The Hippocratic Oath: a missing ingredient in HSV-2 Vaccine Development?

hippocratic-oath

December 23, 2016

Dear Herpes Vaccine Blog Readers,

Christmas is upon us and it is, in the Christian culture, the season of giving.  I recognize that followers of this blog will be people of many nationalities, cultures, religious creeds (including atheism), and thus my intent herein is not to project any such beliefs upon my readership.  However, I would like to, in the Christmas tradition, offer up a gift I have never given before……a relatively succinct and complete overview of my HSV-2 vaccine research of the past decade.

While I have published over 50 manuscripts in my career, these have all been through the traditional scientific peer-review system.  Within this post, I announce a manuscript that I have been writing for the past two months, and the readers of the Herpes Vaccine Research blog will be the first people on the planet to see this manuscript.  So, Merry Christmas!  My gift to the hundreds / thousands of people around the world who have followed my blog over the past three years in the original form of the (1) Science Blog website I launched in June 2013 and (2) my private (advertisement-free) blog that I launched in January 2015.

Over that time, the two blogs have received more than 450,000 hits and those views have come from over 120 countries around the world.  To those for whom English is not their mother tongue, I do apologize for my abject ignorance of your and many other languages.  If I was multilingual, I would have a multi-language blog.  I am all too acutely aware that herpes afflicts those whose mother tongues are Spanish, Korean, Turkish, etc.  I hope that my work may help people of all countries regardless of the color of the skin, the language they use to communicate, or their religious convictions or lack thereof.

Below I cut-and-paste the Title and Abstract of this manuscript to provide readers with some idea of what is contained within within this 44-page / 8-Figure manuscript.  It is unlike any manuscript I have previously written and it recounts how my cancer diagnosis in February 2011 led me to begin self-testing my lab’s live HSV-2 0NLS vaccine in Sept 2011 (as soon as I had recovered from intensive chemotherapy and radiation).

Just to test the waters and confirm what I thought would be true, I submitted this manuscript to the journal Future Virology on December 4, 2016.  On December 21, 2016 I was informed that 3 reviewers hated the manuscript for a variety of reasons.  This is what I expected, as the established vaccine science community will have to (1) accept their HSV-2 subunit vaccine approaches of the past 30 years have been an abject failure if they are to (2) acknowledge that, perhaps, Bill Halford may be saying something worth seriously considering.

So, to my readership, please bear in mind that there are two sides to this story.  Perhaps I am just an arrogant idiot who has nothing of value to add to the conversation about HSV-2 vaccine development.  I think this is what the three reviewers who rejected the attached manuscript would have you believe.  Alternatively, perhaps I am speaking a simple truth that is inconvenient to other vaccine scientists, and thus they choose to bury my words and suppress my thoughts as much as possible so that they may carry on with business-as-usual.

Acknowledging that I cannot objectively evaluate myself, let me embrace and encourage readers to consider the possibility that I may be an entertaining, but nonetheless delusional, fool who has nothing of real scientific value to offer the world.  So, perhaps the attached manuscript should have been soundly rejected as it was.  However, I do believe that (1) there are 100 million people who suffer with recurrent herpetic disease and it is (2) those herpes sufferers who should have the greatest say in which HSV-2 vaccine candidates and antiviral drugs are moving forward to human clinical trials.  I am quite confident that this has not been the case.  Perhaps it is time to dis-empower the few hundred HSV-2 vaccine scientists and antiviral developers who seek to maintain absolute control over the “potential herpes cure” pipeline by which potentially life-saving / life-improving medicines are brought to the world.  If they were succeeding at this task, I would not care.  However, after 30 years of non-stop failures in the realm of herpes treatments and herpes vaccines, these individuals no longer have my vote of confidence.

So, to my readership, I leave it to you to decide.  Immediately below, please find three links to the (1) cover letter I wrote to Future Virology on December 4, 2016; (2) the Perspectives article that I submitted to Future Virology on December 4, 2016; and (3) the unfiltered reviews I received back on December 21, 2016.   My gift to you……the past decade of my life summed up in a single manuscript, for your consideration, and the opinions of three herpes vaccine experts as to why this manuscript does not rise to a degree of quality that warrants sharing with the rest of the world.

Thank you one and all for your support over the years, which has been the driving force behind the blog.

Sincerely yours,

Bill Halford

===============================

  1.  Cover letter for Halford Dec 2016 Manuscript
  2.  Complete Halford Dec 2016 Manuscript (8 Figures are on pp. 37-44)
  3.  Decision Letter and Reviewer’s Comments on Halford Dec 2016 Manuscript

==============================

Genital herpes meets its match:  A live HSV-2 ICP0 virus vaccine that succeeds where subunit vaccines have failed

 William P. Halford

ABSTRACT

Millions of people suffer with recurrent genital herpes.  Antiviral drugs and subunit vaccines have been thrown at the problem for decades, but the pandemic spread of genital herpes has not abated.  In 2007, I proposed a live HSV-2 vaccine was the most viable solution.  A decade and a clinical trial later, it is clear that live HSV-2 ICP0 virus vaccines are safe and elicit complete protection against genital herpes, whereas herpes subunit vaccines elicit a fraction of this response.  After decades of failed subunit vaccines, live HSV-2 ICP0 virus vaccines represent a new opportunity to solve the world’s herpes problem.  It would be a violation of the Hippocratic Oath to further ignore or delay exploration of a live HSV-2 vaccine’s capacity to prevent genital herpes.

 KEYWORDS                                     

  • herpes simplex virus (HSV)
  • live HSV-2 ICP0 virus vaccine
  • recurrent herpetic disease
  • antigenic breadth
  • preventative HSV-2 vaccine
  • therapeutic HSV-2 vaccine
  • live-attenuated virus (LAV) vaccine
  • rationally-engineered live virus (RELV) vaccine
  • subunit vaccine
  • acyclovir-based antiviral drugs

 

52 thoughts on “The Hippocratic Oath: a missing ingredient in HSV-2 Vaccine Development?

  1. Archangel861 says:

    I am hoping something allows this vaccine to be given to the public in next few years. I have herpes and just want to feel normal again. Hold my kids without fear of infecting them

    Like

  2. Dr. Hyder says:

    hello Dr Halford ,
    my question is if you complete the next trial by the end of 2017 will the vaccine will be available in the market in parts of the world other than USA or do we have to wait till the phase 3 trials too ? if the vaccine comes in the market by the end of 2017 people can atleast get there and get vaccinated I think… can you please shed light on this topic ..

