New Wonder Drug Kills Almost Any Virus
- Thread starter Earnest Cavalli
- Start date
Couple of answers for skeptics.
1) here is a full length article from pubmed. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3144912/
It explains alot of questions. Besides ive seen alot of people say: I've seen miracle druggs like this on escapist before. Thats true and usually the source is some news paper or magazine. The link I give here is from a published article I found on pubmed. Anyone studying in the medical sciences will know that this is legit. They havn't started clinical trials on humans tho. But there is great succes in mice and rats.
2)I saw a question as to how a virus could mutate to become resistant? Answer: RNA is much more unstable and thus more susceptable to mutation. Mutation often leads to death but sometimes it can lead to resistance against druggs (aka evolution...) Viruses mutate/evolve alot faster then humans.
3)It is true that alot of human DNA has virus DNA (or RNA translated into DNA) incorporated into the genome. In short: doesn't matter. The medicine doesn't detect a specific sequence. It detects dsRNA (double stranded RNA).
4)In human cells dsRNA(double stranded RNA) is rare and only has a max length of 30bp (base pairs). For this drugg to work you need at least 50+bp. The idea for this was inspired by the human immune system. Human (animal) cells detect dsRNA which is longer then 30 bp.
5) What if you need those infected cells? Answer: Almost all cells can be regenerated. If a cell is infected it is going to die anyway. Better to kill it before it can infect other cells. I'd like to use the zombie metaphor: Shoot the zombie in the head before it has a chance to bite you. You can't cure the zombie anyways and we can allways make babies if we need new people ;-).
6) this is a protein therapy. Not a retro virus. It could have to potential to cause any number of side effects like cancer, infertility, hair loss, head ache, diarrhea, loss of libido, ... Thats why they have clinical trials. But it cannot kill out the entire human race! Unless offcourse it forces a virus to evolve untill the point that it completely blocks the caspase apoptose pathway. In which case 90% of our viral immunity has just been made useless... But what or the odds
. But seriously. Immunity of bacteria against antibiotic's comes from the fact that A) they prescribe the stuff against everything. Including virusses because people come crying that there little baby has the common cold and they want something that will make it better. Doctors don't want patients to nag so they give them antibiotics. B) People don't listen to doctors. If the doctor says: take these pills twice a day for 7 days. You take the damn pills twice a day for 7 days! Not quit after 3 days when you feel better! If you do that you leave the little bastards that are somewhat immune (but not completely) against the medicine alive! This is a bad bad thing.
7)Yes it is triggered by dsRNA. A viral genome can be DNA, ssDNA (single stranded DNA), RNA or dsRNA. But in the lifecycle of MOST virusses, be they DNA/RNA/..., a dsRNA is formed. So yes it is possible that this can help against DNA virusses and such.
8) it cannot cure cancer. Period.
1) here is a full length article from pubmed. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3144912/
It explains alot of questions. Besides ive seen alot of people say: I've seen miracle druggs like this on escapist before. Thats true and usually the source is some news paper or magazine. The link I give here is from a published article I found on pubmed. Anyone studying in the medical sciences will know that this is legit. They havn't started clinical trials on humans tho. But there is great succes in mice and rats.
2)I saw a question as to how a virus could mutate to become resistant? Answer: RNA is much more unstable and thus more susceptable to mutation. Mutation often leads to death but sometimes it can lead to resistance against druggs (aka evolution...) Viruses mutate/evolve alot faster then humans.
3)It is true that alot of human DNA has virus DNA (or RNA translated into DNA) incorporated into the genome. In short: doesn't matter. The medicine doesn't detect a specific sequence. It detects dsRNA (double stranded RNA).
4)In human cells dsRNA(double stranded RNA) is rare and only has a max length of 30bp (base pairs). For this drugg to work you need at least 50+bp. The idea for this was inspired by the human immune system. Human (animal) cells detect dsRNA which is longer then 30 bp.
5) What if you need those infected cells? Answer: Almost all cells can be regenerated. If a cell is infected it is going to die anyway. Better to kill it before it can infect other cells. I'd like to use the zombie metaphor: Shoot the zombie in the head before it has a chance to bite you. You can't cure the zombie anyways and we can allways make babies if we need new people ;-).
6) this is a protein therapy. Not a retro virus. It could have to potential to cause any number of side effects like cancer, infertility, hair loss, head ache, diarrhea, loss of libido, ... Thats why they have clinical trials. But it cannot kill out the entire human race! Unless offcourse it forces a virus to evolve untill the point that it completely blocks the caspase apoptose pathway. In which case 90% of our viral immunity has just been made useless... But what or the odds
. But seriously. Immunity of bacteria against antibiotic's comes from the fact that A) they prescribe the stuff against everything. Including virusses because people come crying that there little baby has the common cold and they want something that will make it better. Doctors don't want patients to nag so they give them antibiotics. B) People don't listen to doctors. If the doctor says: take these pills twice a day for 7 days. You take the damn pills twice a day for 7 days! Not quit after 3 days when you feel better! If you do that you leave the little bastards that are somewhat immune (but not completely) against the medicine alive! This is a bad bad thing.7)Yes it is triggered by dsRNA. A viral genome can be DNA, ssDNA (single stranded DNA), RNA or dsRNA. But in the lifecycle of MOST virusses, be they DNA/RNA/..., a dsRNA is formed. So yes it is possible that this can help against DNA virusses and such.
