Briton world's first to beat HIV: reports

[maddezmom]

LONDON (AFP) - A British man is believed to have become the first person in the world to get rid of the HIV virus.

Andrew Stimpson, 25, was diagnosed as HIV-positive in August 2002. However, tests 14 months later showed that the virus had completely gone from his body, despite taking no medication to combat it.

His doctors are adamant there were no mix-ups with his tests and the sandwich maker will now offer his body for medical research to help doctors in their quest to find a cure for HIV, which leads to full-blown AIDS.

"I remember after the repeat tests my doctor came into the room saying, 'You've cured yourself! This is unbelievable, you're fantastic!'

more:http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051113/wl_uk_afp/healthhivaidsbritain

[bluestateguy]

1. The religious fundies worst nightmare: AIDS could be cured

Look at their response to the cervical cancer drug. They don't want it to go to market. They want people to fear and be ashamed of sex, unless its between two heterosexual married people in the missionary position with the lights out and even then, only for the purposes of having kids.

If AIDS could be cured or even controlled, the fundies would fight that because they like and approve of what AIDS has done to this planet.

[tenshi816]

3. Yeah, makes me think of all the times

I've heard fundies say that AIDS is God's judgement on gays - wonder what they'll have to say about this.

[shockingelk]

5. They'll declare War on Medicine

Don't overestimate their rationality.

[Cha]

41. Their god

is Nasty!

[nemo137]

76. is not my god.

But then, they'd not call me a Christian (I'm more than happy to return the favor).

[Occulus]

4. They believe diseasea- all of them- to be punishment

thus, curing disease- ANY disease- thwarts God's will.

Particularly sexual diseases.

They don't stop for a moment to think the cure could be God's will, for we are therefore stronger and smarter.... no.

Humans cannot advance. We are perfect, created by a perfect Being, who cannot possibly be Himself smart enough to understand that we can vecome stronger and smarter over time...

ack. My head hurts.

[davekriss]

44. "They believe disease- all of them- to be punishment"

Actually that is not true, your claim that *all* conservative Christians believe that disease is God's punishment. Yes, some do, for example the cretins that gave birth to Christian Reconstructionism (now there's a baby that needed aborting!!).

A pastor of a charismatic church explained it to me this way: When you stand outside of God, outside of the wisdom of the Bible, you are in the wilderness and therefore subject to all kinds of dangers. The evil one roams the periphery to devour the weak like a hungry lion. When you choose (important point) to step outside of God's protection, sickness and disease are one possible consequence. All disease comes from Satan, none from God.

(Think of these things as a body of memes -- if they allow the Dawkins-esque boat to row faster and farther, then they have merit.)

This pastor, a conservative Christian, has also said that we are God's ambassadours on earth; once saved, we are here but for one purpose: To example God's good light in order to attract other souls to Him. Otherwise God would bring us home to Him the instant we are born again.

What this means (to the pastor and amongst other things) is we bring forth good works, and these good works include (most of) the works of science and medicine. We should therefore avail ourselves to the positive things emergent from these disciplines -- we should take our medicine when sick, he says, yet also think that we are already healed by Christ (faith is, he says, "believing it has happened before it appears in the natural").

His wife was cured (by faith and medicine) of breast cancer, btw.

His words are also consistent with the only other charismatic Christian I've come to know, also a pastor (of a much larger church).

One thing I find disheartening here at DU is the blanket disparagement of Christianity. Pat Robertson may be visible, he may have an audience in the millions or even tens of millions, but he is *nothing* to the other 2 billion Christians here on earth.

(Big fan of Sara Diamond here, so I am fully aware of the destructive role the Christian Right has played in American politics these last 25+ years.)

[Arugula Latte]

64. re: step outside "the wisdom of the Bible"

The Bible is a collection of stories. It is filled with "wisdom" such as the Earth was made in seven days and woman was made from a rib bone. It is filled with incest, brutality, and contradictions. It is an interesting book that has influenced countless people, but to take it as wisdom passed down from some diety is laughable to millions of us.

I'm not saying people don't have the right to believe it. I'm just saying that for many of us, holding the Bible up as some paragon of virtue is, as I said, laughable.

[davekriss]

78. It is filled with the wisdom of poetry and allegory

OK, I'm going to have some fun with this; any scholarly Christians out there can correct my errors if they want ...

Genesis is not a literal history of the birth of the earth; it's one of many (beautiful) creation myths we've told ourselves throughout time, the latest being a great singularity unleashing the Universe and all its laws and energy and matter in a single Big Bang. I know this goes against the fundamentalist creed that the bible is inerrant literal (historical) truth, but it is held so only by insecure people that cannot face inevitable non-being so they cling to untruths and unhealthy misinterpretations.

The Bible may be inerrantly true -- but in the sense of truth found in all great works of art in that they reflect back on us something deep about who we are and where we fit in the world around us.

Further, you might notice that the Bible is split up into two books, the Old Testament and the New Testament. The Old Testament is filled with passions both sublime and viscious, with anger and love (quite the tempest). However, when Jesus appeared, the Old Testamant no longer applied. Christians are bound to the covenant of the New Testament.

Where in the New Testament do you find your "incest, brutatlity, and contradictions"?

