Blood-letting of about 5.6 liters will resolve the HCV. However, there are other treatments available with produce a cure in which the patient lives.
What a waste of time enegy and money. Leeches might work better for less expense.
Since viral load doesn't mean a darn thing in terms of how much damage is occuring why would anybody worry about it all that much - getting rid of it is the only thing that matters and the drugs out there work much more effectively than bugs.
Do you think the leeches might really work? It's worth a try huh? Perhaps leeches that have been pumped up with vitamin d though! Haha
I agree, the voodoo doesn't work. Get the drugs that have been proven effective in 45-80 percent of the infected.
After 2 weeks of being on treatment my viral load went from 6,000,000 to 120,000 and then two weeks later it was down to 2,000. Why would I want to be hooked up to a machine and have all of my blood pumped through it, cleansed, and then pumped back into me... taking the chance that somebody didn't clean it as good as they should have after the previous patient? That is how a lot of people got infected in the first place.
Plus, I'm pretty sure that our hep c doesn't mutate like you describe. It's not like HIV.
"Can someone please straighten me out and tell me where I am wrong? "
Yes, six simple words: there's a sucker born every minute.
What's not nice is for someone to be hoodwinked. I suppose leeching blood until you are dead is nicer version of telling someone that Hemopurification is a con huh?
Personally, I appreciate your direct no bs approach. You also show genuine compassion for people dealing with these problems. I want to be corrected if I am espousing nonsense.
Does anyone know anything about Aethlon Medical's Hemopurifier. Isnt it supposed to be an adjunctive procedure to be coupled with anti virals. As such I would be interested in it as a non responder, as I would anything else that could improve my treatment success odds. Its an American company and is showing up in some treatment pipelines so hopefully there is something in it ? !
Please don't get hoodwinked as Trin says. There are loads of 'cures' and 'improvements' and 'liver cleanses' out there but honestly if they worked at all we'd all tell people to do them rather than treatment.
I know you are a non-responder but it wont' help you increase your odds or anything of the sort, no matter how much they cost.
Don't be a sucker, keep your wallet closed and pray for those PIs to come to market fast!
Thnx nygirl, believe me I am praying !
If the Hemopurifier being tested by AEMD in India is able to reduce viral loads in blood of HCV infected subjects, then how could this not be anything but helpful?
The only thing it will reduce is the amount of money you have.
Don't buy into all these "latest & greatest" things.
Believe in things like the new meds coming out in about a year. These are the miracle cures that have been PROVEN with 6 years of clinical trials.
At least that is how I think it works. So if a person could even reduce their viral load in there blood by 1% then
would that not decrease the odds of one of the losely made copies of the virus becoming the new mutant strain?
Of coarse if that is true then Blood letting would likely reduce the viral load in the blood by 1%.
To answer your question, the hepatitis C virus is capable of replicating a trillion virons a day. So it would be possible to have the same viral load the next day after one of these treatments or blood letting. The virus lives inside the liver and other organs so these type of treatments will never get rid of all virons. Hope that makes sense
Case in point copyman. I had weekly phlebotomy sessions (1 pint) for 3 months prior to starting treatment. Slow responder.....relapser. Didn't do much for me except put the PCT in remission.
I am thankful for all the responses.
I was not sure what to expect?
This is kind of cool.
To the person that thinks that the Hemopurifier is a scam, I appreciate your consern that I not allow myself to get ripped off.
But that does not answer my question.
So I will ask it more direct.
If the interferon and other drugs often reduce the viral load by 98% but then the high viral count returns. WHY were the drugs NOT able to rid the last 2% of the viruses in the blood? I would think that there had to be something different about those virusis that survived the treatment.
Right? And then when the virus count began to increase again then it was because those were the offspring of those surviving viruses. Right?
If HCV does not mutate in the same way as does HIV then how does it?
I think that it is the way evolution itself works. Right?
I guess it could be intelligent design that allows those 2% of virus to survive the treatment
and then reproduce to make the viral count increase again.
But I am pretty sure that Darwin was correct.
So if the Hemopurifier does really have the ability to physically capture the virus in the blood. (you have got to believe that what AEMD are reporting as data from their tests and clinical trials to believe that, and because they are done in India, I am a little suspect of their data but IDNK).
But if that IS the case.
Then I do believe that they have the ability to increase the chances of a successful treatment with the drugs because they can reduce the chances that a copy (or several different copies) of the virus is in the body that can evade what ever method the drugs are using to try to rid the body of the virus.
The fact that the speed that the virus can reproduce and the large numbers (trillions of copies) of virusis involved only make me think that the Hemopurifier
would be even more helpful.
I think that a game theorist or an evolutionary biologist would say that the use of the Hemopurifier would change the design space in which the evolutionary battle is taking place. Of coarse that assumes that AEMD s claims that ALL strains and genotypes of HCV viruses stick to their filter''s affinity agents. If any copies of the HCV RNA figure out a way to NOT stick to them then evolution will favor that virus and it will win.
So my question is not if it works, but rather, WHY would it NOT?
It sounds like some people have really tried phlebotomy?
