Is There Any Truth to the CAEV virus as treatment?
Feb 2, 2016
Dear Doctor Young, You have been a great resource for critical evaluation of potential HIV treatments. Thanks for all your answers in the past.
You have probably had many people ask you this. If not, here goes: Is there any truth to the claim that the CAEV virus is a treatment for HIV (or any other infection)?
Wikipedia says 'No':
Here's a web site that destroys the rant of a doctor who is pushing it as an HIV treatment:
The thing that gives a glimmer of hope to CAEV are the reports of the vaccines like DermaVir (Lisziewicz) and TAT (Ensoli) and the fact that it (CAEV) cross-reacts with HIV.
Also, papers have been published that claim that CAEV cannot infect human cells:
There appears to be much interest in using other less pathogenic viruses as carriers of epitopes of virus that are more pathogenic, including using other viruses to fight HIV. So, using the CAEV virus as treatment seems to be part of a new obsession in virology:
Is there any independent (of Dr. Samir Chachoua) research on using CAEV to boost the immune system in any disease?
Anecdotally, I saw my CD4/CD8 ratio rise (for the 1st time) from 0.9 to 1.3 after receiving a DTaP vaccine. This was after 25 years of an early treated HIV infection. I also saw large raised Actinic keratoses flatten and fade after receiving a DTaP vaccine. Though 1.5 years later they are back and growing in numbers. I'm almost 60 years old, with CD4+ T cell count of 950 and zero viral load for over five years. And prior to a 1-to-2-year-long treatment break, my CD4+ T cells were often over 1,200 cells/mml. But the ratio was usually only 0.9. But, I was on only a dual-NRTI regimen when the ratio was 0.9. I had been on cART for a few years when it rose to 1.3
With regard to the TAT vaccine, big name HIV/AIDS groupies with high profile web sites, living off Big Pharma grants, have attacked it with absurd logic (there was no placebo control to a phase-I study by Ensoli et al). Yet, early AIDS activists (before there was a treatment to fully suppress HIV) successfully changed clinical trial paradigm from "placebo controlled" research to evaluation of treatments against a "Standard of Care". How could the lack of a placebo in a phase-I study that had no significant toxicities invalidate its results? I see the need to have a placebo in a phase-1 drug study. But, with regard to a TAT vaccine, the patients were already infected with TAT producing HIV virus.
Given that 'immunosenescence' is an underlying cause of AIDS, I realize that the cat-and-mouse game between HIV and T cells may simply weaken the immune system - especially if the immune system is unable to completely clear HIV (sterilize). Aren't there trials in young healthy HIV patients on treatment (that fully suppresses HIV) that support the use of vaccines as adjunct treatment? The results of ACTG5176 (pilot study of DermaVir) claimed that there was a weak "trend" in an improved immune response against HIV in those who received the vaccine.
The above article claims that CAEV causes multi-nucleated host cells. But, is this just in goats? HIV has been known to cause this for many decades. And more recently with Greene et al claiming that cell-to-cell membrane transmission (as opposed to free virus transmission) is the predominant way that HIV kills T cells in the lymph nodes and other lymph tissue.
Has Dr. Samir Chachoua recently published any papers or abstracts at any major conferences (CROI, Retrovirus, etc)?
Response from Dr. Young
Hello and thanks for posting.
No truth. CAEV is not a treatment for HIV. Period.
Antiretroviral medications (ART) on the other hand are extremely well tested and highly effective in preventing serious illness (like TB and cancer), progression to AIDS, death or transmission of the virus to others.
ART is now recommended for all people living with HIV by the World Health Organization and should be offered as soon as one knows his or her diagnosis.
Thanks for reading. BY
Get Email Notifications When This Forum Updates or Subscribe With RSS
This forum is designed for educational purposes only, and experts are not rendering medical, mental health, legal or other professional advice or services. If you have or suspect you may have a medical, mental health, legal or other problem that requires advice, consult your own caregiver, attorney or other qualified professional.
Experts appearing on this page are independent and are solely responsible for editing and fact-checking their material. Neither TheBody.com nor any advertiser is the publisher or speaker of posted visitors' questions or the experts' material.