No, what you find is a man who to me comes off like a force of nature, an iconoclastic tornado stirring up the place, and for three years preached that God is love, love is God, all is within God, and the Kingdom of Heaven is within.

When asked what commandments we should keep, he answered two, as all others are based on these: We should love our Lord our God with all our hearts, all are minds, and all our strength; and, two, we should love one another. Keep to these, and all will be well.

Put aside the literalism of the fundamentalists, put aside the claims for the "supernatural", and look at the Gospel and Epistles in the context of great mythic art. What does it tell us? Be gentle. Love one another. Love is gentle, love is patient, love is kind, love is meek. If you are in strife with a brother, make your peace with him before the sun goes down. If your brother asks for your shirt, give him your coat too. See a stranger in need, give him bread and shelter. Forgive eachother, we all fall short of the glory of God. Avoid adultury, as that leads to strife between men. Don't worry your selves sick over tomorrow, tomorrow will take care of itself; today is the day the Lord made for you, revel in it, praise the God you love, give thanks for the blessings that have rained down on you, and in turn be a blessing to other people. Truly, truly be thankful for what you have.

(And now if I can veer into the supernatural: ) Jesus is always with us, always. Ready to bind the broken hearted; drip oil of gladness on those who mourn; give new life to those who call on him. Always, right there, waiting for you to plug in to him.

The most wonderful blessing is this: Once you call on Him, ask him to pick up the broken pieces of a life entangled in sin, and when that life is laid down at the foot of the cross and, trembling, you look up, fearful you'll see the face of a man defeated and wracked with pain, you will instead see a face of brilliant love with a crown of glory on his head. At that moment you are washed clean by the blood of Christ, as white as snow, free from sin, free, and propelled by love for the mercy shown you to step forward on the path He prepared for you. You are redeemed; you are made anew; you are like a child in the arms of a loving God.

You understand, then, that we are already victorious, we are more than conquerors. That there is nothing that can come against us in this world that can take away our place in heaven. Everything on earth will fall away -- that pretty wife or husband will grow old and die, cities will fall, the earth will grow inhospitable to man, even Satan himself is temporary as in the end he is thrown into the lake of fire to experience everlasting destruction. Yet those who believe in Jesus Christ have eternal life in God the father. Those of us in Him continue in eternity. So if God is for us, who or what can prevail against us?! Nothing!! Thus a blossoming peace that passeth all understanding.

And when this life passes away and you find yourself before the Father (at the White Throne of Judgment), He does not see your sins, your shortcomings, your petty failures and cruelties -- all the Father sees is the glory of Jesus Christ, who died for you so you would not have to. Then, when your name is read from the Book of Life, Jesus adds to it the good things you've done in life, helping that acquantiance by paying her electric bills one summer, getting another out of an abusive, drunken relationship to the help she needs (only to meet her 20 years later, healthy and happy and prosperous!), even the smile and kind word you always had for that lonely, unpopular kid at grade school -- whatever those acts of lovingkindness are that populate your life, they too will be read out to exalt you in front of the saints and angels who then gladly welcome you in their company. Such an act of kindness and mercy, such an act of complete, accepting love. You will then know you are home.

"...holding the Bible up as some paragon of virtue is, as I said, laughable."

I hold it up as a great work of art, and like all great works it has the potential to point you to ineffable truths that nourish the spririt of men. THe New Testament is kind of like an operators manual for good communal living, if you ask me. Step outside of it and you open yourself and others up to strife, chaos, and possible destruction. Stay inside the word and there's a higher chance for peace, prosperity, and life more abundant. However, we are behind enemy lines down here, the road to destruction remains wide while the road to life everlasting is narrow and, in these days, hard to discern. And the evil one lurks all around ready to devour the weak and lost.

If it helps, I am a neo-buddhist-anarcho-syndicalist-charismatic-christian ... um, I didn't say I had it all worked out yet! :)

I will send a second reply made about 6 months which takes another tack on my position concerning religion.

[davekriss]

79. Religion Redux

What follows, Oregonian, is a post made first at U75 about 12-18 months ago and resused here at DU once before. I still hold to the points made then.

***

Just as Chomsky says there is a "language organ" in the brain, I think there is also a "spiritual organ" -- i.e., we are perhaps preprogrammed by countless generations of natural selection to pursue spiritual "truth", "salvation", "peace", and "meaning". To deny that pursuit with "zeal or conscientious devotion" is equally an expression of that preprogrammed given in our natures, albeit in disguised form.

Joseph Campbell describes 4 major cultural functions for religion (IIRC): (i) to engender sustaining and grounding "mystical" experience in a few (the founding roots of religions), (ii) to provide order and meaning that allows a political/economic system to florish, (iii) to establish and justify a ruling priestly class that benefits a few and maintains the general order, (iv) to function as a screening myth that keeps system-contrarian truths from the minds of the non-privileged classes. There is nothing wrong with item one; it all goes downhill with the latter three. That preprogrammed pursuit of the spiritual gets hijacked again and again for sociopolitical purposes that maintain, sustain, and benefit selfish hierarchy -- and at complete variance (usually) from the "mystical" experiences that served to found the religious order in the first place -- steers us into discussions of our natures that spill far beyond just the "religious" in us.

