Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Kosh on March 01, 2008, 07:23:25 pm
-
http://science.slashdot.org/science/08/03/01/1755228.shtml
Is this too good to be true?
-
I hope not...
-
Excellent news, i just hope it doesn't lead to zombie vampires. Fingers crossed they can develop a viable implementation.
-
*goes into full isolation in deep space, far from the problems and zombie vampires of this world*
Go for it, guys! Let me isolate myself though... I don't like rare meat.
-
http://science.slashdot.org/science/08/03/01/1755228.shtml
Is this too good to be true?
Yes and no.
From the very little I've had a chance to read about on this discovery so far, the gene disrupting the virus does just that - it doesn't outright kill it. Infected people will still carry the virus and still transmit it so long as viral load remains high.
Plus, as it is a gene, there remains all the ugly problems of actually getting the gene into the T cells of infected patients, which means gene therapy, which means it'll be a long, expensive, and possibly ugly. The only other real case of gene therapy going on has been for SCID patients, and many of them die as a result of the therapy.
That said, it is certainly a great first step, especially if they can find the exact mechanism by which TRIM22 disrupts HIV and replicate that using a drug or administerable form of RNAi.
As an aside, he works at the University where I graduated with my genetics degree. Different department though.
-
http://science.slashdot.org/science/08/03/01/1755228.shtml
Is this too good to be true?
Yes it is. No matter how infinitely fool-proof it is, some disaster will always occur. On very rare occasions, though, that disaster is the lack of any bad events.
-
'When we put this gene in cells, it prevents the assembly of the HIV virus," said Barr, a postdoctoral fellow. "This means the virus cannot get out of the cells to infect other cells, thereby blocking the spread of the virus.'"
wouldn't that mean it can't be transferred either?
Is this too good to be true?
Yes it is. No matter how infinitely fool-proof it is, some disaster will always occur. On very rare occasions, though, that disaster is the lack of any bad events.
I agree. Freak accidents are never impossible to happen in life.
-
I might be wrong, but isn't this really Old News in new clothes?
It's been known for a long time that the genetic variation called CCR5-Δ32 (Creedence Clearwater Revival 5 Delta 32) appears to prevent being infected by some viruses and bacteria, including West Nile virus, bubonic plague (Yersinia pestis aka. perceived Black Death), smallpox and HIV.
If it were just a matter of changing people's genetic structure (done by another virus that is engineered to replace the relevant part of the genome with a resistant version of the gene) by replacing the non-immune variant of CCR5 receptor with a gene that produces the Delta 32 variant, AIDS wouldn't be any problem.
This TRIM22 gene seems to affect the spreading of HI-virus in the body rather than preventing it from infecting the cell in the first place. That said, I'm a bit wary of statements like
"When we put this gene in cells, it prevents the assembly of the HIV virus," said Barr, a postdoctoral fellow. "This means the virus cannot get out of the cells to infect other cells, thereby blocking the spread of the virus."
because things aren't just as simple as "putting this gene in cells". You can't just take a piece of DNA, make copies of it and inject it into each individual cell infected by HIV. You need to make sure the gene stays in the cell and isn't purged by normal cell activity... which practically means the only chance you get is to insert the gene into the DNA, either by replacing the original gene (dunno if there are accurate enough retroviruses for hitting the right spot in the DNA), or into the mostly useless "junk-DNA" and hope that it doesn't replace something that is actually used for some purpose, since it's apparent that the so-called "junk-dna" which doesn't take part in coding proteins is actually more relevant to life than it should be.
But anyhow, to quote a Slashdotter who pretty much hit the nail in the head:
They just use a mostly-dead other virus to permanently change your genetic code. Nothing could possibly go wrong.
...but, if not a cure for AIDS, it'll sure bring about some new, original horror films about genetic experiments gone amuck. :lol:
-
Votes on the chance that this experimentation will bring up a totally new and equally deadly disease?
-
http://science.slashdot.org/science/08/03/01/1755228.shtml
Is this too good to be true?
Yes and no.
From the very little I've had a chance to read about on this discovery so far, the gene disrupting the virus does just that - it doesn't outright kill it. Infected people will still carry the virus and still transmit it so long as viral load remains high.
Plus, as it is a gene, there remains all the ugly problems of actually getting the gene into the T cells of infected patients, which means gene therapy, which means it'll be a long, expensive, and possibly ugly. The only other real case of gene therapy going on has been for SCID patients, and many of them die as a result of the therapy.
That said, it is certainly a great first step, especially if they can find the exact mechanism by which TRIM22 disrupts HIV and replicate that using a drug or administerable form of RNAi.
As an aside, he works at the University where I graduated with my genetics degree. Different department though.
I might be wrong, but isn't this really Old News in new clothes?
It's been known for a long time that the genetic variation called CCR5-Δ32 (Creedence Clearwater Revival 5 Delta 32) appears to prevent being infected by some viruses and bacteria, including West Nile virus, bubonic plague (Yersinia pestis aka. perceived Black Death), smallpox and HIV.
If it were just a matter of changing people's genetic structure (done by another virus that is engineered to replace the relevant part of the genome with a resistant version of the gene) by replacing the non-immune variant of CCR5 receptor with a gene that produces the Delta 32 variant, AIDS wouldn't be any problem.
