I've read a few comments about who is bearing the cost of the treatments. Some readers have taken issue with asking that question because "it's saving lives!". I'm happy the medications exist and that they are saving lives.
However, if Big Pharma was interested in giving away medicine or selling it at a reasonable rate, they'd be doing it already.
I posit that in this instance they used the humans in the Congo as final test subjects, albeit to the patients' benefit, and now that they have proven that it works extortion-level pricing will not be far behind.
3
EBOLA has been challenging due to its high mortality rate, particularly in the African continent. Fortunately, 90% will be saved from this viral disease with a newly developed vaccine. With this happiest news also feeling sorry for 33% of individuals taking Gilead antiviral drug and 24% taking ZMapp a monoclonal antibody who lost their lives and proved that REGN-EB3 is superior and can protect people from deadly EBOLA. Important to note here is that 6% mortality was in the REGN-EB3 also. The other treatment of similar nature is mAb-114 developed by the National Institute of Health and licensed to a pharma company. At least in future after this human trial, Gilead and other company antiviral treatment hindered based on interim analyses. This is the game of science where scientists make tough choices sound challenging ethically and morally.
Viruses treatment has always been challenging due to their capability to continually change genomic and morphological characteristics. Moreover, genetically viruses are diverse and smartest infectious microorganisms. Disease-causing bacteria, fungi, parasites like other livings have deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) as the genetic material; however, viruses can have DNA, Ribonucleic acid (RNA) and their variations. The Ebola virus genetically has a negative sense RNA.
5
@Professor Muhammad Mukhtar
“This is the game of science where scientists make tough choices sound challenging ethically and morally. “
The ethics of randomized clinical trials have been challenged since they were first widely deployed in the 1960s and 1970s.
How, skeptics ask, can the experimental design deny a possible curative therapy to half those ill with an otherwise fatal illness..
In this experiment, the ebola mortality rate dropped from 80% to 10%.
The answer is revealed by understanding random patient selection, the ignorance the experimenters as to whether one or the other or neither drug might be effective, and the real possibility that one drug might actually be harmful.
As John Rawles argued in “The Just Society”, if people are assigned to a privileged group “ behind a “veil of ignorance” and each has an equal chance of gaining the privilege of a great benefit then justice is blind and the result is as just as ethical as winning the lottery.
1
Horrid disease. This sounds very promising for the People there, and everywhere. It must be contained, and ideally, completely curable and preventable.
2
For those who specialize in hatred of animal research and the pharmaceutical industry, let it be noted that these drugs were developed using animal research and came from the pharmaceutical industry.
3
@James Ribe Yes! So often overlooked in the debate over biologics and so many other drugs is the horrendous treatment that animals go through to provide the raw material. Liquified monkey pancreas. Fetal bovine serum. One peak inside the animal torture chambers of big pharma is beyond disturbing.
1
Thank you to all the researchers, the doctors and scientists, the health care workers, the support personnel for this wonderful development, as well as to all who have fought so hard to heal and help patients suffering from this terrible disease. So This represents the promise of true healing.
5
Hmmm. I smell money.
If these treatments work well enough Ebola could become a disease that Africans and tourists going to certain parts of Africa are vaccinated against routinely or treated for as soon as there is a case reported in an area where they are living or touring.
What we, in America have to hope is that Ebola never gets a foothold here because Regeneron would never consider compassionate use purposes for Americans.
3
Actually, one of the drug companies said they were considering offering it for free.
4
big pharma is the closer that comes in for the fanfare and the final coup de grace. Many more scientists did the work and got nothing for it, particularly foreign PhD students who labor in feudal academia, never to earn their freedom
6
How are they going to price such a treatment? It's not likely anyone in a wealthy western nation will contract the disease. Virtually all of the patients will be from poor nations with poor health care systems and certainly no insurance plans. Are they going to charge the odd western patient $20 million to make up for the difference and loss of profit in the African countries? An American nurse with insurance who is infected will be charged massive amounts of dollars while the patients she treated will pay nothing.
Thanks, but I think most of us already know that the heart of Trumpism is, “Let ‘em die be cause only money matters, and this goes triple if you’re black.”
