Can a HIV Vaccine be Developed?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pakbabydoll
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Vaccine
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the challenges of developing an HIV vaccine, particularly due to the virus's high mutation rate and its ability to attack the immune system itself. While the idea of using an inactive form of HIV for vaccination is proposed, concerns are raised about the risks associated with vaccines, including potential allergic reactions and the danger of contracting HIV despite vaccination. Comparisons are made to the flu vaccine, which can also be ineffective due to mutations. The conversation highlights the importance of safe sex education, especially in third-world countries where misconceptions about HIV persist, and emphasizes that promoting safe sex practices is a more reliable and cost-effective strategy for preventing the spread of HIV than relying solely on vaccine development.
Pakbabydoll
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
IF a vaccine is an inactive form of the virus then in theory can't they make a HIV vaccine from dead HIV virus? the virus dies 90 secs after touching open air... So it can't infect anyone else... Since it attacks the T cells, is not there a way to get the white blood cells out of the red blood cells..

Just curios
 
Biology news on Phys.org
They certainly have been putting much effort and $$ into it for quite some time.
I think one problem with nailing down HIV may be the fact that it has a very high rate of mutation. Or perhaps that it attacks the very system that is supposed to recognoze it?
 
BoomBoom said:
I think one problem with nailing down HIV may be the fact that it has a very high rate of mutation.

This is the primary challenge. It's similar to the reason the flu vaccine is only partially effective, or ineffective some years...too many mutations and variants of the virus to predict which one any particular person will be infected with in time to immunize them. But, while getting a flu shot and winding up contracting flu anyway isn't really terrible except for a very small percentage of the population, getting an HIV vaccination and winding up with HIV infection anyway is an unacceptably dangerous risk.
 
yea but same applies to any other bacterial and viral disease or most of them anyway, but if they had a vaccine made then it could lower the chances even if by 45%
 
Last edited:
Pakbabydoll said:
yea but same applies to any other bacterial disease or most of them anyway, but if they had a vaccine made then it could lower the chances even if by 45%

(HIV is a virus, not a bacteria - though I assume you just had a slip up since you seem aware of this fact in your OP ^_^)
Some vaccines can in themselves be dangerous. Some people may have an allergic or some other type of fatal reaction to them - that's why you usually get a long info sheet about each vaccine before you take it, so you're aware of the risks. These risks also mean you really shouldn't take the vaccine unless you don't have any other choice, and safe sex choices can help a lot in preventing the spread of HIV, and are a lot safer and have a lot more additional benefits.
 
However, todays people are not aware of it specially in schools they teach NO SEX rather then teaching safe sex habits. I don't think this is working any way because look at the rate it keeps going up and up specially in 3rd world countries
 
Many people in third world countries hold mistaken beliefs about the nature of HIV and many other sexually transmitted diseases. Some people in Africa believe that you can cure yourself of AIDS by having sex with a virgin. The Masai in Kenya believed that Masai simply don't get AIDS. Education is essential; and unfortunately, many of the charitable groups working in third world countries are christian based, and again teach abstinence instead of safe sex. It's definitely a difficult issue. But like I said, safe sex is a safer (ha), more reliable, and MUCH cheaper way to deal with slowing the spread of HIV.
 
Back
Top