Jump to content
World's Largest Herpes Support Group


  • 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
      71,132
    • Total Posts
      481,131
  • 0_unsure-if-it-is-herpes.png

    Nervous about dating with herpes? Skip "the talk" and browse profiles here.

  • Posts

    • WilsoInAus
      I am not sure that is the correct interpretation. Your antigen levels are quite high indicating that the lymphocytes did not stop the replication of the antigen. One of your dilutions is also negative. Hence overall this would appear to be a negative result. Note that IgG does not measure activity of the virus, it measures whether there are a specific antibody to the virus in your blood.
    • WilsoInAus
      Great news @Stolo868 hopefully you are now able to put this behind you.  I am not quite sure what the barb is about though, there are no doctors here, self appointed or otherwise, only people trying to help you reach rational decisions on the basis of your experience and testing. If you think you received inappropriate comments from anyone then let us know and they will be addressed. Hey @Just a human being My understanding of how the test works is that antigen cells (the virus) are placed in an growth-rich environment and allowed to replicate. If your blood has the lymphocytes then they will be detected and the growth of the antigen will be restrained. Hence for a positive, you need to see high values of lymphocytes and low values of antigen.
    • Southwestrancher
      https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12325-019-00995-6
    • Stolo868
      Above 2 is positive. Compare to IGG it measures activity of virus. It’s recommended in Europe for seronegative people with ongoing symptoms and those with immune deficiency.  Basically mine is positive for type 1and negative for type 2 which means my t-lymphocytes had contact with hsv1 in the past. 
    • Just a human being
      I do not wish to engage with the difficult politics on this forum regarding rare difficulty in some subsets with diagnosis or debates there in, but could you please explain the LTT test your numbers and your professional opinions in regards to this test, pros and cons of this test and how and why it may be recommended in some cases. I realise the care that needs to be taken as sometimes one will encounter some with irrational fear of HSV. In no way am I suggesting your case as such. 
Sign in to follow this  
Sanguine108

Herpes Cure in 2020

Recommended Posts

VladimirM
14 minutes ago, VladimirM said:

Of course, if the drug is already approved for use, it will  more easily be approved for other uses. There are many laboratories dealing with such substances only. They are testing already approved drugs. The only thing they have to prove is the efficiency for a new use.

 

Edited by VladimirM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VladimirM
22 minutes ago, Mackie82 said:

100 labs working on HSV ? That’s great. Can you provide link with those labs name please. Thanks 

https://scienceblog.com/76180/purpose-of-the-herpes-vaccine-blog/

 "There are at least 100 individuals in the world who are actively pursuing a HSV-2 vaccine, and I am one of these many researchers."

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimmyjimmyhuapua
On 07.03.2018 at 4:33 AM, Taintedgirl said:

It is not an easy virus to eradicate from the body. It's dna is very large it makes everything worse that it’s attached to a sensitive area. VZV and herpes simplex have different DNA that’s why VZV vaccine doesn’t work for herpes or else we would have used it by now and never got infected. HIV is in T cells and has a completely different structure to HSV. You can’t compare it to anything else. You see other viruses being cured and assume herpes is the same but it’s not. It’s very hard to exploit its weak spots. Hard but not impossible so please give the people who are trying time to do what they have to do. The Halford Vax was not done well and you know that. People still suffer because of Halford issues. The media just reports what the cdc gives them don’t blame them. 