By the way...ever think about applying this same logic in the event that you or somebody you love needs a million bucks’ worth of care? Because I assure you, it can happen...and why am i paying for it?
Or if that don’t float your boat, try this: ever think about what America would be like in a world full of the poor and desperate? You think we’d be immune?
4
Curious about the cost of each treatment and who pays for it?
@Mr. K.why? It saves countless lives.
2
@Mr. K. Unfortunately for you, you cannot be curious about anything anymore become people like Pups and another Matt will tromp on you....
He said he was curious about the cost per treatment and who pays for it? It's a legitimate question. What's the problem with that?
1
Ebola infected persons either get cured or they die. Of course more die and so 90% reduction in death would be good news. The news of the possible demise and eradication of Ebola is highly exaggerated. This new Ebola prophylactic treatment give to a handful of persons exposed to the deadly Ebola virus who were lucky enough to acquire one of the precious few doses of the treatment is a long long way to ending the outbreak. Until there is a preventive vaccine against Ebola that will provide 100% protection against an Ebola infection and that can be delivered to those like to be exposed to the reservoir hosts (bats and primates) and to those exposed to other humans with Ebola we are only at the early stages of Ebola eradication. In addition to producing larger quantities of this treatment for mass distribution in large areas of the affected countries, other more accessible treatments with natural broad spectrum of antivirals such as 100% filtered pomegranate juice needs to be explored as a prophylaxis against Ebola for those unable to get treated with this silver bullet. Ebola being an enveloped virus is more than likely to be neutralized by potent pomegranate juice and reduce risk of death. https://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/10.2217/fvl-2017-0154
1
@Girish Kotwal There is a vaccine, and pomegranate juice won't work to denature the virus unless it somehow gets into the lungs, which would cause unpleasant side effects.
The bit about pomegranate juice beautifully explains you.
@David Weintraub from Edison, NJ Vaccines don't denature the virus or any virus. Vaccines elicit antibodies or CTLs that neutralize viral infectivity. If there is a vaccine why is it not administered into people that are living in areas where they are likely to get infected to prevent Ebola infection when exposed? The 2 new treatments they are talking about are not conventional vaccines but they are prophylaxis which are readymade neutralizing antibodies to provide passive immunity against Ebola after exposure to the virus.
If you read the article on pomegranate juice, the broad spectrum virus neutralizing effect is due to compounds in pomegranate juice that bind to viral surface glycoproteins and render it noninfectious could be by denaturation for which there is evidence only in Influenza. The antiviral effect of pomegranate as the review article says was 1st discovered against HIV by Dr. Robert Neurath when he was at the NY Blood center. Later it was tried against Vaccinia and Influenza since then it has been shown to have neutralizing effect against a number of enveloped viruses by independent labs around the world. Pomegranate is grown and found in every continent around the world. Not even a tiny fraction of the billions spent on other vaccines especially the unsuccessful outcome of the quest for HIV vaccine has been spent on the delivery of antiviral compounds of pomegranate and so it remains enigmatic and uncertain whether it will reach its true potential in future.
1
Much obliged.
.
Why did I say that? Because I’m sure the pharmaceutical companies found a way to make working Americans foot the bill for this wonderful new Ebola treatment. Gilead certainly did. They drastically increased the price of their HIV prevention drug. Because why not?
.
Not that I think it’s wrong to develop new drugs to treat Ebola. I was NOT being sarcastic when I said the new treatments were wonderful. I just wish the Swiss, Danes, Norwegians, Saudis, Japanese, French, and the other wealthy countries of the world would also pay their share. It’s not fair for us alone to foot the bill for pharmaceutical research that benefits the whole world.
5
Why can't we cure diseases in this country, such as Chronic Lyme Disease? Why is there no vaccine for Lyme Disease?
As commenters have asked: Why don't the European countries work on diseases in other countries?
@ZAW
The investors and shareholders have been and are paying for the research these biotech companies do. Regeneron shares are trading on the New York Stock Exchange at more than $200/sh.
2
@Bob I can answer why there is no vaccine for Lyme disease. Lyme is caused by a spirochete bacterium, as is syphilis, and so far it's been impossible to develop a vaccine for that. I would guess the same issues are thwarting efforts to develop a vaccine for Lyme disease.
