
Malaria breakthrough as scientists find ‘highly effective’ way to kill parasite - elorant
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/sep/05/malaria-breakthrough-as-scientists-find-highly-effective-way-to-kill-parasite
======
mmsimanga
As a kid growing up in Malaria country I got yellow jaundice. Doctor told my
dad that since I had had yellow jaundice I was "immune" to malaria. Its been
35 odd years since I have taken any malaria medication. Family members often
get malaria once or so a year. A few years ago I decided to check to see if
there were was any literature online with link between Malaria and jaundice. I
couldn't find any papers online. Now I don't know whether what the doctor told
my dad was true or there is something to be said about me having mentally told
myself I am immune to malaria. To this day my dad maintains I cannot get
malaria. The younger me believed him wholeheartedly, the older me would be
grateful for some research papers on the topic.

~~~
youeseh
This reminds me of an interesting story. The host of The Portal podcast, Eric
Weinstein went on the Joe Rogan show where he shared a story: he used to get
very easily sun burnt. No chance of getting a tan. He'd just burn. Then, one
day he took LSD and then stopped burning. Crazy story. No follow up study =).

~~~
tempguy9999
The Psychedelics Encylopedia (3rd Ed, Peter Stafford), P73 info on using LSD
to cure various physical ailments. Too long to reproduce here, suggest you get
the book, you won't regret it.

Anyway, also shows before & after photos of of treatment of sever psoriasis
with LSD and ritalin(?!)

~~~
tempguy9999
And the pix themselves
[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=HwKsDQAAQBAJ&pg=PT141&lp...](https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=HwKsDQAAQBAJ&pg=PT141&lpg=PT141&dq=ritalin+lsd+psoriasis&source=bl&ots=aydk2xZ9pp&sig=ACfU3U3PxsFrYa7ScFHx-
ezxkotM7VS_rg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiI8YKQqM3kAhWKLMAKHWf4CC8Q6AEwBXoECAkQAQ)

------
tbabb
This article is so bad it's basically saying nothing at all, and the headline
is basically unsupported by the article.

In fact, the quality/coherence of the whole thing seems to be about on par
with those AI-generated articles from OpenAI a few months ago.

This article shouldn't be here, let alone under this headline.

~~~
mleonhard
Yes, the article refers to ivermectin as a bacteria. Ivermectin is a drug that
kills parasites. If ivermectin actuall is effective against malaria, I would
like to ask why did it take 40 years to discover this?!?

Ivermectin causes severe reactions in people with onchocerciasis (River
Blindness) unless treated carefully. Now that oncho is nearly eradicated,
deploying ivermectin widely has become easier.

------
Crazyontap
I watched a Ted talk sometime ago about how they've discovered a method to
genetically modify mosquitoes to eradicate entire populations of mosquitoes
from an area (I think it was it made them mos babies die due to genetic
engineering).

I couldn't find it now but it seemed like a massive success at the time almost
eliminating all mosquitoes from the a city in Brazil (iirc).

Anyone know what happened to it? If that were to come to fruition than a lot
of disease in addition to malaria like chikungunya, dengue, etc will be cured
too.

~~~
ChefboyOG
This kind of experiment is called a gene drive, and there's a huge debate in
scientific communities right now around whether it's responsible or not to use
them, particularly around the mosquito problem. A professor of mine who works
in the field was discussing this with us last week.

The idea with mosquitoes specifically is that we can wipe out specifically the
mosquito populations that carry most diseases. The debate is around whether or
not this will upset balance in ecosystems (many feel it will not).

This is just my interpretation, but it seems like there is a sensible portion
of detractors who simply want to derisk the experiment as much as possible by
collecting more and more data. Then there are others who are in general
opposed to this sort of interference in an animal population on ethical
grounds.

Related article: [https://www.sciencenews.org/article/lab-tests-gene-drive-
wip...](https://www.sciencenews.org/article/lab-tests-gene-drive-wiped-out-
population-mosquitoes)

~~~
mullingitover
> This is just my interpretation, but it seems like there is a sensible
> portion of detractors who simply want to derisk the experiment as much as
> possible by collecting more and more data.

