Best
88 Comments
Post
  • #4
    !
    Excellent post Mary. I am glad to see tax dollars being spent on finding cures for terrible diseases. This is the kind of thing we should be spending money on. I can't imagine that anyone will be against this.
  • #12
    !
    @MongoAPillager That's because bacteria and viruses rule this planet. We're kind of kidding ourselves when we say we're top of the food chain. That doesn't mean we surrender, though.
  • R Load more replies

  • #13
    !
    That is really cool, but who is to say that privately funded research couldn't have done it faster and cheaper? Check out the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, to see a privately funded place that is doing amazing stuff for not all that much money.
  • #16
    !
    "...who is to say that privately funded research couldn't have done it faster and cheaper?" Maybe they could, but would they do it if there is no profit in it? Probably not. Cures for rare diseases have been invented and not produced because they are unprofitable, some treatments are available but are not allowed to be cheaply made, and available treatments are not covered by insurance because they are too expensive. That is the problem with making the humanitarian art of healing into a profit making venture.
  • #24
    !
    @Dan_Tien "would they do it if there is no profit in it?"

    Sure they would, because you never know whether research is going to turn up something profitable. I have a hard time thinking of any examples of breakthroughs that could not have been profitable, especially if you discount the cost of government regulation.
  • #32
    !
    @Dan_Tien Thank you, I did. Among other things, I learned that Finns are mutants.

    But that does not affect my point - most medical advances occur as byproducts of other research: penicillin and LSD come to mind (the latter, perhaps a bit too often).
  • #10
    !
    As a country we should be doing more research to cure things like cancer, heart disease, Alzheimer's and other deadly diseases. We can get the money by not giving tax breaks to big banks, multinational oil companies and defense contractors.
  • #3
    !
    I applaud the breakthrough.....still not convinced government funds are the answer but then again.....governments funds a lot more things that aren't this noble or useful.....and this wasn't entirely government funded.....
  • #22
    !
    Hey I'd rather have government funds go to this than to humanitarian aid for countries that hate us and bailing out their economies when they flatline...*cough* Greece *cough* the Middle East *cough*
  • #1
    !
    Happy it worked for baby, but what about the adults living with it? They gave the baby drugs 30 hours after birth? Or so, but I doubt it'd work the same for adult male/females.
  • #5
    !
    Based upon your statement your solution would be to eliminate government funding for research because you doubt it and we don't know if it will help adults? No sense wasting tax payer funding R&D for HIV or anyother disease is there????
    Were I you, which thankfully I'm not, I'd do some really serious reconfiguation of my values and beliefs
  • #8
    !
    @martydotcom If it worked for the child then let other baby's born with HIV to be treated the same, but keep the research going because even though it worked for a newborn there are still many many other Americans dealing with it and just taking the medicine isn't helping. The thing I'm doubting is that it won't work adults because their body is fully grown and the disease has lived with them for years? How can you cure that with pills, keep going with the research
  • #21
    !
    @MrGreenHerb HIV-AIDS drug cocktails have greatly extended life-spans and quality of life for many. Most notable Magic Johnson.( A friend's son is now ~15yrs since dx, still working & leading good lifestyle)
    HIV AIDS is not the death sentence it used to be.
    Two words you never want to hear an Md say: pancreatic cancer which unlike HIV 5 yr survival rate is near 0
  • #37
    !
    @martydotcom Question for you Marty. Pharma does not produce "curing" drugs but "hold the fort drugs" for the most part, correct? Gay and Bisexual men have known about HIV/Aids for more than 35 years now. And yet they continue to be the highest risk for this disease in America because they won't stop indiscriminate sex. They take it home to their wives and partners and to the babies to be born. In Africa men going to prostitutes is the highest risk. They do the same.

    So my question is this? Why are the taxpayers of America responsible for the actions of the few? I don't mind at all taking care of the babies like this one who had no choice in the matter. But those who are adults and know the risk and come down with HIV because of their own behavior should not receive welfare, hospice, drugs or anything else at taxpayer expense as far as I'm concerned. NOTHING. How do you justify that they do?
  • #48
    !
    @jessejaymes curing drugs - wrong antibiotics cure infectios as do parasite/fungal cure etc,
    As far as HIV-AIDS just from a life extension view the results are dramatic
    "Results from a British study of HIV-positive men who have sex with men estimated a life expectancy of 75 years if HIV is diagnosed early, compared with 82 years for individuals without HIV. If HIV is diagnosed late, the researchers estimated life expectancy at 71.5 years."
    Most new cases in USA are adolescents - female, heterosexual, and IV drug users not gays, surprisingly high incidence, thanks to Viagra among seniors. Gays are far more attuned to protection than heterosexuals.
    Drugs going to Africa are ether donated by Pharm, Charities, and UN agencies. not US tax payer funded beyond our UN funding
    Sane drug policy including needle exchanges would save millions. Prison rape is major male transmission mode in US.
    I was in Africa in the early '90's.Countries like Botswana were decimated 25% of the population infected.(we traveled with our own blood in the event of an accident and a transfusion was necessary.) Education was just beginning, the tribal witch doctor was the primary treatment. Last time in Africa 2003 wherever you looked were billboards with Aids/ Condom use info, every hour on TV warnings on unprotected sex. It's my understanding that your info may be dated. Infection rates are dropping due to both deaths and education.
    Vaccine development is promising a program if successful would do to AIDS what Small Pox & Polio vaccine did near total global elimination . I think it's worthwhile expenditure of tax payer money.

