Comments on: The Cure For AIDS? http://donklephant.com/2005/11/14/the-cure-for-aids/ Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable. Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:20:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Patrick Dixon http://donklephant.com/2005/11/14/the-cure-for-aids/comment-page-1/#comment-4352 Patrick Dixon Mon, 05 Dec 2005 15:10:36 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2005/11/14/the-cure-for-aids/#comment-4352 For more information on this important case click on my name For more information on this important case click on my name

]]> By: sleipner http://donklephant.com/2005/11/14/the-cure-for-aids/comment-page-1/#comment-3720 sleipner Mon, 14 Nov 2005 18:20:43 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2005/11/14/the-cure-for-aids/#comment-3720 Hugely vital discovery if true, but I read that the statistical likelihood of spontaneous remission was about the same as taking a trip to the moon without a spaceship. More likely, in my opinion, is that the original test was either a false positive, or a sample from someone else. Since they said something about retesting it, presumeably they may still have the sample on file somewhere, in which case they could do a DNA test to prove that it is actually Mr. Stimpson's, and not a mis-filed sample from another patient. Until proven otherwise, we should assume that the medical officers in charge of his case knew what they were doing and no fraud was involved. Another interesting question is whether the test used was an antibody test or a viral load test. Antibody tests should still show positive results if he was ever exposed to the virus. Viral load tests can and do show nondetectable results for people who are currently on meds, though I believe they have been getting more sensitive over the past few years. I'm not sure if there is any reliable test for detecting the "hidden HIV reservoirs" that remain in patients who are nondetectable on viral load tests, but if that remains in Mr. Stimpson, and he is not taking any antivirals, he may become detectable again. In any case, further research is certainly warranted, and it would be wondrous if his case was indeed real, and led to some breakthrough in treatment or even a cure. Hugely vital discovery if true, but I read that the statistical likelihood of spontaneous remission was about the same as taking a trip to the moon without a spaceship.

More likely, in my opinion, is that the original test was either a false positive, or a sample from someone else. Since they said something about retesting it, presumeably they may still have the sample on file somewhere, in which case they could do a DNA test to prove that it is actually Mr. Stimpson’s, and not a mis-filed sample from another patient. Until proven otherwise, we should assume that the medical officers in charge of his case knew what they were doing and no fraud was involved.

Another interesting question is whether the test used was an antibody test or a viral load test. Antibody tests should still show positive results if he was ever exposed to the virus. Viral load tests can and do show nondetectable results for people who are currently on meds, though I believe they have been getting more sensitive over the past few years.

I’m not sure if there is any reliable test for detecting the “hidden HIV reservoirs” that remain in patients who are nondetectable on viral load tests, but if that remains in Mr. Stimpson, and he is not taking any antivirals, he may become detectable again.

In any case, further research is certainly warranted, and it would be wondrous if his case was indeed real, and led to some breakthrough in treatment or even a cure.

]]>