CURE FOR AIDS??

by tijkmo 6 Replies latest social current

• 

  tijkmo

  Confirmed: Man Cleared Of HIV

  Monday November 14, 02:47 AM

  • 
  • 
  • 

  The NHS has confirmed newspaper reports that a man diagnosed with HIV, the virus that can lead to AIDS, is no longer positive.A spokeswoman confirmed Andrew Stimpson had had a positive and a negative test for the virus - but she stopped short of saying he had been cured.Doctors have urged Mr Stimpson, 25, to come forward for more tests.

  He tested positive for HIV in 2002 but two further tests a year later both came back negative.

  According to the News Of The World, doctors said his case

  ','300','250','1','1',120895,78616,'0','226',185);return false;" onmouseout="if(typeof(prRoll)=='function')prBExit(event);" shape=RECT coords=1,185,300,250 href="#">

  was "medically remarkable".

  "I feel truly lucky," he told the paper. "I have no idea how I got rid of the virus.

  But Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust said Mr Stimpson has so far declined to undergo further tests with them.

  The spokewoman said: "I can confirm that he has a positive and a negative test. I can't confirm with you that he's shaken it off, that he's been cured.

  "When we became aware of his HIV-negative result we offered him further tests to help us investigate and find an explanation.

  "So far he has declined to do so."
• 

  Jordan

  I wouldn't hold my breath unless the guy comes forward for more tests... It could've been a screw up with the first HIV test.
• 

  vitty

  The hospital reckons the tests were right. Apparently, about 25 % of the population have a gene that prvents them getting HIV, and a doctor said if 2 parents had the gene, then maybe, the child could have a mechanisim to reject the HIV antibodies.

  I waatched a film, were a woman adopted a baby with HIV antibodies and when she was two she didnt have them anymore she was clear. I always wondered if theis was a true story or not.
• 

  Black Sheep

  It is quite rare for HIV+s to be retested, so it is not surprising that conversions to 'negative' status are 'quite rare'.

  The anti-retroviral drugs handed out to +s are pretty damned nasty and can cause immuno-supression themselves, so retesting should be routine.

  Personally, I doubt that Andrew ever had HIV. He only had a positive test.

  ALL test kits carry a disclaimer and do not pretend to provide conclusive proof of the presence of HIV.
• 

  Black Sheep

  "Stimpson was tested three times in August 2002 at the Victoria clinic for sexual health in central London and the results showed he was producing HIV antibodies to fight the disease."

  Note: These were not tests for the virus itself, just for antibodies.

  The antibodies they test for are not specific to only HIV. They also arise from contact with other diseases. That is why they have to use an antibody profile that checks for several antibodies. If you are unfortunate enough to have been in contact with a variety of diseases that give an antibody profile similar to the HIV antibody profile you have a very good chance of getting an HIV+ test.

  Another anomaly:

  You should still have antibodies long after you rid yourself of a disease. That is what our modern immunisation programs work on. A cowpox inoculation induces smallpox antibodies that will last for years etc.

  Andrew is not the first person to throw a negative after getting a positive. Some of the personal stories I Googled up a couple of years ago were horrendous. They may still be there, Google around. Destroyed lives, families, relationships, dropped education opportunities, living under the cloud of certain death, shifting from town to town to get away from the stigma etc., then finding out many years later that they were negative. Do you notice anything familiar here?????

  Andrew is a very lucky boy. He found out he didn't have HIV before he started taking anti-retrovirals. If you take the time to read the data on these drugs you will realise that no sane, healthy, person would introduce them into their bodies.

  I wish Andrew all the best for the future. He was on TV news in NZ tonight. He seems like a very nice guy.

  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1870340,00.html
• 

  somebodylovesme

  Have to come out of lurkdom for this one ...

  I waatched a film, were a woman adopted a baby with HIV antibodies and when she was two she didnt have them anymore she was clear. I always wondered if theis was a true story or not.

  Every baby born to an HIV+ woman will test positive for HIV antibodies. It does not mean the child will necessarily develop HIV/AIDS. I know of at least one movie that does deal with that scenario ("A Place for Annie") -- and yeah, it's a very real possibility. As Black Sheep said, the test only checks for the antibodies, and the baby carries the mother's antibodies for (roughly) 18 months. Now, pregnant women with HIV or AIDS can take AZT combinations (e.g. Retrovir) or another drug to vastly reduce the chances of passing the virus on to the baby. I can't remember the stats off the top of my head, but it brings the chances down quite a bit. This is not the same thing as "curing" the virus; it prevents transmission to the baby in the first place.

  As for this case in the news: my bet is that he is one of the rare (but not unheard of) people whose body is currently suppressing the virus. There are a lot of things wrong with the news article: it doesn't say what kind of test was done, it doesn't say why it's just going to the media now, after two years of apparently being negative, it says [in other articles] that doctors were "surprised" by his good health -- which is ridiculous, because most people are still in good health within a year after seroconverting. There are a lot of things that need to be addressed yet.

  It would be awesome if this were a miracle from which researches could learn how to develop a better treatment and/or vaccine. But I can't help but wonder if this is one of those cases where the virus is lying dormant, with so few antibodies that the test currently isn't picking it up. I know people who were infected in the early 1980s who are still healthy and have never had a problem -- without any medication. They're rare, but they're there.

  no sane, healthy, person would introduce them into their bodies.

  I rather hope that healthy people don't take antiretrovirals like candy; the side-effects are dreadful. But for those who aren't healthy -- for those who aren't among the fortunate ones who can live healthy lives for decades without treatment -- they are quite literally a lifesaver.

  Well. With that done, ironically enough, I'm heading off to do my volunteer work at the local AIDS Service Organization ...

  peace and love, everyone --

  SLM
• 

  Black Sheep

  .....my bet is that he is one of the rare (but not unheard of) people whose body is currently suppressing the virus

  Ummm.

  Bad case of cognitive dissonance forming in my head here.

  How does that work without the antibodies that Andrew was found not to have??????????

  Cheers

  Chris