Having said that, my wife (Kriss) is a devout Christian. I can say unequivocally that her church (a small charismatic church) is filled with men and women of good spirit who turn to Sundays for nourishment, comfort, and community. The values and ideals upheld are positive and healing. During the rest of the week many do much community work to alleviate the suffering of others. In and of itself there is nothing negative with this at all; on the contrary, this is a beautiful thing.

If I can wax metaphorically here I think there are levels to consciousness, spheres turning slowly within spheres. Up above are the spheres of transpersonal experience (the mystical, spiritual, revelatory). Down below are the spheres of the wounded child, the detritus of our tragic personal histories. In between are the spheres of the everyday self that balances the checkbook and clocks in at work. A retreat into any one at the cost of the others is disorder, disease.

The transpersonal in flight from the weight of the everyday or acknowledgement of our woundings can lead to imbalance and fanaticism; a retreat below can lead to depression, emotional chaos, continuance and increase of pain. And a retreat into the everyday in denial of the above/below can lead to ennui, emptiness, and meaninglessness. What's called for, and the words of many spiritual leaders across time have called for this, is balance and integration of all spheres.

To the extent that religion orders and integrates it can be tolerated (by me). I understand that many of us are strong enough to stand alone, separate from the ordering community of religions (Tillich's the courage to stand apart vs. the courage to participate, two poles of the courage to be in a world where God can seem very absent -- the many of us fall at various points along this valid continuum). But I am also fully aware how the sensitive spheres can be hijacked for banal (even evil) purposes. And I am aware how the screening myths of religions can distract from and postpone the fight for corrective social justice and equality. On this contradiction I don't pretend to have answers, but unlike some I neither embrace naively nor reject wholly the fundamental drives that lead men and women to bond together in intended good will under the banners of various religions.

But, hey, that's just me <---- lost in Samsarra, swimming in our Ocean of Tears...

[wakeme2008]

9. IMHO it is the DRUG companies worst nightmare...

Take ONE shot and no more zillion pills a day.... Yipes the drug companies would cry big time :)

[murray hill farm]

11. Wonderful news!

But...there are, in any disease, random spontaneous cures..even with cancers..this mans body apparently had the ability to eliminate the HIV...sooooooooo...with any luck, they will find out just how his body did that amazing thing.

[progdonkey]

13. what do you mean "unless"? ;-) n/t

[Judi Lynn]

2. Wow! Hope Andrew Stimpson will not be the only success. n/t

[darkmaestro019]

6. how I hope this is true; how I hope it can be duplicated

a beloved friend once said to me that the day they cure AIDS there will be an orgy to end all orgies.

Here's hoping I see that party in my lifetime. ; )

I'm betting you'll be able to hear the collective-fundy Vader-NOO!! around the world. Or maybe it'll be drowned out in the cheers.

[Old sixties guy]

43. I hear you in a way

but it still wouldn't be cool.I am on the liberal side most of the time but the traditionalists are right on this one-monogamy IS preferable to the whole sexual freedom madness that consumed my generation.
Yeah,I was a male whoredog back in the day like most of my generation.Defintely had a very promiscous side to me.Would trade all the "kicks"back then for one person that truly loved me and vice-versa.

[shenmue]

7. If true this is wonderful

I'm so happy

:applause:

:loveya:

:cry:

:thumbsup:

:woohoo:

[aquart]

8. It's one guy. And it's too damn late for my best friend.

And for my favorite Shakespeare director. And a wonderful community activist. And a young actor who gave great backrubs.

But, hey. Happy for you.

[shenmue]

12. Well I'm sorry about your friends

but what does that have to do with me, and why does that take away from the fact that this could be a real landmark case that helps a lot of other people?

You don't sound like you're 'happy for me' at all. You sound very rude and snappy. I don't think that was merited or even makes sense.

I'm not the only person who said I was happy, why don't you take it out on someone else?

You mean it's bad that someone, somewhere finally beat this thing? If your friends had made it, do you think I wouldn't be happy for you and them? You think they were the only people who died? Think I don't know anybody either? You don't know anything about me. 'Let the dead bury their dead.' I don't know why I deserved to be the recipient of your anger about the past.

I obviously do not know the man in the story from London. I don't know why you had to get personal and project your personal story onto me.

Again, I am sorry about your friends. But I don't know why you had to take that attitude with me.

If this is true, and we can find out why this guy was able to recover, this could be one of the most important medical discoveries in centuries.

That ought to make a lot of people happy.

Friends of mine have died from various causes--accidents, illness, etc.--but apparently only you are entitled to your grief and shock. I chose not to lash out at anyone else. I chose to get on with my life.

I feel very sorry for you, and will not waste my time talking to you again.

[progdonkey]

14. dude

WTF? Why the sarcasm? Should people not be happy to hear that someone possibly beat the AIDS virus?

When Ted Bundy was arrested, did you bitch at people for being happy that a killer was off the street?

[eowyn_of_rohan]

18. Lost my friend too, and understand how you feel

Still grieving the loss, and of course, hopeful that THIS is really the magic cure. But so sad that it couldn't have come in time for our friends. I think of my friend's bravery and positive attitude throughout all the years he suffered, and the roller coaster of remissions and returns... And all the hope he placed in the new drugs and treatment plans. And I miss him, like you do yours.

[KittyWampus]

37. Well, I Pretty Damned Sure All My Friends Lost To AIDS Would Be Supportive

and happy for the potential breakthrough.