3
Hopefully control will fail, and the the virus will mutate to something more easily spread. Humans definitely need a culling.
4
Whoah there, 12 Monkeys.
8
@Spook sorry everyone but while this comment isn't the most popular, it's worth discussing.
Honestly I am surprised that the same NYTimes commenters who fill every article about climate change with shrieks about not having babies and world population being a huge problem come here and laud technology that keeps more people alive while doing nothing for food and water supplies.
Now if we could come up with a vaccine to ward off the graft that is so ripe
2
For those of us who believe in science, who admire the work of the clinicians and scientists who developed the vaccine, who are inspired by the front line workers in the Congo, this is exciting news. Much effort yet is needed to educate, to spread the word, to convince, before the vaccine wins widespread acceptance there.
25
This is excellent news, a treatment that cures 90% and may also work as a vaccine to prevent Ebola. The Economist comments against it are by far the most ridiculous I've seen. This treatment of antibodies not only cures 90% but can act as a preventive vaccine. Who can possibly be against that?
18
Another example of the power of science and research to improve lives. There have been blind alleys along the way, and there is still some distance yet to travel, but this is Nobel work. Shameful that so many here deny science and look at blind alleys as failure, rather than as learning.
Beats thoughts and prayers.
17
Any progress in Ebola response has to be looked at as welcome relief. But, it's important to acknowledge that Dr. Oly Ilunga is the person, who as Minister of Health for DRC until July 22, 2019, was over the treatment protocols. The controversy over his resignation and the rise of Dr. Muyembe is not settled. Political dynamics are at play in the declaration of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), the use of new vaccines and local acceptance of response efforts. Therapy is one thing, rapid diagnosis, public trust, effective prevention and vaccine use are elements still in short supply. Controlling the outbreak is vital and far from happening. AND, Ebola survivors have lingering symptoms and stigma these studies haven't addressed.
2
Best news in a long time.
I hope the delivery of these treatments can be expedited.
4
Congratulations to all involved and hurray for humanity! Another sword in our arsenal against deadly disease!
11
This is incredible and so hopeful for a population that deserves peace and health.
“Now we can say that 90 percent can come out of treatment cured”
9
Well done Dr. Muyembe and all who worked so diligently on fighting Ebola. I also find it uplifting that Dr. Muyembe is an African and is getting recognition he deserves. Here in the US we often think our researcher are the best in the world. This just goes to show great minds are from every race and everywhere in this world.
21
can we leave the proselytizing?
This is great news. Now a chance for big pharma to reclaim some of its integrity: decline to patent the medication like Sauk did for the polio vaccine.
12
This is great news - proof that humanity can once in a while do good things. However, viruses evolve very quickly and it is not inconceivable that the Ebola virus could evolve resistance to a monoclonal antibody. And then there are other emerging viruses - the result of people encroaching on various habitats and eating undercooked meat. Fighting off new viruses and other microbes is a full time job.
4
All things considered, I’m nor so sure about all these new cures designed to render mankind invincible. Somehow it seems we’ve brought many of this planet’s current problems that often makes life unbearable on ourself.
2
This is great news, and the availability of these treatments that came from public-private partnership shows that the science and the efforts of both government and industry can be applied to an important target to save lives. Interesting to me that we applaud the use of antibodies to treat Ebola, but many still forgo vaccination for measles and other preventable diseases - which offer protection through induction of the patient's own antibodies. Vaccination is important, and the measles outbreak in the US due to one thing - vaccine hesitancy - shows that we as a society have a ways to go....
8
All praise to dr. Muyembe , but did he do this single handedly?
The article seems to suggest that he did. Apparently there were multiple scientists involved , many working for Big Pharma and the NIH. Why would'nt the origin of a medical breakthrough be an essential part of a competent report about the breakthrough?