    http://www.aidsbeacon.com/news/2011/12/06/est...

    http://www.webmd.com/hiv-aids/guide/aids-olde...
  • R Load more replies

  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • Comment removed for Engagement Etiquette violation. Replies may also be deleted.
  • #83
    !
    From my understanding of reading the story, the baby is not truly "cured". Doctors cannot confirm or deny the child will remain "cured" for the remainder of their life. I have no issue with government funding research for cures of disease and illness.
  • #80
    !
    I'm all for government funding for science when they actually use it for science and ill be honost I belive that we can already cure most strands of aids and have been able to for quite some time just like cancer curing these things don't bring in the medical revenues
  • #49
    !
    Of course Bristol-Myers Squibb,Gilead Sciences,GlaxoSmithKline,Hoffm ann-La Roche,Tibotec Therapeutics,Pfizer,Boehringer Ingelheim,Merck,Abbott Laboratories,Tibotec, Inc., and Agouron Pharmaceuticals will all band together, hire a lobbying firm, which will pay someone in congress to publicly controvert any type of cure findings. More money in treatment, cures create little revenue ( see: Polio)
  • #34
    !
    I guess the bybull thumpers will say this is from jeebus.....If we would throw out all of the right wing theotards we would have even more great scientific discoveries!(stem cells)

    The churches hate science because science proves no god is necessary.

    Medical science heals us....not jeebus.
  • #33
    !
    Honestly if government would get out of everything and allow private organizations to do business and research without all the regulation and intervention things like this would happen more often and more quickly.
  • #36
    !
    But then it would also just be available to only those few who could afford the treatment or who had some kind of insurance that would pay for it...No....the private sector is only good for making profits, not compassion. Further I really don't want some "private entity" deciding what cures it will "invest in"...."Private Organizations" No Thanks!
  • #41
    !
    @Sonny Then you should invest in the things you want to invest in. People should never be forced to pay for things they do not believe in. If you want to invest in a science or whatever that you support, you should do that. But you, and no one else has a right to force anyone else to invest/support things they do not want to, that is all the government "can" do. Since when is the government compassionate? The government can only use force, and take from one and give to another. Theft and the use of force, can never be described as compassionate. No, Thank You.
  • #42
    !
    @riggers Besides the government invented internet, you still pay for that don't you? Just because the government does something, and our dollars paid for it, in NO WAY means it will be cheap OR free.
  • #44
    !
    @riggers There is nothing stopping you or anyone else from investing in anything you like? I don't understand your comments. I never said there was...I merely pointed out that I am glad that the government is involved in this kind of medical breakthrough...And that I also don't want to solely trust the "private sector" to seek cures for ailments that don't make them as much money. And/or I don't trust the private sector to make certain drugs and treatments available to all people--Their motive is profit...That's fine---but I would hate to see them withhold a treatment from someone just because that person could not afford it...

    I mean....I never said you could not invest as you will?!?!?!
  • #47
    !
    @Sonny Private entities do charity all the time. My local pharmacy gives all of the normal antibiotics away for free with prescription. They aren't forced to. Corporations do good all the time. I not only want to solely trust the private sector with doing whatever they choose, because I believe in freedom in a country where our philosophy is based on freedom. I do not trust our government to do good works with anything. I'd like to know how many millions, if not billions of tax dollars it cost them to come up with this 1 "cure" which isn't even really a cure because they said the baby will still possibly have the virus sporadically essentially. What is wrong is stealing from me, and every other person in this country to fund something that we may or may not agree with. Governments can never give something to someone that which they have not first stolen from someone else.
  • R Load more replies

  • #30
    !
    That is great news!! But I am not for more government spending on science. It would be better for the government to create a better environment for private companies to do this research. Simply because anything the government is involved in wastes 50-75% of the money spent on whatever it's involved in. More actually because every dollar we pay into the government is cut in half by interest payments.
    Several of us decided to start a place for domestic abuse victims. A safe house or houses to give them time to get away from an abusive spouse. We could have gotten some federal funding but the red tape and required extra costs made government help impractical. We can do more by just being able to use the deductions. We take our money directly to the problem. Cut out the government involvement and do more with less. The tax deductions are more cost effective than getting money from the government I'm sure that aids research works the same way.
  • #23
    !
    My sons had bone marrow transplants to cure them of a genetic disease involving their immune systems at the DNA level. I have always wondered why they were not using BMT's to cure HIV. Now I know one country did. Bone marrow transplants for cancer and diseases like my sons' are done all the time. Why are we not doing that in this country? All the lives lost, especially the ones of children and adults who contracted HIV through no fault of their own. Birth, breast feeding, contaminated blood transfusions, rape, a hospital worker getting inadvertently stuck by a needle or attacked by an HIV positive patient. I was bitten by a patient that said she had AIDS. I was given a cocktail of drugs right away and had to keep taking them and getting blood draws to check me. Once that patient was back on her phyciatric medications, she gave consent to be tested because the truth was that she didn't know. She also signed a release that allowed me to be told of the findings of her test. She was HIV negative. That was a very scary time. The drug cocktails I had to take made me sick. I don't know how a baby managed those drugs. Maybe they were given IV, so not the same effect of getting sick from the oral medication. I'm very glad the child was cured! My brother died of AIDS and it was a horrible way to die.
    I do wish they would do bone marrow transplants on the innocent victems, no matter the cost! My brother was not an innocent victem, but he lived 22 years with HIV before he died because of the medications.
  • R Load more comments...
Post