This is so infuriating. Many people will die during this extended hemming and
hawing.

Humans have driven countless important species to extinction with no thought,
but we have to vacillate over a species that is responsible for more deaths
than all the wars in human history _combined_?

My only reservation about driving the mosquitoes to extinction with a gene
drive is that we can't guarantee that the mosquitoes will suffer.

~~~
wolco
What makes you think they won't come back as bad or worse then before? That's
what we did with antibiotics and we ended up with superbugs.

~~~
iamkroot
There cannot be any doubt that the world is in a better place because of the
presence of antibiotics.

~~~
bzbz
Why not? It’s not as if you have an omniscient point of view and the ability
to see the future of both branches. There will always be doubt about complex,
unsolvable scenarios.

------
arkades
This article can’t seem to decide whether it’s discussing ivermectin - an old
antiparasitic derived from the avermectin produced by streptomyces - or
bacteria.

It vacillates between “ivermectin effective” and “bacteria killed parasite,”
which are in no way equivalent. The latter suggests something like “strep
killed plasmodium, so maybe we can find the compound used and use it for
malaria.” The latter suggests, well, ivermectin is the compound.

God, science journalism from scientifically illiterate rehashes of press
releases is always such garbage.

The actual trial they are discussing doesn’t address using bacteria at all. It
is directly the question of “if we repeatedly give ivermectin (the drug) to a
population, can we reduce malaria transmission?” (
[https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736\(18\)32321-3/fulltext)
) studied in 8 villages for 18 weeks during peak malaria season. With approx
75% participation, malaria incidence dropped around 20%.

Please let’s change the link to the Lancet article.

~~~
nneonneo
It almost sounds as if the journalist believes Ivermectin _is_ a bacteria and
a drug derived from it is killing malaria. Agreed that this smacks of sloppy
science journalism.

~~~
giarc
I think you are right. Here is a quote from the author, who is obviously
talking about a bacterium killing plasmodium, of which ivermectin is not.

“We have discovered [that the] bacterium is highly effective in killing
plasmodium falciparum, the parasite that causes malaria, but our research is
more focused on pregnant women and children as they are more vulnerable. We
are getting very motivating leads,” Kariuki said.

Perhaps the issue is that Kariuki is not a listed author on the Lancet paper,
so perhaps he's just providing comment generally and not specifically?

------
peteretep
Disappointing that this might halt approaches that involve KILLING ALL THE
MOSQUITOS

~~~
blisterpeanuts
When dosed with ivermectin, people's blood becomes deadly to mosquitoes. I
guess it's better than nothing. But like you, I want that entire species gone.

 _Bite me and you die._

------
gus_massa
From the press article:

> _Child malaria episodes could be reduced by up to 20% if populations living
> in high-risk areas are given Ivermectin, [....]_

> _An expert, independent from the study, said reports of resistance to the
> current class of malaria drugs are on the rise. [...] “There are cases of
> the drugs being sold over the counter, leading to their resistance and
> overuse. [...]”_

If the plan is to give everyone the new drug, why don't they expect to get
resistant strains soon?

~~~
jessaustin
We give it to our horses every year, and it still kills intestinal worms. Some
genetic changes are just so large that they are extremely unlikely.

~~~
projektfu
There is quite a lot of acquired resistance to ivermectin in horse strongyles.
Just not in S. vulgaris that was causing infarction. Now, the recommendations
for horses are changing to a quantitatively driven approach based on fecal egg
count rather than routine annual deworming. Pasture rotation is also useful.

In sheep, the barber-pole worm Haemonchus has become resistant to most
approved parasiticides. Resistance is a definite problem.

------
Havoc
About time. Story:

Grew up in an area that is close to but not in Malaria country.

One day my mom comes back from visiting a friend that had malaria. Reports he
was in tears due to suffering.