5
It is important to note that the funding for developing these drugs is largely derived from profits earned from selling other drugs. This is a critical driver for the pipeline of new life transforming drugs that are coming down the pike. Unfortunately, in the current political climate, all drug profits are seen as inherently motivated by evil greed. Yes, there is greed in some pharma prices, but the distinction between that and the ambitious and idealistic effort to better the lives of all of us, is not being made. The hard working, highly skilled, and innovative scientists doing this should be viewed as heroes, not as villains. AOC should keep in mind that there are new treatments available right now for treating lung cancer, and ask herself whether she would support paying high prices for treating macular degeneration in order to fund the search for a cure for lung cancer (which killed her father).
8
@Michael Your assumption about the funding for these drugs being " largely derived from profits earned from selling other drugs" could not be farther from the truth. The NIH heavily invested US tax payer $$ in the development of Ebola vaccine after the breakout in Liberia last year. There was very little commericial incentive for big pharma to develop a vaccine for ebola which prompted the NIH to make large investments. Typically NIH research funds breakthroughs at the academic research stage that allows scientists to uncover basic mechanisms needed for drug development. In the case of Ebola, however, the NIH was forced to fund even the vaccine development in response to the Liberian outbreak. Indeed there were "hard working, highly skilled, and innovative scientists" behind the scenes but their financing was provided largely from US taxpayer dollars.
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/diseases-conditions/ebola-vaccines
22
@Michael
"Unfortunately, in the current political climate, all drug profits are seen as inherently motivated by evil greed."
It's not the political climate. It's evidence some of us cn see the forest for the trees. Tons more funds are spent by Pharmas on marketing, middlemen, and dividends than on research. You don't see drug ads in other countries. I wonder how pharmas in those countries manage to develop new drugs, they do, without our excessive greed model.
Add to this when a life critical drug maker like the maker of insulin doubles or triples its price just because it can that's 100% pure greed.
Americans spend double, per capita what other OECD nations spend on healthcare while getting less for our money.
https://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-releases/2019/us-health-care-spending-highest-among-developed-countries.html
9
@Michael Your assumption about the funding for these drugs being " largely derived from profits earned from selling other drugs" could not be farther from the truth. The NIH heavily invested US tax payer $$ in the development of Ebola vaccine after the breakout in Liberia last year. There was very little commericial incentive for big pharma to develop a vaccine for ebola which prompted the NIH to make large investments. Typically NIH research funds breakthroughs at the academic research stage that allows scientists to uncover basic mechanisms needed for drug development. In the case of Ebola, however, the NIH was forced to fund even the vaccine development in response to the Liberian outbreak. Indeed there were "hard working, highly skilled, and innovative scientists" behind the scenes but their financing was provided largely from US taxpayer dollars.
Moreover, about 50% of the expenditure by big pharma is done on stock buy backs and a substantial portion of the remaining amount to develop "me too" drugs where minor manipulations to the chemistry of existing compunds are made in order to patent a new drug for an already existing approved treatment.
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/diseases-conditions/ebola-vaccines
8
These breakthroughs were made possible through the work of the NIH, two biotech companies, and many brilliant and dedicated scientists, including Dr, Muyembe.
Many like to diss the government, and even more like to diss pharmaceutical companies. But they seem to have saved many lives. Remember, ebola can and has traveled to this country.
Today, pharmaceutical companies face a threat that may force many into bankruptcy: American trial lawyers, who are winning multi-billion dollar verdicts which are likely based on what amounts to junk science. American lawyers nearly shut down vaccine manufacturing in the US during the 1970's and early 1980's, until Congress, at the 11th hour, passed a no-fault liability bill.
I don't wish to see our system of tort liability disappear, but make no mistake: our legal system badly needs major reform.
22
@Alex
"Today, pharmaceutical companies face a threat that may force many into bankruptcy: American trial lawyers, who are winning multi-billion dollar verdicts which are likely based on what amounts to junk science."
Considering many pharmaceutical companies are merging giants, invested in by venture capitalists, and make billions in profits (while managing to spend on ad campaigns saturating all media and wining/dining and otherwise entertaining hospitals and physicians), you'll excuse those of us who are cynical of your concern.
5
I believe, if I am not mistaken, that the name of the fantastic scientist who has been working so long on Ebola treatment is Jean-Jacques, not Jean-Paul, Muyembe.
