Possible HIV
resistance gene—hope for new drug targets
According to some recent studies, scientists think that a
specific mutation in the CCR5 gene may contribute to “HIV-safety.” It hinders
the HIV virus from entering the cell, thus making a person sick. This is a huge
breakthrough, although it is not the whole story for HIV resistance. There are
also some forms of HIV that can still infect those with the CCR5 mutation. As
discussed in this article, the mutation may seem like a miracle drug target, but
it could have negative consequences, such as resistance to this type of CCR5
mutation and a new strain of HIV. If you were a public health professional,
what does this new development mean for the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa and
other highly epidemic areas?
As a student in the century of the greatest genetic research development, I am in full support of all possible advancement in the new discoveries of how to prevent or even lessen the severity of HIV/AIDS. Scientists have discovered a small mutation on a gene labeled CCR5 that is a protein which opens the door for the CD4 receptor that would initially be attacked by the HIV virus. Instead, this mutation, newly labeled CCR5-delta32, has been proven to block the virus from entering the cell, thereby creating a complete immunity to those very select few individuals who have inherited this trait from both parents. I think the creation of such a drug to provide partial immunity could present negative consequences among a younger or lower education community, where individuals are more likely to be unaware of the prevalence of such a lethal disease and its detrimental effects. Teens are undoubtedly famous for their tendency to think they're invincible and nothing bad will happen to them. It is therefore very likely that teens would engage in unprotected sex more freely, also resulting in a number of other health issues that come with high rates of sexual partners.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a health professional, I would enforce this research as much as I could because in a country such as Africa where the epidemic is almost guaranteed in the majority of the population, a possible drug to lessen the effects of the HIV virus couldn't possibly worsen their health outcomes. When the epidemic is the worst it could possibly get, there is no risk in giving a possible solution a trial run. The article mentioned that this mutation is nonexistant in African and Asian populations, which could explain the prevalence of the disease in Africa compared to the United States, where 20% of Caucasians are said to have at least one inherited copy of the mutation. On the contrary, HIV/AIDS has been the fastest growing disease in the U.S. for the past 20 years, so we have to look much deeper at the underlying causes for such rapid growth among a population that is supposed to have partial immunity.
After having read the link, I do not think that people should be tested to see if they have the mutation. I feel that this would leave those who do have the mutation, to lead an irresponsible sex life. I believe that some of these people would not use protection because they would think that they are 100% immune to contracting the virus. I think this would prove to be true in young people, mostly teenagers, who often have the mindset of "that would never happen to me, it happens to other people".
ReplyDeleteIf I were a public health professional, I would support further research to the drug discussed. If this drug proved to be effective, it would curtail the epidemic of HIV/AIDS in Africa. Not only are Africans the most vulnerable population in the world when it comes to this disease, but CCR5-delta32 mutation is inexistent amongst them. Though I am aware of the negative effects this mutation can have, I strongly believe that the benefits outweigh this negative effects. I think that once the benefits of this drug do in fact outweigh the consequences, a trial amongst a group of Africans should be performed to test its effectiveness. This drug might turn out to not work, but it is definitely brings science much closer to finding the much-needed cure for this deadly disease.
This is a great step toward understanding how to stop HIV, but as the article shows, that is not the whole story. HIV is a tricky RNA virus that changes rapidly from one copy to the next. This means it is constantly evolving. As the article also mentions, HIV adapts later on in its life and is able to enter through other receptors anyway. As said previously, this is a good first step, but not the solution. I feel a drug created from the CCR5-delta32 mutation would be showing our "cards" too soon. It is insufficient at this time and it may only result making a stronger strain of HIV and leaving the researchers at square one. However, the Flu continues to adapt to annual vaccines, but they are distributed anyway. Once the positives outweigh the negatives, which I don't think they have yet, it would be beneficial to develop a plan to disperse the HIV drug. At this point in time I think the drug is too far in its infancy.
ReplyDeleteAs for being tested? I'm not sure if that is worth it either. Essentially, you need both copies of the CCR5-delta32 gene for it to be of complete use. Otherwise you are still at risk with just one copy. Therefore, testing would cost more than it was worth. Being among those 1% of Caucasians with the double gene could probably be equated to something more significant than winning the lottery. So does it even make financial sense to offer the testing? Of those 1%, if they were to get tested and find out they were HIV resistant, I doubt it would cause any great relative influx in disease.
This was definitely a very interesting article and it kind of gave more hope about finding a treatment/cure for HIV. It was a very interesting read on how having that mutation in the CCR5 gene made people immune to HIV infection. And a lot of it did make sense, but as I was reading it, it did make me question though, how did they make sure that those who had the CCR5-delta32 mutation were virtually immune to HIV? I'm sure they might have done some experiment to prove the immunity of those with this mutation; it just would've been nice if it was included in the article, for me at least. But overall, this is definitely a very hopeful discovery. But at the same time, I do agree with it, about how if we found this new mutation, could this mutation cause a new strain of HIV to develop. It was also really interesting to see that the CCR5-delta32 mutation is virtually absent in African and Asian populations. It does make me wonder why that is and what possibly could've happened in our history that caused such a mutation for people in different regions.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a public health professional, this new development definitely is great and useful, especially for the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa and other highly epidemic areas. I would definitely recommend more research in to this new kind of drug that involves blocking CCR5. But definitely more research and experiments need to be done before it can be given to actual human subjects, because I would not want a new strain of HIV to develop. It would just cause so much damage to the population because HIV is already so bad. A lot of research needs to be done in order to see if a new strain of HIV could develop if this new drug is developed and what are the side effects of this new drug. I wouldn't want a much more negative effect to happen in the HIV epidemic because of just one new hopeful insight.
As a public health professional I would find it very controversial to work with the population of the United States and Africa on a parallel level because as Mia beautifully mentioned, and I actually do not feel like I can stray away too much from her idea, Africa has already the highest HIV rates in reality because of many environmental factors as well as the lack of mutation. Even though we have the possibility of screening for partial immunity we do need to, as public health professionals, be conscientious of the idea that teens will still engage in risky behavior as a whole and will most likely not change only because they found out they have partial immunity. Mia and Natalia both pointed out that teenagers may engage in even more risky behavior because of the new of partial immunity, but I would challenge that argument and say that the consequences will result the same. While engaging this screening it would be ideal to educate the teenagers about safe sex techniques to still prevent from ANY type of sexually transmitted infection.
ReplyDeleteI would support the research, but like I mentioned we do need to be careful of how we approach the presentation to teenagers in order to get more in touch with out predisposition to some diseases. This type of testing may be ineffective if not researched well because we could simply be testing a bunch of people for only partial immunity as opposed to trying to prevent the HIV/AIDS in general. It would become costly and not as beneficial hurting the public health brand and its credibility.
This article immediately captivated and thrilled me because with this information the cure for HIV could be closer than we think. I believe research in this area can make medicinal strides for the human race. As for genetic testing specifically for this mutation, it should not be wholly encouraged because I think this would increase the amount of other sexually transmitted diseases. Just because a person might be HIV resistant does not mean their partner can’t contract it or either of them passing one of the numerous STD’s to one another.
ReplyDeleteAs a public health professional, my main goal would be to decrease the spread of HIV across the globe, but especially throughout areas of Africa and other locations that are being strongly affected. Since, the CCR5-delta32 mutation is so prevalent in Northern Europe, I would form a research team to investigate the genetic and environmental differences between the Europeans and the Africans. The article insinuated that the mutation may correlate to the fact that the bubonic plague effected the lives of many Europeans and those that survived may have developed a resistance gene. I would begin to compare and contrast the traumatic events of Europeans, such as the Bubonic plague and the 1918 influenza pandemic, which caused an overreaction of the body’s immune system, similar to how the Human Immunodeficiency Virus begins to harm your immune system by killing your white blood cells. As this research goes forward and it begins to prove that this genetic mutation can save lives then it would be interesting to think about stem cell transplants to begin making this mutation more prevalent in the human genome. Nevertheless, HIV is a complicated and devious RNA virus that makes many mistakes in its transcription process, which means the viral offspring are a little be different from the original. Although, this finding still leaves us hope to one day find a cure for HIV.
Testing post ...
ReplyDeleteProfessor Chan
As previously mentioned, this appears to be a fairly promising step in the right direction in HIV prevention. By blocking the CCR5 protein and mimicking the effects of having a CCR5-delta32 protein, you prevent the HIV virus from entering into the cell and replicating its RNA. However, there remains the concern that the HIV virus is "sloppy" when it replicates and many variations are made. While some of these replications will not survive, some may actually be more powerful at infecting or simply infect via a different protein. This is concerning because we are well aware of the proteins necessary for HIV to bind presently, but we still don't have a fool-proof cure.
ReplyDeleteCreating a drug to block the CCR5 protein could cause more mutations to develop. This would make prevention of HIV a wild goose chase if figuring out the latest protein to block. It would be unfair to say though that developing this drug would not be partially beneficial. From what I gathered in the article, the HIV virus can mutate into a more powerful form (like other viruses), but this takes some time and as the article said, “It's like throwing darts while blindfolded. Most darts would miss the bull's eye unless you got very lucky. However, if you throw a whole lot of darts, there's a greater possibility of hitting the target just by chance.” Knowing this, perhaps developing this drug would allow us to gain some control over the HIV epidemic until we can understand the virus better.
I think a major point to consider while reading material such as this is that viruses like all life forms are constantly evolving. Change is inevitable. In order to protect ourselves from pathogens we too must evolve, and we do. The difference being is if we decide whether or not we should allow nature to take care of the evolution for us or if we intervene. If we choose to intervene we need to be very careful and have enough foresight about the possible repercussions.
Although "HIV safety" is a great idea, providing this knowledge to the public would not be a beneficial idea. As a public health professional, I would want much more research done as mentioned by my classmates. This theory must be tested a great deal. I would also be very hesitant in releasing this information as it might add to the sexual promiscuity in many people who were not tested for the gene, especially younger people who have a tendency to view themselves as invincible. People who are tested for this gene will think that they are safe and will not have to protect themselves from HIV but the article did specify that this does not protect from all strains and HIV constantly mutates causing the length of the protecting to come into question.
ReplyDeleteInforming people of this possible "HIV safety" could cause the HIV epidemic in areas with high rates of infection to become even more of an issue. Those who have the gene might think that they are immune and will never be infected, this could be detrimental to both their health and the health of any of their sexual partners. This would cause them to get screened much less often, if at all, allowing them to pass HIV to multiple people without knowledge of suffering from the idea. This is a great educational resource and very interesting but should not be used as a preventative measure as protected sex and testing is now.
According to the article, CCR5 is a co-receptor that allows HIV to enter cells. A mutation in the CCR5 gene results in the absence of a specific protein on the outside of the cell. The absence of this protein does not allow HIV to enter the cell. People who inherit the CCR5 delta32 gene from both parents have a resistance to HIV and are therefore are immune. I agree that this discovery could result in a miracle drug treatment but it must be used with caution. If we start to test people for this gene, then those who have the gene may consider themselves to be one hundred percent not at risk and therefore may engage in more unprotected sex. This could lead to the transmission of other sexually transmitted diseases and cause an endemic of STDs and also unwanted pregnancies. It could also lead to a new HIV strain that has adapted and now can infect people with or without the CCR5-delta 32 gene. A gene variant previously found exclusively in East Africa also was shows to provide protection from acquiring HIV. It also inhibited the progression of the disease in people that were already infected. Researchers found that people with the HLA-A*7401 allele, were less likely to become infected. Among those with HIV, those with the A*7401 allele were less likely to have CD4 counts below 200. More research should be conducted to determine if other factors are also at play. Other genes or the environment may also influence the resistance to HIV that these CCR5 gene carriers display.
