Jump to content
World's Largest Herpes Support Group
MikeHerp

GREAT NEWS! Dr. Jerome at Fred Hutch has achieved 50% to 90% elimination of latent HSV in mice

Recommended Posts

WilsoInAus
2 hours ago, MikeHerp said:

Guys. This is logic 101.

 

if A the  B

if B then C

A therefore C

B and C are “higher risk of”

You know what A is in the equation. 

 

 

But this is totally flawed, because:

- B happens without A in any event and if there is a cure for A it may actually increase risk behaviours and increase the incidence of B

- removing A only potentially reduces future B (and it may not) and does sweet FA for those already with B

- no matter which letters you use, it will always be the case that a cure for B is a cure for all current and future B AND C.

Leaving the letters behind, let’s make it real simple, the best cure for HIV is a cure for HIV. And that’s the A to Z.

Pour me a G&T!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeHerp

We aren’t arguing to convince you. We are just trying to explain to you why FH Cancer Research Cebter is working on an HSV cure. It’s up to you whether you accept it or not. It won’t make any difference either way. 

If you accept that HSV increases risk for HIV, and you accept that HIV increases risk for cancer... well, the rest is just logic. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
farnsworth

HSV doesnt increase your chances of cancer

HIV does

 

seems something your confused by

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BulaHope
44 minutes ago, farnsworth said:

HSV doesnt increase your chances of cancer

HIV does

 

seems something your confused by

 

Personally I think we've had enough of this argument. No-one will change their mind on this and I for one don't care, as long as Keith Jerome and his colleagues at Fred Hucth keep getting their funding for their fantastic work. Let's let it be, as the wise men said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WilsoInAus
5 hours ago, MikeHerp said:

We aren’t arguing to convince you. We are just trying to explain to you why FH Cancer Research Cebter is working on an HSV cure. It’s up to you whether you accept it or not. It won’t make any difference either way. 

If you accept that HSV increases risk for HIV, and you accept that HIV increases risk for cancer... well, the rest is just logic. 

 

 

But there isn't a why, nor is there a need to manufacture one as suggested.

The Pacific Northwest Research Foundation applied itself to several areas of research including immunology long before HIV came on the scene. It was renamed Fred Hutch Cancer in honour of the founder's brother who died of lung cancer, certainly never meant to infer an exclusivity for cancer or related research. The independent immunology stream has pioneered the way for decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stayjay2013
29 minutes ago, farnsworth said:

HSV doesnt increase your chances of cancer

HIV does

 

True statement....but I haven't seen or read from MikeHerp or anyone all this while say it does.

What I've read them implying is that; hsv indirectly increase the risk of certain Cancers. Which they explained with the simple logic that; *1* hsv increases the risk of getting HIV.  *2* HIV also increases the risk of certain Cancers. Therefore, *3* hsv indirectly increases the risk of cancers in those who acquired HIV due to their hsv infection.

The best cure for HIV is a cure for HIV - totally correct. But there is a better clinical treatment for HIV (and researchers have not stopped finding ways to cure it)  But there is not a better clinical treatment for hsv other than the old acyclvir, valtrex (and their generics) which doesn't work for a lot of people.

HIV sufferers need a better treatment/functional cure or cure for HIV.

And hsv sufferers also need a better treatment/functional cure or cure for hsv. ( No one will force anyone who would reject "it" because they feel their hsv is mild  to get one when one comes to the market) 

As to which one gets cured first will depend on a lot of factors which includes but not limited to the difficulty in curing it, the available technology to a researcher, the cost of the research, etc. And those factors might not be rated the same by all researchers. 

In an examination room, most people would answer or attempt the questions they think are easier for them before they attempt the difficult ones. But fortunately, the search for both HIV and hsv cures are not being attempted in that exact way in the sense that we have tons of different researchers at different places trying with different approaches and technologies available to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
14 hours ago, hi202020 said:

Where are the publications that talk about these studies you're referencing? This is awesome, do you think Excision Bio is further along than Jerome? Has Excision published any of their stats in regards to elimination of latent virus during tests in vivo?

