what is one possible danger to the patient of using retroviral vectors for gene therapy?
153890
Retroviruses and retroviral vectors mutate faster than DNA based viruses and vectors because DNA has two strands and a mutation in one is easily corrected with the template on the other side. Retroviral vectors lead to possibly bad mutations in a persons genome
843229
no--it would not be safe either from you or the person you are donating to
223029
The only danger I am aware of is they occasionally come out and you have to go back to the hospital for reinsertion.  I can tell you two things that I see that are common.  All of the patients I have come in contact with that have them are very skinny (I guess due to the fact that they can't eat McDonalds anymore).  Also, there is a certain smell associated with them (due to the products placed in the tube).  Other than that, I am not aware of any problems.
25846
A Red Cross study reported in 1989 that the risk was one in 153,000.\n\nCurrent estimates are that fewer than 1 in 1,900,000 blood components is capable of transmitting HIV.\n\nTherefore, the risk is very very very small.  You should be more worried about other Transfusion-Transmitted dieses.
244588
Is there a possibility during a gynecologic surgical procedure? Sure, needle sticks are something concerns most healthcare professionals. If HIV infected material (for example if a patient is bleeding during a vaginal delivery or any gynecologic procedure) is splashed into the mucous membranes of the doctors eye for example, leads to the possibility of infection. This route isn't a major avenue for HIV infection overall, but the possibility exists, and is more than enough reason to wear eye protection and double glove when working around HIV and Hep C patients, no matter what department you are in.\n\nFrom regular pelvic exams, probably not a very high possibility. \n\nIf your question is should you be afraid of your gynecologist, I would say definitely NO. Most doctors are very cautious.\n\nMaybe you should check out the Centers for Disease Control website for better information:\n\nhttp://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/pdf/bbp/Exp_to_Blood.pdf
1143556
idk if you can with hiv or aids, but cancer yes, the only reason why hiv could be a problem, would be becuase your on the battle ground, and if youwere to get injured you could spread it becuase ppl around aren't covered or prapared for it, so you'd unknownly be sprading it, and i dont think that you want to do that, teehee
1126179
It can only be transferred by bodily fluids. Even  if the person had an open cut on the had, the HIV can only live outside the body for a few seconds. your pretty safe.
988460
Have you ever watched a loved one wither away in their hospital bed from a common cold because the AIDS virus made their immune system so weak? If not, you should be grateful. I watched my uncle sit there and wither away to skin and bones because of AIDS. Please educate yourself more on this subject and be more respectful about it.
4624
the kid who has HIV is in more risk than all the others.  they are susceptible to all kinds of disease and can die with a simple cold.  let him wear a mask and just say it was a super hero costume.  Practice good hygiene in your center.  Don't isolate the kid.  But keep your eyes open so as not too let anyone exchange body fluids accidentally
395674
Although this is not technically impossible, this is extremely unlikely.\nHIV needs blood or blood product transfer to be caught. An HIV infected person has very few viruses floating around in their blood and bodily fluids (compared to hepatitis, for example), so the chances that some of the virus was in the saliva on the cigarette and managed to get into the cut on your lip is very very slim. So unless you and the person you shared a cigarette with were both bleeding quite a bit, I wouldn't lose sleep over it. \nMy sister, a paramedic in NYC, has been covered with HIV positive blood twice that she knows of, and she is fine.  \nI'd worry about lung cancer from those cigarettes, though. :)
777116
ETHICAL ISSUES:  First off, the people in general who have ethical issues with gene testing/sequencing/therapy a lot of the time are uneducated in this field and also have strong religious beliefs.   Gene testing is done a lot of the times in genetic counselling for people who want to know if they will pass down a genetic disorder...I suppose people have issues with this because this leads the the question of abort or not to abort when it comes to an "imperfect" child.  I personally thing gene therapy is an amazing field which will continue to grow, however some people may see this as interfering with what "nature" has planned.  Some of the ethical issues have to do with stem cell research, since these cells are taken from fetuses.  Obviously people who do not believe in abortions are usually against this.  However, you do not have to abort a baby in order to do this kind of research...it can be done with misscarried babies etc etc.  Like I said, they do not know all the "science" behind.\nPOTENTIAL USES: Gene therapy is HUGE right now because it could lead to potential cures for things like organ failure (especially with cloning).  Imagine this...you are on the list for a heart transplant but instead of getting someone elses heart, you recieve your very own cloned heart.  Why is this a good thing?  This is a genetic copy of your own flesh and blood AND you do not have to take immunosupressive drugs for the rest of your life.  Might I add...the average lifespan for a heart transplant is about 10 years...with your "own" heart you might live into your senior years.  Another big thing with gene therapy is the ability to produce genes which are defective in your body normally. For example, people who have diabetes are unable to metabolize sugar properly...so with gene therapy, they are hoping to eventually be able to replace that defective gene with a good one so these people will no longer need to take insulin.\nMany many other things...but hope these are good for you.