8) it cannot cure cancer. Period.
Right, but doesn't cancer create clones the same way viruses do, by infecting other cells?E-Penguin said:
Ah, look there. Someone hasn't read the first page of the thread with all of its numerous "and I say this without irony" zombie Cassandras.Salad Is Murder said:
Seriously?Voration said:
Aids does not attack the nerve cells... It attacks the immune system! Specificly Tc4+ cells.
And yes aids has a ssRNA genome but after infection it creates dsRNA particles which can activate DRACO. It's never this simple tho. Not just a question of weither or not dsRNA is formed in the infected cell. This is the prime requirement yes, but there are other factors in play. Clinical trials and time will tell.
No. Viruses infect cells, but have to kill them in order to spread. Cancer causes a cell to go haywire and keep producing more of itself, without dying. These cells are, in effect doing too good a job of replacing themselves.Jabberwock xeno said:
To keep it in the forest analogy used in the article: virus infections are a forestfire. You can cut off their fuel supply, and they'll burn out.
Cancer is a new, agressive kind of tree which spreads quickly and doesnt die. More and more of the trees in the forest are going to be replaced with the new kind, because the old species of tree do die and get replaced with the new kind after they are dead. Eventually you go from a forest with many different kinds of tree to a forest with only one kind of tree.
Cutting down other trees doest help here, because you're not affecting the new kind.
In short: Viruses are caused by infection, cancer is caused by mutation.
1) Evolution is survival of the fittest. In this case: virusses that have some random mutation which serves no purpose. You introduce draco and suddenly those virusses with that specific mutation are somewhat more resistant to the drugg. They have a greater chance of survival. You whipe out the population without the mutation. The only variant of the virus left standing after a couple of years is the immune one. Voila: evolution.YunikoYokai5 said:Perhaps but I don't think so. How can a virus develop and change if the host cell dies? Viruses are only able to reproduce within a living cell, so if DRACO kills the cell before the virus replicates, the virus can't mutate/evolve/adapt.mad825 said:
While I agree with you that it is silly to remove all viruses, what about viruses that just about destroy the immune system, like HIV? The immune system can't adapt if its being weakened to the point of failure against even common viruses
OT: Why does everyone immediately jump on the zombie apocalypse wagon?
2)As long as you have bone marrow, your immune system can regenerate. You are long dead by some other infection before aids has the chance of whiping out your entire immune system. Besides this drug doesn't require an immune response. Every cell has the innate possibility of self destruction. Just got to tap into that innate response. That's what this drugg does. The immune system also has the option of inducing cell death when it thinks it is necessary. But that is not the case here. So yes it can cure hiv in theory
But cells still require certain nuterients and such to live right?Saxnot said:
If the cancer cells are cut off from any surronding ones, won't it "starve" off and die since no nutirents are being transfered to it from surronding cells?
But DRACO targets the host cell, not the virus. Even if this new random mutation is resistent to some drugs, if there is no host cell then that virus can't reproduce. That can give people or the immune system time to find a way to beat down this new strain (preferably the immune system so its still evolving in case drugs go out the window)iseko said:
And that process is called chemotherapy.Jabberwock xeno said:
Unfortunately, even with chemo, you can't be sure all the infected cells will die off. Most of the cells surrounding the cancer cells will also be dead, but you have to give your body time to recover after the therapy.
If the therapy worked, all the cancer cells will have died off by the time your body has recovered (either of the radiation itself or lack of nutrition afterwards).
If the tharapy was unsuccesful, some of the cancer cells will have survived, and gone right back to spreading themselves again.
This new cure wouldn't affect cancer because it works by recognising which cells have been infected by a virus. The process by which cancer spreads is completely different from the process by which a virus spreads, so DRACO doesnt have any way to recognise what to kill off.
DRACO targets infected host cells. All the virus has to do is for example:YunikoYokai5 said:
1) inhibit the working of an activated (i.e. dsRNA bound) DRACO dimeer. It can do this by binding to the domain that activates the caspase enzymes. If it has a random mutation in any of the proteins (lets say protein A) that are encoded in its genome. That doesn't inhibit the original function of that protein A. But also gives it a new domain that can bind to DRACO. Then DRACO cannot induce cell death in the host cell. Competitive inhibition.
2) Directly inhibit cell death by interacting somewhere in the apoptose pathway. You can imagine it like this: Activated DRACO activates protein A. This in turn activates protein B, then protein C. And so forth. If it interacts and stops the pathway at let's say point E. Then DRACO is useless...
I don't feel like debating the science behind this because I'm not that level of scientist yet, my only question is: Who volunteers to kill all the extra people on Earth that are not dying from disease?
Sounds interesting. But with something like that there's a chance it will keep killing any cells it finds, even healthy ones. Hopefully tests can avoid something like that.
Or it will create a zombie apocalypse. My money's on the apocalypse, that'll be fun
Or it will create a zombie apocalypse. My money's on the apocalypse, that'll be fun