Excision Bio is not eliminating the latent virus, they are trying to stop replication. What that means exactly I'm not sure; i.e. does it mean actually stopping the latent virus from replicating or does it mean clearing the new virions (created by the latent virus), within the neuron. In either case, it would be a functional cure because there would be no virus coming to the skin surface; i.e. no OBs, no shedding.

They're currently in animal studies I believe, with plans to go to human trials in 2021, but we will see

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
farnsworth

I'm under the impression he is implying hsv is causing cancer when 99.9% of people with hsv have never even been exposed to HIV.

That's like saying being gay or sexually promiscuous increases your chances of cancer.

I'm all for curing cancer hsv and hivs but how do you even pull that one out of your ass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeHerp

You don't have to be under any "impression".  The facts are the facts.  The science is the science.  Just watch the video that was posted and you can understand it.  

Some people will never get the connection or will refuse to understand it.  That's alright.  It really doesn't make any difference.  This cure research will continue regardless of your beliefs.

Nobody is trying to persuade you. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Voyager2
Posted (edited)

Everybody is correct.

Suppose two people having HSV outbreaks decide to have unprotected sex and one of them also has HIV, then there is obviously a good chance one will transmit HIV to the other, since HIV is transmitted via blood. Statisticians look at data from large populations and multiply all the probabilities together to get the "probability of HSV causing cancer."

In the case of ONE person with HSV, you would have look at many things. Celibate? Monogamous? Careful? Outbreak frequency?  There are also non-sexual ways to acquire HIV. The only way to lower risk to absolute 0 would be to live in a plastic bubble.

 So HSV per se does not cause cancer, but in a large population, there is "statistically" a slightly higher probability of a randomly selected HSV-infected person getting HIV-related cancer, if nothing else is known.

It's the same with car and airplane crash statistics. Everything we do carries a small risk.

A statistician found that the probability of a bomb on any one flight was 1 in 100,000 and the probability of two bombs was 1 in 1,000,000,000,000, so he always carried a bomb in his suitcase when he traveled (math joke). 

Edited by Voyager2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WilsoInAus

@Voyager2 some good points here.

I feel a key point though is if you have HSV-2 you are at higher risk of acquiring HIV, but only if you choose to.

The social issues are also important. If there is a cure for HSV-2, will everyone choose and be able to afford it? Will governments support its implementation? Or will it just be another element of white man’s magic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Voyager2

Yes, we need to be vigilant.

Maybe the huge number of people that will get cured of HSV will bring the price down and Jerome-type labs could be set up everywhere. Awhile back, Dr. Jerome said, "once you've got it, you've got it."

If there is an HIV cure, hopefully all governments would want to get their HIV-infected citizens cured.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hi202020
Posted (edited)
On 5/10/2019 at 2:07 PM, Cas9 said:

Excision Bio is not eliminating the latent virus, they are trying to stop replication. What that means exactly I'm not sure; i.e. does it mean actually stopping the latent virus from replicating or does it mean clearing the new virions (created by the latent virus), within the neuron. In either case, it would be a functional cure because there would be no virus coming to the skin surface; i.e. no OBs, no shedding.

They're currently in animal studies I believe, with plans to go to human trials in 2021, but we will see

This is very interesting.

Is there any information on the types of animals they've tested or results? All I see on their website in pipeline is "Excision is currently conducting animal studies with plans to be in the clinic by 2021.".

Edited by hi202020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, hi202020 said:

This is very interesting.

Is there any information on the types of animals they've tested or results? All I see on their website in pipeline is "Excision is currently conducting animal studies with plans to be in the clinic by 2021.".

No, all I know is what the pipeline shows. There were some articles about the technology, that I read in the past, but haven't been following them for quite a while. Five years from now should be the start of an interesting period. If results go as expected, we should see some promising vaccines that are currently preclinical, starting human trials. Again, only if things go well with the technology and funding.

My favorite vaccine is the prophylactic from Albert Einstein College in NY.  I think it's the only one that completely stopped the virus in mice; i.e. no virus found anywhere (including the neurons), after being challenged with several times the lethal dose. I believe they are working with some company right now, testing on other animals.