[davekriss]

45. My wife TODAY is cross-country at the funeral...

...of her "brother" (in quotes because...well a long story).

Neal died last week of AIDS 15 years after diagnosis. Those years were filled with ups and downs, and he is finally down. His family, though saddened, are actually releaved as his suffering has come to its end.

Rest in peace, "brother" Neal...

[LisaL]

26. It's one person, who was cured by himself?

What is so wonderful about it, except for the guy who cured himself? It's not like they finally came up with medications that can cure it. That is if they haven't made a mistake in a first place with his tests.

[alcibiades_mystery]

32. Because if they discover the mechanism whereby his body beat it

Then that mechanism can be replicated and used on others.

As the kiddies say, DUH.

[Liberal Veteran]

36. It's not that simple, I'm afraid.

What are they going to do? Try to infect him repeatedly to see the result? That ain't gonna happen. If it was a big mistake, then they just gave a man HIV. Too much risk.

Without other cases to compare what he and others like him have in common, there is no medically acceptable way of figuring out how he seroconverted to negative.

Even the CCR5-delta32 mutation was found by comparing what people who appeared to have some resistance to infection with HIV had in common genetically. Without more than a single case, all we have is an abberation.

[xchrom]

10. amazing wonderful news!

isn't that fantastic!?!? i love that.

[shadowknows69]

15. Power of the mind baby!!!

"His doctors are adamant there were no mix-ups with his tests and the sandwich maker will now offer his body for medical research to help doctors in their quest to find a cure for HIV, which leads to full-blown AIDS."

I just hope he put some stipulations on this on for his own sake.

[shawn703]

16. Could it be the hospital covering their ass?

"On hearing of the negative results, Stimpson told newspapers he considered suing the hospital for bungling the initial test.

But he received a letter from the hospital last month stating there was no case to answer. An investigation had confirmed the blood in all the samples was his and there were no mix-ups.

"Those tests are both accurate, the positive and a negative. They are correct," said the hospital spokeswoman."


Anyone think the hospital thought it might save some money by telling the guy he cured himself instead of admitting a false positive?

[Straight Shooter]

19. Probably not.

In the long run, they would have more to lose. The increased scrutiny concerning all their tests, especially those involving HIV, could become difficult to bear. I'm just guessing, though. One would have to look at their long-term record of false positives.

Maybe it is exactly what it appears, that this man's immune system has something unique about the way it handled HIV and his body simply vanquished the virus. It's exciting, it gives me hope for the future, especially if it's something that Big Pharma can't make billions of dollars of profits from.

[LisaL]

27. That would be my bet too. Maybe they accidentally contaminated

his first test and now claim the test was correct, to save their asses?

[Liberal Veteran]

31. That would be the most likely case....

As I stated in the other post, there are only two possibilities:

1) He was never really positive to begin with.

2) This is something that is astronomically rare, given that not a single case of positive to negative seroconversion has been documented in over 20 years and literally millions of HIV cases.


One case doesn't really help either in the hunt for a cure if it is the latter. It's not like they can repeatedly try to infect him with HIV. That would be immoral and criminal, particular if he did get infected.

Without other cases there is not way to compare what this person has in common genetically with other people who are equally able to fight off the virus. That's how they found the CCR5-delta-32 mutation that makes many people of northern European descent resistant to HIV infection. But they had more than one person with the mutation to study to see what they have in common.

At best, we have a very lucky person who is an abberation. At worst, we have a medical mix up.

Without more information, I'm inclined to go with the latter.

[LisaL]

33. Just like people going to fertility clinics in rare cases end up with

a baby that is not their biological child-one infected pipette, etc-and this guy has become "positive", when he might have never been positive to begin with.

[More Than A Feeling]

17. Not everyone is sure that this is true

"Associate Professor Andrew Grulich, an epidemiologist at the National Centre in HIV Epidemiology and Clinical Research at the University of New South Wales, said there was "no evidence" that Mr Stimpson had been cured.

It was more likely that the virus was still present but had retreated to undetectable levels in Mr Stimpson's blood."

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/claim-to-be-cured-of-hiv-is-doubted/2005/11/13/1131816809189.html

It would be so wonderful if it does turn out to be the real deal, though.

[whatelseisnew]

20. There's more to the article

"I can't confirm with you that he's shaken it off, that he's been cured.

"When we became aware of his HIV-negative result, we offered him further tests to help us investigate and find an explanation. So far he has declined to do so."
...
On hearing of the negative results, Stimpson told newspapers he considered suing the hospital for bungling the initial test.
...
Stimpson was all the more surprised, given that on hearing he had tested HIV positive, he gave up safe sex with his infected boyfriend, 44-year-old Juan Gomez.

[Samurai_Writer]

22. WTF???

"Stimpson was all the more surprised, given that on hearing he had tested HIV positive, he gave up safe sex with his infected boyfriend, 44-year-old Juan Gomez."

So the guy someone cures himself of HIV, and then afterwards, is having unsafe sex with his HIV-infected partner? That's just insane.

[northzax]

23. no, once he tested positive

he gave up safe sex, since he already had the virus.