4
This is fabulous news, except for the fact that when PHARMA gets their hands on them, no one will be able to afford the treatments.
2
@Glen
Exactly wrong. Both drugs were developed and made available by Pharma. (Regeneron and Ridgeback). Yes, the companies built on the work of others, as is the case for most science. But without out work by commercial entities, the drugs would probably not have seen the light of day.
25
Not even one mention of the Biotech Company involved in developing REGN-EB3 in the article...this wasn’t shocking to me given the Media’s and Politicians’ disdain for Pharma (both Dems and Trump equally).
It’s much for fun for people to attack them for gouging prices when they have no idea how the pricing system actually works, and then gloss over life saving therapies. The media should help point out who develops real life improving therapies versus those who are corrupt and in it just for the profit (Purdue, Insys, Valeant).
It’s Regeneron by the way. And they will likely make very little (if any) profit on this drug.
37
@Icanhas Cheburger
Although they are to be applauded for the development of REGN-EB3, they're still a profit seeking corporation that benefits from sales of their drugs. For example, they still charge a list price of over $14,000 for their cholesterol drug.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regeneron_Pharmaceuticals
5
@Icanhas Cheburger
Regeneron is mentioned several times in the article.
8
@Marcus Aurelius
Yes, where would those freeloading foreigners be without monoclonal antibodies like this? Oops, that was invented by the British.
Well, where would they be without antibiotics? Oops, that was also invented by the British.
Well, where would they be without hypertension drugs? Oops, invented by the Scots.
Well, where would they be without statins? Oops, invented by the Japanese.
Well, where would they be without insulin? Oops, discovered by the Canadians.
....
7
A Nobel Prize in Medicine for Dr. Muyembe! Yes there are problems to resolve in treatment delivery, but now there is something to deliver. We know how to provide every corner of the world with weapons, maybe some of that know how could serve a better purpose.
12
@Clodoaldo Barrera
The two successful treatments were developed by Regeneron, in one case (Pharma, if you will), and the NIH (American governmnet agency). A genuine private-public (tax-payer-funded) project, with both working together. Their work made use of Dr. Muyembe's, but the actual treatments were developed by the two American entities. The special feature of Regeneron's treatment is that it does not have to be refrigerated, and can be shipped to where it is needed. If Nobel prizes are going to be handed out, there will need to be several of them! The story behind the success is many-faceted.
4
I've been waiting for a pandemic that will wipe out 98 percent of the humans on earth so the plants, animals, land, water and sky can regenerate from our harmful impact. This one isn't it.
2
@Sasha Love Yep, it's a crying shame :(
This is is the one bit of good news reported by this paper today, and
as far back as I can remember.
14
Awarding of the Nobel Peace prize to Dr. Muyembe for his monoclonal antibody treatment is now the appropriate recognition.
7
This is great news. Now we can all pray word gets out and those that start to feel ill seek immediate medical assistance.
6
Huge congratulations to Dr. Muyembe and all those working tirelessly on the ground to contain the current outbreak. Goma is a bustling and densely populated place with little in the way of infrastructure; it's a fearsome place to have an outbreak.
7
Great! How long before the Trump “administration” makes them unavailable?
11
This is good news. I suffer from autoimmune disease and monoclonal antibody treatment gave me my life back.
10
It is good to hear positive developments in saving lives. I would prefer that we spend more money on saving lives than on taking them (so called 'Defense' department - originally correctly titled 'War' department.
25
@Bruce Maier
The Department of War is now called the Department of the Army. The Department of Defense is an overarching body created after WWII including the Army, Navy and Air Force.
2
Some much needed good news from the land of science and medicine. Three cheers for Dr. Muyembe and all of those who've worked tirelessly to prevent the loss of life from the virus.
33
This article left out that mAb-114 was developed by the US National Institutes of Health and REGN-EB3 was developed by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. Both relied on decades of US government funding (largely by the NIH) to develop the antibody engineering, virology techniques, and other basic science insight needed to develop novel therapeutics. Give the NIH and pharma its due: it's needed to ensure the public has a sense of the massive investments required to tackle dire and difficult health challenges like Ebola.
