Thursday 24th September, 03:01 PM JST
Feature Archive
December 08- Latest Bar & Dining Spots in Tokyo
September 08- Business Schools
World › 11:48 AM JST - 19th November
World › 05:58 AM JST - 18th November
World › 09:20 AM JST - 20th November
World › 04:25 AM JST - 17th November
World › 06:37 AM JST - 16th November
› Login to comment
Latest 15 of 22 Total Comments Show All
nipponreddog at 07:48 PM JST - 24th September
What if the wife is already HIV positive from a bad blood transfusion? Condoms are not 100% effective protection. So no sex FOR LIFE is your reasonable alternative for the husband? How realistic is that?
It's "old fashioned", many people say, but it works.
sensei258 at 08:13 PM JST - 24th September
Too early to celebrate. Even if the 31% risk reduction is accurate, that still leaves a 69% chance you will become infected after having unprotected sex with an HIV+ partner. That's like playing Russian Roulette with a revolver that has 4 loaded chambers and two empty ones. Who likes those odds?
dolphingirl at 09:04 PM JST - 24th September
It's true that humans are biologically programed to pair-bond but we also have the urge to seek new mates so abstinence and staying with one partner for life are not realistic solutions. Best realistic solution to stop the spread of HIV is condoms.
That aside, a reduction of 31% may not be a lot but it gives hope to researchers and to people who are HIV positive. These findings will help to motivate further studies which could mean a better vaccine, better treatments or even a cure in the future.
ca1ic0cat at 09:13 PM JST - 24th September
16,000 volunteers is a good sample size so I would say they are on to something. At the same time the vaccine is nowhere near 100% effective. There is a long way to go.
BTW, all those of you preaching abstinence, etc. seem to lack a lot of understanding of human nature. Abstinence certainly hasn't worked very well for Catholic priests and I don't expect the rest of the population to fare any better with that. A little pragmatism would be useful, eh?
leitmotiv at 10:31 PM JST - 24th September
Celebration is indeed in order. Vaccine projects against HIV have generally been failures. A lot due to difficult biology, but also significantly due to underfunding and only modest interest from the real sources of cash for these expensive trials, namely global pharmas. They would generally rather use R&D funds to develop antivirals which customers must use repeatedly, rather than a one-time injection.
lunchmeat at 10:50 PM JST - 24th September
31%? Sounds like a crap shoot to me.
Good_Jorb at 01:23 AM JST - 25th September
I could only imagine trying to present a study like this to an ethics committee/board. I wonder if any of the test subjects engaged in riskier sexual activities because they believed they been inoculated with the vaccine and then contracted HIV.
Taka313 at 01:49 AM JST - 25th September
Superlib,
The word you are looking for is "hoo'ah."
Taka
benhur at 02:25 AM JST - 25th September
"dummy shots" huh? um, sorry you have to die... we gave you the "dummy shots", all in the name of medicine, so thank you for volunteering. hahaha.
LIBERTAS at 03:05 AM JST - 25th September
AIDS/HIV is one of the few bugs you actually have to try to get. Avoidance is significantly easier.
SEPTIMUS at 05:32 AM JST - 25th September
So I take it that this vaccine only DECREASES the risk of contracting HIV to only 69%. Still doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy, but it does give me optimism they're working in the right direction.
SARCASM-- Wow, I can't wait to hear about all the people who contract it now after taking this vaccine thinking they didn't need to worry about HIV anymore. Either way, we'll see its true effectiveness soon enough I think.
bdaniel08 at 05:53 AM JST - 25th September
4thEstateDotCom
Another amazing French breakthrough :)
hellhound at 07:10 AM JST - 25th September
If it is aids related.... Definitely french
lunchmeat at 08:59 AM JST - 25th September
31%? Sounds like a crap shoot to me.
Noliving at 09:04 AM JST - 25th September
Lunchmeat, when you compare it to 0%, 31% is heck of a lot better. Plus its really the first time in the history of treating this disease has anyone even come close to finding something that actual worked in terms of acting like a vaccine.