My question would be, does he still have anti-bodies? This is certainly possible, but it's really no more remarkable than the people who should have HIV, based on lifestyles and history and don't, (by this, I don't mean should in a moral sense, I mean there are men who have had everyone around them die, especially from the 80's, when they engaged in the exact same behaviours as those who got infected, and yet somehow didn't.) or those who live with HIV as a chronic disease without serious medical complications. Some people are just somehow better equipped to fight it.

[Liberal Veteran]

29. No, he wouldn't have antibodies.

There's the rub.

HIV diagnosis is not as simple as say, a strep test. In the a strep test, a culture is done which determines you are infected with the bacteria.

Culturing HIV is a very costly and difficult process.

So you might ask, how is one diagnosed with HIV?

A person takes an HIV test which detect the presence of HIV specific antibodies in the blood. A positive test is confirmed with a western blot test. The former is much more prone to false results than the latter, but the latter is much more accurate, but complicated and thus not used as the primary test.

If both those tests are positive, you are usually told at that point that you have HIV.

So, that brings us to the next stage. This would viral load test which detects the genetic markers of viral particles in the bloodstream. A relatively expensive and complicated process and usually done on everyone with a positive HIV test (assuming they are being seen by a competent physician) to determine just how much replication is going on in the body.

In my own case, I presented with a viral load of 250,000+ copies per ml. Since beginning treatment that test has consistently shown what is called "undetectable" which doesn't mean I am free of HIV. It means that the number of copies in one ml are less than the detection threshold of the test. The gold standard for viral load testing is the ultra-sensitive assay which detects down to 50 copies per ml. Anything under that is "undetectable" and it the goal of antiviral therapy, meaning viral replication is being controlled.

If I were to go off HAART (antiviral therapy), I would likely remain undetectable for a few weeks and then my viral load would start climbing exponentially because antivirals are incapable of eradicating all reservoirs of the virus.

Some people have been documented to be HIV-positive (meaning they have antibodies) and are undetectable on viral load tests without treatment for some time. If this is what this story was, then there is no story as there isn't anything that hasn't been seen before.

That would mean that he seroconverted from positive to negative on the antibody tests. Which means no antibodies.

[KittyWampus]

38. Thanks For That Info. May I Ask, Wouldn't This Person Be Unique In That

he MIGHT have seroconverted himself from postive to negative on antibody tests unaided by antiviral drugs?

Just asking and trying to understand a subject I nothing about.

[Liberal Veteran]

40. Assuming we take the story at face value....yes.

Although babies born to HIV-infected women have gone from positive to negative, but that's because they had their mother's antibodies which eventually die off. That's a whole other story.

No one has ever seroconverted from positive to negative with or without antivirals (that has been documented anyway).

I am not ready to accept the story without more information.

[LisaL]

28. No, he has been told he is HIV positive, and since

then he had started having unsafe sex with his boyfriend. After a while, he has been told he "become" HIV negative.

[andyarundel]

21. Caution over HIV 'cure' claims

BBC News Sunday Nov 13, 2005

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

Scotsman Andrew Stimpson, 25 was diagnosed HIV-positive in 2002 but was found to be negative in October 2003.

Mr Stimpson, from London, said he was "one of the luckiest people alive".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4432564.stm

From Bloomberg News Report

A spokeswoman for London's Chelsea & Westminster hospital, which carried out the tests, said she couldn't say if Stimpson had been cured or not, and urged him to come forward for further tests. She confirmed he had sought to sue the trust, and that the tests, which both had his DNA in them, were accurate.

``I feel truly special and lucky,'' Stimpson said in the News of the World interview. ``I have no idea how I got rid of the virus. I was just taking daily supplements to keep myself as healthy as possible.''

There is no known cure for HIV infection. Suppressing replication of the virus for as long as possible helps delay its progression into AIDS, which has killed more than 20 million people since the first case was diagnosed in 1981. As the virus that causes AIDS mutates quickly, developing resistance to drugs, it is usually treated with a cocktail of medications.

Stimpson didn't take medication for HIV, because he was in the early stages of the disease, the newspaper said. He says he will offer himself for medical tests to find out how he apparently shook off the virus, the newspaper reported.

``If Andrew has been cleared of the virus, that needs to be investigated thoroughly to see if it can be reproduced in any way,'' the News of the World quoted Lisa Power, head of policy at the Terence Higgins Trust, a London-based charity, as saying. ``This could be of major interest to HIV researchers.''

From Reuters Report

"We very much want him to return so we can try to find out what exactly has happened," she added.

There is no known cure for HIV/AIDS, responsible for the deaths of millions of people and especially virulent in parts of Africa. Some experts say there are nearly 35 million sufferers around the world.

Scientists cite anecdotal accounts from Africa of people shaking off HIV but say they have never seen firm evidence.

"I feel truly special and lucky," Stimpson, who is a sandwich maker, told the News of the World. "All the dotors have told me it is a medial miracle that I am clear."

Patrick Dixon, a doctor and HIV expert, told Sky News this was the first time someone had kicked the virus out of their body.

"(AIDS) is a hugely significant problem which at moment we have no cure for," said Dixon.

"It's just possible inside this man's body is a biological key. If we can find an antibody that he's produced that has enabled him to kick this virus out, we could in theory find a way of engineering that antibody and giving it as some sort of treatment," he said.