ReplyDeleteAs public health professionals, we need to understand the protective and harmful effects that these genes have on different regions of the world, especially Africa. More research needs to be conducted, especially seeing as the CCR5-delta32 gene mutation is not shown to exist amongst the African population. The genetic diversity of the HIV virus can complicate the effects that these genes have. This can be one of the negative effects of developing a drug test but we cannot predict if it will outweigh the positive affects. The results from these studies have given us more insight and understanding into the host and HIV virus interaction. These results are complicated and will hopefully help us to design a vaccine or treatment.
http://www.hivresearch.org/news.php?NewsID=197
When I first started reading this article, I was very intrigued at the idea that HIV could be stopped and there may be a chance to prevent this disease from taking more lives. But as I read on, I began to think more realistically and less optimistically. One thing I really liked about this article is that it wasn’t trying to give false hope, it was trying to be unbiased and stating the positives and negatives of this new discovery of the CCR5-delta32..
ReplyDeleteAs a future public health professional, I think that while this discovery is good news, all of these treatments are much easier talked out than actually implemented. In an article called “The End of AIDS” by Jill Neimark, potential HIV/AIDS treatments and their results are discussed. For example, it means the idea to “lure HIV out of hiding” by using inflammatory antibodies to fire up the patient’s immune system in hopes of activating the dormant CD4 cells where HIV was stowed away. Unfortunately this led to the CD4 cells being destroyed, taking away the body’s best weapon against HIV. Several other treatments such as stem cell therapy, medications, antiretroviral therapy, and even the activation of histone deactylase (supposedly thought to keep HIV turned off) are mentioned as well.
My point is mentioning all that is that this new specific development may not mean too much for the HIV/AIDs epidemic. As of 2002, the new HIV infections outpace those placed on treatment by almost 2:1. The main issue is that HIV is so rapidly evolving and human evolution cannot keep up with it. Because of this, I believe, like the article states, “blocking CCR5 is unlikely to be a miracle cure”. By the time a new cure if discovered for a specific strain, that strain has evolved and become resistant.
So as for this new discovery, I think a lot more research and testing needs to be done before any promises are made to those plagued with this disease, especially because the majority of people infected are in Africa, where this CCR5 mutation apparently does not exist. The disease itself is very complicated but I am hopeful that the millions of hours put in by thousands of scientists all over the world will be worth it.
http://www.one.org/c/us/hottopic/4079/
http://discovermagazine.com/2011/oct/11-the-end-of-aids#.URlOXuT7JI4
It is extremely interesting and impressive that the science of today has allowed for the discovery of the exact mutation that could inhibit a person from contracting one of the deadliest diseases on earth. However, this discovery is relatively new and because of that, although the prospect is very exciting, it is important not to get ahead of ourselves and think we have found a cure. One thing that is known about HIV/AIDS is that the disease itself is very crafty and is ever-changing which is how it has been so lethal. Although this mutation has been discovered, it does not guarantee that harnessing this information and creating a drug will mean the eradication and ultimate protection from HIV; in fact, it could just mean that the virus itself will somehow adapt to the new receptor cells and we will be back to square 1.
ReplyDeleteAlso, from a social perspective, the mentality of thinking that a cure exists, or that one is immune, could lead to an individual having more unprotected sex and still passing on the disease. Even if the person's cells block the entry of HIV, does this mean that they cannot pass it on to their unprotected sexual partner? These questions must be explored and tested before we can really get excited about this information. However, it is definitely a hopeful step in the future.
More research needs to be done on this brilliant discovery before any action towards treatment begins. Because of HIV's ability to alter itself and adjust to its environment, it is extremely dangerous. However, a treatment that would prevent HIV from entering cells could be a miracle for HIV epidemic areas of the world, including Africa. But like I mentioned before, we must be careful before we take action. HIV has the ability to use other proteins, rather than just the CCR5 and CD4, to enter into cells and replicate, making the release of a drug that blocks HIV from using the CCR5 receptors might create a resistant form of HIV. This will make HIV all the harder to combat. But if the CCR5 gene is the primary co-receptor used, and researchers create a treatment that allows the prevention of HIV to enter cells through the use of it, HIV infection rates could significantly be slowed and reduced, and help reduce the overall prevalence of HIV in especially epidemic areas.
ReplyDeleteAnother common result of the development and dispersal of vaccines or preventative medicines is a false sense of security among the population receiving them. If the population believes there's a cure or a method of prevention, one might be more inclined to engage in ricky behaviors. As a result, a treatment for HIV must be marketed carefully. In epidemic areas, especially Africa education, or lack thereof, is a very large factor in HIV infection rates. Misinformation about possible treatments or preventions could be even more dangerous than not providing them at all.
My beleif is that if the body hasn't naturally found it's own resistance we should not tamper with genetic makeup to insure this safety. It is better to disable the pathogen (HIV virus) itself rather than alter the human genetic makeup to confer resistence. The CCR5 Delta 32 mutation changes a receptor on white blood cells so that the HIV virus cannot infect the host. So acording to my beleif, the corresponding antagonist AD101 should be targeted instead of the bodies own cells.
ReplyDeleteThe good news is that the virus does not show signs of switching to a different ligand receptor, it keeps binding to CCR5 even with interfering drugs based on this mutation or with the mutation itself. It simply binds with a higher affinity or at a different domain. The affinity of other diseases such as Plague or Smallpox to receptors like CCR5 show the similarity of infection mechanisms among different pathogens and that previous immunities we have developed or have lost in our genetic history can be studied to base new drugs on. I will always support novel treatments of disease via hindering the pathogen and not the body.
The new development in regards to HIV is promising yet still unpredictable. I think that it is a topic that needs to be explored and researched much more before anything drastic is done. If health professionals begin to create a vaccine of some sorts with the CCR5 receptor, it may at first help reduce the epidemic in places such as Africa, but I believe that HIV will inevitably mutate and leave researchers at a dead end. If the new strain becomes stronger more people will get sick. There has been a lot of work done in efforts to control the virus in high epidemic areas and I do not think it would be sensible to risk what has been done so far. (Here is an article about some current efforts http://www.kumc.edu/news-listing-page/kessler-works-to-slow-hivaids-in-africa.html). As stated before by another student, until the positives outweigh the negatives, more research needs to be conducted. Health professionals should not lead people to believe that there is a cure or that they are safe from contracting the disease because that will lead to irresponsible unhealthy behaviors. The current information should be shared, but with caution, reaffirming that this is the beginning stage of further research and people should continue to be aware of the virus and continue practicing safe habits.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a public health professional, I would wonder why this resistance gene was virtually absent in Africa and other areas with high rates of the HIV/AIDS epidemic rates. If regions with high infection rates normally have higher frequencies of resistance genes, why is this CCR5-delta 32 mutation absent in these regions? Are there other diseases that frequently occur in these areas in which possession of this gene mutation would provide a greater risk to the individual, and that is why the gene is absent in these regions? Additionally, I would be concerned that if people thought that this gene mutation was a cure for HIV/AIDS they would be less careful about practicing safe sex, and other prevention behaviors that would still be more effective in decreasing the rate of the disease than the potential cure provided by this gene mutation.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis discovery of how the CCR5-delta32 mutation works in HIV is an amazing development regarding the virus and a potential cure. However, as many people have stated previously, it is important to not get ahead of ourselves as HIV is an extremely complex virus due to its faulty reverse transcriptase process. There needs to be a lot more research done on the virus' reaction to the absence of the CCR5 protein before even considering testing it on populations with high rates of HIV. This being said, the article states that the CCR5 receptor is used during the beginning stages of infection, and if we were to block the virus'access into the cell to begin with, there would be less replication of new viral cells and less possibility for mutation. If this can be researched and confirmed, I believe a drug blocking the CCR5 receptors could work as a type of preventative vaccine for HIV. However, public health professionals must be wary of how they introduce and educate people about this potential vaccine. Especially for areas with high rates of HIV and AIDS, it must coincide with plans to educate people on healthy behaviors and safe sex practices. It must be promoted as something that can only help prevent HIV when combined with safe and healthy behavioral practices, and not as a cure.
ReplyDeleteThis is not the first time I hear about some people being resistant to HIV because of their genes. I think that as a public health practitioner, this new development can be of great use in areas where there is an HIV/AIDS epidemic. This is because if they can create a drug that specifically targets the CCR5 gene, then it will help control the epidemic and can serve as good preventative medicine. On the other hand, like the article mentioned, this type of drug may have some side effects like weakening our immune system. So, we would have to see if the benefits of this drug outweigh the risks. The article also mentioned that some people that do not have the CCR5 receptors live perfectly normal lives. On the other hand, I think that introducing this drug into more developed countries like the US (at least without an education component to it) can be dangerous. If people have the idea that they can potentially be resistant to HIV, they may start practicing risky sexual behaviors. So, if the drug isn’t effective and they come across the virus, they can get infected. But, even if the drug does work, their risky sexual behaviors will create another public health issue related to other sexually transmitted diseases. With that being said, I think that this new development can be of great use but it needs to be handled carefully. As a public health practitioner, we need to think about where we are introducing this drug and how it is going to be introduced and that sort of thing.
ReplyDeleteWhile the fact that some people are seemingly immune to HIV is great news for science and the world in general, it could be dangerous if people thought that they could be immune to HIV based on their genes. I agree with the article that all people should not be tested for this mutation, because HIV prevention is critical for public health and something like this could slow down the progress we have made in preventing HIV. The article says that it is possible for people with two copies of this mutation to still die from AIDS, so my first instinct was that mass testing could set us back a few steps with prevention efforts. I also think that the prospect of a new strain of HIV that could arise if we found a successful treatment by blocking CCR5 is daunting. We are finally making some decent progress on the current strain and having to deal with an entirely new strain would be a big task for the medical industry. I would be interested to know how those currently working on finding a way to prevent HIV felt about this CCR5 research. The article makes it sound like a lot could go wrong, even though it could potentially be very helpful. I know there is a dire need for a HIV prevention method, such as a vaccine, in areas where the virus is a big danger, such as in Africa. I agree that we should invest in trying to find a prevention method, such as a vaccine, but I am not convinced that CCR5 is the key after reading just one article.
ReplyDeleteI think this discovery regarding HIV resistance is both exciting and something to be absorbed with caution. As others have mentioned, this discovery could be very helpful in developing new treatments for HIV because many individuals with 1 or 2 copies of the CCR5 delta32 gene have shown resistance to HIV. However, more research must be done before researchers and health care professionals jump on this new treatment bandwagon because of some of the information provided in this article: not only do we know from experience that the HIV virus often mutates around treatment angles and thereby becomes more dangerous and makes more individuals susceptible, but it has been found that some individuals with 2 copies of the CCR5 delta32 gene have still been infected by the HIV virus. The article poses a valuable point when it mentions that if anything, we can use this new information to help us better understand the life cycle of the HIV virus and to guide further research into treatment options in the right direction. For instance, the article mentions that later on the virus stops using the CCR5 co-receptor and starts using the CXCR4 co-recepter. This shift correlates with a time when the infected individuals starts to get more sick. What we have learned about resistance in people with 2 copies of the mutated CCR5 gene could lead researchers to look into mutations impacting CXCR4 protein development for possible treatment options.
