[expatpat]

Controversial it does seem to be. But does it work? If it does, the establishment is being obstructive.

[xzins]

That is a bottom line kind of question, isn't it?

[e_engineer]

Seems to me that the answer to your question could be found in Africa, using epidemiological studies rather than infecting AIDS patients with malaria. There must be tens of thousands of HIV infected Africans who already have malaria.

[Kenny Bunk]

Dr. Lurie says. "Many or most of them have not worked. Some are incredibly grandiose."

Which is to say that some of them have worked. This is a replay of a 19th Century idea which sought to cure syphilis patients by infecting them with malaria. It is simply too weird for Dr. Lurie-type scientists to handle.

Apparently, it apparently occasionally worked. The AIDS virus is very small, requiring careful electron microscopy of the highest order to observe. Malaria, Syphilis, and Lyme Disease are all three caused by very large (In microscopic terms) unicellular protozoa, rather than bacteria or viruses. Malaria causes extremely high fevers which kill or weaken the other protozoa. It somehow might do the same with AIDS. In the old days, the subsequent Malaria could be controlled with quinine> Today much more advanced drugs are available.

Why this avenue of research should be forbidden is a mystery to me, given that the therapy has shown some promise in the past. No one knows exactly why, which is exactly why it should be of scientific interest.

[NetValue]

"Controversial it does seem to be. But does it work? If it does, the establishment is being obstructive."

The pharmaceutical companies are the biggest obstacle to this research. My pharmacist cousin says he believes it is the best chance for a technique to cure AIDS. We have no cure at this time.

[drlevy88]

There are drugs that elevate body temperature. Why use a parasite, which will weaken the body in other ways?