While I obviously like the idea of a free HIV vaccine, I'm sceptical that a small startup, however well run, can do better than the entire might of the pharmaceutical industry.
I don't know enough about the subject matter to be sure, but I would predict there are good reasons why this technique hasn't been focused on. It would require an implausibly massive level of groupthink for pharma companies and other charities to have overlooked a potential solution for such a prominent (and potentially profitable) disease.
It would require an implausibly massive level of groupthink for pharma companies and other charities to have overlooked a potential solution for such a prominent
If you have 10000 possible solutions and can only test 1000 than you have to make choices about not persuing some avenues.
But I would be surprised if there not also big pharma research looking at AIDS vaccines. In this case the people behind the immunity project seem to have made a patentable finding in 2010. Then they run a successful animal study. They chose to to the innovative road of bein...
The short story is that animal trials of a vaccine have been completed and they're looking for funding to go further.
https://pledge.immunityproject.org/the-free-hiv-aids-vaccine
Discussion on Hacker News here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7108684
A few personal notes:
My first thought on seeing this was "I want to donate, but only if it's actually going to pan out. Otherwise it'll be a waste of my money." But that's exactly the wrong way to think about science. You fund it because it has a worthwhile probability of success. Even if the attempt fails, I can still believe that I've made a "correct" decision.
I've basically outsourced my vetting of the worthiness of the endeavor to Paul Graham, Sam Altman, and the rest of the YCombinator team. They have the time and the resources to examine and consider this more thoroughly than I could possibly do.
Another reason that I donated to this was to encourage the general idea of crowdfunded science.