ReplyDeleteAs many others have mentioned in their comments, I think health care professionals should be very wary to divulge this new knowledge to patients because our understanding of the influence of the CCR5 mutation and the HIV virus is not complete. Those who may be more susceptible to encountering the HIV virus via sexual interaction or other fluid exchange/exposure interactions would be putting themselves at risk by allowing their knowledge of this discovery to reduce their cautiousness. This is especially true since the resistance provided by 2 copies of the mutated gene has not effectively protected against HIV infection across the board. Clearly, there is more to the story. I look forward to what this new discovery leads to in terms of future research.
Alexandra Kramer
ReplyDeleteThe article, The Evolving Genetics of HIV, is amazing to read because HIV has become one of the most important and difficult topics to discuss over the past few decades. It is great to read that there is a gene that is immune to HIV, and even better that we are now able to not only identify it, but learn more about it so we can make progress in finding a cure. Unfortunately, it is important for us to remember that this gene is extremely uncommon, especially in the non-Caucasian population. Furthermore, as the article stated, viruses are constantly changing and mutating to adapt to their environments so that they can continue to thrive wherever they are.
I do like how the article mentioned that no one should assume that they are immune to HIV. That is where discoveries like these get dangerous. people assume that just because there is something out there that may be immune to HIV, that it is possible to forget all of the precautions that have been lifesaving over the years. To go along with this point that this is not to for a magical immunity for HIV is how "the usefulness of this work is mainly in how it helps us understand how the virus works and points to new possibilities for drugs to treat infection". Before we can start immunizing everyone, we have to fully understand all aspects of the virus.
We also need to remember that along with finding cures and immunities, we have to continue our work of prevention and awareness. These are the best ways of staying healthy and safe.
Wow! Sometimes I'm amazed at how all my classes interconnect. Today in my sociology of healthcare class I watched a film called RX For Survival on this exact topic. Check out the link- http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/rxforsurvival/series/video/index.html - to watch a clip from RX survival exploring the mystery of natural immunity and whether it could be key to an AIDS vaccine.
ReplyDeleteAs a future public health professional, I am interested to see this discovery progress and see what actions are taken to combat this illness. It is clear that various steps are being taken to understand the full nature of the disease in order to figure out the best method of prevention. According to the article, blocking the CCR5 protein to mimic the effects of having a CCR5-delta32 protein prevents the HIV virus from entering the cell and replicating its RNA. However, HIV/AIDS is a virus that continues to mutate, one of the reasons it has been so deadly. The nature of the virus is unpredictable, thus creating a drug to block the CCR5 protein could simply lead more mutations to develop. Thus, health professionals need to be careful when deciding whether the costs outweigh the benefits of the drug. I feel that more research needs to be done to understand why the CCR5-delta32 mutation is virtually absent in African and Asian populations.
The notion that there are individuals who are immune to HIV is exciting news, however there is also a possibility the information could have negative repercussions. It would be dangerous for people to believe they were immune to HIV based on their genetics alone.
Definitely check out the video clip I mentioned if you get the chance!!
Morgan, thanks for sharing that channel! I watched "Vaccine for AIDS? Part II: Keys to a Vaccine" and it was a great addition to the article that was posted in the TAG. I, also as a future public health professional, believe that this new development for the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa and other highly epidemic areas means another step to preventing the disease. It may not be the one vaccine that we are looking for because there are flaws to this such as leading to another mutation of the disease, but it is new knowledge that can lead to the vaccine in the future. With this new knowledge we have to make sure that the people that are being informed, are being informed accurately because this CCR5 mutation is not a mutation that makes them invincible from HIV and can have intercourse with anyone without fear.
DeleteAs said in the video, there is high pressure from the epidemic areas to do tertiary prevention but as public health professionals we need to look at primary and secondary preventions which may be hard because there are already a large number of people with HIV/AIDS that need help. Maybe putting effort in the development in HIV vaccinations is a good path to eradicating HIV but there are also other ways that could be more effective in the long run like giving more education about it and understanding the spread of it in epidemic areas. Vaccines can just lead to other problems such as more costly vaccines (yearly ones to adjust to mutations such as the flu shot) or difficulty of access.
If I were a public health official, I stress that this breakthrough does not mean anything for the highly epidemic areas affected by HIV and AIDS globally. Science is not yet in the position to be able to create a miracle drug; as mentioned, a "miracle drug" could in fact contribute to resistance and to new strains of HIV. These consequences are too great to even consider creating a drug. Unless every vulnerable individual were genotyped to check for the CCR5 gene and the potential effectiveness of the drug, the idea of a miracle drug should not be pursued. As mentioned in the article, the gene was found in 1% of Caucasians. Needless to say, sub-Saharan Africa and other epidemic areas in desperate need of good HIV/AIDS control do not have many Caucasians. As Alexandra Kramer above me stated, "...we have to continue our work of prevention and awareness. These are the best ways of staying healthy and safe." Funds diverted to education and treatment programs will have a greater return on investment than pursuing a drug that we know from the get-go would have an extremely limited effectiveness
ReplyDeleteAny new developments in ways to prevent diseases like HIV is always exciting. The article states that there are some people are resistant to HIV. Those who are resistant to HIV have two copies of the CCR5 delta32 gene. However, this only occurs in 1% of Caucasian people. There are also people with two normal copies of the CCR5 gene who are immune so there is more to learn about HIV and our genes. The CCR5 drug that is being developed may actually cause harm. It can possibly have bad side effects and make people sicker. Although a CCR5 drug may not be the answer to stopping HIV the more knowledge we have on HIV and our genes the closer we are to find a cure. Like many others have stated more research needs to be done because CCR5 delta32 gene mutation is only found in Caucasians. With the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa a drug to stop this disease would be extremely beneficial. If there was a way to stop HIV/AIDS in Africa health professionals could then concentrate on other health issues in Africa.
ReplyDeleteIf testing for this gene began and people found out they were immune to HIV it could cause people to be less inclined to practice safe sex. These people who do have the mutant gene may have unsafe sex and put others at risk. This could increase the incidence of HIV/AIDS and other stds.
If people with CCR5 mutations have varying levels of HIV virus resistance, perhaps drugs targeting (or blocking) the receptors of CCR5, may have similar effects of virus-resistance as those with the CCR5 mutation. Due to HIV’s ability to mutate so rapidly, it is very possible that HIV may mutate and find other pathways into cells. But despite this possibility, I think that the benefits of a CCR5 targeting drug may outweigh the negative consequences of resistance.
ReplyDeleteThis topic parallels the current fears that current pathogenic bacteria are becoming increasingly more resistant to antibiotics. But if antibiotics were never discovered or used in medicine, rates of deaths due to bacterial infection would still be tremendously high. If you apply that thinking to HIV medication, drugs targeting the CCR5 receptors can potentially stop the spread of HIV in populations with HIV epidemics. Although drug resistant strains may remain, stopping the spread of that particular CCR5 targeting virus may greatly benefit populations with epidemics. Using receptor targeting drugs may significantly decrease prevalence of HIV in these populations. Similar to antibiotics, I think that the potential to significantly reduce rates of death and spread of HIV now far outweighs the consequences of resistance in the future. Perhaps drug resistant viruses will be so isolated that they will eventually (hopefully) cease to exist.
The discovery of this new resistant gene means a lot in HIV treatment and research. Just understanding how specific people develop this mutation can allow for the new treatment options and hopefully in the long run a cure. In the countries of Africa where there is a high prevalence of the disease, this gene could create treatment options that would truly tackle the epidemic. However as public health professional we definitely should be wary of the negative consequences of this discovery. For example, with the creation of any new effective treatment there is a chance that the virus can build a stronger more resistant chain. A more important reason that this information can cause negative consequences is the fact it can lure many people into a false sense of security about catching HIV. Just as we saw in class with the “Cheating Gene” it is easy for the media to exaggerate on the conclusions of research studies. If many people believed that having this gene significantly lowered there chances of catching the disease, they might go and get tested for it believing that they are no longer at risk. This would be more of a problem here in the states where people have the capabilities to get the genetic testing done. In my Intro to Public Health course I took last year, we watched a Ted Talk from a epidemiologist named Elizabeth Pisani who discussed why HIV has become such a huge epidemic. One of the reasons she lists is the fact that more people are currently living with the disease thus there are more chances of other catching it. Thus with the discovery of this gene a key question to ask is that even if a person does not get sick from HIV can they still spread it? Will they even know they have the virus if it never presents itself? And as public health professionals what do we think that would mean for the prevalence and incidence of the disease?
ReplyDeleteTed Talk with Elizabeth Pisani
http://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_pisani_sex_drugs_and_hiv_let_s_get_rational_1.html
Having taken microbiology last semester, I am very familiar with this gene mutation & its effectiveness in preventing HIV. This is a mutation that is widely recognized by the science and medical community as a way to stop a person with this mutation from contracting HIV. Maybe it is even evolutionary, and our bodies are beginning to create their own response to this disease that is becoming so deadly globally. Even if this is the case, and the numbers of people with this mutation keeps rising, I don't think it is something that should be tested for or used as a "preventative" method against HIV.
ReplyDeleteIt is well known that patients with HIV are at a much higher risk of having other STDs or transmittable infections. Because of this, it is very important that safe sex and sex education are still taught. If people learn that they have this mutation, they may feel invincible and may engage in sexual promiscuity. As we well know, there are many other complications of sex than just contracting HIV. This mutation does not protect against any other STDs (that we know of), and definitely not pregnancy. As news about this mutation comes out to the public, it might become necessary to stress these things even more than we have in the past when educating people on sex education.
Although this is definitely an amazing breakthrough, as with most new discoveries, there are undoubtedly unanswered questions and more of the story of the resistance to HIV that remains. As a public health official, this new development could offer hope for the areas where HIV/AIDS is an epidemic and may have the potential to alleviate the problem that exists in these areas if the mutation is found to be a drug target and if that drug is successful. But as the article states, there are consequences that come with this, such as resistance to the CCR5 mutation or the possibility for a new strain of HIV. I would not want to get people's hopes up with this discovery, especially those in areas where HIV/AIDS is so prevalent and is causing many people to suffer because this is only one step in the right direction, it does not necessarily offer a comprehensive solution to the disease.
ReplyDeleteOne concern that I have in relation to this discovery would be that people would not make careful decisions if they believe that they are no longer at risk of being infected. Although the mutation in the CCR5 gene could protect against HIV, this does not mean that it will do so for all people. If people do get tested for the mutation, they may act more promiscuously and make different life decisions than they otherwise may have made. This could lead to dangerous consequences because although they have the mutation, the developed drug that comes out of this could have different influences on different people, which may lead to resistance of the drug or new strains of HIV as the article mentioned.