    Like

    • ALFH says:

      Thank you for your diligence to this endeavor in spite of your own personal health concerns. Your tenacity is greatly appreciated. I have signed the petition and will do my part to try & influence my local representatives. I have HSV2 & have recently infected my eyes; I completely understand how this virus is life altering & severe. Hopefully, others will come to terms with its impact and propel research/funding/new data in field.

      Like

  3. Pepper says:

    Dear Dr Halford,

    First of all I want to thank you for being all that I am not. You are battling your own illness yet still have dedicated most of your own life to helping people with a much less life threatening illness. At times I have contemplated suicide, due to the pure thought of my life never being the same, and me never being able to engage in a the most natural human activity of sex, without having an incredible amount of anxiety and heartbreaking worry. Is life worth living if it isn’t the life I wanted for myself? I have been suffering with HSV2 for over a year now and whilst I can find relief through using the current anti viral medications, they do not help in easing the emotional burden.

    Your work and dedication gives me hope. I have read up continuously for the past year about the virus, and the vaccine’s which have failed in clinical trials. None have given me hope like yours. If Theravax is indeed 100X more effective than current treatment, the risk of transmitting would be so low that people like myself would not have to live such a guilt filled anxious painful mind numbing life.

    Dr Halford, you are saving lives by giving hope, if it was not for your research giving me hope, I would have most definitely commited suicide.

    I’m sure you hear this a lot, but on behalf of all the herpes sufferers out there, thank you for giving us all something to live for.

    You are the definition of a hero.

    Love Pepper xxx

    Like

    • Herpes Vaccine Research says:

      Dear Pepper,

      Thank you for your thoughtful words. You, and people like you, who suffer in silence are the reason the blog was created. Hang in there. There is always hope, although sometimes it is harder to find than at other times.

      – Bill H.

      Like

      • Pepper says:

        Is there anyway I can be included in the Phase 2 trials. I am willing to go anywhere and pay for the costs myself. I know this may be annoying to you but I am beyond desperate. I wake up everyday feeling numb. I need a way to get through, therapy hasn’t helped in anyway. I have applied online on RVX’s website. I am so sorry once again.

        Like

    • Dr. Hyder says:

      hello Dr Halford ,
      this question is out of context but since you are a specialist I was considering your views on this..
      I have genital herpes … if in the future if I have sex with condoms without an active outbreak with someone with hiv can I still get hiv despite condom use and with no sores ?

      Like

  4. A hopeful scientist says:

    Dear Dr. Halford,

    Thank you so much for posting this so that I, as someone with a little knowledge of virology, could see how your work has been reviewed. I have had so much hope and faith in your vaccine and I’ve wished every day that your claims are valid so that this will go somewhere and we might find a cure. I think it is very admirable that you chose to post the reviews along with your manuscript. It shows that you are willing to make improvements.

    Now I must ask, are you going to post a rebuttal for the reviews? I am very curious to hear what you have to say about some of their comments. I’m especially curious about the following:

    1) Was the study done without IRB approval? How?
    2) Do you have data to support the claims in the paper for which you did not include supportive data?
    3) Which statistical test did you use to obtain your p-value? Do you think it was the correct test to use with such a small sample size?
    4) Did you continue to follow up with those who have received the vaccine?
    5) Have you been able to identify specific proteins that are able to contribute to protection from infection or disease therapy in the live vaccine specifically, or do you just assume there will be more proteins that will when dealing with a live vaccine vs subunit?
    6) How do you support the claim that this vaccine could be available to the public in only one years time? I realize you are going to attempt to push it through in another county but a promise of one year is very optimistic. It gives me too much hope which will disappoint me a lot if it doesn’t happen.

    It makes me cautious when I see you refute your reviews with statements like:

    “I was informed that 3 reviewers hated the manuscript for a variety of reasons. This is what I expected, as the established vaccine science community will have to (1) accept their HSV-2 subunit vaccine approaches of the past 30 years have been an abject failure if they are to (2) acknowledge that, perhaps, Bill Halford may be saying something worth seriously considering.”

    This statement is broad and doesn’t address the reviewers real criticism. I’d really truly appreciate a more detailed response to their statements.

    Thank you so much for your work and efforts in curing this horrible condition. I truly respect and appreciate your work. Please don’t give up.

    Like

    • Herpes Vaccine Research says:

      Dear Hopeful Scientist,

      I would love to write a rebuttal letter to these reviews, as all of the comments are easily addressed. The issue is not me giving up…..it’s that I don’t have a clone or an excess of time. So, for now, the version I posted on my blog will have to suffice. Once I complete writing up 3 other manuscripts, then I can return to the issues you raise. When one is terminally ill with cancer, one does not have the luxury of addressing reviewer comments on a summary article before dealing with three manuscripts of data that are in one’s head, but noone elses. Getting info and data out of my head and into the public domain is the priority for the first three-quarters of 2017….oh, and an another clinical trial too. Addressing academic wankers (i.e., reviewers) who are woefully out of their depth and only reveal their stunning ignorance of HSV vaccine science through their disdainful but factually incorrect or irrelevant comments….less of a priority for the moment.

      Checking out on this conversation now, as those 3 manuscripts suffer every time I spend time on the blog. First things first!

      – Bill H.

      Like

      • A hopeful scientist says:

        Comments like this make me worry about the validity of your claims

        “Addressing academic wankers (i.e., reviewers) who are woefully out of their depth and only reveal their stunning ignorance of HSV vaccine science through their disdainful but factually incorrect or irrelevant comments….less of a priority for the moment.”

        I throughly read your manuscript and the reviews given to you and brushing off the reviewers in such a harsh way is something I have never seem a professional in the field do before. I felt the reviewers provided professional feedback that was mostly correct considering what you wrote about your study. I understand how one could become frustrated if a few of their comments may not have been accurate because perhaps you know a piece of information they don’t but overall their feedback was constructive criticism. Why do you have so much disdain for these other professionals in your field? Even your manuscript itself is written with a critical voice of the virology community. I have never read a manuscript written in such a format. This makes me apprehensive about your claims to having a scientifically sound answer. I am hoping with everything I have that you are right. Rooting for you.

        Like

      • Herpes Vaccine Research says:

        Dear Hopeful Scientist,

        Please feel free to worry away. The problem I have with your line of reasoning, as is true of most academic scientists, is that your line of reasoning reduces to, “Dr. Halford, please disregard the 1 million+ people who will contract HSV-1 or HSV-2 this week, and please disregard the scores of people contacting you weekly who say they are borderline suicidal, and please answer my questions now.”

        It’s great that people like you live in ivory towers and are seemingly immune to the suffering of your fellow men, and that what you seem to value most greatly is TALKING ABOUT SOLVING HERPES rather than TAKING CONCRETE STEPS towards that end. So, feel free to worry about the validity of my claims, and I will feel free to spend my time ignoring you so thay I may focus my time on doing what herpes sufferers actually need to happen ASAP.

        – Bill H.

        Like

      • Mary says:

        Boom! Way to go Dr. Halford. Please keep doing what you do. I now know you have more than one battle going on. Keep fighting the good fight. God Speed. Much love & gratitude.
        Mary

        Like

      • A hopeful scientist says:

        I actually suffer as well and very much would like a cure for myself and millions of other sufferers. I just wonder why you shoot down valid points made by the scientific community by constantly insisting that any criticism to your experiments assumes “stunning ignorance of HSV science.” I am just concerned with your study design and methods. It confuses me that you respond like this.

        Like

      • Herpes Vaccine Research says:

        Dear Hopeful Scientist,

        I responded to this elsewhere. It puzzles me why you don’t take the time to read the 10 years of papers that I have published in this space and answer your own question. I am not Siri. It is not my job to answer every question that pops into your head. It is your job to read the literature and arrive at your own conclusions.

        – Bill H.

        Like

      • A hopeful scientist says:

        On the note of my having it and also having a scientific background I just want to make it known that not only is this an issue for me but, aside from the deaths of loved ones, it has been the greatest struggle I have had in my life. I spent years depressed over my situation, contemplated suicide, and eventually used my experience as a mental push further into my scientific career. I still very much hate that I carry this virus and want so badly for this to be gone as soon as the technology exists that will allow me to take care of it. So please, I understand your argument that sufferers don’t want to wait because sometimes I feel like I myself cannot wait another day. Still I am concerned with the points I brought up to you in the above comments because I very much want to believe that this is real. I completely understand you need time to respond and I very much look forward to your response. Thank you for doing what you do.

        Like

      • Herpes Vaccine Research says:

        Dear Hopeful Scientist,

        I will respond as you request when time allows. My point is not to disparage you, and I am sure that you have the best of intentions. I think what I am trying to call attention to is that when it comes to the live HSV-2 vaccine, I find that people’s natural tendency is to “let the perfect become the enemy of the good.”

        I have published (or been closely involved in the publication of) the following papers that address the safety of the live HSV-1 ICP0- virus and live HSV-2 ICP0- virus vaccine concept:
        – Halford, et al, 2006
        – Halford, 2007
        – Halford, et al, 2010
        – Halford, et al, 2011
        – Halford, et al, 2013
        – Halford, 2014
        – Geltz, et al, 2015
        – Halford, et al, 2015
        – Royer, et al, 2016, and the soon to be
        – Royer, et al, 2017

        My problem with the reviewers of the review article I recently submitted isn’t the comments per se, it’s the fact that I am being accused of the reckless deployment of a live HSV-2 ICP0- virus vaccine that (1) I have been carefully vetting for 20 years in animal models and which most of my colleagues agree is incredibly safe; (2) I have injected myself with this virus at doses ranging from 0.1 to 200 million infectious units on numerous occasions; and (3) I just completed a clinical trial of n=20 herpes sufferers in St Kitts who generally compared the discomfort of the vaccination to a mosquito bite. Nowhere in that data set is there any indication that a live HSV-2 ICP0- virus is too dangerous to test as a therapeutic or preventative HSV-2 vaccine, and yet at least one of the reviewers is still accusing me of being reckless.

        So, where does this leave us? People such as Pepper (and many, many others) indicate that they are borderline suicidal and just the hope of a live HSV-2 vaccine that contains nearly 100% of HSV-2’s antigens is reason enough to carry on and see if this therapy improves their quality of life. The live HSV-2 vaccine is safe, and this has been proven time and time again….in fact the live HSV-2 ICP0- virus vaccine is safer than any live viral vaccine we currently give to children.

        I could spend the rest of my days answering “just one more question,” but nothing I have experienced in my past 10 years in this space tells me that the questions will ever stop.

        It’s time to quit answering the endless questions. It’s time to quit letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. It’s time to offer people like Pepper hope today…..not tomorrow. We can keep answering the questions simultaneously while we are offering herpes sufferers hope.

        – Bill H.

        Like

      • A hopeful scientist says:

        Thank you for leaving me the dates your publications. I have been able to read the abstracts of some of these and I appreciate that.

        I am mostly concerned with your most recent study conducted in St. Kitts. I have been able to watch the presentations you posted regarding it but may have missed where you posted the publication for that particular study. I would like to be able to read it. I am concerned with the lack of mention of IRB approval for the study. I understand you mention in your manuscript that you believe in beneficence, which is indeed one of the three core values of ethical review. Not seeking IRB ethical review in your study would be very worrying to me as you are then trusting in only yourself to decide what is ethically sound in your experiment. So, although you mention you believe in beneficence, not seeking ethical review goes against this core value. I am just concerned because these patients may not have been aware that all studies mandatorily go through this process and that this particular study has not.

        I am happy you are seeking locations abroad to conduct your studies because the US process is long and drawn out but not seeking some sort of ethical review for the study leads me to believe you could actually do harm to the patients. I understand you feel you have much more knowledge than perhaps someone on the review board and you feel you are sure that your study would not do harm. Still, I wonder if these participants were informed of the difference between participating in a study that does and does not go through a review process because uninformed consent in itself, is doing harm.

        If you did indeed seek some sort of ethical review, I apologize for the above comment. I am just expressing my concern. I hope you are able to find time to respond to the question I pose about ethical review, even if you do not have time to answer any other question.

        Aside from this concern I also just want to point out to those who may not have a scientific background reading this blog, some weaknesses in the study. This is not in any form a way to accuse you of anything, but simply a way to deconstruct the study and be able to take the data at face value. In fact, most studies will write about the weaknesses they possess directly in their own publications. My comments are as follows:

        First, in a study looking at effectiveness, you would want to observe the cases before treatment and record their outbreak status in some physical way for a number of months. In just requesting that the participant fill out a questionnaire or be interviewed on their past symptoms, you end up introducing recall bias into the study. Often times participants won’t recall the correct details of outbreaks and symptoms, leading to incorrect data recording. Interviewer bias could have also been introduced into the study. The participant can be (perhaps subconsciously) encouraged to answer the question a certain way based on the way it’s presented to them or based on the answer they think the interviewer wants to hear. This might sound like a small problem but it can affect the results of some studies. In other words, collecting data via survey and interview can be highly subjective. This is not to say that collecting data via survey isn’t common, it just makes for a weaker study than one that records the number of outbreaks in a different way, like a swab or exam for example.