This TRIM22 gene seems to affect the spreading of HI-virus in the body rather than preventing it from infecting the cell in the first place. That said, I'm a bit wary of statements like
"When we put this gene in cells, it prevents the assembly of the HIV virus," said Barr, a postdoctoral fellow. "This means the virus cannot get out of the cells to infect other cells, thereby blocking the spread of the virus."
because things aren't just as simple as "putting this gene in cells". You can't just take a piece of DNA, make copies of it and inject it into each individual cell infected by HIV. You need to make sure the gene stays in the cell and isn't purged by normal cell activity... which practically means the only chance you get is to insert the gene into the DNA, either by replacing the original gene (dunno if there are accurate enough retroviruses for hitting the right spot in the DNA), or into the mostly useless "junk-DNA" and hope that it doesn't replace something that is actually used for some purpose, since it's apparent that the so-called "junk-dna" which doesn't take part in coding proteins is actually more relevant to life than it should be.
But anyhow, to quote a Slashdotter who pretty much hit the nail in the head:
They just use a mostly-dead other virus to permanently change your genetic code. Nothing could possibly go wrong.
...but, if not a cure for AIDS, it'll sure bring about some new, original horror films about genetic experiments gone amuck. :lol:
Is it just me, or are the TVWP guys the biggest nerds on HLP? (And I mean that in the best way possible)
-
Is it just me, or are the TVWP guys the biggest nerds on HLP? (And I mean that in the best way possible)
Yeah that's true. :lol:
-
You'd think it would be the WC guys...but nope.
-
I might be wrong, but isn't this really Old News in new clothes?
CCR5-Δ32 (Creedence Clearwater Revival 5 Delta 32)
Seriously? :eek:
-
No. I just couldn't pass it. :p
It's Chemokine Receptor 5, but the other CCR is cooler...
-
Awww, and here I was getting my hopes up that some geneticist had a sense of humor.
-
No. I just couldn't pass it. :p
It's Chemokine Receptor 5, but the other CCR is cooler...
ACTUALLY...
:)
The Chemokine receptor is required in conjunction with an additional T-cell receptor for HIV to infect a cell. We don't actually know what the chemokine receptor on T-cells is actually used for though, since people born without them (a predominantly Caucasian european population) seem to have no ill effects and are completely immune to the effects of the HIV virus (they are still carriers). There were a number of researchers who did some seriously cool work around the chemokine receptor a number of years back, but antiretrovrial drugs have been more and more promising and most of the funding for HIV research has gone to them and preventative measures.
TRIM22 sounds almost like a form of natural RNAi, disrupting a protein synthesis process and preventing viral assembly. Alternatively, it might preferentially bind a key component of the HIV viral package and prevent assembly. Either way, we're looking at a gene that has the potential to seriously drop the viral load if used in conjunction with antiretroviral drugs.
The big problem, as I said before, is gene therapy. It's a very unreliable science at this point, and frankly it is only approved for use in patients which already have a death sentence and it is literally a last hope (gene therapy works wonderfully for adding a gene, but it has a nasty side-effect of causing cancer in many of the patients).
Most modern gene therapy uses targetted insertion through an adenovirus variant, and inserts non-randomly into a pre-selected block of inactive DNA, so the old problems of retroviral insertion are no longer an issue - we can rather easily circumvent that. The trick isn't producing a transgenic cell (with the new gene); the trick is getting that stem cell back into the bone marrow and causing it to propagate and take over main T-cell production without giving the patient cancer.
Now, if it were me and I had the choice between taking modern HIV-inhibitors orally (and the side effects are dramatically decreasing with each new generation), or a chance to survive the HIV virus but still carry it plus the possibility of cancer, I'd be taking the drugs. In a Western nation, the prognosis for an HIV+ individual isn't all that much worse than a normal healthy adult.
We actually have the means right now to cure HIV+ people of the effects of the virus; the problem is, its too expensive and far too risky. What we're looking for is a method, like RNAi, where we can administer a drug orally that will effectively stop the virus in its tracks.
And yes, I am a huge geek. But then again, I have a B.Sc in Molecular Genetics so really what do you expect =)
-
Damn, TVWP people really ARE geeks :p. Meh, at least we have em
-
11. Be nice to nerds. Odds are you'll be working for one someday.
Wisdom at it's finest :D
-
What are the first three. Dekkers rule of life is if it's not important to be in the first three then it's not worth knowing :p
-
There may not be a Creedence Clearwater Revival gene, but there is a Sonic Hedgehog (http://www.bio.davidson.edu/Courses/Molbio/MolStudents/spring2003/Watson/Sonichedgehog.htm) gene.
srsly
-
Was that rly srsly? Or just a comment on my hair! Lol
-
I'm begining to create a shelter and stockpile supplies. When the brain-eating zombies come, I'll be ready. :D
-
I'm renaming my dog Sam, making friends with shop dummies and taking up aircraft carrier golf.
-
il just join the brain eating zombies myself, seems like an upgrade
mmmmmmm braaaaaaains
-
I'm begining to create a shelter and stockpile supplies. When the brain-eating zombies come, I'll be ready. :D
You are well on your way to enlightenment. Be sure to study this priceless material (http://www.videojug.com/film/how-to-survive-a-zombie-apocalypse) in your process of readying yourself. :p