Aa
If the Hemopurifier being tested by AEMD in India is able to reduce viral loads in blood of HCV ?
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?
I am sure that it is not cure because not every copy of the virus is in the blood.
There are likely only a small percentage that in the blood.
But from the virus''s point of view , is it not a numbers game.
Because the reason that a person's own immune system can not rid the body of the virus is because the virus keeps mutating? The only way it can mutate is by making lose copies of it self in high numbers until one copy figures out how to defeat the immune system. Right? And then natural selection will of coarse favor that copy of that virus and it will survive and multiply until the immune system figures out how to defeat it and then the virus will have another mutant copy that natural selection will favor. And the war goes on.
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%.
I am not advocating the return to middle evil medicine .
But it makes so much sense to me that if the Hemopurifier does being down the load then it would definately be of great help before starting any treatment.
Unless I got it all wrong and virus's really do their thing though the aide of some sort of divine intelligence for the outside that guides their mutation.
I have no knowledge or training in medicine of any kind, so I can only look at the problem of HCV
in the way a statistic would, or a game theorist.
Can someone please straighten me out and tell me where I am wrong?
I am sure that it is not cure because not every copy of the virus is in the blood.
There are likely only a small percentage that in the blood.
But from the virus''s point of view , is it not a numbers game.
Because the reason that a person's own immune system can not rid the body of the virus is because the virus keeps mutating? The only way it can mutate is by making lose copies of it self in high numbers until one copy figures out how to defeat the immune system. Right? And then natural selection will of coarse favor that copy of that virus and it will survive and multiply until the immune system figures out how to defeat it and then the virus will have another mutant copy that natural selection will favor. And the war goes on.
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%.
I am not advocating the return to middle evil medicine .
But it makes so much sense to me that if the Hemopurifier does being down the load then it would definately be of great help before starting any treatment.
Unless I got it all wrong and virus's really do their thing though the aide of some sort of divine intelligence for the outside that guides their mutation.
I have no knowledge or training in medicine of any kind, so I can only look at the problem of HCV
in the way a statistic would, or a game theorist.
Can someone please straighten me out and tell me where I am wrong?
Can you post a link please to your 400,000 IU/ml updated info ?
Or a link to any valid 2010 info that shows that starting with a low VL does not help in achieving SVR with SOC Tx ?
Or that VL has no impact on SOC Tx ?
Dang it , I'm still waiting .... darn it ....
Or a link to any valid 2010 info that shows that starting with a low VL does not help in achieving SVR with SOC Tx ?
Or that VL has no impact on SOC Tx ?
Dang it , I'm still waiting .... darn it ....
Anybody here that claims they know 100% conclusively about how this virus works or does not work , effects of the meds used or different treatments for HCV ,,,, are in my opinion,,,,,,,,,
Practicing very risky behavior ,,,,,,,, that could influence someone newly diagnosed, there are plenty on your forum, who have not done his/her homework, or is having trauma and easily influenced ...
into making an ill informed decision that may not necessarily right for them.
We are all entitled to our opinions ... giving an opinion is ok , no problem,,,,,,,,,
However ,those of you who claim to be "experts" and are presenting your selves as giving sound medical advise ,
Should rethink your objectives about being here , or at the very least, the way you phrase your opinions ,,
You could not possibly know what is right or wrong for someone you meet online, give your opinion, make sure the folks know it is only your 2 cents worth.
None of you are professional medical practitioners ,or, research scientists.
Practicing very risky behavior ,,,,,,,, that could influence someone newly diagnosed, there are plenty on your forum, who have not done his/her homework, or is having trauma and easily influenced ...
into making an ill informed decision that may not necessarily right for them.
We are all entitled to our opinions ... giving an opinion is ok , no problem,,,,,,,,,
However ,those of you who claim to be "experts" and are presenting your selves as giving sound medical advise ,
Should rethink your objectives about being here , or at the very least, the way you phrase your opinions ,,
You could not possibly know what is right or wrong for someone you meet online, give your opinion, make sure the folks know it is only your 2 cents worth.
None of you are professional medical practitioners ,or, research scientists.
Not so sure that i missed your point Ruffuss, and i don't think you are missing something any more than the current data available provides.
There is no substantiated or conclusive data on your question as far I know. My thinking is pretty much the same ...
"the Filter reduces the count for All the HCV Viruses. Not just the Viruses that are of the variant that are killed by the new drug.
