Vaccine Blues, The Aids Crusade Moves On
Bad day at Merck …. But good day at Boehringer Ingelheim! (Proud maker of Nevirapine. ‘Nevirapine – Give it to Someone You Hate’)
Why? Because: There’s Gonna be no ‘Aids Vaccine,’ after all!
WallStreetJournal: Aids Effort Suffers Big Blow
- In a major setback, one of the leading experimental AIDS vaccines not only failed to prevent test subjects from becoming infected with HIV, but it didn’t offer any indication it might delay the onset of full-blown AIDS, which had been a key hope.
- The collapse of the trial leaves Merck & Co., which had spent a decade developing the vaccine, with no remaining prospects in the global hunt for an AIDS immunization. The vaccine was tested in a network funded by the National Institutes of Health.”
Note: “Funded by the NIH” means, “Your Tax Money!
Gosh, it’s such a shame to have wasted all of it, huh? If only they could have predicted that injecting people with synthetic proteins from “hiv tests”, would make people come up positive on hiv tests…
Gosh and Bother.
But wait! They did predict it! They even wrote it down:
- “A person who has antibodies to HIV-1 is presumed to be infected by the virus, except that a person who has participated in an HIV vaccine study may develop antibodies to the vaccine and may or may not be infected with HIV.” (Abbot Laboratories, 2006 ‘Hiv test’)
- “The purpose of this study is to find out more about how persons respond to HIV-1 infection if they have received an experimental HIV-1 vaccine before they became HIV-infected. It is important to study people who have been given experimental HIV vaccines and who later became HIV-infected for several reasons.” (January 2002, ClinicalTrials.gov)
But really, any vaccination will do:
- [R]ecent inoculation with any brand of influenza vaccine was significantly associated with a false positive screening assay for HIV antibodies …
- [I]t is very important to remind patients and clinicians that influenza vaccination may cause cross-reactivity with HIV antibody assays. (New England Journal of Medicine, March 2006. Influenza Vaccination and False Positive HIV Results)
Then again. they actually don’t have any idea what the fajiminy they’re talking about:
- “At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence of antibodies to HIV-1 and HIV-2 in human blood.”
- “The risk of an asymptomatic [not chronically ill] person with a repeatedly reactive [positive] serum sample developing AIDS or an AIDS-related condition is not known.“ (Abbot Laboratories, 2006 ‘Hiv test’)
Positive, Negative…who can tell the difference? As long as you’re “at risk” to be tested… I mean, “At risk for the disease.” Well then, I’m sure the nice scientists will help you find ‘the medication that’s right for you, at a plan you can afford.’
You go Glaxxo and AZT! You go Boehringer. Ball’s in your court. No Vaccine to compete with. I guess you’ll just have to drug everybody to death….I mean… save all those lives with AZT and Nevirapine, after all.
Notes
- What could possibly be wrong with AZT?
- What’s so bad about Nevirapine? And more.
- What’s so confusing about hiv testing? And even more, for the intrepid.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment