Pink Poogle Toy Forum

I think that's pretty cool. It's not a cure per se but if this is real, it could help save countless lives. Funny how this just came up out of nowhere though. I thought something like this would have caused a bit of a stir or something.

I don't believe it for a second. First of all, you can't "fight AIDS." AIDS is a condition where you have lost 80% or more of your white blood cells. It theoretically could be caused by anything, but it usually caused by HIV. You CAN fight HIV with antiretroviral drugs. What this medicine claims to do, however, is to make the body immune to HIV--which would not be possible without some sort of vaccine.

Also, I have to question the statistical practices they used. From the sound of the study, they probably gave the drug alongside antiretroviral treatments and looked for improvement. And lo and behold, they found improvement. That just proves that the drugs work. I'm HOPING they didn't stop already infected people from receiving the drugs they need just so they could try an herbal medicine instead.

The way I interpreted the article was that it helps you grow more immune system cells to help any effects AIDS may cause, even though the HIV is still present. It still sounds good to me...every bit helps with a disease like that.

That would be awesome, but it sounds unlikely. My main concern is that they stopped infected people from getting other treatments while they tested this one.

Actually with antiretroviral drugs, the T cell count of a HIV infected person will rise again after starting treatment.

From how I've read this article, this provides an alternative to anteretroviral drugs in helping reconstruct the immune system to delay to progression of HIV into AIDS.

An older article, but it's a bit longer than the one post:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/1,7340 ... 69,00.html

What is wrong with you?

Who honestly cares if it doesn't "cure" AIDS. At least it's helping in some form or another, why does it have to be "all or nothing"?

Kudos to Iran for progressing in this field, hopefully their research will advance to help victims infected with AIDS.

You see, THIS is what Iran should be concentrating on! Not some silly nuclear bombs!

And am I the only person who thinks the drug should be renamed 'iMod'?

iMod? that sounds like an iPod modification unit.

I want to see this for my self, though I don't think Iran would just go out and say "we have a cure for AIDS" if they didn't. So hopefully, they have some kind of treatment.

Because inspite what that stupid green ferret says, a great many people deal in absolutes quite regularly.
I do, you probably do, we all do.

Still, a small victory is still a victory.
Yay Iran ^^

If it helps, it helps, and that's awesome. From the other sources you guys have posted, it sounds more legitimate, but I'm still waiting for verification from outside Iran.

My main problem was not with the drug, but with their testing practices. From the article, it sounds like they found people with AIDS, withheld any other treatment, and just gave them this experimental drug. That's wrong, even if they find useful information.

At any rate, there's no reason NOT to use this drug if you have HIV. I'm not against the drug itself in any way, but I am skeptical of the claims made by its manufacturers (as you should be of any new drug) and I'm waiting for independent verification. I'm merely worried about the patients they tested it on.

What? Were we reading the same article? Did it say anywhere that these patients didn't give their consent?

Keep this civil, or it'll be moved to Debate or locked.