This was mentioned in a lecture by a guest speaker in a biology course here at BU. It is definitely an interesting breakthrough and demonstrates how mutations can be beneficial, since mutations are often associated with being bad or harmful. The fact that the article mentions how it would be dangerous to assume you are completely safe if you have this mutation is very important thought because there is rarely a magic bullet for an issue as complex as HIV.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of a new drug is very interesting but complicated as well. Because HIV attacks specific cells in our immune system, who knows if this drug would somehow affect the immune system in a negative way. Discovering this drug would be a huge undertaking for this fact, as well as the fact that HIV is constantly mutating and changing its protein coat. All of these factors add to the challenge of creating a new drug.
To answer the question, I think this new development has a lot of potential and gives hope for the overall HIV/AIDS epidemic. This discovery is worthy of more effort, research and money to be put into studying this, and figuring out all the functions and possibilities that this gene mutation may provide. Although this gives health professionals, patients, or just people in general this sense of hope for preventing HIV/AIDS, I think we have to be careful. The article says that this gene is in fact a mutation. Gene mutations are not very common; in fact, gene mutations usually occur in less than 1 percent of the population. This article states that this specific gene mutation “occurs in about 1% of Caucasian people.” Later in the article, it also states that it is virtually absent in African and Asian populations. Judging from this statement, people have already done the research on African and Asian people. What are we able to do with this gene mutation if one race has a higher chance of obtaining it? This gene mutation has proven in some cases that it slows down the attack on a cell by an HIV virus. Copying this gene mutation and inserting to HIV patients seems like a perfect idea – that way, people are suffering less. If this gene mutation has been found to occur in Caucasian people, will it not function properly or in the same way, for African and Asian people? What are the consequences of inserting a gene into a body that did not originally have it? As much as this is an exciting, potential-filled discovery, I wonder if the possibility of more negative outcomes is worth it.
ReplyDeleteI don't think any health professional in sub-Saharan Africa or urban Washington D.C., for that matter, will be excited to hear this news. Although it's absolutely a great thing that new discoveries like this are emerging that may potentially contribute to the eradication of the virus one day, this find does nothing for the millions of people currently living with the virus/AIDS, and the millions more that will become infected before any type of widespread cure is developed and administered. Researchers may be more excited for this development, but they know more than anybody that turning this into something meaningful will take years (if at all).
ReplyDeleteWe already have resistance to HIV. It's called health education, or condoms, or circumcision, or ARVs, or god forbid, abstinence. The prevalence of HIV can be curtailed drastically if large-scale interventions like PEPFAR and MDG are funded more and implemented better. This is another example of medical intervention being weighted more than public health intervention. The US follows a biomedical model when approaching health care and more focus should be placed on the bio-psycho-social model.
The possibility that a mutation of the CCR5 gene would prevent people from getting HIV and could potentially be used as a vaccine is a high complex subject. Of course, if this research is accurate and there is a possibility to mutating genes to prevent the HIV/AIDS epidemic from spreading that would be a huge medical breakthrough. The problem is that by altering the human's response to foreign virus's such as HIV/AIDs makes us vulnerable to different strains of the same virus. If scientists were to develop a medicine that focuses specifically on the CCR5 gene, the virus may grow stronger and attack in other ways.
ReplyDeleteI have heard about the idea that certain people have a resistance to the HIV virus, and although an outstanding breakthrough and a possibility for treatment improvements, my biggest concern is the resistance this may cause. The article mentions that HIV is very sloppy when it comes to replicating, leading to many (quickly changing) alterations in its genetic code. This in itself may lead to treatment being less effective than perceived due the virus's ability to continually change, until it develops a code that does not require the CCR5 gene. Furthermore, even if the treatment is quite potent, it will lead to the elimination of HIV that requires CCR5 and allow HIV that does not require CCR5 to increase in quantity and become the virus that is commonly transferred. Depending on how quickly HIV can adapt, the treatment focused at CCR5 may not be effective for very long. I therefore believe that, although this is a fantastic step forward in understanding a virus that has been very difficult to control and that quickly became an epidemic, we should take the next steps with caution so as not to create an HIV that is even deadlier and more protected against out intervention.
ReplyDeleteI have heard about this mutation before while in a Biology class here at BU, and it led to some critical thoughts for me then also. I feel like this is a great breakthrough and as a public health professional I would definitely support further research in this field. However, I do not feel that this breakthrough is any substitution for preventive care. I think that it would be a coin toss as to what mentality people would develop. I think that using this as a potential preventive treatment for folks, yet still stressing to them that they could acquire HIV would be essential because it would be easy and quick for people to adapt a "it won't happen to me now" mentality, which is naive.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Maysam above me in that the treatment may not be effective for long, because HIV seems to be a quickly mutating virus, and I think it would find another way to enter cells if we block one of it's options.
The idea that certain genes exist that could lead to better care or a cure for HIV is exciting. It would help millions of people and could maybe even get rid of the epidemic all together. However, I have some reservations about screening people for the CCR5 delta32 gene. If people were to be screened and discover that they have this gene or were carriers of this gene than it could lead to a rise in unprotected sex, other STD’s and unwanted pregnancies. People may just assume that because they have this gene they are automatically immune and do not need to take precautions. If 20% of Caucasians are found to have one copy of the CCR5 delta32 gene it would be interesting to see the trend that follows their genetic screening. This research could help a lot of people but scientists should be careful about who they test and how they use this information.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWith the incidence rate of HIV all over the world constantly on the rise, I am glad to see advancements being made in understanding this crippling disease. However, this article may cause people to act on this information and get their genome sequenced to find out if they possess this rare mutation. I know that after I read this article, I wanted to find out if I was one of the 1% of people that had the CCR5 gene from both parents. Having people wonder about their genes may not be the best idea because this research is only in the beginning stages and may overwhelm people if something else is found in their genome.
ReplyDeleteMy other reaction after reading this article was a memory of another study dealing with prostitutes in Africa. (1) In a Nairobi slum, prostitutes that had sex multiple times in a day, and exposed to all sorts of sexually transmitted diseases, were not getting sick. Scientists were very puzzled with this occurrence and many thought they had some sort of immunity to HIV. After reading the article for this week I thought maybe the Nairobi study found a CCR5 gene within these sex workers. Looking back, these researchers reached different conclusions about the workers’ boosted immunity. This just shows how different people are attacking the HIV problem differently, and nothing has been very conclusive.
However, if more studies find the link between HIV and certain genes, then the future looks promising. As a public health professional, this could potentially mean a new vaccine for places where HIV is an epidemic and have been wiping out entire families. When a vaccine for smallpox became readily available, health professionals travelled around the world to eradicate that disease. The same can almost be said for polio. People will no longer have to suffer through the deleterious effects of HIV and literally wither away in parts of Africa. This could mean less money spent overall on the HIV problem, a healthier workforce, and a better future to those in other parts of the world. I would love to see a vaccine for HIV come to the market during my lifetime. But can science do it?
(1) http://www.nytimes.com/2000/02/03/us/a-new-aids-mystery-prostitutes-who-have-remained-immune.html
The article mentions that we do not yet know what side effects this potential miracle drug might be. They may also have unforeseen consequences. The mutation may lead to a virus that is potentially worse than HIV. The article also mentions that it is not efficient to test people for this mutation and even people with this mutation are not usually immune to all strains of HIV. If I were a public health professional the new development could possibly mean good things for areas where HIV is highly epidemic. If researchers are able to figure out how to create this miracle drug it could act as a vaccine against HIV, or at least against certain strains of HIV. Then again, this miracle drug has not yet been created and we cannot rely on it as a potential HIV prevention method. Time and money should still be focused on preventative programs and education about HIV/AIDS. However, the discovery of this mutation and its potential benefits for HIV prevention shows hope for the future.
ReplyDeleteAs a public health professional, I think this idea has a lot of potential. We are going in the right direction to find a cure, I just don't think we have sufficient data to back it up yet. I was unaware that not everyone exposed to the HIV virus gets sick, and it has to do with certain genes being triggered. The CCR5 delta 32 gene gives protection and decreases the severity of the infection and since scientists are working on ways to barricade the ccr5 receptor, I dont think this is something we should just shut down. Although I'm sure many people are aware that AIDS is one of the most prevalent diseases in the world, not everyone knows that 95% of all cases are centered in Africa. Taking this drastic statistic into consideration, I think that even if this discovery can lead to saving just a few lives before it starts creating a resistance it would be beneficial. I think that my fellow classmate, Samuel Arsenault has a great idea, that as a health professional, I would definitely try to implement. He suggests that since this CCR5-delta32 mutation is very prevalent in Northern Europe, there should be a research team implemented to investigate the genetic and environmental differences between the european and affiances. This could be truly beneficial because it could lead to another breakthrough that would not require such extensive research and science to implement. I do not disagree, however, with the concept that if this discovery goes viral, teens would engage in risky behavior without the concern of contraction. Therefore, if I were a public health professional this new development would lead me to create a two fold plan that would encompass further research and implementation of this discovery, a long with a change in how our education system presents the epidemic of the HIV/AIDS virus.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.globalissues.org/article/90/aids-in-africa#TheImpactofAIDSinAfrica
When looking at this matter through the eyes of a public health professional, I believe that it is a sign of good things to come. It means that science is headed in a positive direction and at least a step closer to finding a cure for HIV. HOwever, one must be cautious when marking anything a "miracle drug," as there are usually adverse side effects. As stated in the article, "It's not an airtight guarantee of never getting AIDS. Some unusual types of HIV can use other proteins for entering cells. Rarely, there have been people who have two mutant CCR5 genes who have died from AIDS," thus proclaiming that there are ABSOLUTELY other ways the virus can enter the cell. However, there will always be those that feel the need to deem this drug a "cure-all" miracle drug. In addition, the article explains that the HIV virus is rapidly changing and developing in different ways. This means that any drug found to cure the virus today, could become obsolete in a certain time frame. In terms of how i would direct this drug to the people in Africa, it would be appropriate to warm them first that there are certainly possible side-effects and a sub-100% success rate before administering the drug to them. All-in-all, it is important to take any new drug with some caution and hesitation, as the HIV virus is indeed rapidly mutating and can easily build resistance to any drug it is overly exposed to.
ReplyDeleteAs a future public health professional, I think that it is great that scientists have discovered the mutant CCR5 gene. I think that this discovery puts us on the road to learning more about HIV/AIDS, and perhaps developing a vaccine or a cure; however, the article did mention that this mutant gene was almost non-existent in African and Asian populations. That being said, I don't see how the discovery of this gene will help areas that are currently experiencing and HIV/AIDS epidemic, like Africa, at the moment. If this mutant gene is not present among the populations that are strongly at risk for contracting HIV/AIDS, then it is not very useful, unless of course a vaccine or new drug is developed that will prevent the contraction of HIV. I think for the time being, prevention efforts should be the main focus for areas that are experiencing an HIV/AIDS epidemic, especially in populations where the mutant CCR5 gene is not present.
ReplyDeleteIt's amazing how science seems to always be evolving. In my biology class freshman year we were discussing it we thought there would ever be a cure or some sort of prevention for HIV. I think it's great to see that this mutation in the CCR5 gene may contribute to HIV safety, although I do have concerns of what else this could lead to. I wonder if people will become more careless in sexual protection if they discover that HIV cannot make them sick. I also think it might make people seem invincible in a sense, but as the article states, other forms of HIV can still infect those with the CCR5 mutation.