Yes ofc i dont claim that its an easy virus to eradicate but there is no sufficient interest on it. Vzv is also from herpes virus family and in some studies it showed impact on hsv 1 and hsv 2 as well. The most famous research was at paris hospital in 2012 maybe you read about it. I compared hiv and hsv at drugs point. There are lots of drugs imroved for hiv but for hsv we dont have nothing better than valtrex. For halford vax we dont know yet, they didnt publish results and halford was more interested in hsv research compare to other researchers and he continued to his research with his own money and donations. And if you have a friend from temple you can ask their work about hsv. Here is the link https://temple-news.com/researchers-aim-to-find-cure-for-herpes/ Here they try to edit hsv's ICP0 its their target and Halford's vax was also version of virus without ICP0. So we cant say anything before there will be trial on people and published results. Some claim halford vax worked well , some claim it didnt work. I didn't blame media actually who i blamed was officials because if there will be decreasing number of people with herpes spread should stop, people should die and  it should decrease but here we are talking about a virus and there is nothing preventative for it. What we criticise here is its really a shame for governments, pharmas, officials that we dont have any better treatment option or something preventative for herpes. Valtrex was on market in 1995 and we are in 2018 how many years without any improvement then ? 23 years... So if you are glad from this situation okay i dont have nothing to say but there is nothing fair for herpes patients. BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT OTHER STD'S HIV INFECTION CAN BE PREVENTED BY TAKİNG DRUGS DAİLY, HPV HAS A PREVENTATIVE VAX, HEPATITIS HAS VAX, OTHER STD'S ARE CURABLE. HSV 2 RATE WORLD WIDE IS 500 MILLION PEOPLE AND THERE IS NOTHING TO PREVENT IT. VALTREX CAN LOWER TRANSMISSON RATE %50 and Herpes increases possibility of your getting other std's so how these people can have comfortable sex life ? I hope you understand now

Edited by Jimmyjimmyhuapua

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cracked
2 minutes ago, Jimmyjimmyhuapua said:

HSV 2 RATE WORLD WIDE IS 500 MILLION PEOPLE

 

30FCFF50-0F60-4555-BDED-F76627196387.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimmyjimmyhuapua
3 minutes ago, cracked said:

 

30FCFF50-0F60-4555-BDED-F76627196387.jpeg

Thanks for ur share i read some where its 500 million so maybe its more... Thats worse ofc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taintedgirl
17 minutes ago, Jimmyjimmyhuapua said:

Yes ofc i dont claim that its an easy virus to eradicate but there is no sufficient interest on it. Vzv is also from herpes virus family and in some studies it showed impact on hsv 1 and hsv 2 as well. The most famous research was at paris hospital in 2012 maybe you read about it. I compared hiv and hsv at drugs point. There are lots of drugs imroved for hiv but for hsv we dont have nothing better than valtrex. For halford vax we dont know yet, they didnt publish results and halford was more interested in hsv research compare to other researchers and he continued to his research with his own money and donations. And if you have a friend from temple you can ask their work about hsv. Here is the link https://temple-news.com/researchers-aim-to-find-cure-for-herpes/ Here they try to edit hsv's ICP0 its their target and Halford's vax was also version of virus without ICP0. So we cant say anything before there will be trial on people and published results. Some claim halford vax worked well , some claim it didnt work. I didn't blame media actually who i blamed was officials because if there will be decreasing number of people with herpes spread should stop, people should die and  it should decrease but here we are talking about a virus and there is nothing preventative for it. What we criticise here is its really a shame for governments, pharmas, officials that we dont have any better treatment option or something preventative for herpes. Valtrex was on market in 1995 and we are in 2018 how many years without any improvement then ? 23 years... So if you are glad from this situation okay i dont have nothing to say but there is nothing fair for herpes patients. BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT OTHER STD'S HIV INFECTION CAN BE PREVENTED BY TAKİNG DRUGS DAİLY, HPV HAS A PREVENTATIVE VAX, HEPATITIS HAS VAX, OTHER STD'S ARE CURABLE. HSV 2 RATE WORLD WIDE IS 500 MILLION PEOPLE AND THERE IS NOTHING TO PREVENT IT. VALTREX CAN LOWER TRANSMISSON RATE %50 and Herpes increases possibility of your getting other std's so how these people can have comfortable sex life ? I hope you understand now

Even crispr was unable to remove latent virus of hsv. It is not HIV jimmy that’s what I need you to understand that this virus is very tightly packed to exploit its weaknesses is not easy. People are trying. I’m obviously not happy but I have to be realistic. This disease has been around since Hippocrates if no one in all that time couldn’t come up with anything then it wasn’t for a lack of trying it was the nature of the beast. We only recently learned of asymptomatic shedding in all those years why because no one knows how this works. I get that you want a cure but also understand that science can only move so fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
56 minutes ago, Taintedgirl said:

Even crispr was unable to remove latent virus of hsv. It is not HIV jimmy that’s what I need you to understand that this virus is very tightly packed to exploit its weaknesses is not easy. People are trying. I’m obviously not happy but I have to be realistic. This disease has been around since Hippocrates if no one in all that time couldn’t come up with anything then it wasn’t for a lack of trying it was the nature of the beast. We only recently learned of asymptomatic shedding in all those years why because no one knows how this works. I get that you want a cure but also understand that science can only move so fast.