193
@bruce,
And while giving out credits, let's not forget Cesar Millstein (Argentinian) and Georges Kohler (German) who, working together at The Laboratory of Molecular Biology in Cambridge (UK), invented monoclonal antibodies in the mid-1970s. Their invention was THE invention that made everything else eventually possible. For that they shared a Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine, in 1984.
55
@RR yes! We also need to call out all of the structural biologists who developed the protein expression and X-ray crystallography techniques that enabled the Ebola surface proteins to be studied safely, enabling us to see the epitopes where neutralizing antibodies could be effective.
25
Bruce, Thanks for clarifying the sources of this outstanding scientific breakthrough for humanity. It does seem notable that Donald McNeil omitted to name Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. That this was purposeful seems likely - and, despite the misgivings one may have about the Pharma industry, basic journalistic practices - thoroughly reporting facts, for example - would have prompted the inclusion of one of the co-creators of this promising advance. As you note, Bruce, this breakthrough also demonstrates the values and capabilities our government-funded institutions can achieve - and why they are worthy of our substantial support.
22
And the cost?
2
@Eileen
And the cost...of doing nothing (including not treating those infected at all)? The cost of a growing epidemic?
9
@Eileen
Many lives saved. Even more infections prevented. A small but important measure of global health security gained.
8
@Eileen thank god no one was worried about cost during the polio outbreaks when the people, namely Dr. Salk, was finding the vaccination for polio. One does not want to think what our world would be like if not for “the cost” of these wonderful drugs we take for granted today. Diseases like yellow-fever, MMR & many others used to kill many people until we decided not to worry about “the cost”.
2
This is great news, but local conditions may still allow this outbreak to fester.
This breakthrough is also a testament to the scientific method, particularly with regard to infectious diseases. Folk remedies, nutritional supplements that ‘support’ the immune system, and ‘naturally’ acquired immunity wouldn’t have accomplished a thing with regards to Ebola infection. Science denialism is not compatible with advancing public health.
31
@Michael Tyndall
"Science denialism is not compatible with advancing public health."
Of course. But try telling that to Trump supporters.
17
This is so wonderful. Absolute testament to the power of the scientific method and the value of all of the data, knowledge, hunches, and hypotheses that led up to this. Even though REGN-EB3 (three antibodies with at least partially separate specificities) and mAb-114 (single antibody with likely single recognition specificity) were both highly effective, by very strong theory, the triple cocktail will prove to be a better approach because viruses can easily mutate and evade the monoclonal. Even though the 6% death w REGN vs 11% with mAb-114 isn't statistically significant (yet), I believe it would be reckless to provide a single point of failure approach when the triple targeted cocktail could easily prevent/significantly lessen the risk of resistant virus from emerging.
23
Whatever happened to the Ebola outbreak Obama was supposedly allowing into the US? You know the one that terrified voters into giving McConnell the majority to ruin America.
(But was actually only set loose on American streets by a private hospital in Dallas.)
After the election,the threat just vanished. Poof!
However, don't let go of your fear yet. It will probably turn up once again crossing the border in 2020. With, this time, POTUS heroically on our side!
32
One question: how much do the treatments cost?
1
@ML Sweet
...and how much would untreated epidemics cost? Spreading to other countries?
4
What’s monoclonal?
2
@J. Luke Our immune response to a pathogen includes antibodies made by immune cells. These proteins attach to the pathogen. These antibodies are polyclonal, made by many different immune cells.
Monoclonal antibodies derive from just one of these cells and are made in the laboratory.
11
Your blood contains millions of different antibodies, derived from different B cells— they are polyclonal. If you take a single B-cell and clone it, all the antibodies you make will be the same— monoclonal.
7
After almost 5 years on the ground in the DRC as Chief of the MONUSCO Video Unit ( 2007-2012), please forgive me if I do not see this new treatment as a silver bullet for stopping the current Ebola epidemic.Anyone familiar with Congo knows there are many obstacles preventing current treatment of patients - rough terrain, malevolent armed groups who attack and sometimes kill medical workers, and a well documented distrust on the part of many locals. Any treatments will have to be administered as part of a well organized campaign to be successful, and any well organized campaign will require a multi-dimensional effort involving military as well as medical contingents. It remains to be seen if the DRC government is capable of handling this task, since it refused to take the necessary measures when the Ebola was limited to Beni and Butembo over a year ago. Now there are cases in the Eastern hub of Goma and even in South Kivu. This story is far from over.
