4 ms·
I mean, it seems like it did _something_ meaningful. But if you were part of an at-risk population, how promising would you really consider an animal trial that
by abeppu 5y ago
I mean, it seems like it did _something_ meaningful. But if you were part of an at-risk population, how promising would you really consider an animal trial that, for most treatment subjects, delayed infection by 5 weeks? Note, these animals had received multiple vaccines/boosters spaced out over a year before they were exposed to SHIV, i.e they spent 10x as long being vaccinated as they resisted infection.
- bluGill 5y agoBetter than nothing. Maybe not enough for me to stop whatever other practices I'm doing to reduce risk, but it seems like a good shield in case one of those others fail.
- abeppu 5y agoBut the alternative isn't nothing. E.g. one class of alternatives is PrEP which is very effective, well-tolerated in many patients, and depending on country, pretty affordable. Oh, maybe for various reasons, regularly getting and taking pills is difficult for some populations, and a series of injections makes more sense? Subdermal injections for PrEP are also in the works and look like they would work for more than a year. I would love there to be a really highly effective vaccine. But PrEP sets the bar relatively high for a vaccine to actually be an improvement, right? https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/prep/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/prep/index.html https://www.aidsmap.com/news/mar-2021/reformulated-islatravir-implant-should-provide-prep-over-year https://www.aidsmap.com/news/mar-2021/reformulated-islatravi...
- bluGill 5y agoSort of. There are side effects, which might or.might not be bad for any individual. And of course you can forget to take daily medication. Can the vaccine be combined is an open question.