ReplyDeleteAs a public health professional, this development could be extremely beneficial in places like Africa. I would encourage more research to see what this mutation means to the HIV epidemic in these areas. As mentioned in the article, this mutation isn't found in the populations in Africa and other places. But, more people have it in the American population, serving as a protective barrier to this population and not in African populations. In conclusion, I feel the benefits of furthering the research outweigh the costs. I think the rates of HIV would eventually decline if this mutation started to exist in these populations.
I found this interesting article about the CCR5 gene. It is protective against HIV but makes these people more susceptible to other diseases such as West Nile! http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/01/060117113225.htm
I found this article very interesting, especially the point about how the CCR5-delta32 could be a mutation passed down through generations as a result from the bubonic plague and small pox epidemics in Northern Europe. HIV/AIDS is a devastating disease and it is very encouraging to hear that researchers are having success in mapping certain genes that contribute to the spread of this disease. Hopefully, the recent addition of the CCR5 co-receptor and the CCR5-delta32 mutation can help researchers create new medicines to help infected individuals fight off this disease.
ReplyDeleteIn the section of the article where the possibility of a new drug being produced, the author(s) suggest that creating a drug to block the CCR5 may have bad side effects. Unfortunately, this outcome is not limited to just the CCR5 gene. Any medication created to block a receptor has the likelihood of creating side effects that negatively affect the individual taking the drug. This happens everyday, but there are ways to avoid these negative side effects. For instance, other drugs can be given to reduce the side effects. Unfortunately, HIV has the ability to frequently alter its DNA. Researchers are hopeful that by blocking the CCR5 receptor, the virus will not be as easily able to mutate and consequently the virus will spread slower. This will allow medications to be effective for longer periods of time. If it is possible to create a drug that will block the CCR5 receptor, it could be extremely helpful in areas where the epidemic affects a majority of the population, such as in parts of Africa. Medications developed to fight other epidemics in areas such as these have been extremely successful; such diseases include polio, small pox, amongst a host of others.
As the article points out, the HIV epidemic is still too new for the population at large to develop a mutation, such as the CCR5-delta32 to provide protection from HIV. This discovery is important though because it provides an avenue for future research endeavors and provides hope that a cure/preventive measure against HIV will be available in the future. We have come a long in terms of treating HIV/AIDS since the initial outbreak and hopefully this epidemic can be put to rest in our lifetime.
This is an enormously important discovery. I think that this should be the focus of most genetic research. Finding a genetic coding that enables a person to be more resistant to the HIV virus could possibly give us a vast amount of information that we previously were unaware of. This information could give us a fighting chance against HIV, and possibly finding the characteristics of the gene and the HIV virus that would allow us to create vaccines and cures.
ReplyDeleteSome people above have been saying that this discovery would enable teens, specifically, to be more promiscuous and risky involving sex. I don't think that is necessarily true. There are many STIs that are curable or treatable with today's medicine, but there are still countless measures many people take while having sex. And just because we have a possible treatment or cure for the HIV virus doesn't mean all the other STIs automatically become treatable and curable also. People above also say that they would like to see if they had the 1% chance of having the gene, but personally, this information does not change any point of view of mine when concerning sexual health. Knowing if I had the protective gene or not would not affect my actions on sexual health.
http://www.pamf.org/teen/sex/std/stis.html
I also was not aware that 95% of the world's AIDS is concentrated in the continent of Africa. This is extremely alarming, and maybe with this new information, different public health care methods can be used to give more effective treatment, or have more effective prevention strategies along with education.
This is definitely a great discovery and may give some people hope, especially if they live in an area that is high risk for contracting HIV. But at the end of the day HIV education triumphs the genetic probability that one will not get the disease. If I were a public health official, the information in the article would not change my attitude or how I managed spreading education about HIV or safe sex. I agree with some of my fellow students in that the new information about the CCR5 gene may cause a high risk population to become more careless about protecting themselves.
ReplyDeleteDespite this I think that the research being done on the CCR5 might open doors to a possible cure or even vaccine for HIV. If I were to share this news with a high risk population, I would highly stress the concept of drug resistant strains of the virus. I would also make a point of saying that having this mutation does not guarantee that one is completely immune to the disease.
As a public health profession in the African / Asiatic countries this discovery has important implications. As always, the emphasis on education and prevention for HIV is first and foremost in it's treatment in many countries. Outside of that education realm, which still has a long way to go, is the possibility of altering people's chances on a genetic level. If a widespread vaccination were to be developed it could have a significant impact. Though there are concerns on HIV developing a new strain, what are the benefits of not developing something just because some new strain may come along? It is my personal belief that not developing this possibly very influential drug would be much more of a detriment than a new HIV strain. One, because it shows a loss of hope, and two, just because there is a risk of harm...does that mean it is pointless to do good?
ReplyDeleteAs stated before I think that the BEST way for HIV treatment and prevention is simply education and public awareness. Unfortunately, many people are ignorant to this infection. Public health professionals must focus on ALL people in the spectrum, the healthy, the sick, and the dieing. Not to do so would be a disservice to those who put their faith in us as providers and caretakers of health.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think this is an incredibly interesting topic and a ground breaking discovery. HIV itself is a fascinating disease. It is very unique in the way it is transmitted and the pathophysiology of the disease. Different populations are more susceptible to HIV than others. Furthermore, the epidemiology of HIV is different all over the word. Various dispositions including race and ethnicity can put people at a higher risk of infection. The fact that there may be a genetic link that is protective of HIV infection is astounding. This science can shape the future of prevention of HIV and save many lives. I am excited to see more research on this.
ReplyDeleteAny development that helps prevent HIV/AIDS is an exciting one. I think that this discovery will be important in the future for drug and treatment development, and I hope that it will be helpful in finding a cure for AIDS or a way to control this growing epidemic.
ReplyDeleteThis being said, as a public health professional working in a highly infected area it would be extremely dangerous to assume that because of this genetic mutation a person can’t get HIV. The article explicitly states that this mutation still allows for other strains of HIV to infect a person, and that this mutation is only found in a very small percentage of the Caucasian population. This is not particularly relevant in the most infected regions including Southeast Asia and Africa.
Education, prevention, prolonging life, and establishing routine health care in the most severely HIV- affected areas should continue to be the focus of any interventions being done. There are still millions of people who are not educated about the danger of HIV/AIDS or other sexually transmitted infections. The proper use of contraceptives and the education and empowerment of women is essential in the fight against HIV/AIDS, regardless of a person’s genetic makeup. One issue of rising concern is ensuring that persons living with HIV are not further spreading the infection to others. Finally, the establishment of routine healthcare and prevention services are essential to improving the health of these populations. I also do not see genetic testing the populations of these countries for this mutation as an economically sensible intervention.
A comprehensive treatment of HIV/AIDS has two components; future treatment and preventative measures as well as treatment for those already living with the disease. While gene therapy could potentially provide an immunity, it would provide little comfort to the millions of people living with HIV/AIDS. How many years would it take for this therapy to be approved let alone become available to the general market? Most likely decades. What about the places where it would do the most use such as Africa? Probably even longer. That being said, the potential that lies in this therapy and the genetic avenue in general holds a large amount of promise. Unlike my classmates, I believe that the potential of the CCR5 research being done lies in gene therapy rather than vaccination. The dark cloud of looming over the potential manipulation of the CCR5 research is resistance. Will manipulating the body’s current immune system result in increased protection or merely expose us to a more fatal opponent? In all likelihood it will however a failure to fully examine it as a therapeutic approach would be negligent.
ReplyDeleteThis discovery is definitely a step in the right direction. Any information on how exactly the HIV virus works and on how certain people seem to be able to avoid being infected is helpful to know. Since CCR5 is the receptor used in the first part of aids and many people are asymptomatic for years, how exactly would this drug work? Would people need an annual HIV test or would everyone get a vaccine?
ReplyDeleteA huge issue is potentially accidentally causing a super HIV, just like overprescribing antibiotics lead to a problem with MRSA. But at the same time, we can’t just find something like the CCR5-delta32 protein and not try to do something with it. This is a very delicate situation as it has the potential to really help people but also could have disastrous consequences. Therefore, more research should be done, but I don’t think it should be counted on to stop the spread of AIDS. I think that educating people about the spread of HIV/AIDS is still the most important preventative measure that healthcare professionals can make at this point in time.
I was actually reading about the linkage between the Bubonic plague and the CCR5-delta 32 mutation earlier this week through PBS ( http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/previous_seasons/case_plague/clues.html). As a public health professional, I would feel that further research would have to be conducted on possible "miracle" drugs to inhibit the CCR5 receptor. Given how we are facing newer challenges constantly due to drug resistance, I feel extensive research needs to be conducted on these "miracle" drugs. These inhibiting drugs could also bring about detrimental side effects. It is extremely concerning to think that we could possibly create a resistant/new form of HIV. In terms of a public health approach, I would still recommend education and early prevention techniques for the time being. Even if these drugs do become available in the near future, I would still advocate for HIV education and early prevention as the main public health approach. Overall, I find this research extremely interesting and I think it will bring about new methods of approaching HIV. I think through further genetic testing and drug research, great strides will be made in the near future towards limiting HIV infections.
ReplyDeleteI agree, I think this is a tremendous breakthrough. But as some of my classmates have noted, the implementation of these findings – in screening and treatment, for instance – is still far away. This is not an easy fix to the HIV/AIDS epidemic, and it won’t be for a very long time. As the article notes, there are still a lot of issues that need to be addressed, such as the association of the CCR5 gene mutation with other diseases (e.g. smallpox), evolving strains of HIV, and roles of other receptors and proteins. Findings, like this one, should encourage further research on cures and treatments, but the majority of resources should be spent on education and forms of prevention – emphasizing public health over medical interventions. We already know much about the transmission of HIV/AIDS, and how to intervene, but that hasn’t inhibited its epidemic. That makes me a little skeptical about the eventual impact of a medical intervention at the molecular level.
ReplyDeleteI think it is very fascinating that some individuals may not become infected with a disease because of a gene mutation. People with two copies of CCR5 delta32 are really lucky because they are virtually immune to HIV Infection. If I were a health professional, this new development would mean that some people may be protected from acquiring HIV; however I would not recommend getting people tested for the mutation. If people are tested, and they find out that they have one or even two mutated genes, they may think they are "immune" to getting HIV, and not protect themselves while engaging in sexual activities. In addition, these mutations do not help individuals completely from getting HIV because some strands of HIV can use different proteins to get into the body.
ReplyDeleteI found an article that mentions that not every ethnic and racial group has the same frequency of the mutated gene. Since the allele is found in some mutations and not others, this suggests that there was a strong selective pressure in favor of the allele. In addition, the article mentions that CCR5-D32 may provide resistence to smallpox. All in all, I think that testing for a specific mutation in CCR5 should be done if people want to find out more about their ancestry or genetic information, but it should not be done as a reason to prevent oneself from a medical condition. Instead, I think people should focus on educating people on HIV prevention, and not getting tested for a specific gene.
http://www.thegeneticgenealogist.com/2007/03/29/are-you-immune-to-hiv-and-smallpox/
The article presents interesting findings about the development of interventions in the research field of HIV. The fact that genetics could be an important avenue for combating the disease is exciting. The way the genetic mutation in the receptors can prevent the infection from further causing destruction is possibly a new direction for HIV treatment research.