        Lack of a control group: This was’t a double blind study, meaning there was no control group. Without a control group, the self-reported positive results of the data are weaker. The placebo effect is a very real phenomenon. Without another blinded group of participants(persons who are unaware if they have received the vaccine or a placebo), there is no control group to tell us how much the placebo effect came into play and affected the accuracy of the data. Could this study have included a control group? I understand this trial was done to observe safety and not effectiveness but even still it seems it would be easy enough to add a control group to the study even at this early stage, especially if you plan to present the results of not only the safety but the effectiveness of the vaccine as well.

        Small study population: This study could only include a small number of participants at this stage due to safety, but the small study group gives the data less power. In other words, the more participants a study has, the more likely it is that the results are real rather than due to other factors or random chance. This study had very few participants in it. When the 20 participants were broken into even smaller groups based on the determinants: HSV-2 neorpathic pain, menstrual cycle induced outbreaks, recurrent HSV-2, and GHSV-1, the groups became very very small. These samples of only 2 to 6 participants seem a bit too small to make inferences from.

        The statistical method used to obtain the results was not mentioned. Using the inappropriate statistical method can change its accuracy.

        There are also lots of positive things about the study. One I will point out are the Western Blot Tests that were compared with a control and were reactive. This indicates those injected produced antibodies that fight off herpes infections.

        I do not want you to feel like I am criticizing you in any way Dr. Halford, I am simply interested in the science behind the study, especially because I have so much personal interest in finding a cure. Thank you so much for taking the time to respond to me thus far. I know your time is valuable and you are very busy.

        Like

  5. Forest says:

    Dr Halford – here is another confirmation and strong validation of your brilliant approach of live attenuated virus. In this case, it is about a malaria vaccine that has passed a milestone in human safety trials by using a weakened form of the parasite…

    GM malaria vaccine ‘milestone’

    A malaria vaccine that uses a weakened form of the parasite has passed a “critical milestone” in human safety trials, say researchers.

    Read more:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38509736

    All the very best of health and success …

    Like

  6. Rylee says:

    Dr. Halford-
    When will trial participants be notified of selection for the next trials? Is there a point or rating system used to select applicants? How long will the trails run, before the product will be available for persons not selected.

    Like

    • Herpes Vaccine Research says:

      Dear Rylee (and all other blog followers who keep asking me this question),

      Please understand that first and foremost I am a researcher. I have accrued six years worth of data on (1) the live HSV-2 vaccine’s performance in human trials and I have posted initial snapshots of the data from these tests on the blog already; (2) the new HSV ABVIC test’s performance in human clinical trials in collaboration with the Westover Heights Clinic (Terri Warren)….which I am currently writing up; and (3) the creation of a new technology for generating stable cell lines whose transgene can be turned ON or OFF over a 200-fold range of biological activity, which is necessary to obtain the best ICP0-complementing cell line possible; this latter technology was developed in concert with Dr. Andy Wilber.

      Now, please appreciate that each of these three important scientific advances on which I have been collecting data for six years are currently only available to my laboratory and/or company, and it would be a crying shame if I kicked the bucket and had not committed these results to paper such that the scientific community might benefit from these scientific advances, which have broad biological implications well beyond herpes. In the first half of 2017, this is my highest priority and that is simply not negotiable. In science, the idea of spending six years collecting data to develop a better way to address three separate biological problems (all of which needed to be solved to advance a better class of HSV-2 vaccines), and then not telling anyone (writing it down), would be nothing short of idiotic and pointless.

      So, for those who follow this blog, please quit badgering me about the next clinical trial. I will get to it ASAP, but every inquiry I receive that asks me the same question over, and over, and over, and over, does not speed up the proces, and to the contrary is just one more inquiry that takes me off point.

      Yes, I get it! Herpes sufferers want a solution ASAP and deserve a solution ASAP. However, bitching at me and wasting my time is really not the most productive use of herpes sufferers’ time. Is Bill Halford really the rate-limiting factor here? I mean, I have spent the past decade of my life delivering one consistent message….if you want to solve the herpes problem, then THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY (as a whole) needs to advance a new class of live HSV-1 and/or HSV-2 vaccines into the clinics that treat human beings. So, if herpes sufferers want to do something useful to help in this cause, contact the OTHER SCIENTISTS who are glycoprotein D-zealots and ask them what gives? Contact the FDA and ask the same. Contact your local senator or representative.

      Herpes sufferers cannot have it both ways……everyone wants a cure ASAP but is unwilling to go public and bring a face and a voice to the problem. The simple fact is the herpes community has gotten exactly what it deserves….noone speaks about the problem, and so none of the decision makers are pressured into addressing the problem, which they generally do not know exists. If you want to solve the herpes problem ASAP, then quit hiding in the shadows and direct your pleas for help to the policy makers who do not yet know that herpes is an infinitely solvable problem. I am happy to testify in front of CNN, 60 Minutes, or the U.S. Congress, but that is only going to happen if herpes sufferers quit bitching to me, and bitch instead to the people putting obstacles in my path. Most lawmakers would happily change the rules to help herpes sufferers. However, if herpes sufferers don’t speak up and bring a face and a voice to the problem, then they will keep having only crappy antiviral drugs to address their problems.

      So, Rylee (and all the others asking me the same question), quit asking me when the next trial is, and quit waiting for Superman to swoop in and solve your problems. Get off your a– and do something for yourself. Your choice….you can have your anonymity as a herpes sufferers and endure this condition for the rest of your life, or you can bring a face and a voice to the problem and educate the other 7 billion people on this planet that you are suffering (along with 100 million other people of recurrent herpes) and there is a solution out there that the scientific community is, as a whole, not acting upon.

      Rylee, I am here to help, but I cannot do everything alone. Your choice…keep badgering me for info on the next trial or get in the game for real, and think about how you can act within your sphere of influence to get this movement ACTUALLY MOVING at the pace that you deserve.

      Sincerely yours,
      Bill H.

      Like

      • Gar11 says:

        I think a big group possibly from a forum needs rallying to start a big email/ peteition towards the fda. I agree with everything youve wrote above, the sufferers need to take a stand and stop the governements denying us a fix. keep up your good work, I think everyone fully understands how much work youve done and are very greatful.