The hospital spokeswoman said subsequent DNA checks had proven there had been no mix-up in the identity of the patient and the HIV tests, but said she did not know whether there could have been any other error in the original test.

ABC Newsonline

A London hospital will carry out tests to investigate how a British man who was diagnosed as HIV positive in 2002, recovered from the virus the following year.

LIFE STYLE EXTRA (UK) - A Briton apparently cured of the killer HIV virus could hold the key in the battle to beat Aids, an Aids expert has claimed.

Londoner Andrew Stimpson, 25, appears to be the first HIV sufferer in the world to have later tested negative for the disease.

Gay Andrew caught the virus from his HIV-positive boyfriend Juan. He was diagnosed in August 2002 after blood tests at the Victoria Clinic for Sexual Health in west London, which specialises in HIV.

In October 2003, a repeat HIV test result came back negative and an investigation by Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust confirmed that there had been no mix-up over either test.

Dr Patrick Dixon, founder of international Aids group Acet, described Andrew's case as "extraordinary and unique".

He said: "Individual cases have been reported in the past where people have tested positive and then later tested negative but it has been hard to be sure that there weren't errors in the testing in the first place as some of these reports have come from Africa.

"What's unique in this case is the care in the way that these tests have been done and the re-checks which has led the hospital to the conclusion that this individual has learned how to cure himself of HIV infection.

"If it's true, it means that the immune system of this individual has discovered a weakness in HIV which holds the key to destroying it.

"If we could find a way of reproducing that same effect in other people who have HIV then it could lead to a new kind of treatment or even potentially a cure.

"The answer may turn out to be in his specific genetic code. We know that some individuals have a genetic resistance to HIV infection.

"This is known as the CCR5 gene and there is some evidence that up to 20 per cent of Caucasians in the UK carry this gene.

"There is also evidence that around 1 per cent of Caucasians in the UK carry two copies of this gene and these individuals in studies around the world seem to have powerful resistance to HIV infection.

"Medical researchers will be wanting to look closely at how the white blood cells behave inside this individual. The immune system is incredibly complicated and the key will be to discover exactly how this individual's immune system is working.

"The holy grail of Aids research would be to find an antibody that is effective.

"The only real answer at the moment though is prevention."

[Barkley]

24. Bottle Andrew Stimpson and sell him - nt

[Liberal Veteran]

25. Not to throw cold water on this....

I'm somewhat skeptical to be sure, but it is entirely possible that a person was able to mount enough of a defense to infection to produce enough antibodies to kill off the disease before it went from acute to chronic infection. That's a guess based on my understanding of HIV infection which I am quite well read in.

Still, I'd like to know whether a PCR viral load test was ever done on this man after his diagnosis and that piece of information is missing from this report and would be critical.

ELISA tests can produce false positives (and negatives for that matter).

Generally speaking, when someone presents with a positive HIV test (which involves an initial ELISA and then a confirmatory Western Blot test), the patient is usually given a few other tests. It would border on malpractice to have not done an initial viral load and t-cell count, particularly in a country with universal health care (ruling out the possibility the tests were not done due to financial constraints of the patient).

And I am skeptical of isolated stories like this. HIV testing has been around for 20 years and something like this has never happened before which leaves only two conclusions:

1) The story is totally accurate which given the fact that in 20 years and millions of people being tested spontaneous seroconversion from positive to negative has never been documented, means that this is an astronomically rare incident.

2) The story is not accurate or at least not being presented accurately.


I suppose the real question is if it is true, what good would it do to experiment on him or more to the point: how would they? Other than drawing some blood and looking at his DNA, I can't imagine they are going to start trying to infect him to see HOW his body fights the disease. That would be criminal (particularly if it didn't work).

We know that not all HIV is the same. Beside there being HIV-1 and HIV-2, we have mutated viruses out their have been documented to be less fit in the body, usually in the prescense of inadequate antiviral therapy giving the mutated virus the environmental edge. One could guess that he might have been infected with a strain that was less fit, assuming of course his partner was taking antivirals at the time, and his body mounted a defense against a less fit version of the virus.

So without more information, it is probably not a good idea to raise any hopes on this OR take the story at face value. I'd certainly like to see a cure for HIV so I could stop taking these damn pills and worrying that my regimen is going to fail, but I'd advise looking at this story with a critical eye.

[rayofreason]

30. Good points.

Another possibility is that this case is related to the ccr5-delta32 mutation that confers immunity to HIV.

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/29/0417226&from=rss

No general cure there, but it does means that if HIV gained a significant evolutionary edge (such as evolving to be vector-bourne, or worse, airborne) only Black Death survivors would survive this plague.

[sofa king]

34. Funny, I've heard this story half a dozen times now.

I've been watching HIV just like anyone else since the 1980s, and every few years there's a news tory of one person who miraculously recovers completely--often it's a child.

Anyone else remember these other stories?

I've never put any real thought into it before, but now I'm sort of curious. What happened to these other claims?

[Liberal Veteran]

35. Yep...when I read this I was nagged by a story I recall

...that I cannot for the life of me find online anymore. If I remember it correctly, it was a case in Germany where a man taking antivirals had successfully eradicated the virus from his system to the point they took one of his lymph nodes (a common compartment for HIV) and could not isolate the virus.

I doubt I'd have that much detail of a story if I had not read it a few times, but oddly can't find.