Edited by Cas9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hi202020
59 minutes ago, Cas9 said:

No, all I know is what the pipeline shows. There were some articles about the technology, that I read in the past, but haven't been following them for quite a while. Five years from now should be the start of an interesting period. If results go as expected, we should see some promising vaccines that are currently preclinical, starting human trials. Again, only if things go well with the technology and funding.

My favorite vaccine is the prophylactic from Albert Einstein College in NY.  I think it's the only one that completely stopped the virus in mice; i.e. no virus found anywhere (including the neurons), after being challenged with several times the lethal dose. I believe they are working with some company right now, testing on other animals.

What's a good link to check out that vaccine? I'm checking out some random google results but thought you might have some reputable sources you reference. What's the potential timeline for this vaccine by your understanding? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
Posted (edited)
On 5/11/2019 at 11:18 PM, hi202020 said:

What's a good link to check out that vaccine? I'm checking out some random google results but thought you might have some reputable sources you reference. What's the potential timeline for this vaccine by your understanding? 

Just google einstein college hsv

They've partnered with someone to carry out at least preclinical (animal) trials I believe in 2018. Those trials should be on guinea pigs or higher; i.e. They've already proven it's effectiveness using mice.

It's going to be at least a few years I assume before it's even possible to consider going to human trials.

The key to this vaccine is the deletion of the virus's surface protein called gD2. If your a bit confused on the articles I'll try to answer.

Edited by Cas9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeHerp

Dr. Friedman hopes to be in clinical trials with his trivalent vaccine later this year. 

Tests in guinea pigs last year were successful. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30551986

I'm hopeful on that one because it also targets the immune evasion domains of HSV.  Anyway, I believe that, of the 3 prophylactic candidates, some or at least one of them should be at least partially effective.  These were vaccines that were developed in the wake of the previous failures and they've learned from them.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
Posted (edited)

Yes, the Friedman vaccine looks promising also, and it's ahead of the Einstein college vaccine for starting human trials. Wasn't sure though if it 100% stopped latent viral infection in mice, like the Einstein College vaccine. What's good is that the two vaccines have a different approach.

The Einstein approach involves generating a different immune system response called ADCC.
ADCC does not involve neutralizing antibodies like most of the older vaccines. I believe an ADCC immune response directly attacks the virus, killing it quickly before any of it can settle in the neurons.

 

Edited by Cas9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tired of waiting

I believe the Einstein effort was covered on another thread,  anyway here is the video presention of their efforts from last year explaining the vaccine they are working on. 

and the  the company formed by the co-inventors Dr Betsey Herold  and Dr Willian Jacobs https://x-vax.com

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cas9
Posted (edited)

It's part 2 of 3 (Betsy Herold) of the above YouTube presentation that gets into the vaccine. Here it is; It gets rather technical in the middle.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wRT219obLM

Also note that the speaker indicated that they tested the vaccine on Guinea pigs and it was 100% effective. Guinea pigs are a better model for humans than mice of course.

Edited by Cas9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HelpMeowt
On 5/10/2019 at 8:46 AM, WilsoInAus said:

Pour me a G&T!

LOL amen... 

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.


  • The Hive is Thriving!