        Like

      • Herpes Vaccine Research says:

        Hi Gar1,

        I do believe that if all herpes sufferers wrote a single 1-page letter to their government representatives in a single week stating that:
        (1) there is now overwhelming scientific evidence says a live HSV-2 vaccine is safe and effective;
        (2) this treatment modality has been ignored for the NIH and FDA by 30 years and there is no end in sight to this status quo;
        (3) as one of the 5 million Americans who suffer with recurrent herpetic disease, you expect your gov’t representative to do something to help break this stalemate and advance this life-saving medicine (in every sense of the word “life”) to U.S. clinical trials ASAP as there is now 30 years of evidence that the status quo of antiviral drugs or subunit vaccines is not working;
        and (4) if you want my vote, then please address this no-brainer issue by providing federal funding and a direct path to human clinical trials ASAP.

        If you guys can get me to Congress, I can summarize why this is a no-brainer decision in 10 minutes or less.

        – Bill H.

        Like

      • SG says:

        Mr. Halford,

        What you just said here, is as trougthfull as hurtfull for all sufferers…

        Being ashame of yourself, feeling dirty and alone, are synthoms that hurt more than the actual virus.

        Hope 2017 can bring the strength for unhiding.

        Meanwhile, thank you Doc for all you are doing…

        Lo que acaba de decir aquí, es tan doloroso como cierto para todos los sufridores…

        Sentirse avergonzado de uno mismo, sucio y solo, son síntomas que duelen más que el propio virus.

        Ojalá el 2017 sirva para dejar de esconderse.

        Mientras tanto, gracias Doc por todo lo que está haciendo…

        SG

        Like

      • Herpes Vaccine Research says:

        Hi SG,

        It is not my intention to be hurtful, although I understand my words may seem harsh. However, I have now four years of continuous interaction with (1) herpes sufferers on one hand and (2) government officials and scientists on the other hand. The simple reality I see is that the reason noone wears a ribbon for the >100 million herpes sufferers (i.e., far greater than the population of the entire UK) is because herpes sufferers suffer in silence. One cannot expect the general population to rally around a cause that they do not know exists.

        In English, the relevant saying is “The squeaky wheel gets the grease.” In Chinese, the relevant saying is “The crying baby gets the candy.”

        Herpes sufferers commonly lament the conspiracy Big Pharma has lobbied against them. I think Big Pharma can be accused of “monetary indifference” (lack of adequate incentives), which has slowed the exploration / development of better HSV-2 vaccines considerably. However, there is no Big Pharma conspiracy per se.

        The truth of the matter is that herpes is an incredibly common condition, and sufferers empower the condition to consume their life when they spend all of their time trying to hide the condition. I cannot profess to understand the intense social pressure to not admit one has herpes, but here is the God’s honest truth of how I feel about the condition. The vast majority of people with whom I have interacted who have herpes are GREAT people and the idea that this medical condition reflects who these people are is as farcical as saying that Bill Halford is an a–hole because he has cancer…..one thing has nothing to do with the other. I doubt that makes it any easier for people to go public, but I do know that the rate-limiting factor to “change the landscape and eradicate herpes” is that Bill & Melinda Gates (people with $$$), the members of the U.S. Congress (people who make the laws about clinical trials and timetables), and the vast majority of scientists simply fail to appreciate the DEPTH OF HUMAN SUFFERING caused by genital herpes.

        So, SG, please do not take my comments personally, but do appreciate that I am doing everything I can and the ultimate solution will require making investors, gov’t officials, and scientists aware that stopping the herpes pandemic should be of the highest priority to everyone on Earth because it is something we can do so easily starting today. If I could personally write the check, and change the laws, I would make it so. But, we all need to be real…..this will take a bit of a group effort, and fundamental to that effort will be conversations between herpes sufferers and policy makers.

        – Bill H.

        Like

      • Gar11 says:

        Cheers for taking the time to summarize what needs to be said, this needs to be posted somewhere of influence to get people behind it. I truely believe what you have presented is the fix for this. live vaccines are the way forward, the governments need to give and stop snubbing hsv as a minor issue when the reality is its causing alot of pain , especially when it is so hard to detect!! every potential partner could be a risk / at risk as we already know. bewilders me why they constantly deny any good research / vaccines that can help!

        Like

      • SG says:

        Hi Doctor,

        Maybe my words weren’t clear, sorry for that!!!!

        I wanted to give you ALL CREDIT for what you said!!!!!!

        You can’t do more!!!!! It´s up to sufferers to unhide!!!!!!

        Just that the truth many times hurts…

        Thanks for the truth, for your work and all the best Doctor!!!!

        SG

        Like

  7. Mary says:

    Dr. H., time is running out for me. The antiviral meds are taking a toll on my health. Can I pay for the vaccine? I can travel. Thank you!
    Mary

    Like

  8. Dave says:

    I agree with and support the goal of research being directed by the needs of patients and their doctors. What is the strategy for effecting this change? Attention to the issue needs to be directed to forums in which speak to policy makers, and to the broader public. Op-ed pieces, etc. There is a political dimension, and one could imagine class actions if research that has potential to cure disease is being systematically ignored.

    There still is a complementary role that I can envision for specifically targeted academic publications. Elsewhere you said that you are not interested in publishing just another paper, but any experimental evidence that you can provide for the safety and efficacy of these new vaccines — that is not just another paper! If you published a paper which just described your experiments and the results — sans the broader conclusions and the position statement — wouldn’t that be a useful certificate when arguing the broader case in policy-oriented forums?

    Happy New Year,
    and wishing Health to everyone here
    – Dave

    Like

  9. TVEC says:

    Let me get this straight, you vaccinated yourself against HSV and then transferred your serum to mice which subsequently protected them from HSV challenge!? Badass

    I noticed that you mentioned the 3.2 fold reduction number. In a previous blog comment, you explained that this number has gotten better over time since you can now exclude the “intra-vaccination days” from the dataset. When can we expect to see a re-analysis of the patient reported symptom frequency? i.e. that histogram from your tech expo slides but with updated data

    Keep up the amazing work Dr. Halford!

    Like

    • Herpes Vaccine Research says:

      Hi TVEC,

      You are 100% on point. Yes, I vaccinated myself and could transfer the protective antibodies from myself to naive mice and confer upon them protection against HSV-2-induced disease. That will be the design of a prophylactic HSV-2 vaccine trial when RVx is ready, and I am providing proof-of-principle in advance of how that trial should be designed, and why it will yield positive results (and how we can empirically prove that). If I may be allowed to say so myself, yes, the results are pretty badass.