ReplyDeleteWhat is important to take from this article is that the mutation only occurs with two copies in one percent of Caucasian population and with one copy in twenty percent of Caucasian population. It also states in the article that the mutation is virtually non-existent in minority populations such as Asian and African-American populations. This is disheartening to hear because African-Americans are the hardest hit by the disease in the US. The article pointed out in the end that the mutation does not guarantee immunity to the disease if it is present. Individuals without the mutation have also shown signs of resistance which indicates that other genes could have a role in HIV infection prevention. The findings of this article provide a framework for further developing research in merging genomics with HIV prevention and treatment.
This article brings up a few interested points about resistance to HIV and a other living viruses. We spent a lot of time in Biology of Infectious Diseases talking about HIV as an immune system attacker. We learned about the process of how the HIV virus attaches to the CD4 and CCR5 on the surface of a cell, is let into the cell in that way, and multiplies to create more viral cells. I never learned, however, that some CCR5's have mutations which can cause a person to be immune to HIV. Most forms of HIV can not infect a normal cell if there is no CCR5 on the surface. A person must always be careful even if they are tested to not have the CCR5 on their cell surfaces. Just because a person has the CCR5 mutation (CCR5-delta32), it does not mean that they are completely immune to all types of HIV. More research needs to be done on this issue. There are always other variables to take into consideration while dealing with issues health care and the biology of cells. Everything in the body works together, and therefore there can be other causes for immunity to HIV (for example), or immunity to other diseases such as Small Pox (as mentioned in the article).
ReplyDeleteShould a person be tested for a CCR5 mutation? I do not think it is necessary because it is important for everyone to be careful in a situation where HIV is a possibility regardless of whether one is immune or not. There can be other isolated variables that contribute to the danger of getting the virus, transmitting it to others, or encountering other viruses in the process.
It is very encouraging to see that there are advancements of preventative HIV medicines. Although it is exciting to see the possibility of a person being immune to HIV, it also seems to have some negatives as well. A drug that blocks the CCR5 protein may also weaken our immune system at the suspense of stopping HIV. What makes the HIV and diseases alike so troubling is that they can always adapt and mutate once certain drugs are taken. In the article it talked about Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” and how viruses have a way of evading the immune system. It is also very interesting to see that the CCR5-delta32 gene mutation provided resistance to previous epidemics, which sheds light on why this mutation is more prevalent in Europe. People who had survived the bubonic plague could have also had this mutation and were able to pass it down to their offspring. Overtime it is very interesting to see how certain genes that survive and adapt to their environment are passed on for generations and generations.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Briana Zinsmeyer’s post when she talked about applying this to certain parts of the world. In Africa, HIV/AIDS is the number one killer in many African countries. With future development and research this discovery could go on to be useful in specific parts of the world and go on to save millions of lives. Although the costs of future research and experiments might be very high, I think that the benefits in the future are worth it. Although this discovery is not the perfect fix for HIV, it gives opportunity for future research to be done. Preventative care is always the best way to go when trying to save money rather then treating people who are already sick. I am excited to see future research of this mutation.
As a public health professional, this new development does not offer a huge break through in HIV/AIDS therapy, but it does help us understand more about how the virus works and points to tentative possibilities for drugs to treat the infection. The discovery of the CCR5 delta32 mutation and its resistance to HIV is important in studying what types of populations/ethnicities might be more prone to HIV infection. It also leads into future research as to why some populations may have a higher HIV rate correlated to a lower CCR5 delta32 mutation prevalence. Although, the mutation is indicative to possible/partial HIV immunity, I do not feel as though people should be tested for the mutation for precautionary purposes. This is because everyone should properly protect themselves against HIV because having the mutation does not guarantee 100% immunity. I do, however, feel as though testing for the mutation in certain races to see the prevalence may be helpful in determining genetic or environmental factors that may cause this mutation.
ReplyDeleteLike most of my fellow classmates, I believe that those working in public health should be cautious of how they present this information to the public, in order to prevent an increase in unsafe sexual behavior, especially in areas of increased HIV/AIDS presence. As of now, I don't think the recent discoveries should be expressed to the public in a completely hopeful way, but rather simply an informative one. Information should be presented in full about the gene mutation and the effects of having one vs two copies. Scientists should continue research on the CCR5 gene, and work on the discovery of a drug that is effective in blocking CCR5 without causing severe side effects. Overall, these scientific findings will help us better understand HIV/AIDS and the CCR5 mutation and their prevalence/lack thereof in certain areas.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article, I was very impressed with the researchers. It is fascinating to me the extent of their knowledge on HIV's mechanisms. With increasingly more information known about the virus, scientists are getting closer and closer to finding a cure. However, I don't think that a perfect cure will be found for a very long time. I think when it comes to messing around with genes, there are many random effects and mechanisms that can occur that people can't predict or explain. I understand that they want to come up with a way to perfectly block the CCR5 receptor, but maybe they should approach the issue differently. I was thinking that maybe scientists could focus on the CCR5-delta 32 gene because while "it would be dangerous to assume you are completely safe from infection if you have the CCR5-delta32 mutation," it is clear that they know a definite linkage of people having the gene and being protected from HIV. Therefore, I think adding or creating a mutation in receptor would be better than trying to block a receptor (CCR5) that is already there.
ReplyDeleteAs a public health professional we would not only look at the benefits of this new way of prevention but also cons that would come along with it. Yes, as lots of people would agree that this new discovery is very exciting and could change a lot of people’s lives where HIV/AIDS is an epidemic. It would save lives and a lot if emotional relief for a lot of these people. However, like the article states there are also downfalls to this where it is dangerous to assume that you are completely safe from a mutation and there are certain side effects such as weakening your immune system. Thinking in a public health sense you’d ask yourself what this new found discovery of complete immunity would also mean when it comes to people thinking and behaviors. It’s already hard to convince people to practice safe sex and if people know that they have this CCR mutation or could possibly get it through medication I think it could lead to some bad consequences. It could lead to giving people an excuse to their behavior, which may be risky and could lead to other diseases. The HIV epidemic wouldn’t exist if this were successful but it also may start another type of epidemic and will continue to be in a circle. With that said there needs to be more research done on possible medication and as important, the issues that will arise that come with this new idea of immunity.
ReplyDeleteThis article presents an exciting and hopeful outlook for the future of HIV/AIDS treatment. However, as stated in the article however, no one should assume they are immune to HIV. As a few of my classmates have mentioned, it would not be a good idea to release to the general public with the news of this discovery. Many people would jump to conclusions at the prospect of potential "immunity" to HIV and assume they are one of the rare few without being tested. Additionally, for the rare few who are tested and screen positive for the gene mutation that provides immunity to HIV, this does not mean they are immune to other sexually transmitted diseases. Therefore, while they may believe they are invincible in terms of STDs, this is not actually the case and they should be warned of this. Until further research is done and the specifics are fully understood, I do not think people should be tested for this gene mutation because of the possibility of it leading to a false sense of security. With that being said, I definitely feel that this a step in the right direction and I look forward to learning more about future developments of this discovery.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteAs many have mentioned before me, this discovery can be quite beneficial in preventing HIV/AIDS. As a public health professional, I feel that focusing on the genetic aspect takes away from dealing with people’s behaviors. As the article stated, this mutation is only present in a small group of people, so it would be hard to generalize for areas like in Africa. Instead, education on prevention would have a bigger impact in reducing AIDS. It can affect a larger group of people and last longer as well. As for the new strain of HIV that can arise, I believe that although it is still important to continue on researching and developing drugs despite the strain, expenses should be considered. The money spent on this can be used on furthering preventative education. Furthermore, we still do not know enough about future side effects that can arise from this drug, which can lead to further expenses, not to mention a possible new epidemic to worry about. It is great that we have a path to look at, but overall, I feel that whenever there are risks involved in anything relating to health, it is better to stay on the safe side and work with what is already present.
I believe that although there is some evidence that the CCR5 gene mutation may help reduce the risk of contracting HIV, most public health professionals would still focus on preventative measures that involve good decision making. Like the article said, having the CCR5 mutation does not necessarily mean that you are immune from HIV as fatal cases have been found in people with the genetic mutation. I also believe that it would not be beneficial to spend an enormous amount of resources trying to implement an intervention that would take advantage of the CCR5 mutation's effects. With the rapidly changing nature of HIV, having these types of "miracle cures" can create "super bugs" similar to the role many people believe hand sanitizer may have in creating new strands of viruses. Creating a cure with this approach may have some immediate benefits for high epidemic areas, but in the long run would not have the ability to keep up with the virus' rate of change and mutation.
ReplyDeleteAs a public health professional, I would be torn with what the next steps in controlling the HIV epidemic would be. While I believe that moving forward in our medical and scientific knowledge is important, I know that there could be meany unforeseen consequences. However, I believe that the CCR5-delta32 gene mutation provides great insight into how HIV attacks the human body. I think that the knowledge that blocking CCR5 might prevent HIV from infecting people presents a great opportunity. The HIV and AIDs epidemic in Africa is difficult to control, and more information on the disease would be invaluable. Many preventative strategies have been or are being implemented in Africa and already have had some effect, but the epidemic is still incredibly large. I believe that we should support research towards developing a drug that could prevent or at least lessen the severity of HIV infection. Without more information about HIV or a possible new drug, there are few more strategies that public health professionals can try in order to curb the HIV epidemic.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I am definitely concerned about the mutations in HIV that will make it drug-resistant and more powerful. So many other diseases, such as tuberculosis, have mutated and have created strands that are durg-resistant. This creates many cases of the disease that cannot be treated and is often more fatal. However, as concerning as it is to have a new strand of HIV in the future, I think that we should focus on controlling the disease now because we don't know what will happen with the virus. HIV may never mutate into a drug-resistant strand, or it might be just one strand of many and the other HIV strands can be treated with the drug. Despite the possible future consequences, I believe that we should do all we can in the present in order to prevent the most people from developing HIV and AIDs in the future.
If I were a public health professional, this new development for the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa and other highly epidemic areas would mean some people would be less likely to get HIV and better treatments could be used on those already infected. Testing each person for the CCR5-delta32 gene would be a waste of resources because a person may still get HIV even though it is unlikely. The article said nothing about minorities or other ethnic groups having the CCR5-delta32 gene. It only stated percentages for caucasians. Most of the highly epidemic areas are in Africa and countries where the majority of people are black. Blocking the CCR5 receptor is already used to treat HIV in its earliest stages, before mutations can occur. This would be the best way to treat those infected with HIV. People must get tested and once they are diagnosed should get the treatment. The earlier each person who is infected gets the CCR5 treatment, the more likely mutations cannot occur, which would slow the HIV infection and possibly lead to a cure in the future.
ReplyDeleteAs a Public Health Professional this information means to me this: "Men and women still need to wear proper forms of protection (i.e. condoms) while having sexual intercourse". Especially in Africa, where depending upon the price of this new drug, it’s important to continue to prevent new cases of HIV. And I definitely don’t want to use this drug as a form of protection having people, who are potentially at risk, taking it, which could be a direction this goes in.