    • Total Topics
      69,761
    • Total Posts
      470,435
  • Posts

    • TerribleAtUserNames
      Hi there,  Long time lurker, first time poster, and I'll keep it simple and condensed.  I've only signed up because I realize the depths of suffering some people are in, trying all sorts of desperate treatments, and I've basically been sitting on something that has taken me to near 0 outbreaks (hsv1 genital). When I first got infected some years back, I had an atypical presentation--no pain or itching, but permanently there. Bumps going up and down within the same day even, but pretty much permanently covering the head of my penis. Doctor swabbed it--came back hsv 1; he said it looked like it to him too.  Now to the meat of it--rubbing alcohol. Its simple, and I'm pretty surprised that I've only seen it mentioned once here--a woman was talking about it, so I assume it works for girls too. I apply once daily, to once every 3 days, and that keeps me pretty much permanently outbreak free.  It quite literally went from every day broken out for me to just about nothing. Anyway, to the what and where of it all...    I use 99% isopropyl. 70% seems good too. I now have a spray bottle, but used to just dump it on the head and roll my foreskin up over it for like 20ish seconds--whatever process is actually happening, I like to think I'm facilitating absorption into the soft tissue by doing this and wreaking havoc on the virus. Obviously, you may have to do it a bit differently, genital depending. I've been doing this treatment for a few years now, so it has staying power. I read once that herpes is shreded by alcohol, so if true, I guess that explains it? However, iterupting regular treatment seems to have anecdotally, but not with great surety, made the herpes a bit less suceptible to the alcohol upon resumption.  Yes, it burns terribly at first. Over time it gets better. Some days it still really burns, and in those cases I advise listening to your body and cutting the countdown short. Other than that, it feels really damn good to basically tell herpes to eff off.  I don't know what kind of health risks there are. Or whether using a high % grain (drinking) alcohol would work / be healthier. I advise asking your doctor--afterall, alchohol is implicated in throat cancer. Who knows if 20-30 seconds daily on your junk can do something too.  But for those who struggle constantly, I truly hope this can help someone other than just me.    I also hope that this finds its way to the right forum. I wanted it in a place where casual, straight from Google, viewers would see it when they came here, and I'm hoping--and asking, please--that if I didn't get it in the right place, a moderator can instead. And, should it help as I suggest, perhaps even stickying it one day.  I'm sorry in advance, I'm not a big forum person and don't come here crazy often. It just felt like something I should do for everyone else's sake. Hopefully you can excuse me if I'm an absentee topic starter.  Thanks for reading, - Taylor
    • WilsoInAus
      Hey @Jazz923 they don’t look like herpes lesions, more like pearly papules that some guys get.  I’d suggest these are independent of your herpes status. The question of your herpes status will depend on the test that you had. What test suggested you had HSV-2? Was it a blood test?
    • Jazz923
      I recently seen these bumps on my penis didn’t hurt or itch only broke because I was masturbating (dumb move) this cleared up in week I got test and said it was hsv 2 but my gf got tested and had nothing I didn’t experience the things I seen on google and I didn’t take the medicine cause it has the virus in it I just need a bit more clarification like any kind of test or anything helps     https://ibb.co/pRm0VbJ
    • Sarah889
      So I guess I'm just on here for a bit of a rant, as today I woke up with my second outbreak in a month! My initial one was only at the end of April, and even after investing in a load of vitamins, lysine etc I'm in this situation again. I was hoping I'd be one of those who never gets another outbreak, but apparently not.  I think the problem is, I really liked my life before all of this crap, and I don't really want to have to change anything. Going to the gym is amazing for my mental health, and i normally go around 4 times a week. I also love a bit of chocolate every day (but I eat super healthy for the majority of the day) and being a uni student, I'm partial to a few cocktails and late nights every month as well. This is my time to socialise with my friends and have some fun. At 21 you really don't want to be taking your life too seriously.  Does anyone else just feel annoyed about having to switch up a happy life that they enjoy? I understand there's a lot of people who had unhealthy lifestyles before their diagnosis, that went on to lose weight which is great! But I'm already slim and active, and I eat freshly cooked food every day with lots of fruit and veggies.  I'm starting to believe that the only way to avoid an outbreak is to sit in my flat eating salads all day and have no contact with anyone else (in case of stress). Like I legit feel like I need to wrap myself up in cotton wool and just not allow myself to have a life at all. I'm so frustrated that I have to stop doing the things that I love. I'm going travelling next month, and I would bet all the money that I have that I will get another outbreak, because of the plane journey, late nights and alcohol. I just want to be a normal 21 year old who gets to enjoy her life! Does anyone else feel the same? 
    • BioHacker
      The meds work the same as long as you take them every day (some are one a day, some are multiple times per day). They cost money, but there is no reason you can't take them for life. Most people would just take the meds, but if you are married for 20 years and the meds are annoying for some reason, and you don't care about it, then maybe don't bother? It's up to the two of you. Skipping the daily meds would increase the risk from 0.7% per year to 1.4% per year (assuming sex 2x per week). That changes it from a 1-in-140 year event to a 1-in-70 year event (assuming you still use condoms every time). To be honest, most married people would probably rather skip the condoms before they skip the meds. It's up to you what measures you take though.
×
×
  • 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.