3 ms·
It has been common experience for me to check my internet news feed and see "the cure" for HIV/AIDS/Cancer/Diabetes fairly regularly. This article does not app
by coryfklein 11y ago
It has been common experience for me to check my internet news feed and see "the cure" for HIV/AIDS/Cancer/Diabetes fairly regularly.
This article does not appear to claim to be "a cure", but does seem promising. Can anybody comment on the significance of this and why the layman should care about it?
- azurelogic 11y agoMost HIV treatments center around suppressing the virus. For example, many antivirals used in treatment interfere with viral reproduction. These people are never cured, because part of what HIV does is it inserts itself into the DNA of the infected individual's cells. The technique proposed in this article would be revolutionary because it suggests that we may eventually be able to use CRISPR to selectively cut that HIV DNA out of infected cells, leading to a permanent cure, if 100% eradication of HIV DNA can be achieved. Unfortunately, doing it in a petri dish is much different than doing it in vivo, particularly with 100% eradication.
- x0x0 11y agoif we could create a reasonable number of healthy (uninfected) t-cells, would an individual be left infectious but otherwise asymptomatic (because of the retention of a working immune system)?
- azurelogic 11y agoThis would only make sense if you could make the uninfected t-cells totally resistant to infection. What this paper suggests is that even this would be unnecessary. The combination of antiretrovirals and CRISPR therapy would prevent replication and excise the embedded viral sources. With enough of this combined therapy, eradication may be obtainable, resulting in a properly cured patient.