So I would think that getting a reduced load count after using the filter would be better than getting the same load count after using a new drug."
I agree, for me it makes sense, but I don't understand your following question:
"But the Viruses that the Filter removed are physically removed so they would have the same offspring as before."
Can you clarify ? I don't get it , if they are removed physically ... that's it end game.
We need time , the DFPP seems to be the only clinically trialed and approved filtration device at this time & has only been approved since 2008 in Japan. AEMD is just now supposedly starting their clinical trials.
DFPP is undergoing more clinical trials in Taiwan at 6 facilities right now, as you know it's a different system than AEMD based on the same concept. I like the idea , it makes sense to me.
The data to date on viral mutations of HCV is very far from conclusive, the scientists just don't know much ,,, yet.
Ruffuss , What little data is available : once the virus has mutated , all it's offspring are the same mutation ,,,, or,,,,, possibly in transition to another form of mutation,,,, nice ya ..... nobody really knows yet....
Any left hiding in the liver, which they do so well, the scientists studying this aspect of HCV mutations, can only agree with what the clinical trials say about adding PI's to the regime, thats it's possible ,,,, up to 65% of the mutated virus will react to the new meds.
It's anybody's guess Ruffuss. SOC Tx , mutations, side effects ,,,, all of it at this time, is a guess , speculation , nobody can say 100% conclusively one way or the other.
Mutations are being researched, unfortunately there are no easy answers, as you said & it takes a long time.
I wish you, and everyone, the best results on your battle and quest for attaining SVR.
I have no idea of AEMD's financials, I like the concept, like the DFPP from the first time I read about it & I wish them success on their quest. At least someone is out there trying to find a different approach.
And all the other companies searching for an alternative, drug based or machine based system, to using the only FDA approved drug INF, it is very toxic as the FDA and any doctor will tell you,,,,,
There are many new attempts in the "pipeline" and with time and some luck, maybe one or two will be able to withstand clinical trials and go on to help us all to remove the many strains and the mutations of HCV infections around the globe.
About all we can do right now is keep our fingers crossed that more attention and $$ is focused into finding a real "cure" for HCV. $$ invested and research is being attempted all over the world to find the cure.
Make an informed decision what is personally right for you , not one decided on from this or any other so called "experts forum" ...
There is no substantiated or conclusive data on your question as far I know. My thinking is pretty much the same ...
"the Filter reduces the count for All the HCV Viruses. Not just the Viruses that are of the variant that are killed by the new drug.
So I would think that getting a reduced load count after using the filter would be better than getting the same load count after using a new drug."
I agree, for me it makes sense, but I don't understand your following question:
"But the Viruses that the Filter removed are physically removed so they would have the same offspring as before."
Can you clarify ? I don't get it , if they are removed physically ... that's it end game.
We need time , the DFPP seems to be the only clinically trialed and approved filtration device at this time & has only been approved since 2008 in Japan. AEMD is just now supposedly starting their clinical trials.
DFPP is undergoing more clinical trials in Taiwan at 6 facilities right now, as you know it's a different system than AEMD based on the same concept. I like the idea , it makes sense to me.
The data to date on viral mutations of HCV is very far from conclusive, the scientists just don't know much ,,, yet.
Ruffuss , What little data is available : once the virus has mutated , all it's offspring are the same mutation ,,,, or,,,,, possibly in transition to another form of mutation,,,, nice ya ..... nobody really knows yet....
Any left hiding in the liver, which they do so well, the scientists studying this aspect of HCV mutations, can only agree with what the clinical trials say about adding PI's to the regime, thats it's possible ,,,, up to 65% of the mutated virus will react to the new meds.
It's anybody's guess Ruffuss. SOC Tx , mutations, side effects ,,,, all of it at this time, is a guess , speculation , nobody can say 100% conclusively one way or the other.
Mutations are being researched, unfortunately there are no easy answers, as you said & it takes a long time.
I wish you, and everyone, the best results on your battle and quest for attaining SVR.
I have no idea of AEMD's financials, I like the concept, like the DFPP from the first time I read about it & I wish them success on their quest. At least someone is out there trying to find a different approach.