      The Theravax^HSV-2 vaccine trial has a 12-month follow-up period post-vaccination, so I don’t plan to start writing until June 2017 when we are 12 months out from the first vaccination of Group 2. I have other stuff in the works (i.e., manuscripts to write and talks to deliver), so everyone will just have to hold tight and wait for the publication of the Theravax^HSV-2 vaccine trial results.

      – Bill H.

      Like

      • optimistic says:

        Hi Bill,

        Thanks for the explanation, Wish you a very happy new year & to the other friends on the blog.
        As u said the results will be available in june 2017, So after this there would be a phase 3 also or the vaccine would be available to the person in the market , I know its a silly question but wanted to know how will it go. Phase 3-phase 4 -new drug application & then commercially available.

        Regards,
        Optimistic

        Like

  10. Dr.Hyder says:

    Hello Dr. Halford ,
    in your previous comment you said the goal of Rvx is to get the vaccine in the American continents as soon as possible.. so can we expect the vaccines to get in the markets in some south american country by 2017? I must say your approach of live vaccine is amazing so can u also do a similar type of research for Hiv also ?? brilliant minds like you are very much needed for this as conventional scientists have been failing in the area of hiv research since it first got diagnosed in the early 80s

    Like

  11. Wes says:

    Hi Bill,

    Call me cynical but if the drug companies thought they would make more money finding a cure than suppressing the symptoms it would be on prescription list for Doctors. Keep up your vital work and thank you for your detailed posts it gives sufferers hope.

    Wesley

    Like

  12. Dr. Hyder says:

    is it true that the vaccine will be available by the end of 2017? I’m a doctor practising in india and I’ve been getting questions like these from many of my patients here .. as far as I know phase 2 and 3 are still remaining so I think it should take a minimum of 5 years to be commercially available outside US if not undergoing through the FDA trials … ur comments would be highly appreciated Dr. Halford

    Like

    • Herpes Vaccine Research says:

      Hello Dr. Hyder,

      Immediate development of the HSV-2 vaccine is focused in the Americas, and so you are correct that it will likely take longer to reach Asia. I cannot promise an exact timetable in any continent at this point in time, as this process will require the input of and working with regulatory agencies in every country where RVx conducts testing, and works towards entry into clinics of that country or region.

      – Bill H.

      Like

  13. Sweet7 says:

    Thank you Bill for all that you have done and are about to achieve. As a sufferer and a person who is in a supportive role to other people who suffer from genital herpes, I thought I might leave some comments regarding the reviewers. I’m not a scientist or trained in a medical profession. However I have read and learned a lot in the over 6 years of my chronic infection. Were some of the reviewers’ concerns and comments valid? I would say yes. However, there are some I have to question and wonder if they are even biased.

    Reviewer 1:
    Yes it is unknown if a live HSV-2 vaccine will work as well as the VZV vaccine. That is the point of trying it out and why a clinical trial was conducted. It’s great that the recent success of a VZV subunit vaccine can be superior then the current live VZV vaccine. However VZV as experts know is better controlled through antibody responses. The point of the success of a live VZV vaccine was more about safety and efficacy.
    As far as the comment “~10% of HSV infections resolved within the first month of infection”, I think what was meant was the initial outbreak. Most likely the patient never had another outbreak after the first and it cleared within a month. As a sufferer, and a member of several herpes forums, that appears to be the typical version for initial symptomatic outbreaks. I stress symptomatic outbreaks since the typical outbreaks does not produce symptoms.

    Reviewer 2:
    How is “the world has little to lose by more rapid testing of live HSV viruses” reckless? I don’t think the world has little to lose when 90% of the population is expected to acquire HSV-1. Meaning most people are going to get a form of it. It’s because it’s a human pathogen that has been left to spread unchecked for far too many years. Now it’s supposed to be ok because it’s so common even though there is a minority of people who suffer severely from it. As high as the prevalence is, that minority is a whole lot of people.
    Yes there was a test of a live attenuated HSV-1 virus called IMLYGIC® (TALIMOGENE LAHERPAREPVEC). It’s an oncolytic vaccine that Amgen bought to treat tumors and has been approved by the FDA. That actually could be a prophylactic for type 1 but I’m sure Amgen would never want to sell it for the price needed to be viable as a herpes vaccine. Knipe’s vaccine owned by Sanofi Pasture that is in a current clinical trial in DC is replication deficient. That’s a three year phase I trial. THREE YEARS!!! Three years for a vaccine where the developer claimed may not be suited for African strains which is ridiculous. Halford made the point that he meant that an attenuated replicating live vaccine shouldn’t be confused with a replication deficient vaccine as far as not have been tested in Humans.
    Yes this was an end run around the FDA because it’s too expensive and time consuming to go through the FDA. I suffer. I want help. If you can give me a version of something I already have but give me lots more so my immune system will better react, then I want to try it. Maybe it would reduce or end my suffering and I can have a normal quality of life.
    If this reviewer was suffering from genital pain induced by HSV-2 to the point where it feels like they are sitting in battery acid every day, all day, then a 60 cm2 area of inflamed epithelium even for a few days is worth it to no longer feel like sitting in battery acid. Even flu like symptoms are worth it to herpes sufferers who wish they didn’t have to suffer.

