Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Herpes / June 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

when do think we'll see a herpes vaccine?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
David Markham - 05 Jun 2004 06:53 GMT
So if you were to guess how many more years we'll have to wait
before we see a vaccine for herpes, what would your answer be?  
Tim Fitzmaurice - 07 Jun 2004 07:47 GMT
> So if you were to guess how many more years we'll have to wait
> before we see a vaccine for herpes, what would your answer be?  

I would not dare bet on it as far as when goes. THere have been a huge
long list of attempts at an HSV vaccine through various methods. There
have been some successes in the herpesvirus field with the chickenpox
vaccine in humans and feline herpesvirus and equine herpesvirus vaccine of
varying efficacy in animals.

The preliminary successes with vaccines that have then failed later in the
phase I to III testing process suggest we are at least barking up the
right tree and that by picking the right part of the virus we will be able
to prevent disease. I'll be pretty surprised if a sterile protection one
crops up first and I wouldnt place money on that type getting developed in
my lifetime, but a traditional 'prevents a high percentage of disease' Im
hopeful on. Its just a matter of picking the next target option and using
it once the current options dry up. It might go into clinical testing next
year and be out in 5 if all goes well, it might be much much longer.

Tim
--
When playing rugby, its not the winning that counts, but the taking apart
ICQ: 5178568
Pain Devine - 07 Jun 2004 09:06 GMT
There already is a very effective vaccine... religion.... Muslim, Christian,
Hindu, whatever... as long as it keeps you (and your mate) a outa the sack
until marriage. lol This is why the government won't sink money into this
disease. They see it as "Easily preventable" which is true, but cold hearted
none-the-less. I was a fool when I was younger, but it's unfortunate that I
now, after growing up a learning much about life, have to live with those
consequences for a very long time anyway.
Perl Molson - 10 Jun 2004 18:19 GMT
> There already is a very effective vaccine... religion.... Muslim, Christian,
> Hindu, whatever... as long as it keeps you (and your mate) a outa the sack
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> now, after growing up a learning much about life, have to live with those
> consequences for a very long time anyway.

I would dare to say the religion is one of the causes for the spread of
these diseases and not vice-versa.

You should not be surprised if the chick that infected you
was a "true" christian or something like that.

I think religion is the bad apple in the fight against the STD's.
If sex were to be easier available, people would not
rush into having sex at any opportunity and being more readily prepared for it.

People would be more experienced and knowledgeable regarding sex and
of course, more open for it.
A very controversial topic but my opinion is clear.

From the video M2slocht in his Webcast topic has posted,
there were statistics regarding the infection with herpes simplex.

People that had only 2-4 partners had about the same chance of getting infected
with herpes, as those having over 50 partners. Go figure.
Considering you need 2 to tango, it's pretty impossible to avoid
getting infected, isn't it?

Perl Molson
Angela S. - 11 Jun 2004 04:12 GMT
> I would dare to say the religion is one of the causes for the spread of
> these diseases and not vice-versa.

Oh Please Perl -

> You should not be surprised if the chick that infected you
> was a "true" christian or something like that.

Oh give me a BREAK Perl -

> I think religion is the bad apple in the fight against the STD's.
> If sex were to be easier available, people would not
> rush into having sex at any opportunity and being more readily prepared for it.

Actually it's the comments that you make over and over again on this board
that perpetuate the std problem in this world. THAT along with clinicians
that don't feel it's necessarily to screen for herpes.

Now - I need to take the advice I gave AR not too long ago and ignore you.
You're a very bad troll and I wish you would GO AWAY! lol

Signature

www.yoshi2me.com
www.herpesonline.org
www.wartsonline.org

STD Message Board:
www.yoshi2me.com/ipw-web/bulletin/bb/index.php

Pain Devine - 11 Jun 2004 06:11 GMT
Ok, I should have been more specific... sorry... I'll quote Nancy Regan
since she's all over the T.V. lately "Abstinence is the only safe sex."

I'd also like to point out that I don't go to church... not because I have
anything against it... I'm just not good in groups... lol
I was just try'n to make lite of the situation is all.

> > I would dare to say the religion is one of the causes for the spread of
> > these diseases and not vice-versa.
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
> Now - I need to take the advice I gave AR not too long ago and ignore you.
> You're a very bad troll and I wish you would GO AWAY! lol
M.L.S. - 13 Jun 2004 19:43 GMT
>There already is a very effective vaccine... religion.... Muslim, Christian,
>Hindu, whatever... as long as it keeps you (and your mate) a outa the sack
>until marriage. lol This is why the government won't sink money into this
>disease. They see it as "Easily preventable" which is true, but cold hearted

I'm not sure where the notion arose that "government" should be in
the health care business.  Surely, it couldn't be the impressive way
they deliver the mail, or run the railroad, or run the schools,
courts, jails, elections, immigration, social security, etc.  ;-)

HIV is easily preventable, too, so I think the inattention to herpes
is the fact that it's mostly benign.  

>none-the-less. I was a fool when I was younger, but it's unfortunate that I
>now, after growing up a learning much about life, have to live with those
>consequences for a very long time anyway.

I dated a woman last year who also was rather foolish in her youth,
and managed to contract Hepatitis.  She's now contemplating a future
with a possible liver transplant in it, and feels no qualms about
asking "the government" to "sink money" into the project (equalling
about twenty years of the taxed fruit of my labor, at my usual
rate).  I guess it's a good thing I wasn't *as foolish* in my youth,
but, still, I wouldn't mind having that money for myself.

la la.

Mike
Perl Molson - 14 Jun 2004 02:41 GMT
> >There already is a very effective vaccine... religion.... Muslim, Christian,
> >Hindu, whatever... as long as it keeps you (and your mate) a outa the sack
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
>
> Mike

My goodness, did you knew that hepatitis has an extremelly
high rate of transmission? Not sure though if all types have this
kind of ability.

P.S. If you require treatment I can have a look
into the unconventional treatments really.

Perl Molson
M.L.S. - 14 Jun 2004 03:54 GMT
>My goodness, did you knew that hepatitis has an extremelly
>high rate of transmission? Not sure though if all types have this
>kind of ability.

Hepatitis C, is mostly obtained via contaminated blood products.  We
tried not to share any blood products.

>P.S. If you require treatment I can have a look
>into the unconventional treatments really.

Thanks, Perl, but I didn't acquire the disease, and if I had I doubt
I'd be in the market for any unconventional treatments.  Really.

Mike
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.