And all the other companies searching for an alternative, drug based or machine based system, to using the only FDA approved drug INF, it is very toxic as the FDA and any doctor will tell you,,,,,
There are many new attempts in the "pipeline" and with time and some luck, maybe one or two will be able to withstand clinical trials and go on to help us all to remove the many strains and the mutations of HCV infections around the globe.
About all we can do right now is keep our fingers crossed that more attention and $$ is focused into finding a real "cure" for HCV. $$ invested and research is being attempted all over the world to find the cure.
Make an informed decision what is personally right for you , not one decided on from this or any other so called "experts forum" ...
I think you missed my point.
I am sure that there are (or soon will be) drugs that can lower the load count just as much as AEMDs filter can. But the Filter reduces the count for All the HCV Viruses. Not just the Viruses that are of the variant that are killed by the new drug.
So I would think that getting a reduced load count after using the filter would be better than getting the same load count after using a new drug.
Because even though the number is the same. The make up of the viruses in the body are not the same. The ones left in the body after the new drug are the ones that are more immune to the new drug. And when those reproduce their offspring will for the most part be like them.
Get it?
But the Viruses that the Filter removed are physically removed so they would have the same offspring as before.
Right?
Am I missing something?
That was my original question that nobody has answered yet.
Please help me out.
I am sure that there are (or soon will be) drugs that can lower the load count just as much as AEMDs filter can. But the Filter reduces the count for All the HCV Viruses. Not just the Viruses that are of the variant that are killed by the new drug.
So I would think that getting a reduced load count after using the filter would be better than getting the same load count after using a new drug.
Because even though the number is the same. The make up of the viruses in the body are not the same. The ones left in the body after the new drug are the ones that are more immune to the new drug. And when those reproduce their offspring will for the most part be like them.
Get it?
But the Viruses that the Filter removed are physically removed so they would have the same offspring as before.
Right?
Am I missing something?
That was my original question that nobody has answered yet.
Please help me out.
Your forgetting one little thing Aaron. It doesn't matter if the viral load goes to
400,000 IU/mL or below (which is the new low in the hep community) with your crazy cute little machine, the patient still must take those horrible, nasty life altering big pharma drugs to be cured. Dang it. And I'm thinking AEMD must be giving out crystal balls with their hemopurifier because they are certain those nasty life altering big pharma drugs are going to work more effectively with a lower viral load regardless of how the immune system works with those horrible, nasty, life altering big pharma drugs. Right? And then of course geno 1's they will have the option of shortening their treatment time to 24 wks because they will have started out with a low viral load, RVR'd and won't need the full 48 weeks. And there are statistics to back this up correct? And then there are those like myself, clinically low viral load, relapser who should jump on SOC right now because that viral load is LOW so SVR odds are HIGHER regardless, right? Any statistics to back that up?
What you post is nothing more than speculative crap and I think by now you realize this community is hip to you but it makes for amusing conversation. I suppose if I was committed to such a concept like yourself, I would have to continue with my illusions of grandeur so as not to lose face. And perhaps credibility means nothing to you because you're just a die hard hemopurifier kind of guy.
Trinity
400,000 IU/mL or below (which is the new low in the hep community) with your crazy cute little machine, the patient still must take those horrible, nasty life altering big pharma drugs to be cured. Dang it. And I'm thinking AEMD must be giving out crystal balls with their hemopurifier because they are certain those nasty life altering big pharma drugs are going to work more effectively with a lower viral load regardless of how the immune system works with those horrible, nasty, life altering big pharma drugs. Right? And then of course geno 1's they will have the option of shortening their treatment time to 24 wks because they will have started out with a low viral load, RVR'd and won't need the full 48 weeks. And there are statistics to back this up correct? And then there are those like myself, clinically low viral load, relapser who should jump on SOC right now because that viral load is LOW so SVR odds are HIGHER regardless, right? Any statistics to back that up?
What you post is nothing more than speculative crap and I think by now you realize this community is hip to you but it makes for amusing conversation. I suppose if I was committed to such a concept like yourself, I would have to continue with my illusions of grandeur so as not to lose face. And perhaps credibility means nothing to you because you're just a die hard hemopurifier kind of guy.
Trinity
Have an Answer?
You are reading content posted in the Hepatitis C Community
Learn about this treatable virus.
Getting tested for this viral infection.
3 key steps to getting on treatment.
4 steps to getting on therapy.
What you need to know about Hep C drugs.
How the drugs might affect you.
These tips may up your chances of a cure.
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
