Risk for AIDS mutation in Africa?

[Genghis Pwn]

Is there any chance that President Bush's $15-billion Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief for Africa could cause the AIDS virus to mutate in Africa at a time when the disease seems to be almost completely under control in the United States and other developed nations?

Africa currently has over 25 million infected HIV sufferers. By comparison, only about 360,00 Americans are living with the disease. The current cocktail of AIDs drugs is highly effective and can virtually eliminate all detectable signs of the virus.

With Africa utterly out of control, spawning 3.5 million new cases of AIDs every year (compared to 25,000 in the US), if we throw $15 billion worth of new drugs at the continent, do we risk mutating the virus beyond our control, and seeing it come back to America in a form we cannot stop?

http://www.securethefuture.com/images/afrmp2.gif

[reprise]

My WAG is that whatever we throw at HIV will not increase the risk of HIV mutating to a more lethal form to a higher level than the risk which already exists of it doing so in the wild (or of it recombining in the wild to form a new, more virulent strain).

Am I right in guessing that your concern is that HIV might a mutation which is similar to antibiotic resistance or to multi drug resitant tuberculosis?

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Genghis Pwn
Is there any chance that President Bush's $15-billion Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief for Africa could cause the AIDS virus to mutate in Africa at a time when the disease seems to be almost completely under control in the United States and other developed nations?



Not really. Why should it mutate more in Africa than anywhere else?

What are you advocating? just leave Africa to die?

[Genghis Pwn]

I'm not advocating anything; I'm posing a question here for consideration.

I mean, the chances of a resistant strain emerging from Africa seem far greater than the US based sheerly on the number of cases: 25 million vs 360,000.

When I was in Africa, I came down with a new, extemely drug-resistant strain of Malaria that landed me in a New York hospital for a week. Two doctors from the Centers for Disease actually came to visit me for a couple days. It took almost 5 days to get the malaria under control, and meanwhile, I can promise you, IT WAS NOT FUN.

When I see 15 billion dollars worth of new drugs suddenly being thrown at a massively infected continent like Africa, I wonder what all the effects might be.

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Genghis Pwn
When I see 15 billion dollars worth of new drugs suddenly being thrown at a massively infected continent like Africa, I wonder what all the effects might be.

A reduction in the rate of HIV infection?

PS, also had malaria many times. I thought it was cool----- got to stay off school for a few weeks :D

[Genghis Pwn]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


A reduction in the rate of HIV infection?

PS, also had malaria many times. I thought it was cool----- got to stay off school for a few weeks :D

Lol, you obviously didn't have the Genghis-killing strain that I got! I was on malaria prophylactics at the time, but they didn't stop this strain.

Anyway, so is everyone saying that I am wrong -- that dumping these high-tech new drugs into the bloodstreams of 30 million infected Africans might not mutate HIV, or produce a drug-resistant strain?

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Genghis Pwn


Lol, you obviously didn't have the Genghis-killing strain that I got! I was on malaria prophylactics at the time, but they didn't stop this strain.

Anyway, so is everyone saying that I am wrong -- that dumping these high-tech new drugs into the bloodstreams of 30 million infected Africans might not mutate HIV, or produce a drug-resistant strain?

Well, in all seriousness, I know/know of people how started feeling a bit of on monday and were dead by wendsday lunch from malaria. Prophylactics are good if you are just visiting but to take them long term is prolly more damaging than the odd case of malaria.

Genghis- you arent wrong, but arent really right either.
That HIV will eventually become resistant to our limited reportoire of drugs is an absolute certainty- even if you dont give it to anyone in Africa. You are right in saying that giving more drugs to more people will result in more resistance but the alternative (restricting drug availbility to a chosen few) is thoroughly immoral.

The best course of action would of course be to invest half the money in research into HIV drugs and vaccines (and give me a new job as well ;) )

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Genghis Pwn

Africa currently has over 25 million infected HIV sufferers. By comparison, only about 360,00 Americans are living with the disease. The current cocktail of AIDs drugs is highly effective and can virtually eliminate all detectable signs of the virus.


I suppose it may depend on exactly how the current AIDS drugs actually work.

With bacterial infections, antibiotics work on the organisms themselves. The problem with antibiotics is that if not all of the bacteria are killed, some will survive and pass on their immunity.

Now, do AIDS drugs act on the virus themselves? Any drugs that interrupt a crucial part of the Virus life cycle may not allow 'resistant' forms to be created.

The other issue is retransmission. Many diseases (like malaria) can be transmitted without having 'direct' physical contact with someone. Since the HIV virus can only exist in body fluids, there is less chance of somone 'accidentally' catching it, thus less chance of a resistant strain getting passed 'accidentally'.

[arcticpenguin]

Originally posted by Segnosaur

Now, do AIDS drugs act on the virus themselves? Any drugs that interrupt a crucial part of the Virus life cycle may not allow 'resistant' forms to be created.

Yes. AZT and other nucleotide analogs interfere with operation of reverse transcriptase and integrase, and the protease blockers interfere with the HIV protease (imagine that)

[arcticpenguin]

This is not directly related to Africa, but here is some of the latest AIDS news:

Mice made to host HIV (http://www.nature.com/nsu/030623/030623-18.html)
(subscription only)

Adding a crucial human protein to mice cells allows them to carry HIV. Genetically engineered mice might one day replace the monkeys and apes used to study AIDS in the laboratory.

This could be a good step in laboratory experimentation with HIV.