[Chemical Bill]

42. I remember a story from the late '80s or early '90s.

A woman had lived at the Oregon ashram of Bagwan Sri Rasneesh (the Rolls-Royce/Rolex guru). He was into group sex, encouraged it in his followers, and many of them eventually tested HIV positive. This woman supposedly used new-agey techniques like meditation, and tested HIV negative after her first positive test. I read about this in a new age magazine, but no word since.

In 1987 or so I attended a talk by a guy named Louie Nassaney (sp?). At that time he had lived 10 years after being diagnosed with AIDS. He talked about how he had lived with AIDS using diet and herbal therapies, but never claimed to be cured.

Bill

[cosmicone]

39. It is a hoax for two reasons

a) If this was a natural phenomenon it would have been observed a lot more frequently in the last 24 years. No one is genetically THAT unique and,

b) even after a supposed "cure" he will not become HIV negative because he must surely still have antibodies to the HIV virus after the exposure.

[Taxloss]

46. UK Guardian: Man claims vitamins cured his HIV

http://www.guardian.co.uk/aids/story/0,7369,1642035,00.html

A man who claims to be the first in the world whose immune system has been able to beat the HIV virus was facing mounting pressure yesterday to submit to further vital medical tests. Health experts, Aids campaigners and gay rights activists urged Andrew Stimpson to come forward following claims that he has been able to rid his body of the virus after taking little more than vitamins.

Activists say that if the claims are true, the phenomenon could potentially bring countless benefits to millions of people infected with HIV. There are more than 53,000 in the UK alone.

Mr Stimpson, 25, twice tested positive at the Victoria Clinic for Sexual Health in west London in August 2002. A test 14 months later appeared to be negative. But the heath trust concerned, Chelsea and Westminster, yesterday said Mr Stimpson had so far "declined" to undergo further tests. It is understood that he was first asked to do so immediately after last year's negative test result.

A spokeswoman said: "I can confirm that he has a positive and a negative test. I can't confirm that he's shaken it off, that he's been cured. We urge him, for the sake of himself and the HIV community, to come in and get tested.

---------

I'm very sceptical, but I hope this is a step towards a cure because a cure's a cure.

[BrklynLiberal]

47. Big Pharma is going to have him killed.

[barb162]

52. Thje vitamin pill manufacturers will protect him

[Occulus]

62. .

:rofl:

[Megahurtz]

66. The sad thing is, is that

what you said is probably not very far from the truth.
Big Pharma will kill, buy off, shut down, silence etc. anyone that comes up with a real cure for anything! They've already been doing this for decades now.

What money is there to be made off up people who are well?
Big Pharma would rather keep everyone sick!

[andyarundel]

80. please just one example of this claim

I have seen this claim 1000's of times in the past few years, is there any thruth to this? Can you provide one example of this happening?

thanks

[WindRavenX]

48. There are soooo many variable in this...

Assuming (this is a big if, of course) that this is indeed true--

1) Either the HIV strain he had was/is different from some of the more prevelent ones

2) He himself has an odd mutation somewhere along the lines of his immune system...if this is true, hoo boy, there are too many possibilities to think of on why he was able to clear the virus.

I have no idea how on earth this will be tackled. I would have no idea where to start exploring.

[unblock]

49. not to throw cold water on this, but

first, how the hell would he know what caused it to go away? just because he's taken vitamins doesn't mean that's what did it. maybe there was some genetic resistance that he's unaware of, or something unusual in his diet that he's not thinking of.

second, with all the hiv testing that's going on, surely there is a remote chance of a false positive -- perhaps he never actually had it in the first place?

:shrug:

of course, i'd be thrilled if this put us closer to a cure. but this is little to go on....

[politicat]

50. But 2 false positives?

If that's the case, he should have been playing the lottery, not getting tested.

The article at the Guardian says he was tested positive not once, but twice at the Victoria Clinic.

If he got two false positives, that's amazing. If he got a false negative, then we need to mess with the test - a false negative is a bad thing.

If he's killed the virus, it's time to be looking at his DNA and seeing if tissue samples can do the same thing in lab conditions.

[unblock]

53. you're assuming the two false positives are uncorrelated

that's not usually the case. whatever factor caused the first false positive could very well also cause the second. i don't know enough about the nature of the hiv test, but let's say it looks for a particular antibody. let's say this guy had happened to have a very similar antibody, close enough to react with the test. this might cause him to ALWAYS test positive for hiv, even if he doesn't have the hiv antibody that's actually being tested for.

most subtly, his false positives could depend on recent exposure to more common viruses. who knows what's going on in this guy's immune system.

anyway, so little to go on, so easy to speculate....

[politicat]

58. Well, usually when an HIV test comes back positive, a different test is

given to eliminate that possibility. From HIVtest.org:

HIV testing consists of an initial screening with two types of tests commonly used to detect HIV infection. The most commonly used initial test is an enzyme immune assay (EIA) or the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). If EIA test results show a reaction, the test is repeated on the same blood sample. If the sample is repeatedly the same result or either duplicate test is reactive, the results are "confirmed" using a second test such as the Western blot. This more specific (and more expensive) test can tell the difference between HIV antibodies and other antibodies that can react to the EIA and cause false positive results. False positive EIA results are uncommon, but can occur. A person is considered infected following a repeatedly reactive result from the EIA, confirmed by the Western blot test.

