts

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 by sour grapes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by HarryAUS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by Malcolm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Donate

    If Honeycomb has helped you, please help us by making a donation so we can provide you with even better features and services.

  • The Hive is Thriving!

    • Total Topics
    • Total Posts
  • Posts

    • FirstTimeUser
      @WilsoInAuswould appreciate your thoughts as have seen you comment quite a bit before!
    • Marlena
      Good morning. My name is Marlena and I come from Poland. Sorry, my English is average. For two years I have been in a relationship with a man, for a year and a half I have been struggling with intimate problems. On average, my intimate condition is getting worse every month. Then I feel itching, redness, swelling around the entrance to the vagina, small blisters (not always). Most often it is only red and swollen, itches and then disappears. This state lasts 3-4 days. I come from a small town, doctors don't know what it is. They say it's 'skin irritation'. They prescribe moisturizing creams with lactic acid, probiotics. It doesn't help. I did a blood test for HSV on my own, which is very expensive in Poland, but it does not separate HSV1 from HSV2. The doctor, when he shows these results, says that it's not herpes, but irritation. I would like to add that in the past I suffered from herpes on the lips, then it was a 'scab'. There has never been a scab in an intimate area. Sometimes there are blisters that last 1-2 days, but not always. So what do high blood test results mean? I would like to add that in Poland people do not talk about the HSV virus. It's just that sometimes someone has it on their lips and that's it. Results translation: IgM HSV 1/2: questionable IgG HSV 1/2: result above the measuring range https://files.fm/f/4cpu7uee4  
    • FirstTimeUser
      This is my first time posting here. Im generally pretty anxious when it comes to anything to do with health conditions etc. For context I have had jock itch and fungal infections previously on my buttcrack. I have had 0 new sexual partners and I am not concerned about my girlfriend cheating at all. 4 days ago my balls began itching and red pretty much all over, as you can see some general flakeyness and what looks to be a lesion I noticed on Monday when I checked them out. My partner and I do get cold sores from time to time so the anxious part of me is concerned this could be herpes, but at the same time could be some sort of fungal infection. My doctor cant see me until tomorrow so I just have to worry until then. There is no pain and nothing on the penis or anywhere else, just general itchiness. Any ideas if this is herpes or not?  
    • Jeremy Spokein
      Yes, but every married person who I found out about that has this waited 6-8 months into the relationship to disclose it. But maybe you're right. If I had told her 6-7 months in, she'd still have Googled it and flipped out, and maybe it would have been harder then. I don't know. I don't see myself going through this level of pain and rejection so easily next time. I really don't. I'm taking the meds. I use protection. It's been almost a decade since I've had it so I'm not worried about shedding or passing it on so easily. British studies confirm that the first 2 years are the most contagious and we're passed that. I'm just over this. I've never been in so much emotional pain in my life.
    • Possiblehypercon11
      @WilsoInAus would really appreciate your input please. Kinda freaking out lol. 
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.