Man recovers from HIV...

Man recovers from HIV...

Author
Discussion

puggit

Original Poster:

48,355 posts

247 months

Sunday 13th November 2005
quotequote all
And sues

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4432564.stm

bbc said:

British man 'recovered from HIV'

Doctors say they want to investigate the case of a British man with HIV who apparently became clear of the virus.

Two Sunday newspapers report Scotsman Andrew Stimpson, who lives in London, was diagnosed as HIV-positive in 2002 but found to be clear in October 2003.

Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust, which carried out the tests, has asked him to undergo more. Mr Stimpson did not take any medication for HIV.

HIV experts say his case could help to reveal more about the disease.

Bacteria modified to fight HIV

A statement from the trust said: "We regret this has been a distressing time for Mr Stimpson and are happy to discuss any aspect of his care with him.

"This is a rare and complex case. When we became aware of Mr Stimpson's HIV negative test results we offered him further tests to help us investigate and find an explanation for the different results.

"So far Mr Stimpson has declined this offer. It is therefore difficult for us to comment any further."

There have been anecdotal accounts before from Africa of people shaking off the HIV virus, but the evidence in this case, as reported in the News of the World and the Mail on Sunday, appears to be conclusive, BBC health correspondent Adam Brimelow said.

Mr Stimpson, who is originally from Largs in Ayrshire, said: "There are 34.9 million people with HIV globally and I am just one person who managed to control it, to survive from it and to get rid of it from my body.

"For me that is unbelievable - it is a miracle. I think I'm one of the luckiest people alive."

Mr Stimpson told the newspapers that he became depressed and suicidal after being told he was HIV-positive but remained well and did not require medication.

Further tests

Some 14 months later he was offered another test by doctors, which came back negative.

He sought compensation but has apparently been told there is no case to answer because there was no fault with the testing procedure.

Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare Trust have asked to conduct more tests on Mr Stimpson both for his benefit and for other patients.

He has told the papers he would do anything he could to help find a cure.

Aids expert Dr Patrick Dixon, from international Aids group Acet, said the case was "very, very unusual".

Vaccine clue

"I've come across many anecdotal reports of this kind of thing happening in Africa, some quite recently, but it's difficult to verify them," he told BBC News 24.

"You have to be rock-solid sure that both samples came from the same person, no mix-up in the laboratory, no mistakes in the testing, etc.

"This is the first well-documented case."

He said the case was important because "inside his immune system is perhaps a key that could allow us to develop some kind of vaccine".

speedy_thrills

7,760 posts

242 months

Sunday 13th November 2005
quotequote all
puggit said:
And sues
But I don’t see how the article makes clear that he knew he really knew that both tests produced correct before he pressed charges. I have to say if I got a misdiagnosis like that I would probably consider legal action as well.

D_Mike

5,301 posts

239 months

Sunday 13th November 2005
quotequote all
But it is supposedly not a misdiagnosis - He was HIV positive and then he recovered and is now negative.

Some people are able to live with HIV but never develop AIDS and, as the article says, some people (reportedly) can "shake off" an HIV infection. Clearly the mechanism of doing this is of great interest and that is why he has been asked to have more tests.

HIV infects you and then just incubates in you (I think it can copy its RNA - HIV is a RNA rather than DNA virus) into your genome and then either stay there or just replicate itself using your cellular machinery.

simpo two

85,151 posts

264 months

Sunday 13th November 2005
quotequote all
His desire for compensation tells me he is clearly disappointed by his recovery, and wishes to be re-infected so he can continue on the original course...

MilnerR

8,273 posts

257 months

Sunday 13th November 2005
quotequote all
D_Mike said:
But it is supposedly not a misdiagnosis - He was HIV positive and then he recovered and is now negative.

Some people are able to live with HIV but never develop AIDS and, as the article says, some people (reportedly) can "shake off" an HIV infection. Clearly the mechanism of doing this is of great interest and that is why he has been asked to have more tests.

HIV infects you and then just incubates in you (I think it can copy its RNA - HIV is a RNA rather than DNA virus) into your genome and then either stay there or just replicate itself using your cellular machinery.


Its a retro-virus. It reverse transcibes its RNA into DNA which is then expressed by the infected lymphocyte and produces more virus particles.

In this case i suspect that its a cock up somewhere along the line. Either that or a false positive (unlikely). The anecodotal evidence that shows people living with HIV for extended periods have come (mainly) from prostitutes who are repeatedly infected and whose immune response is elevated. As soon as they "retire" they develop AIDS and die. I wouldn't hold your breath on the production of a vaccine. Retro viruses are genetically unstable which makes producing a vaccine very difficult....

R988

7,495 posts

228 months

Sunday 13th November 2005
quotequote all
Well he wont really be able to sue unless it was a misdiagnosis, which would probably be valid since he did go twice to make sure.

If he did somehow recover then he wont win the case but he can probably sell or patent his DNA to some drug company as a cure or something.