It's been around for millions of years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taintedgirl
3 minutes ago, Cas9 said:

It's been around for millions of years.

Exactly this disease is not new. If in all those years no one stumbled on a cure one thing I know for sure is that it wasn’t for a lack of trying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
19 minutes ago, Taintedgirl said:

Exactly this disease is not new. If in all those years no one stumbled on a cure one thing I know for sure is that it wasn’t for a lack of trying.

I doubt one of our hominid ancestors was working on a cure for herpes :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taintedgirl
6 minutes ago, Cas9 said:

I doubt one of our hominid ancestors was working on a cure for herpes :)

Lol probably just covered the rash in mud

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
3 minutes ago, Taintedgirl said:

Lol probably just covered the rash in mud

Hopefully the males washed the mud off before intercourse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lukeherpwalker

Just a note crispr couldn't completely remove hsv. But it was easier to block replication of hsv than it was for hiv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cracked
13 minutes ago, Lukeherpwalker said:

Just a note crispr couldn't completely remove hsv. But it was easier to block replication of hsv than it was for hiv

Which is all that’s needed as a ‘cure’. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
31 minutes ago, Lukeherpwalker said:

Just a note crispr couldn't completely remove hsv. But it was easier to block replication of hsv than it was for hiv

The challenge for HIV was getting crispr to all the immune cells since immune cells are everywhere; they're not localized. But from what I understand, Excision Bio believes they can do it.  It should be very interesting to see what happens in the next couple of years with their HIV trials; i.e.they're supposed to start them this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35hope
2 hours ago, Lukeherpwalker said:

Just a note crispr couldn't completely remove hsv. But it was easier to block replication of hsv than it was for hiv

yeah thats the jest of it of what i been reading, it basically only goes after the active dna that floats around in the cell by itself and not the latent dna thats attach to your cells dna i expect soon you will hear it sniping it out of our cell dna but getting it to those cells is another obstacle, only thing i can think of is directly injecting it to nerve ganglion, so how would you know if your penetrating the protected barrier? though if it only goes after the active virus wouldnt you have to get a shot every once in a while when that shot wears off? and how would that stop shedding completely, it would have to attack the virus when it's leave the nerve endings i would think some of it would get passed the defense and reach the skin...

can anyone explain this to me i would appreciate it thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lukeherpwalker
1 hour ago, 35hope said:

yeah thats the jest of it of what i been reading, it basically only goes after the active dna that floats around in the cell by itself and not the latent dna thats attach to your cells dna i expect soon you will hear it sniping it out of our cell dna but getting it to those cells is another obstacle, only thing i can think of is directly injecting it to nerve ganglion, so how would you know if your penetrating the protected barrier? though if it only goes after the active virus wouldnt you have to get a shot every once in a while when that shot wears off? and how would that stop shedding completely, it would have to attack the virus when it's leave the nerve endings i would think some of it would get passed the defense and reach the skin...

can anyone explain this to me i would appreciate it thanks

Not a doctor. But from what I've read the solution would be to change the cells around the nerve ending to be more antiviral than they already are by changing its DNA. So when the hsv started to replicate or move towards the skin it would be wiped out before it can shed.... Something alomg those lines. I'm summarizing but Google crispr herpes see what u interpret it as 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
3 hours ago, 35hope said:

yeah thats the jest of it of what i been reading, it basically only goes after the active dna that floats around in the cell by itself and not the latent dna thats attach to your cells dna i expect soon you will hear it sniping it out of our cell dna but getting it to those cells is another obstacle, only thing i can think of is directly injecting it to nerve ganglion, so how would you know if your penetrating the protected barrier? though if it only goes after the active virus wouldnt you have to get a shot every once in a while when that shot wears off? and how would that stop shedding completely, it would have to attack the virus when it's leave the nerve endings i would think some of it would get passed the defense and reach the skin...

can anyone explain this to me i would appreciate it thanks

Hsv1 and 2 do not integrate into the host cell dna, they lie inside the cell body but outside the dna.