45
@Ted Folke
Having been involved with AIDS/HIV treatment since 1982, in NYC and India, I agree with you wholeheartedly. The actual story is often not newsworthy, because it is often sad, frustrating and even depressing. ...and it drags on and on for years. This seems like a good step in the right direction..let us hope it proves itself to be just what is needed. The AIDS story is far from over as well. The public is always ready to applaud what seems to have a glimmer of hope..not fully taking in the enormity of the clinical and epidemiological facts.
18
@Ted Folke - As a former pilot for Doctors Without Borders and an Air Force veteran, I can see a worthwhile use of a “shock and awe” campaign where military troops trained for deployment in rugged terrain can be called upon to execute a uniquely humanitarian mission to deliver the medical aid and protect the caregivers. Any number of countries including the US and NATO have this capability. We owe this to the world to use our resources in a positive way to undertake such a mission.
20
@Ted Folke
Having been in S. Kivu for two years in the early 70s and seen many cases of HIV (as yet undiagnosed), the local people recognized that HIV, which they called "the wasting disease," could not be cured by Western medicine. That then was true; it could not then be treated effectively. The big difference was that in the early 70s there was peace, no fighting, in S. Kivu. So the local people were not suspicious of W. medicine.
6
This is fantastic news and a wonderful medical breakthrough likely to save thousands of lives in an area of the world that has been devastated by this horrible disease. Thanks to those pioneering researchers who persevered and contributed to this important breakthrough.
23
Great news! Why not mention the companies making and researching these drugs? These are philanthropic, not profit-motivated, pursuits, and they deserve some recognition.
30
Thank you Erica. I know one company very well: Regeneron. It's latest drug is Dupixent, which treats atopic dermatitis and has been shown to be life changing. With all the bad press about drug prices and the lack of differentiation in the marketplace in drugs that are innovative breakthroughs and require billions in research to bring them to approval, it is quite nice to finally see Regeneron credited for this pursuit. All billionaires are not evil and greedy, and all Biopharmaceutical companies are not price gougers.
41
Wonderful news! Dr. Muyembe is indeed a true hero. Thank you.
15
This is fantastic news & great thanks are due to these frontline scientists and their clinical providers. They are risking their lives to find cures for these deadly diseases. The whole of humanity is in your debt.
8
Meanwhile in the United States, more parents are choosing to not vaccinate their children.
76
@Randeep Chauhan I thought of the antivax folks when the article talked about villagers who accuse treatment teams of witchcraft and body part stealing.
Sadly, the antivaxxers, anti-gmo people, climate change deniers, and anti-immigrant xenophobes are everywhere.
We used to use terminology like “primitive tribes” or - in Ronald Reagan’s words - even “monkeys” to describe Africans, but who is more primitive: a person with illogical beliefs who never had access to education, or a person in the world’s most advanced societies who believes the same nonsense?
10
I’m confident Stephen Miller is working with Trump on a way to stop this.
20
Congratulations to Dr. Muyembe for his pioneering foundational work. Will it be possible to keep big pharma’s profit machine out of equation and when will Trump claim credit for the discovery?
8
I wonder how this monoclonal antibody treatment is different from the older ones mentioned at the end. They have the same basic mechanism for fighting the virus, but vastly different outcomes.
Is it a new process? Does it attach to the virus better? Has the virus been evolving?
11
@MD,
The difference is that "the older ones" weren't laboratory-produced monoclonal antibodies directed specifically at the Ebola virus, but rather they were total antibodies that had been produced in patients who had survived Ebola. Only a small percentage of those total antibodies would be specific for the Ebola virus; the rest would be specific to the myriad other antigens that those patients had been exposed to during their lives.