I was just kidding about the blood letting.
I would think that that would not work as well as Hemopurifier filter because even though you are removing virus copies when you remove
the blood and flush it down the toilet, but you are also removing parts of your own bodies immune system that is there to fight the virus at the same time. Kind of like ordering an artillery attack on your front line While your infantry are engage in hand to hand combated with the enemy.
I'm still intested in Aethlon but as far as I know they havent released any strategy or research findings and have made many people suspicious by moving to commercialise it in India ???
The logic of using it as an adjunct therapy does stack up if it reduced viral loads substantially and was followed with immediate triple therapy. Thats my thinking any way, purely theoretical as I wont be flying out to India in the near future !
I posted above about my viral load drops. I just got my 12 week labs back and now my virus is undetectable. You talk about that 2% that won't go away... that happens with some people, but a lot of people get rid of them.
I understand that machine takes your blood, cleanses it, and then puts it back inside of your body. Do you understand that the virus does not replicate in the blood? It has to be inside of a liver cell to replicate, so if you were to get this procedure done today, by tonight one cell in your liver could release millions of virons that have replicated, and tomorrow your blood would again be full of the virus. Especially since in reality it isn't just one cell that releases the virons at a time, but hundreds... that is what causes the inflammation in the liver. So then you'd have to have that procedure done every day till all of the virons that are doing their thing in your liver have been released... and how would you know when that was? How would you keep the newly released virons from invading other liver cells and starting the process all over? This would have a huge price tag on it, and you'd still have to be on tx to get the virons inside of your liver, so you'd have that price tag too.
I also want to re-state what I said above about the chances of the machine not being cleaned well enough from the person that used it before you. A person from India has been on here who was afraid that he got infected at a doctor's office in India because they reused slides for viewing blood. They told him it had been rinsed in ionic water and once it was dry, he didn't have to worry about catching anything. That is total garbage! I'm sure the people who are developing that machine use all of the universal precautions while running their tests... but they aren't the people who will maintain it and administer the treatment to the public. If those people are the slightest bit careless, or if they believe that ionic water is all they need to clean it between patients, you could be infected with a different blood born disease, or worse... say the person before you has A+ blood, and you have B-- blood, and they didn't get all of the blood cells out. It only takes a few cells to set off a reaction in your body that would be very painful or, depending on how many cells there were, could lead to death. I know this is a worse case scenario, but I went to school to be a lab tech, and saw people cutting corners whenever they thought they could get away with it.
In my mind there is no way the benefits could outweigh the dangers and expense.
I'm sure India takes universal precautions when administering procedures much like everywhere else in the world. One poster's bad experience does not mean India as a whole is careless or uneducated when it comes to preventing the spread of infectious disease.
I personally wouldn't want to use a machine that removes my blood especially in India :-)
It is interesting all the discussion regarding Aethlon's Hemopurifier and the scientific approach of blood filtration, and almost none of if actually includes any facts from the company or information from scientific literature on the subject.
Is anyone here aware of the clinical study by Asahi that should blood filtration at the onset of drug therapy showed a higher percentage of positive outcomes in those that previously failed drug treatment than the clinical data coming from Vertex for the same population? Is anyone aware that their filtration system is currently marketed in Japan and that Aethlon's filtration technology is more efficient and more specific than Asahi's commercialized product?
It is okay to be skeptical, but to throw emerging technologies out before knowing anything about them seems a bit odd.
And by the way, the hemopurifier is used via already existing infrastructure, such a typical dialysis machine, so these fears about inadequate cleaning or blood contamination seems a bit far-fetched.
Also, you might like to know that some a hybrid study/first-step commercialization just got approved by Medanta's ethics board (www.medanta.org) and will likely begin later this fall under Dr. Vijay Kher. it is also worth noting that Aethlon Medical also just announced a deal to expand treatments into 3-5 additional medical centers in India. (www.aethlonmedical.com)
Maybe you can explain the benefits of reducing viral load rather than eliminating the virus.
I should also let you know that the comment about having the same viral load the next day after a filtration treatment is simply incorrect based on the human data presented by the company.
If you go to www.slideshare.net and search for Aethlon Medical, you will find two different presentations that have a slide discussing treatment data collected on Hep C patients without the benefit of drug therapy. Your will see that the viral load continued to drop three days after the last filtration treatment, suggesting that not only was the Hemopurifier effective in reducing viral blood load but also that the immune system appeared to continue the fight after the last filtration treatment.
The concept is that reducing the viral load at the onset of treatment improves the effectiveness of the drug and/or improves the capability of the immune system to mount its own defense. It is quite logical and has been shown to be sound via the Asahi study.
And, based on the scientific literature, according to the company, the sooner a patient can get to a non-detect viral load at the onset of treatment the higher their likelihood of being cured.
And by the way, an added benefit of the Hemopurifier as an adjunct treatment compared to the dozens of adjunct drug treatments going through clinical trials is that the Hemopurifier avoids a patient's risk of 1) experiencing additional drug toxicity from the layering drug treatments and 2) unwanted drug--drug interactions.