...that severely rattled me as a kid. Because I knew he's the kind of man that
sews himself together again with fishing line. People like that do not as a
general rule cry.

~~~
grecy
I contracted Malaria twice while driving around Africa for three years.

The first time in Mali was like the worst cold/flu I've ever had. The "cure"
medicine (Coartem [1]) helped a lot. I was alright.

The second time I was in remote Angola and it was B.A.D. I was only 35 and
very fit and strong. For five days I did not walk, talk, eat, sleep or
function in any way. My friends were injecting me with the stronger version of
Coartem twice a day, and I thought my head was going to split open from the
severe headache. I did not think I was actually going to die, but mighty
close. I lost 20lbs in those 5 days.

After that I was severely paranoid about covering up and using bug spray in
the evenings, and I'm extremely happy I didn't get it again all through
Southern and Eastern Africa for the 18 months after that.

I've been reading up on the drugs that are supposed to permanently remove it
from your system, but they seem to function best on the Asian strain of
Malaria. Maybe I'll take it anyway to prevent a relapse.

TLDR: I don't recommend getting Malaria.

[1]
[https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2009/02...](https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2009/022268lbl.pdf)

------
bohm
Ok translation: Ivermectin, a safe and well-tolerated bacteria-derived
insecticide already used in humans, can kill mosquitoes. By feeding humans
ivermectin, mosquito populations can be reduced, which in turn reduces spread
of the malaria parasite which is transported via mosquitoes.

~~~
mc32
Does it work with West Nile, Zika, EEE and other mosquito borne diseases too?
If so that’d be even better news on top of good.

Do the downvotes mean this blood medicine does not affect these mosquitoes?

~~~
stubish
The study looks completely focused on the malaria parasite and malaria
carrying species, so we don't know for sure.

------
Medicalidiot
I'm wondering when we start using biologics to attack parasites. We've started
using bacteriophages in trials to serious success, but I cannot wait until we
start using something analogous to that to take out malaria.

The reason I say this is malaria is a nasty pathogen whose ability to develop
resistance is well documented so even though this is an exciting breakthrough,
we will always need another exciting breakthrough on the horizon to
continually fight it.

------
ovi256
Nobody posted the obligatory 'in mice' yet ?

... in mice.

~~~
minitech
No, not in mice. The trials were on people in Burkina Faso.

------
tinytrader
That title is like satire bait. I was hoping I would see a huge slipper
squatting gif after clicking through.

------
whenchamenia
I have to assume nobody read the article, it is nosenseical. Wtf hn.

------
webwielder2
>science journalism

I think this is the case for pretty much every area of journalism. If you are
a subject matter expert, you quickly realize that 90% of coverage of that
subject is dreadful.

~~~
ssully
I know it's really popular these days to shit on journalists, and I agree that
the quality of some outlets can be less then desirable, but it is an
incredibly difficult field that involves a lot of work, little pay, little
thanks, and terrible job security.

Looking at this article, there is no Author by-line, but just the "Global
Health" topic. Digging in, their Global Health topic is managed by their
"Global development" team, which has a single writer assigned to it on their
Contributors page [1]. I am sure free lancers contribute to this section as
well, but I am trying to illustrate that this team/writer is probably on the
bottom of the totem pole when it comes to resources and priority. If this
story would never have been written if it had to pass HN's level of scientific
article standards.

[1]:
[https://www.theguardian.com/index/contributors](https://www.theguardian.com/index/contributors)

~~~
ekianjo
What is incredibly difficult about being a journalist? It is the core of their
job to read stuff and know better than the average how to make sense of things
they read. Not "very difficult" by any measure, we are simply witnessing sheer
laziness.

~~~
ssully
I provided four reasons as to why an average journalists job is difficult, and
an entire paragraph as to why this particular journalists job might be
difficult.

Also your description of a journalists "core" job is incredibly reductive. It
would be like me saying a programmers job is to just "write code". It's
accurate to a point, but fails to capture a majority of a programmers
responsibilities and how they do it well.

------
boratinos
Yes.