Monoclonal antibodies (the process was invented in 1975) can be produced (through cell culture) in essentially unlimited supply. And unlike natural antibodies, monoclonal antibodies are true reagents -- they're pure, so one would know, a priori, exactly how much anti-Ebola activity a "dose" would contain. All the antibody molecules in that dose would be identical, as would all the molecules in all other doses produced from the same cell culture. (That would not be true of total antibodies harvested from different surviving patients.)
Other laboratory cell cultures would produce different anti-Ebola monoclonal antibodies (but again, each culture would produce only one type). Some monoclonal antibodies would, by virtue of biochemistry, be more effective at neutralizing Ebola virus than others. So an initial collection would be screened in lab tests first, and then the best candidates would be evaluated in an actual epidemic -- as reported here.
11
Wonderful news!!! Now comes the hard part, getting patients early. At least people will realize the Ebola treatment units actually have a treatment now. I’m curious if the infusion is just one dose given as a bolus or if it requires multiple doses per day or long infusion times.
14
Some good news for a change. Affirmation that the world is not just one terrible event after another. Anything that decreases human suffering is a rare story these days.
90
This type of medical research and triumphs are due to the incredible work of scientists, researchers, physicians, and field workers who devote countless hours, work cooperatively and take great risks to achieve such results. They also rely on government funding, and a recognition by governments that science is real and research needs the vast resources that only a government who cares about it’s citizens and the future of humanity can provide.
179
This type of medical research and triumphs are due to the incredible work of scientists, researchers, physicians, and field workers who devote countless hours, work cooperatively and take great risks to achieve such results. They also rely on government funding, and a recognition by governments that science is real and research needs the vast resources that only a government who cares about it’s citizens and the future of humanity can provide.
7
This advancement demonstrates again that medical sciences and the dedication of researches and their public health colleagues can together reduce death and suffering against tropical diseases and hopefully other chronic diseases. As ex-smallpox warrior I offer my sincerest and humble congratulations to all involved. Peter Carrasco, Berkeley Springs, West Virginia
50
A triumph of modern medicine! Amazing.
Kudos to all that participated in the making of these amazing treatments. And to all who care for the Ebola victims and survivors, this nurse sends you her love.
56
I am glad to see the Times take statistical significance seriously for once. All too often, I have read articles here which claim an effect only to find at the end that it did not achieve statistical significance. All scientists (and undergraduates who take statistics) know that if there is no statistical significance, there is no effect.
16
@dr. c.c. you misunderstood Dr. Fauci's statement. There was no difference between the two different antibodies that were both extremely effective. The significance of this (and each) is monumental..
12
@Bruce I was referring to the statement that the difference in mortality rates between the two drugs was "too small to be statistically significant."In other words, no difference was found.
Of course the effectiveness of the drugs was of monumental importance. This is a separate issue. And, being a statistician, I do understand Fauci's statement.
8
@dr. c.c. ha! i thought you read it too quickly.. so sorry. see my other comment in the thread where I am jabbing Fauci for saying the single monoclonal is insignificantly worse. Although each of the targets of the triple cocktail are unlikely to be equally effective, targeting just a single domain with a single monoclonal would be pretty reckless when we know enough from mechanistic knowledge to say that designing a single mutation-overcomable treatment will lead to the emergence of resistant clones very quickly.
4
Congratulations to all who worked on this treatments. The world thanks you.
109
We should remember that in order for a forest to flourish, it needs frequent and uninterrupted brush fires... this is no different.
4
What a ridiculous thing to say. The burden of the illness on the overall population is huge: people must spend time and money caring for the ill, they live in fear of getting infected, and those who die take the knowledge and experience they built up over their lives with them. In rich countries we inoculate and treat ourselves against every illness we can, which is largely why life expectancy skyrocketed over the last 100 years. Stop trying to deny poor countries the same opportunity based on some erroneous understanding of biology.
87
@Marcus Zamboni
That is not true of most forests, as well as a pretty horrendous thing to say about humans. The main thing that distinguishes us from animals is that we take care of our dick and injured (and, yes, I know there are a few animals that do this too).
23
@Marcus Zamboni
That is not true of most forests, as well as a pretty horrendous thing to say about humans. The main thing that distinguishes us from animals is that we take care of our sick and injured (and, yes, I know there are a few animals that do this too).
8