Vesuvius996

35,829 posts

270 months

Sunday 13th November 2005
quotequote all
He looks like a TOTAL chav. I reckon he thinks "I can make a few quid here alright..."

IF he has beaten HIV then for the sake of mankind he should either give the samples required OR should be forced to.

jessica

6,321 posts

251 months

Sunday 13th November 2005
quotequote all
MilnerR said:
D_Mike said:
But it is supposedly not a misdiagnosis - He was HIV positive and then he recovered and is now negative.

Some people are able to live with HIV but never develop AIDS and, as the article says, some people (reportedly) can "shake off" an HIV infection. Clearly the mechanism of doing this is of great interest and that is why he has been asked to have more tests.

HIV infects you and then just incubates in you (I think it can copy its RNA - HIV is a RNA rather than DNA virus) into your genome and then either stay there or just replicate itself using your cellular machinery.


Its a retro-virus. It reverse transcibes its RNA into DNA which is then expressed by the infected lymphocyte and produces more virus particles.

In this case i suspect that its a cock up somewhere along the line. Either that or a false positive (unlikely). The anecodotal evidence that shows people living with HIV for extended periods have come (mainly) from prostitutes who are repeatedly infected and whose immune response is elevated. As soon as they "retire" they develop AIDS and die. I wouldn't hold your breath on the production of a vaccine. Retro viruses are genetically unstable which makes producing a vaccine very difficult....


quite
but wouldnt it be cool if this is the breakthrough all scientists have been looking for.
It has to be researched ASAP.
Especially as this is a documented case.
His antibodies could be in the future used as a vaccination.

tinman0

18,231 posts

239 months

Monday 14th November 2005
quotequote all
i read this yesterday - i could be wrong - but i got the impression he sued because the trust wouldn't give him a decent explanation of what happened. one test said positive, next test said negative, and they seemingly brushed it aside as "oh well mistakes are made - good luck with the rest of your life, cya".

it was only after he involved his solicitors did the trust get the original blood dna tested (or maybe it was dna tested in the first place), compared it to the non infected sample, and then kinda came forward with the real answer "omg you really have cured yourself".

cymtriks

4,560 posts

244 months

Monday 14th November 2005
quotequote all
I heard that some cases of recovery from AIDS had been investigated and that one factor was the individuals ancestory.

Apparently HIV resistant people are descended from people who survived the great plagues, sometimes being the only survivors in their communities.

If so some of us have an inherited resistance to normally lethal diseases.

BliarOut

72,857 posts

238 months

Monday 14th November 2005
quotequote all
It's interesting if it's right and it triggers a line of research that leads to a cure/treatment. My main question is how certain are they that the original test was correct?

Plotloss

67,280 posts

269 months

Monday 14th November 2005
quotequote all
If he has genuinely recovered and it wasnt a massive balls up.

It will make previous life insurance decisions interesting...

stackmonkey

5,077 posts

248 months

Monday 14th November 2005
quotequote all
cymtriks said:
I heard that some cases of recovery from AIDS had been investigated and that one factor was the individuals ancestory.

Apparently HIV resistant people are descended from people who survived the great plagues, sometimes being the only survivors in their communities.

If so some of us have an inherited resistance to normally lethal diseases.


I hadn't heard of this, but it doesn't surprise me. I would expect that a (very) small proportion of the world population is effectively immune to one or more of the fatal viruses etc that infect humans.
It will probably be from these people that any cures/vaccines will be developped
I had heard of 2/3 men in the US who have apparently remained HIV negative despite living (unknowingly) with a positive partner for many years before testing was available.

MilnerR

8,273 posts

257 months

Tuesday 15th November 2005
quotequote all
jessica said:

His antibodies could be in the future used as a vaccination.



Certainly an interesting case. However HIV is not only a difficult virus to produce antibodies against as the antigen specificity changes but it also attacks the T4 lymphocytes that are required to maintain a robust immune response.

I hope this case comes to something but i doubt it. More likely a cockup with the barcode reader in a lab somewhere...

>> Edited by MilnerR on Tuesday 15th November 10:43

racefan_uk

2,935 posts

255 months

Tuesday 15th November 2005
quotequote all
Does anyone else find this quote the interesting bit?

[quote]
A statement from the trust said: "We regret this has been a distressing time for Mr Stimpson and are happy to discuss any aspect of his care with him.

"This is a rare and complex case. When we became aware of Mr Stimpson's HIV negative test results we offered him further tests to help us investigate and find an explanation for the different results.
[/quote]

Sounds to me like the hospital are trying to explain away the different tests as if its a mistake they've made. As in, oops, we've actually cocked up his original sample, and now have to dig ourselves out of a hole.

I reckon this is going to eventually turn out to be a testing cock-up and not a miraculous cure.

Vesuvius996

35,829 posts

270 months

Tuesday 22nd November 2005
quotequote all


Hmmm. A "cock up" is often how this thing starts.

Sorry.