    Reviewer: 3
    So there have been other live vaccines tested in animals that showed equivalent or in this reviewers opinion, superior to this OLNS vaccine. Well I’ll be damned. Other live vaccines have shown to be effective in animal models but not tested in humans. So let’s just allow this virus to continue to spread while we keep tinkering with the why and how even though were pretty sure a live vaccine can do the trick.
    Reviewer stated “He states that he was the first  to propose a live HSV‐2 vaccine in 2007”. Wrong. He proposed that it was the most viable solution. He never stated he was the first to propose a live HSV-2 vaccine. Are you so biased that you think he is dumb enough to make such a statement?
    I believe there had been studies of people who have acquired more than one HSV-2 strain. This was due to people who will only be with other positive people. What was found among the symptomatic patients is that even though a person picked up a new strain, the behavior didn’t change as far as severity and frequency. What was noted was the that the person may have 4 outbreaks per year but with the new strain, 3 out of the four may be the original and the 4th may be the new strain. I’m not sure where that study resides but believe that came out of the UofW. So in theory if a person is vaccinated with a live HSV-2 vaccine that does not reactivate then it’s possible that even if another wild type strain is picked up later in life that there would be no reactivation or symptoms. The behavior should be the same.
    I think this person needs to meet the many women who suffer genital disease with the unsought of the menstrual cycle or shortly after. They also should speak to the many women who either never had outbreaks or started having outbreaks after years of no symptoms when they started perimenopause. I have seen comments from women who take birth control pills nonstop to keep their hormone levels regulated so they don’t have outbreaks. Many people advise them that could be dangerous but they don’t care. They were sick of having outbreaks. No it may have not been specifically scientifically proven that hormonal regulation plays a role in re-current genital disease, but I challenge these experts to study this phenomenon. As for neuralgia caused by HSV that improves with medication or a more heightened immune response, then I would also like to challenge study on that aspect. However both challenges are not free and would cost a tremendous amount of money and time. I have read comments from patients who had to take high doses of antivirals to stop the burning when there was no sign of lesions or inflammation on the skin. People in the trial in St. Kitts saw a reduction or stopped suffering from similar chronic neuralgia symptoms after vaccination. Does it really matter why?

    Do you think some of these experts could have enough compassion to rally behind patients who need help now? Especially when it comes to a virus that most of humanity will contract?

    Once again, thank you so much Bill and the RVX team for moving forward. I hope that this vaccine becomes available somewhere very soon and the recipients can speak for the safety and effectiveness. I look forward to more clinical trials to study shedding and prevention.

    Sweet7

    Like

    • Herpes Vaccine Research says:

      Hi Sweet7,

      Thank you for taking the time to provide your thoughtful comments, and for bringing a human face to the herpes problem. I have two comments to add to yours.

      First and foremost, you hit the nail on the head that there is a lot of human suffering caused by HSV-1 and HSV-2, and I would suggest therefore that we should be trying a diversity of herpes vaccine strategies. By all means, proponents of HSV-1 and HSV-2 subunit vaccines should keep pushing forward because maybe they will find a new iteration that works, which has yet to be tested. However, we have never once in the history of medicine tested a live, replication-competent (but attenuated) HSV vaccine in human clinical trials. What I am trying to say on this blog and in the manuscript is pretty simple……if Strategy 1 (subunit HSV vaccines) has been failing for 25+ years, then perhaps we should diversify our options and test BOTH Strategies 1 and 2 (subunit and live HSV vaccines). Given the magnitude of the problem, which Sweet7 brings to life in his/her comment, I think it would be appropriate to empirically test ALL possible HSV vaccine strategies and to do so posthaste.

      Second, Sweet7, you rightly state that in the reviews of this manuscript, the reviewers have some valid points. I wholeheartedly agree. I have been publishing papers out of my own laboratory for 15 years, and I have yet to receive comments from reviewers that do not contain some valid points, and very useful suggestions, that if addressed and incorporated do not yield a better manuscript.

      This acknowledged, the last four vaccine reviews or manuscripts published out of my laboratory (1) have taken 6 to 13 months to publish; (2) have required me to take the time to formulate thoughtful responses to as many as 120 collective comments over 5 rounds of peer-review and those comments are often 2 to 3 times longer than the manuscript itself; and (3) at the end of the day did not change the foundational premises or data presented within the manuscript. Interestingly, other competing groups published similar findings to 2 of these 4 manuscripts within 6 to 9 months after my papers were published even though there had been no similar prior publications for a decade before these papers were published.

      Namely, I am referring to Halford, et al. (June 2013; Pubmed ID#: 23755244) which was first submitted to PLoS ONE in June 2012, and which made the allegedly “controversial claim” that the total antibody response to HSV-vaccines was a highly effective correlate of immunity that researchers had been suggesting for almost a decade was either (1) exceedingly difficult to identify or perhaps (2) simply did not exist because “HSV is so different.” This is a common cop-out in HSV-2 vaccine research; it’s not that researchers have been barking up the wrong tree, but rather HSV-2 genital herpes simply may not be vaccine-preventable. I cry “B.S.” on the latter suggestion. As controversial as the claims of Halford, et al, 2013 were (hence why it took 13 months to publish), it was followed 9 months later by a very similar finding of Belshe, et al. in Mar 2014 (PubMed ID#: 24285844). I note that Belshe, et al (2014) did not find my prior work on the same topic relevant enough to cite in their paper.

      Likewise, Halford, et al., 2015 was similarly viewed with skepticism by my reviewers (Pubmed ID# 26670699) because I claimed that vaccine-induced antibodies were an essential mediator of vaccine-induced protection against HSV-2 disease. My reviewers vehemently opposed this concept, despite the fact that it is consistent with what happens in vaccine-induced protective responses to a wide array of viruses. As “controversial” as this manuscript was (according to my reviewers and the academic editor), it was followed 6 months later by a paper in Nature in May 2016 (PubMed ID#: 27225131) that supported a similar conclusion that the protective efficacy of HSV-2 antibodies had been underappreciated for the past decade. While this paper repeated many aspects of my lab’s Dec 2015 paper, the Nature paper of Iijima and Iwasaki (May 2016) failed to cite or acknowledge my prior work, and thus was groundbreaking and paradigm-shifting enough to be published in Nature. It’s much easier to publish a “ground-breaking” paper when one fails to cite the previously published literature.

      This has been my experience in publishing on HSV-2 vaccines for the past four years. My data and ideas are too radical to publish straightaway, and so I (a person working with a limited clock due to cancer) spend 6 to 12 months per paper addressing the comments of reviews that are similarly contentious to those associated with the current manuscript that I posted on my blog on December 23, 2016. Despite what a reckless idiot I am in the eyes of my reviewers, other colleagues in my field think enough of the work to repeat it and publish it again 6 to 9 months later (without acknowledging that my lab had just published similar findings). On one hand, imitation is the highest form of flattery. On the other hand, I do wonder if the critical nature of some of my reviewers’ comments stems from their desire to delay my publication so that they may publish their findings first.

      So, returning to the blog post, I am simply disempowering my reviewers from wasting the remainder of my life addressing obstructionist comments, and putting both the manuscripts and the reviewers’ comments out there for the world to judge.

      Sweet7, thank you for taking the time to consider both my manuscript and the reviewers’ comments. I hope that a few others follow in your footsteps.

      – Bill H.

      Like

  14. richard says:

    What about japan? since the chickenpox vaccine was developed there wouldnt they be very open to the idea of your vaccine?