Since that's the best practice independently confirmed by both WHO and CDC (not to mention however many other agencies). NHS uses the same best practices that CDC uses for confirmation of HIV infection.

So, while there is little to go on, false positives are probably not the issue.

[barb162]

51. Those are really good points.

I thought if others with HIV take vitamins, which they probably do, then they should all be cured too... which doesn't happen.

[unblock]

54. i got one more for ya --

check to see if this guy's got stock in any vitamin companies....

:tinfoilhat:

[barb162]

57. Hadn't thought of that! It would make sense

[capaylib]

56. The article I read

and I am sorry I don't remember where...said: He tested positive in 2001 and after testing positive started having unproctected sex with his lover who had hiv. When he tested negative he started legal proceedings against whomever tested him because he had been engaging in risky behavior that he wouldn't have been otherwise. The place responsible for the original test was able to compare the dna from the positive test to his dna and it was a match.

Here's the link http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051113/sc_nm/hiv_dc

[Monkey see Monkey Do]

63. That's pretty much my thinking

I'd love for this to be true, but hmm...

[pinto]

55. see also this thread in GLBT forum:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x20237

[kestrel91316]

59. I'll believe it when his doctors write him up in a REPUTABLE

medical journal. They should be quite excited to have a cured patient on their rolls. This would be VERY exciting news, like the little girl in WI who is the first case in history of a rabies victim recovering without benefit of post-exposure prophylaxis.

Somehow, I suspect this "miracle cure" will never make its way into the annals of science.

Skeptically yours,
kestrel91316

[davidinalameda]

60. hate to say it but this guy is probably a fraud

the whole not wanting to take a second test makes me think that

[truthisfreedom]

61. unfortunately, this story doesn't mean anything unless he submits to more

tests.

[Megahurtz]

65. Oh come on, he must have done SOMETHING

to get rid of the HIV!

Maybe some kind of alternative medicine/regimine?

I would trust an alternative medicine/regimine to cure aids,
but I will never trust mainstream medicine to come up with a way, ever!

[Oilwellian]

67. Is this the first person in the world to cure himself of HIV?

MEDICAL experts want to carry out further tests on a Scot who appears to have recovered from the Aids virus. Andrew Stimpson, 25, was diagnosed as being HIV-positive in August 2002, but repeated blood tests gave him the all-clear 14 months later.

At first, Mr Stimpson, from Largs, Ayrshire, believed he had been misdiagnosed and sought compensation. But an investigation confirmed there had been no errors in the labelling or testing of his blood samples.

His recovery has puzzled doctors, but Mr Stimpson believes his case could help experts defeat the disease which already overshadows the lives of almost 35 million people worldwide.

A spokeswoman for The Terence Higgins Trust, the HIV/Aids support group, said the chances of someone clearing themselves of the virus was "the statistical equivalent of going to the moon without a spaceship," and called for a thorough investigation.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/50711.html

[ananda]

68. What if..

.. it wasn't his blood.. the samples got confused or switched or something?

[Oilwellian]

73. The article clearly stated...

that possibility was considered and completely ruled out. There were no mistakes in the testing.

[zalinda]

69. This is not the first person

Many babies who are born with HIV cure themselves by the age of 2. They still haven't figured that one out.

zalinda

[Liberal Veteran]

77. Actually, they have....they weren't infected with HIV.

They test positive because they have HIV specific antibodies from the mother. Since HIV tests only test for the presence of antibodies, the infant shows up as positive. Usually in 18 months, their bodies clear out the antibodies and they test negative.

Put another way, an ELISA test is not reliable in children born to mothers who are HIV positive.

http://www.sfaf.org/aids101/hiv_testing.html

[andyarundel]

81. do you have some evidence based studies to .....

back up this claim. There are some women in Africa who show apparent immunity to the HIV virus.

[YOY]

70. I saw this on the BBC...I hope it is not a fake

If true I hope Mr. Stimpson does the right thing and helps medical science in understanding what specifically happened.

[whatever4]

71. Also I recall cases of women in Africa being able to fight off the virus

Now it's been a while since that story, and I don't remember which country or many other details. Just that some women, typically prostitutes, were repeatedly exposed to aids but didn't get it. They seemed able to fight off the disease. I forget entirely what they might have said about the children of those women, if they were also able to survive exposure. I think they discussed antibodies and their super immune system response, and basically were studying that. That is different than this case, of course, where the individual actually got the disease and apparently recovered.

[nickinSTL]

72. I've heard of people not developing

AIDS after being infected, but they just don't get sick, they haven't eliminated the virus from their body, like this guy (and infants) appear to.

I know someone personally who's been studied due to being one of those who has HIV but won't develop AIDS. (kind of ironic, in her case, as she was suicidal at the time she was infected...got herself deliberately infected hoping to die - she's since moved beyond the suicidal problems...and now has to live with the HIV)

[MissMarple]

74. I read that people were doing this in the late 80's.

Actually I read that in the late 80's. But it was just a very few people.

[William769]

75. Nothing would please me more but...

I fear it is a false test. :(

This article makes no sense & may even give some a false hope which is really sad.

[LeftofU]

82. Gibson predicted this in his book "virtual light"