96827
unlike conventional pharmaceutical treatments... which address the manifestation of disease or illness, i.e., symptoms, gene therapy is a potential permanent therapy or cure. \n\nthink about taking daily doses of insulin to treat diabetes or the drug lipitor to lower cholesterol levels... whether its a natural biological product (insulin) or a chemical compound, a patient needs to intake these drugs because they can not be manufactured in the body.\n\nwhat if instead of taking manufactured insulin, you were able to restore the body's natural ability to produce insulin by transfering the insuling gene with a subset of cells or the appropriate organ... you'd end up with a lifetime therapy... not a short term treatment.\n\nI participated in the first ever human clinical gene therapy trials at the NIH... it was to treat a girl with ADA (adenosine de-aminase) deficiency... essentially an immune suppression that leads to the 'boy in the bubble' syndrome where the person is ultra hypersensitive to external antigens. \n\nsome of the challenges and issues then still remain and some are advanced...  gene identification, gene cassette construction, gene transfer, gene expression, longevity, immune rejection, \n\ngene identification - with the completion of the human genome project, many more genes have been identified and available to be used as a cure... \n\ngene cassettes - the genes need to be engineered to produce the appropriate gene product (protein) within the body...\n\ngene transfer - the gene needs to be transfered from outside the body (ex vivo) to the appropriate organ in the body... engineered (think neutered) viruses serve as vehicles to carry the genes... they are further engineered to target specific organs or cells... e.g., liver, T-cells... pros & cons with different viruses exist, e.g., size, infection rate, immune reactivity, etc...\n\ngene expression - once the gene arrives at the desired location, it has to borrow the cells machinery to produce the proteins... the delivered gene can be express transiently or more permanently... usually when its transient, it requires on-going treatment (... not desirable)... but in order to establish a permanent footprint in the DNA, it must be careful not to cause insertional mutagenesis (get stuck in the middle of an essesntial gene and cause untoward damage)\n\nimmune rejection - colds are caused by viruses... viruses are used as gene transfer vehicles... the body tries to fight off a cold... the body tries to fight off the gene transfer vehicles... a severe inflammatory reaction to a gene transfer event can lead to death...\n\nbesides the technical difficulties, there are ethical, legal, social implications (ELSI) associated with gene therapy... so far gene therapy has been discussed in terms of somatic cell thereapy (adult body cells), not germ line therapy (sperm or egg)... it's one thing to affect a single person, but if you make changes to a sperm or egg, then there is the potential now to pass along the changes to the next generation... \n\ngene therapy, much like other advances in biotech/medicine, was overhyped in its early days... the promise of a cure for intractable diseases raised hopes for patients (and investor)... because the expectations were so high the initial results failed to meet them, but continued progress in this area occurrs each year and soon I believe we will realize the full promise of gene therapy.
19329
maby a genome but making new ones is dangerous
1187759
You can get infected with a different strain of the virus.  The HIV virus mutants.
723081
The risk of contracting HIV here is very low... but if your girlfriend had HIV and she was bleeding from an open sore inside her mouth and you ingested some of her blood (EVEN a microscopic amount) then there is some chance you could contract the virus but the odds are against it. Why take chances with your life?
504633
You can read about the reported complications here- \nhttp://www.fda.gov/cdrh/breastimplants/breast_implant_risks_brochure.html
68875
Well, I think if you're still here, then somebody's doing something right, but that's really a question you should be asking a doctor, doll.\nUnfortunately, I am not familiar with the specifics of HIV or AIDS.  What I do know is that HIV can lead to AIDS, which stands for Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome.\nA deficient immune system is what would keep you from getting better if you did get sick, and would obviously be more likely to result in death.\nSo aside from the HIV-AIDS link there, I don't know what to tell you except ask a doc.