    Like

    • Herpes Vaccine Research says:

      Hi Richard,

      I would love nothing more than to work with the country of Japan, as this is a country that has produced many brilliant scientists and many great inventions, such as the chickenpox vaccine. If RVx receives an invitation to run a Phase I clinical trial in Japan, I will be there with bells on. As of now, I do not have any active leads / paths to run a clinical trial in Japan, but I would welcome any such opportunity.

      – Bill H.

      Like

  15. David Tanzer says:

    Suggestion, what about changing the form of the article to focus on the description of the positive results you found in your experiment. In methods and materials, you would need to talk about rationally engineered live viruses. I know that is not the full scope and meaning of your work, but it would help to get your data on the scientific record.

    Since the logic of your vision is compelling, you may be able to convey it effectively using techniques of understatement. People will be able to connect the dots, if you supply them with key facts, and make neutral references to relevant points of theory.

    I know this is not a neutral matter, but if publication is going to serve your agenda of making this happen, then why not state your broader case is other forums.

    All the Best!

    Like

    • Herpes Vaccine Research says:

      Hi Dave,

      You are correct…this is not a neutral matter. I have been publishing in the HSV biology space for 20+ years. The goal is not to publish one more paper. The goal is to give herpes sufferers (~100 million people) access to the relevant information on a real-time basis. Call me crazy, but I believe that patients and doctors should be driving the conversation on which herpes treatments advance to clinical testing. I am fine with giving academic scientists an opportunity to be the sole arbiters and mediators of this conversation, but in my estimation, they have had about 40 years to do precisely this and have yet to deliver a real solution to the herpes problem. Perhaps if we involve doctors and patients in the conversation, the next 40 years may be different. That is the idea behind the blog post. We shall see how it pans out.

      – Bill H.

      Like

  16. John says:

    Thank you Professor Halford.

    Millions of suffer were waiting for someone with the balls to prove something different in the research of this desease. With all the respect to the rest of scientist, if they continue practicing the researches with the same ideas.. they will continue getting the same results.. you Dr. Halford decided to follow another avenue and therefore the results we have!! **Better alternative than veltrex**. You had the balls, the faith, the sacrifices, and the patience..

    Our Christmas present is the hope you provide us through the new vaccine Rvx👍

    Thank you, thank you

    JG

    Like

  17. stevenet777 says:

    Hi Bill… Greetings Brother. I read everything you supplied on this thread. In my view, you have accumulated enough clinical evidence to show the vaccine to be safe – which is the most important consideration before moving forward in any clinical trial. A larger and more effective trial could be done to show safety; however, no human trial would have been possible had you not done so outside of the USA. Also regarding safety, you have shown evidence that your attenuated virus may be more safe than the live virus vaccines already in use. 2ndly, I see good reason to believe their is potential for this vaccine to be successful in developing long term latency (with boosters) in those already infected. 3rdly, I see good solid reason to believe their is potential for this vaccine to be preventative (with boosters). I am confident that you have a successful phase 1 clinical trial in these regards.

    Your paper also addressed a major concern/question of mine, which was: If a wild type HSV-2 infection is not successful in establishing long-term latency in a recipient, then why would your attenuated live virus do what the wild type virus could not do in those infected with it? The answer you gave was plausible, and, so far, appears to be a realistic explanation considering the clinical study results, but remains to be proven in further clinical trials in humans.

    Further clinical trials can also determine more exact levels of shedding that is prevented/diminished in those already infected when using your vaccine candidate. This is a major concern of those already infected – the fear of transmitting HSV to others – loved ones in particular.

    I can see that some of the concerns the 3 reviews addressed are valid, but I am also looking at what you have already accomplished, and are accomplishing. In light of the clinical trials and in view of the safety of a live attenuated virus as your candidate, I see good reason to go ahead with further clinical trials, and wish the FDA would be able to see this as well. Safety and potential Efficacy are the major considerations. You have shown safety for your candidate vaccine. The FDA should recognize this considering that millions more weekly are being infected with HSV. The safety risk appears quite minimal in comparison with the millions already continually being infected and disrupting lives, and in some instances, disabling lives and killing some. The safety and the potential benefits should make this vaccine a go ahead for future trials.

    Blessings Bill, and hope you recover from you cancer. If not, then your mission while you are here is not in vain. You will be remembered, and I believe your work will continue… and I feel your soul is safe.

    Love, Steven

    Like

    • Herpes Vaccine Research says:

      Hi Steven,

      Thank you for your thoughtful review and analysis of the materials provided. I agree with nearly all of your points. I believe the important thing for everyone to remember is that science does not function to “PROVE A FACT” all in one test. Rather, science progresses in at least three phases, and these are:

      Phase 1. Taking an idea from pure conjecture to the phase of “This seems like a plausible idea that merits serious study.” That is what RVx and I have accomplished so far, and as the manuscript points out, the available evidence in 2017 is that the world has little to lose and potentially much to gain by testing the capacity of live HSV-2 ICP0- virus vaccines in people.

      Phase 2. Running extensive testing around a “plausible idea” to iron out the details and see which facets of the hypothesis stand the test of time, and which facets (derivative hypotheses) are bits of imaginary fluff that dissolve under testing and scrutiny. Phase 2 could easily take 5 to 20 years depending on whether you generally want to know if live HSV-2 ICP0- virus vaccines are really superior to HSV-2 subunit vaccines in humans, or if you want to explore all of the derivative (spin-off) hypotheses.

      Phase 3. Description of codified fact that can no longer be considered a theory because it has been so well studied. This is at least 40 years off in the space of describing how a safe and effective live HSV-2 vaccine stopped the spread of herpetic disease in the human population.

      The manuscript I offer is addressing Phase I……this seems like a promising possibility that merits exploration, and which might be preferable to simply sitting around and watching >1 million people per week contract new HSV-1 and HSV-2 infections while we continue to watch HSV-2 subunit vaccine trials fail, which is basically what we have been doing since the year 2000.

      – Bill H.

      Like

  18. Carol Herbst says:

    Thank you for your persistence, dedication, and faith that your research and vaccines are of life-changing value to those of us who suffer. Thank you for caring enough to move forward in spite of resistant forces. Thank you for your gifts to us and continued forward movement into uncharted territory. May you be blessed with continued strength and stamina to accomplish this great feat, as well as to experience the joy of seeing it come to fruition. I believe in you and your work, and hope and pray that I can be one of the 300 in the upcoming trial, and that you are able to carry out many more to come!

    Like

Comments are closed.