ReplyDeleteFrom a scientific stand point I think this a great discovery. Knowing how HIV enters the cell and finding a genetic link is so important, but obviously learning more about what else the gene and protein mutation do in the cell as well as learning about what happens to people that we suppress this gene in is very important. It seems to me that this gene probably has more value than just inviting the HIV virus to come into the cell and use its cellular devices. But more research is definitely needed.
I think if we can save lives by implementing this drug, it will be a huge success; creating new strains of resistant HIV probably not as much of a success. But either way, whether we implement this drug or not, as a public health professional, it’s important to keep stressing protected sexual activity. Preventing HIV from entering the body should still be the biggest concern, but it’s nice to know that there’s a nice, expensive. back-up plan. Again safe sex first, then we’ll worry about your genetic code.
As previously mentioned by many of my classmates, this article is fantastic in that it offers hope for a possible cure for the HIV virus in the future. However, I am not sure that this mutation of CCR5 is the entire cure in itself. As the article states, the mutation is also not commonly found in areas where the HIV epidemic is found, such as Africa and Asia. The CCR5-delta32 mutation is actually frequently found in Northern Europe and possibly provides resistance to previous epidemics such as the bubonic plague or smallpox. I found this very interesting, because I would have thought that it would have been present in currently or recently affected areas.
ReplyDeleteI'm not entirely certain what this new developments means for the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa and other highly epidemic areas. While I would like to say that it does offer a significant amount of hope for a cure in the future, in the present I am honestly unsure of how much of a help this will be. The mutation discussed evolved over years of exposure to the bubonic plague and smallpox, evolution that does not occur overnight. The possibility of a pill or drug being created is exciting and would be a huge step forward for the treatment to HIV. However, we cannot forget that HIV is a tricky virus to deal with. It evolves incredibly rapidly, much quicker than our genes, and there are multiple strains already in existence. If there is a drug created, it would not be the end of the epidemic. There is the potential for new strains to arise as the resistance to that specific strain of virus increases. It could potentially create a form of HIV that may be even tougher to combat with medicine and treatments. The article also touched upon screenings to determine if an individual has the mutation, but I don't think that this would be wise. If a teenager or anyone really, finds out that they have the mutation and are resistant to HIV they may be more likely to engage in risky behavior that could lead to higher rates or STDs, teen pregnancy, and drug use among other issues. I feel that this discovery is absolutely a huge step forward closer to the finish line in the race against HIV/AIDS, but it is not the end yet and there is still a great deal of work to be done.
It is interesting how a mutation can give immunological benefits to people. I am curious how the mutation developed originally, if it was random or if it was during a significant epidemic. I don't think this makes a big impact from a public health standpoint. I mentioned it was present in 1% of caucasians and 20% may have some form of resistance. It also mentioned it doesn't give 100% immunity.
ReplyDeleteI think in places like many of the countries in Africa, this would not mean much. It didn't mention the mutation in non-caucasians, so the gene probably isn't significantly present there. It wouldn't change the approach either, because ultimately even if 20% were resistant and 1% were almost immune, there still would be the same prevalence and the population would still need to be educated, encouraged and given the opportunity to practice safe sex. They would still need to help treat an overwhelming amount of HIV patients ad prevent those who are infected to pass it on by helping the population get tested and preventing them from spreading the virus.
It will be interesting to see if this gene mutation leads to research and see if there is a way to mimic the gene with drugs or immunizations that have the same effect. It gives a clue on how the virus works and how to stop it. Although that would most likely take years of research, in addition to time spent to get it tested on populations, so I think it is more important to raise awareness of HIV, help the population get screened and prevent those infected from infecting others.
Jonathan Greenbaum
ReplyDeleteFrom a public health viewpoint this is an important step because it means that science is getting increasingly closer to finding a cure for HIV. At the same time it is important to note that this should not be considered a cure because the article suggests there are still other ways for the virus to get into the cells. I don’t believe we should begin messing around with the genetic makeup because this could lead to other issues that were never even considered in the first place. It would be much safer to find a way to actually combat the virus directly than to tamper with the human genetics. In regards to Africa, I believe that this CCR5 treatment can certainly be helpful. It is crucial to warn the people that it does not have an absolute 100% success rate and then allow them to make the decision on their own. It is crucial to approach this treatment with caution, as we do not want to create new resistant strains of the HIV virus.
It is already widely known that bacteria and viruses cause some people to get sicker than others, and that different versions of important genes change how easy it is for an individual to be infected. Since the 1980s, many people have been afflicted with AIDS, caused by the virus HIV (human immunodeficiency virus). However, not everyone who is exposed to the virus gets sick. Scientists have been working hard to search for an answer.
ReplyDeleteIn a recent microbiology course, I was educated about the pathway of HIV; we only learned about CD4 receptors. Needless to say, I found this article very interesting because of the importance of the CCR5 protein. It is a co-receptor, working with CD4 to allow HIV to enter the cell. Many people who are resistant to HIV have a mutation in the CCR5 gene called CCR5-delta32, a smaller protein that isn't on the outside of the cell anymore. Most forms of HIV cannot infect cells if there is no CCR5 on the surface. People with two copies of the CCR5 delta32 gene (inherited from both parents) are virtually immune to HIV infection, occurring in about 1% of Caucasian people. One copy of CCR5-delta32 seems to give some protection against infection, and makes the disease less severe if infection occurs. This is more common, and it is found in up to 20% of Caucasians.
The usefulness of this is mainly in how it helps us understand how HIV works, and it points to new possibilities for drugs to treat infection. Can blocking CCR5 stop HIV? Drugs are being developed that barricade the CCR5 receptor so HIV can't use it. A drug to block CCR5 may have bad side effects and make people sicker. As Christine Deasy said, “Creating a drug to block the CCR5 protein could cause more mutations to develop. This would make prevention of HIV a wild goose chase if figuring out the latest protein to block.” This is without a doubt a possibility.
After reading this article, I could not agree more with Liz Mathew, “One thing I really liked about this article is that it wasn’t trying to give false hope, it was trying to be unbiased and stating the positives and negatives of this new discovery of the CCR5-delta32..” They are not saying specifically that blocking CCR5 will cure HIV/AIDs around the world. This article even states that, “blocking CCR5 is still unlikely to be a miracle cure. Why not? The reason for this lies in the special properties of HIV's genes.” The very rapid evolution of the HIV virus makes it extremely difficult to treat; however, scientists are pursuing all avenues to learn new methods to impede infection.
If I were a public health professional, I would say that this finding has no real significance for the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa and other areas because as the article stated, the CCR5-delta32 mutation is "virtually absent in African and Asian populations." Therefore, research into this mutation would not benefit people in afflicted countries and they would not be able to use that research to develop solutions for the epidemic. I believe that research should be done on the most common strain of HIV in affected areas and develop drugs that would combat those strains, which is how we dealt with things like the flu and tuberculosis, until a new strain becomes more popular.
ReplyDeleteFor public health professionals in countries where CCR5-delta32 is more common, I would be cautious when this information is publicized because people may perceive the information incorrectly and believe themselves to be invincible to HIV. Even people with two copies of CCR5 have died from AIDS, so no one is really 100% guaranteed immunity. But drugs only deal with treatment, so we are missing the prevention aspect of AIDS which is by far the cheaper method. Public health officials should still continue to educate the most vulnerable populations about AIDS and prevention methods to stop it before it happens.
The notion of the gene mutation in CCR5 that contributes to HIV immunity is intriguing but still leaves enormous lengths for research to achieve before any true solution can be claimed. The article sites unknowns which raises many questions regarding the various strains of the HIV virus and their resistant capabilities.
ReplyDeleteI found the prevalence data of Caucasian people and HIV interesting, but later fell disheartened as I learned that the African population whose immunity is arguably most pertinent and at risk, is virtually unaffected by this news.
I would agree with Jeremy in that the most effective resistance is public health intervention. Though drug treatment is an important part of AIDS-patient care, prevention seems like the best focus for those highly epidemic areas like Africa. Considering the cures suggested are no where near the point of development, the best treatment to widely implement is education.
As a Public Health Professional, I would find this information to be fascinating and exciting. Strictly speaking, in terms of science, I find this to be a huge breakthrough and it is gratifying to see progress in the fight against HIV/AIDS. Although, as stated in the article, this should not be considered a cure by any means, it gives some hope to future research and the individuals that this may benefit, such as Northern Europeans. With any new intervention, comes skepticism: In what other ways could these drugs affect us? The article mentions that the drugs being developed to block the CCR5 Receptor have their own set of dangers. "One danger is that blocking one of our own proteins to stop HIV infection might weaken our immunity system." I believe that although this research is beneficial in helping us better understand the mechanisms of HIV and the effects certain genes (such as CCR5) have on the HIV virus, it would be a huge jump to say that this new development would have positive affect for the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa and other highly epidemic areas. It does not seem that this new development is exactly a "cookie-cutter" intervention that will work for everybody. Every individual will respond differently to the developing drugs mentioned in the article. In addition, having the CCR5-delta32 mutation does NOT necessarily mean you are safe from infection. I do not believe that the development of these drugs would be the end of the epidemic. They may be beneficial to some individuals, but would in no way be a "miracle cure" for HIV/AIDS. Although this new research is a step in the right direction towards combatting the HIV/AIDS epidemic, I believe plenty more research needs to be done until we can start drawing conclusions.
ReplyDeleteAs a public health professional, I would be temped to use this breakthrough to help alleviate the incidence of HIV/AIDS in highly epidemic areas of the world. However, it's important to consider the potential negative consequences that may arise from blocking the CCR5 receptor. Though these findings provide important information about how HIV infects our cells, I think a safer alternative to altering our genetic material would be to destroy or alter the virus itself. As others have mentioned above, an even better way to prevent HIV infection is education. Jeremy makes a good point about the U.S. following a biomedical model that focuses on the biological determinants of disease. In addition to this biological approach, we should be also looking at the social/cultural determinants of HIV infection. Because the CCR5-delta32 mutation does not confer 100% protection against infection, an attitude of invincibility could lead people to engage in promiscuous behavior that puts them at risk for sexually transmitted diseases including HIV. We have to make sure that people understand the risks of their behaviors, as well as effective ways to prevent HIV infection.
ReplyDeleteAnother consequence to consider is the possibility that the HIV virus will mutate and become resistant to the CCR5 mutation. On one hand, I can't help but wonder if altering our DNA to protect ourselves is only expediting the slow process of human evolution. Even if our DNA is evolving to be resistant, permanent resistance may never be possible. As is the case with antibiotics, the CCR5 mutation may protect us in the short run; however, a virus that is constantly mutating could adapt to changes we've made in our DNA and work around it.
In terms of just scientific research this is a great medical advancement in the mission to stop the HIV virus from affecting the body; however, there are way too many problems keeping this discovery from being a medical cure. The article states that HIV is a further evolving virus that consistently recopies RNA differently so a medical cure for all HIV viruses is unlikely. Like penicillin, I believe that finding the cure to HIV will be based around both science and luck. At the end of the article they describe finding the disease as “playing darts blindfolded.” This development does not take off that blindfold but our aim is in the right direction.
ReplyDeleteAs to finding a cure for the HIV/AIDS Africa, the cure is not worth funding mass production if there is no guarantee that the percentage of people with HIV/AIDS will drop. In addition, the problems that could occur are too high and the risk might not be worth the reward. The new developments are a step in the correct direction though.
