4 ms·

I think it's interesting and (if it were free) I'd want to know (even the me 10 years ago who wasn't married would). But what problem does it solve? Why (besi

I think it's interesting and (if it were free) I'd want to know (even the me 10 years ago who wasn't married would). But what problem does it solve? Why (besides curiosity) would I want that? Is it for HIV positive people to who might be hoping for a slow progression? For people who just want to feel a little more comfortable having lots of unprotected sex? I guess I can see the former... Though I would think that the audience is relatively small (and hopefully getting smaller) and would be looking to their doctor for stuff like this.

tlrobinson 19y ago
Agreed. I know nothing about this gene, but I doubt it would be wise to go around having lots of unprotected sex just because a test from some random company said you were resistant to HIV. I think it would actually be irresponsible and dangerous if that were the explicit or implied message. A lawsuit waiting to happen. Make sure it's clear to your clients that that's not the case.
rms 19y ago
For now, it is for information purposes only -- to satisfy curiosity. The state of the current research into CCR5 delta 32 doesn't allow for treatment decisions to be made -- it is known that CCR5 delta32 slows down the progression of HIV to AIDS, but you can't adjust medication dosage based on this. Similarly, scientists have concluded that individuals with CCR5 delta 32 in high risk populations are less likely to have HIV. But that study is based on an after the fact study of the group. It would be irresponsible for us to encourage unprotected sex and foolish for anyone to make a decision like that. So what problem are we solving? I'm not sure that there is a real problem here, beyond a lack of genetic testing services. We're offering a service providing information and some people are more curious than others about this particular information.
daniel-cussen 19y ago
I could see you selling it to people who have been told they have AIDS, but want to see if they are actually immune and don't need the expensive (around 20,000 a year, last I've heard) medicine.
- rms 19y ago
  The market for that is incredibly small. I have only seen one case of a CCR5 delta 32 homozygous individual with HIV in the scientific literature. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T1B-45Y6RP9-H&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=65d83dbf8ba06d9a3b62902766559de4 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi...
  - cstejerean 19y ago
    If I read that article right it says 1% not a single case (but then again I didn't read too hard)
    - rms 19y ago
      1% of people are homozygous for the mutation. The study itself is of one individual with the homozygous mutation that persistently had measurable viral loads for HIV-1. Normally the homozygous CCR5 mutation means you don't get HIV, because HIV infects through the CCR5 receptors which CCR5 D32 homozygous positive individuals don't have. But you could get infected by a blood transfusion from a late stage HIV patient, because HIV eventually starts infecting via the CXCR4 receptor. You could also get infected via the less transmitted and geographically confined HIV-2. But these scenarios are unlikely to happen, so they haven't happened very often. The study was notable because they found ONE GUY who couldn't fight off HIV with CCR5 delta 32 homozyous. If we could magically take away the CCR5 receptors from HIV+ individuals, many would be able to fight HIV to the point where they tested negative on some HIV tests. See this old thread for discussion of Josh's curing HIV idea. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47751 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47751

tlrobinson 19y ago

Agreed. I know nothing about this gene, but I doubt it would be wise to go around having lots of unprotected sex just because a test from some random company said you were resistant to HIV. I think it would actually be irresponsible and dangerous if that were the explicit or implied message. A lawsuit waiting to happen. Make sure it's clear to your clients that that's not the case.

rms 19y ago

For now, it is for information purposes only -- to satisfy curiosity. The state of the current research into CCR5 delta 32 doesn't allow for treatment decisions to be made -- it is known that CCR5 delta32 slows down the progression of HIV to AIDS, but you can't adjust medication dosage based on this. Similarly, scientists have concluded that individuals with CCR5 delta 32 in high risk populations are less likely to have HIV. But that study is based on an after the fact study of the group. It would be irresponsible for us to encourage unprotected sex and foolish for anyone to make a decision like that. So what problem are we solving? I'm not sure that there is a real problem here, beyond a lack of genetic testing services. We're offering a service providing information and some people are more curious than others about this particular information.

daniel-cussen 19y ago

I could see you selling it to people who have been told they have AIDS, but want to see if they are actually immune and don't need the expensive (around 20,000 a year, last I've heard) medicine.

rms 19y ago
The market for that is incredibly small. I have only seen one case of a CCR5 delta 32 homozygous individual with HIV in the scientific literature. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T1B-45Y6RP9-H&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=65d83dbf8ba06d9a3b62902766559de4 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi...
- cstejerean 19y ago
  If I read that article right it says 1% not a single case (but then again I didn't read too hard)
  - rms 19y ago
    1% of people are homozygous for the mutation. The study itself is of one individual with the homozygous mutation that persistently had measurable viral loads for HIV-1. Normally the homozygous CCR5 mutation means you don't get HIV, because HIV infects through the CCR5 receptors which CCR5 D32 homozygous positive individuals don't have. But you could get infected by a blood transfusion from a late stage HIV patient, because HIV eventually starts infecting via the CXCR4 receptor. You could also get infected via the less transmitted and geographically confined HIV-2. But these scenarios are unlikely to happen, so they haven't happened very often. The study was notable because they found ONE GUY who couldn't fight off HIV with CCR5 delta 32 homozyous. If we could magically take away the CCR5 receptors from HIV+ individuals, many would be able to fight HIV to the point where they tested negative on some HIV tests. See this old thread for discussion of Josh's curing HIV idea. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47751 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47751