The location of where to inject the AAV (which will contain crispr), is already established by scientists. What do you think Excision Bio is doing?

Crispr would reside only in the nerve cell. My assumption would be that it would remain there. For how long it would last, I don't know. As long as crispr is there in the cell, we assume that virtually no replicated viral particles will escape the nerve cell and therefore there would be no appreciable shedding. Essentially, you wouldn't get any OBs nor would you be contagious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
1 hour ago, Lukeherpwalker said:

Not a doctor. But from what I've read the solution would be to change the cells around the nerve ending to be more antiviral than they already are by changing its DNA. So when the hsv started to replicate or move towards the skin it would be wiped out before it can shed.... Something alomg those lines. I'm summarizing but Google crispr herpes see what u interpret it as 

The nerve ending is simply the end of a nerve cell. It is not itself made up of cells. Here's what a nerve cell looks like

https://www.google.com/search?q=nerve+cell+picture&client=firefox-b-1&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj2krmD8N3ZAhUCUKwKHcksCZgQsAQIJg&biw=1413&bih=653#imgrc=7A0w3aAwf2wCjM:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35hope
9 hours ago, Cas9 said:

Hsv1 and 2 do not integrate into the host cell dna, they lie inside the cell body but outside the dna.

The location of where to inject the AAV (which will contain crispr), is already established by scientists. What do you think Excision Bio is doing?

Crispr would reside only in the nerve cell. My assumption would be that it would remain there. For how long it would last, I don't know. As long as crispr is there in the cell, we assume that virtually no replicated viral particles will escape the nerve cell and therefore there would be no appreciable shedding. Essentially, you wouldn't get any OBs nor would you be contagious.

Thanks Cas9 that actually made me feel better, now if they would figure how to edit the latent dna so you don't need to get a booster shot if you would even need one which if thats the case wouldnt even care about it.

i really hope crispr is a massive success in general so this test triasl can happen as fast as they can do it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ManagingIllness

There will be nothing in the next few years. To say otherwise is a total misunderstanding of the nature of clinical trials and drug approval.

Also, you can thank retarded anti-vaxers for making the situation 100X worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nietzsche
14 hours ago, ManagingIllness said:

There will be nothing in the next few years. To say otherwise is a total misunderstanding of the nature of clinical trials and drug approval.

Also, you can thank retarded anti-vaxers for making the situation 100X worse.

We don't know how the competition between China vs US will cut regulations in the future.. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuAg-RaZ4Is

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeHerp

I really hope ExcisionBio can really get something going, first with HIV.  It sounded like they are targeting early 2019 for clinical trials, so we may need to wait a bit.

But if they can really start a phase 1 at least, I think the whole field will benefit from the knowledge gained.  We'll have a better idea where we stand with this.

By the way, I was reading an earlier 2014 study using meganucleases (not CRISPR), they were able to edit a tiny bit of the latent HSV virus with that, though the experiment was in vitro and not in neurons.  I'm still hoping that they'll be able to figure out how to edit latent virus with CRISPR or other genetic editing tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
brookeb300
On 3/8/2018 at 6:18 PM, Cas9 said:

Hsv1 and 2 do not integrate into the host cell dna, they lie inside the cell body but outside the dna.

The location of where to inject the AAV (which will contain crispr), is already established by scientists. What do you think Excision Bio is doing?

Crispr would reside only in the nerve cell. My assumption would be that it would remain there. For how long it would last, I don't know. As long as crispr is there in the cell, we assume that virtually no replicated viral particles will escape the nerve cell and therefore there would be no appreciable shedding. Essentially, you wouldn't get any OBs nor would you be contagious.

This is what I’m confused about - they don’t integrate into the host nerve cells dna?  How do the replicate?

How do they replicate I mean the herpes virus particles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mackie82

I don’t really who has posted this herpes cure in 2020, with all of my respect did you mean 2020 or 2050 . Thanks 

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Guest
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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • 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.