The pharmaceutical industry has generated a new, apparently viable biotechnology product under the auspices of combatting HIV: self-assembling nanoparticles.
Via National Institutes of Health (NIH):
In recent years, we’ve witnessed some truly inspiring progress in vaccine development. That includes the mRNA vaccines that were so critical during the COVID-19 pandemic, the first approved vaccine for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and a “universal flu vaccine” candidate that could one day help to thwart future outbreaks of more novel influenza viruses.
Inspiring progress also continues to be made toward a safe and effective vaccine for HIV, which still infects about 1.5 million people around the world each year [1]. A prime example is the recent first-in-human trial of an HIV vaccine made in the lab from a unique protein nanoparticle, a molecular construct measuring just a few billionths of a meter.
The NIH explains that the self-assembling nanoparticles are needed to form a larger structure in order to induce the desired immune response followed by, theoretically, immunity to HIV.
This nanoparticle, administered by injection, is designed to mimic a small, highly conserved segment of an HIV protein that allows the virus to bind and infect human cells. In the body, those nanoparticles launch an immune response and then quickly vanish. But because this important protein target for HIV vaccines is so tiny, its signal needed amplification for immune system detection.
To boost the signal, the researchers started with a bacterial protein called lumazine synthase (LumSyn). It forms the scaffold, or structural support, of the self-assembling nanoparticle. Then, they added to the LumSyn scaffold 60 copies of the key HIV protein. This louder HIV signal is tailored to draw out and engage those very specific B cells with the potential to produce bnAbs.
This is the thing: to anyone with a cursory understanding of human physiology, it is clear that catalyzing an immune response by way of nanoparticles programmed to assemble on a bacterial framework in the human body is inherently fraught with risk.
Were the Public Health™ authorities worthy of trust regarding their willingness and capability in terms of vetting the safety and efficacy of this experimental product, then the risk to the patient would be minimized. A well-run, transparent clinical trial carried out before the medication was introduced for public consumption would at least provide proof of concept and some evidence of safety and efficacy in the short-term, if not long-term.
But COVID-19 ripped the veil off of the whole corrupt Public Health™ regulatory process, which, if anything, has only gotten more corrupt and less ethical post-pandemic. Frankly, it’s amazing these companies can still recruit for their trials, given how thoroughly discredited they are.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member