The detrimental effect HIV has on our immune system is caused by its attachment and interaction with various receptor proteins. I found it fascinating that 1% of Caucasian people inherit the CCR5-delta32 gene from both parents making infection extremely rare; whereas 20% inherit one copy which decreases the severity of the infection. Even more interesting is that having two copies does not guarantee immunity. It is important that drugs used to block CCR5 do not block CD4 because cells with these receptors are important for our body's immune system. The rapid evolution of HIV is a disadvantage when it comes to new discoveries because of how quickly the virus catches up to technology. Blocking CCR5 makes it harder for the virus to use co-receptor CXCR4 (which if not blocked, causes people to become more ill). This shows how breaking down the process of infection can lead to great findings in the study of genomics.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a public health professional, this would provide a great stride in sparking further research in African and other areas where HIV/AIDS is an epidemic. Although the article mentions that the mutation making Caucasians resistant is virtually absent in Africans and Asians, it wouldn't hurt to test an African population for this genetic mutation. First we must determine which African population to target since this mutation is virtually absent. To do so, the epidemic history of various African populations must be analyzed. Populations where the most viral epidemics occur is the area where this mutation is most likely to occur, like the article stating that Caucasians have the mutation due to a bodily response to the Black Plague. Any further research done on this gene mutation and its potential would aid in the fight against HIV/AIDS, instead of waiting around for some miracle pill that can cure everyone.
ReplyDeleteI also support any advancements in extending research for HIV/AIDS immunity. While it may seem like a waste of resources if we hit a roadblock in understanding the CCR5 Receptor, it could potentially help us understand how these receptors work in different body and cell types. This is an amazing understanding and we should be taking advantage of the opportunity to explore the possibilities in the fight against HIV/AIDS. This is an epidemic in countries throughout the world, and it would benefit so many future individuals. Why wouldn't we want to further pursue this knowledge? The risk of a CCR5 mutation or new strain of HIV is just an unsure possibility, and we shouldn't allow our fear of possibilities to prevent us from continuing our developments in this field. We can definitely benefit from pursuing this research, and I do believe that this information can and should be used to aid in the fight against HIV/AIDS.
ReplyDeleteThis article shows a step in the right direction in terms of potentially creating a vaccine for HIV. However the variability of the virus creates a potential threat to HIV mutations that will not be affected by future vaccines. The influenza virus is another highly variable virus, however researchers have developed a way to reformulate the flu vaccine each year in order to coincide with the changes in the flu virus. If there is a way to apply this strategy to the formulation of an HIV vaccine it could deal with potential mutations within HIV strains. The risk of a vaccine resistant strain of HIV is a potential problem but I feel that with more understanding of both the virus and the CCR5 receptor it may be possible to create such a preventative measure and at this point, this is the closest researchers have been to finding a potential prevention technique from HIV strain.
ReplyDeleteI am very skeptical about this potential new vaccine. HIV is known to be a fast mutating disease, hence why it has been so difficult to find proper treatments and cures. I believe that the creation of this vaccine will only lead to more problems, for HIV will mutate again and a new vaccine will need to be made. Although it is promising, much more research must be done to see just how useful this new CCR5 research is. I think the bigger Public Health issue in Africa is not a vaccine, but affordable and accessible treatment. Many countries in Africa are facing extreme detriments in their population demographics, as the younger populations are having to take care of themselves since they lack older relatives as aid. Africans affected with HIV are not able to access proper treatment and must die at much younger ages than their American counterparts. New research should focus their efforts on making treatment available worldwide.
ReplyDeleteHello.........
ReplyDeletemy name is Mrs MARIAN CANDY,i am from CANADA,i am happily married and
blessed with kids,I am a hair dresser,why my husband is a taxi driver, on
December 28st 2019 me and my husband embank on a trip to France,on our way
back,we had a terrible accident,that took my husband's life,while i was
rushed to the hospital,by god grace,i was still living,after a year and seven
month,when my husband were passed away,a man came to my house,and ask me to
get married to him, unknown, that he was HIV positive and i never bordered to
conduct a check up test with him,before,i accepted him into my
life,why,because,he was so cute,gentle and handsome young man,he was so
caring.i never look at him,like one that would be HIV positive.after two year
of our marriage,my body system began to weak up,all day i feel dizzy and
lazy,and i began to lose weight as well, so i went for a check up test ,for
[fever,HIV/aid,malaria],the result, show me that, i am HIV positive.so i was
afraid,that,i would die,so, i were running from hospitals,churches and
native doctors,searching for cure, because i didn't want to die.one day i
went to a pastor's house,i told him my problem;as i was telling the pastor my
problem, there was one man which was with us,which i never look at his
face,the pastor prayed for me,on my way out , this same man,who was siting
with us,called me,i was like asking myself why this man was calling me, so i
just manage to wait to hear out what he will say,he told me that,he will like
to introduce me to this spell caster man, his name is Dr Charles,SO i Dr
Charles thanks and leaved,i never wanted to go and see this man called Dr
Charles,but a mind,ask me to go for a try,so i went there,i meant him and i
explain everything to him,he cast a spell on me and he told me,after two
weeks,i should go for a HIV check up test again,after two weeks,i went for
the HIV test,which the result shows me that i am now HIV NEGATIVE,i was like
mad at the hospital,very happy.....if you have any problem you are facing
now.....THIS DOCTOR,HE WANT THE WORLD'S HAPPINESS AND HIS NAME TO BE
TESTIFY,TO THE WORLD ABOUT HIS GREAT POWERS
HE IS SPECIALIZING IN THE FOLLOWING SPELL.
love spell marriage spell divorce spell
(1) If you want your ex back.
(2) If you always have bad dreams.
(3) If you want to be promoted in your office.
(4) If you want women/men to run after you.
(5) If you want a child.
(6) If you want to be rich.
(7) If you want to tie your husband/wife to be yours forever.
(8) If you need financial assistance.
(9) How you been scammed and you want to recover you lost money.
(10) If you want to stop your divorce.
(11) If you want to divorce your husband.
(12) If you want your wishes to be granted.
(13) Pregnancy spells to conceive baby
(14) Guarantee you win the troubling court cases & divorce no matter how what
stage
(15) Stop your marriage or relationship from breaking apart.
(16) If you have any sickness like (H I V), (CANCER) or any sickness.
(17) If you need prayers for deliverance for your child or yourself.
(18)are having legs or joint pain,that is making you not to walk well
Once again make sure you contact him if you have any problem he will help
you. contact him immediately via[ Dr Charles]OR [hivspelltemple@outlook.com]
WAITING TO HEAR FROM YOU;FROM hivspelltemple@outlook.com
There is a safe & effective Natural Herbal Medicine. For Total Cure Call +2349010754824, or email him drrealakhigbe@gmail.com For an Appointment with (Dr.) AKHIGBE contact him. Treatment with Natural Herbal Cure. For:Dengue Fever, Malaria. Painful or Irregular Menstruation. HIV/Aids. Diabetics. Vaginal Infections. Vaginal Discharge. Itching Of the Private Part. Breast Infection. Discharge from Breast. Breast Pain & Itching. Lower Abdominal Pain. No Periods or Periods Suddenly Stop. Women Sexual Problems. High Blood Pressure Chronic Disease. Pain during Sex inside the Pelvis. Pain during Urination. Pelvic Inflammatory Disease, (PID). Dripping Of Sperm from the Vagina As Well As for Low sperm count. Parkinson disease. Obesity, Lupus. Cancer. Tuberculosis. Zero sperm count. Bacteria, Impotence Fertility,Protoplasmic, Diarrhea. Herpatitis A&B, Rabies. Asthma. Quick Ejaculation. Gallstone, Cystic Fibrosis, Schizophrenia, Cirrhosis, Premature Ejaculation. Herpes. Joint Pain. Stroke. Cornelia Disease, Weak Erection. Ovarian problem, Erysipelas, Thyroid, Discharge from Penis. Bronchial Problem, HPV. Hepatitis A and B. STD. Staphylococcus + Gonorrhea + Syphilis. Heart Disease. Pile-Hemorrhoid.rheumatism, Impotence, thyroid, Autism, Sepsis Bacteria, Penis enlargement, Prostate Problem, Waist & Back Pain. Male Infertility and Female Infertility. Etc. Take Action Now. contact him & Order for your Natural Herbal Medicine: +2349010754824 and email him drrealakhigbe@gmail.com Note For an Appointment with (Dr.) AKHIGBE.I suffered in Cancer for a year and three months dieing in pain and full of heart break. One day I was searching through the internet and I came across a testimony herpes cure by doctor Akhigbe. So I contact him to try my luck, we talk and he send me the medicine through courier service and with instructions on how to be drinking it.To my greatest surprise drinking the herbal medicine within three weeks I got the changes and I was cure totally. I don't really know how it happen but there is power in Dr Akhigbe herbal medicine. He is a good herbalist doctor.
ReplyDeleteThere is a safe & effective Natural Herbal Medicine. For Total Cure Call +2349010754824, or email him drrealakhigbe@gmail.com For an Appointment with (Dr.) AKHIGBE contact him. Treatment with Natural Herbal Cure. For:Dengue Fever, Malaria. Painful or Irregular Menstruation. HIV/Aids. Diabetics. Vaginal Infections. Vaginal Discharge. Itching Of the Private Part. Breast Infection. Discharge from Breast. Breast Pain & Itching. Lower Abdominal Pain. No Periods or Periods Suddenly Stop. Women Sexual Problems. High Blood Pressure Chronic Disease. Pain during Sex inside the Pelvis. Pain during Urination. Pelvic Inflammatory Disease, (PID). Dripping Of Sperm from the Vagina As Well As for Low sperm count. Parkinson disease. Obesity, Lupus. Cancer. Tuberculosis. Zero sperm count. Bacteria, Impotence Fertility,Protoplasmic, Diarrhea. Herpatitis A&B, Rabies. Asthma. Quick Ejaculation. Gallstone, Cystic Fibrosis, Schizophrenia, Cirrhosis, Premature Ejaculation. Herpes. Joint Pain. Stroke. Cornelia Disease, Weak Erection. Ovarian problem, Erysipelas, Thyroid, Discharge from Penis. Bronchial Problem, HPV. Hepatitis A and B. STD. Staphylococcus + Gonorrhea + Syphilis. Heart Disease. Pile-Hemorrhoid.rheumatism, Impotence, thyroid, Autism, Sepsis Bacteria, Penis enlargement, Prostate Problem, Waist & Back Pain. Male Infertility and Female Infertility. Etc. Take Action Now. contact him & Order for your Natural Herbal Medicine: +2349010754824 and email him drrealakhigbe@gmail.com Note For an Appointment with (Dr.) AKHIGBE.I suffered in Cancer for a year and three months dieing in pain and full of heart break. One day I was searching through the internet and I came across a testimony herpes cure by doctor Akhigbe. So I contact him to try my luck, we talk and he send me the medicine through courier service and with instructions on how to be drinking it.To my greatest surprise drinking the herbal medicine within three weeks I got the changes and I was cure totally. I don't really know how it happen but there is power in Dr Akhigbe herbal medicine. He is a good herbalist doctor.
ReplyDelete