New drug blocks influenza, including bird flu virus

[IChing]

Contact: Stacey Schultz-Cherry
[email protected]
608-265-6462
University of Wisconsin-Madison
New drug blocks influenza, including bird flu virus

MADISON -- Opening a new front in the war against flu, researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison have reported the discovery of a novel compound that confers broad protection against influenza viruses, including deadly avian influenza.

The new work, reported online this week (Oct. 4, 2006) in the Journal of Virology, describes the discovery of a peptide -- a small protein molecule -- that effectively blocks the influenza virus from attaching to and entering the cells of its host, thwarting its ability to replicate and infect more cells.

The new finding is important because it could make available a class of new antiviral drugs to prevent and treat influenza at a time when fear of a global pandemic is heightened and available antiviral drugs are losing their potency.

"This gives us another tool," says Stacey Schultz-Cherry, a UW-Madison professor of medical microbiology and immunology and the senior author of the new report. "We're quickly losing our antivirals."

The new drug, which was tested on cells in culture and in mice, conferred complete protection against infection and was highly effective in treating animals in the early stages of infection. Untreated infected animals typically died within a week. All of the infected animals treated with small doses of the drug at the onset of symptoms survived.

"Pretreatment with (the peptide) provided 100 percent protection against numerous subtypes (of flu), including the highly pathogenic H5N1 viruses...," according to the Journal of Virology report.>>>>>snip


http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-10/uow-ndb100406.php

[yellowcanine]

1. This could be very good news. Question will be side effects if any.

Could save millions of lives in a major pandemic.

[Avalux]

2. This is encouraging news.

I'll wait to see the results of human trials before I get my hopes up though. The drug will work much the same way drugs for HIV do - block the receptor sites of the host cells.

[LSparkle]

3. Only one problem -- it probably won't be available to EVERYONE

Just to those can afford INSURANCE, and the *RIGHT* kind ... And big pharma has got to get a DECENT PROFIT out of it ...

It's sad when a medical breakthrough doesn't inspire hope but provokes cynicism.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LostinVA]

7. "Wal Mart"??!!??

AAARE YOU SERIES?!!1111111111111

[shanti]

12. heh!

:rofl:

[tinfoilinfor2005]

10. We're democrats. We've had a lot to be pessimistic about the last

six years. Arrgh.

On that happy note, Welcome to DU! :)

[sugapablo]

5. Very sad, actually.

Another note to consider is if the company will produce enough of this drug such that if a pandemic begins, we could get the drug to everyone who needed it, even just those who would have the means to pay for it.

If the stockpiles are scarce during a pandemic, we could see bidding wars for the drug, fights, riots, you name it!

Keep in mind many drugs do not have a long shelf life. It could be impractical for a company to stockpile enough to cover everyone.

Moreso, since this drug is new, legally, only one company will be permitted to manufacture it (the company that created it). So it's not like we could have multiple manufacturers each producing small stockpiles spread out over the planet.

This is VERY good news, but unfortunately, not the final "solution". (No Hitler jokes, please.)

[IChing]

6. It should be given out to the world as a gift from science

There should be no copy-write or patent on the drug

OK, I know

"You might say I'm a dreamer
but I'm not the only one."

[HereSince1628]

8. Yes, it should be, but it wasn't a gift, it was paid for by tax-payers...

State university, federal agency, funding through federal program.

The researchers were certainly paid as were all the "scientific" companies supplying commodities and equipment.

In general full time researchers at UW-Madison are paid well. True they exploit grad students and post-docs but though they are cheaper than full time folks, they aren't free, either. I have no doubt these folks are dedicated, and I wouldn't impune their motives because I have worked in two of the UW-labs but the folks toiling there aren't typically donating their services.

The only part of gift from science I can see is the concept of "free-flow" of information between scientists through the journals...but the journals themselves are hardly "free." And library subscription rates for scientific journals are stunningly high.

[Lance_Boyle]

11. UWM will not be manufacturing or marketing any drug

They will license the technology to Amoral Drugco #1, which will charge "what the market will bear" for the drug, offering the excuse that it is only seeking to recoup its R&D expenditures, which it will conveniently forget were already covered by Wisconsin state taxpayer dollars and Federal grant monies.

[HereSince1628]

13. Yeah, this is a perennial problem with federal funds to develop

new drugs at universities. One could argue that "overhead" costs to taxpayers are paid for by the grant, but that's really a joke, the money comes from taxes not the printing press.

[sugapablo]

9. You're NOT the only one...

...but there are WAY too few of us. :)

[mom cat]

14. Hope that it is made by a company that doesn't have Rummy in the

profiteers gallery!