What happens if we manage to kill 91% of the HIV strains? Won't the remaining 9% of the strains continue to spread and mutate? Then we're back to square one.
I remember reading in "The Tipping Point" by Malcolm Gladwell how STDs like HIV can be effectively stopped before they become epidemics. If this antibody can be administered and eliminate a large chunk of people with weaker strains of HIV, then assuming the stronger strains of HIV are in the same geographic area, a strong campaign of eliminating HIV spreading behavior in those areas could really reduce the spread of the disease. But like another poster said we don't know which strains are most prevalent, so it could be that a stronger strain is more widespread.
"'We're going to be at this for a while' before any benefit is seen in the clinic, he said."<p>No doubt. It is a first step. Good news if clinical application follows from this finding.<p>As usual, I advise readers unfamiliar with Peter Norvig's article on reading scientific research reports<p><a href="http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html" rel="nofollow">http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html</a><p>to check that for issues that may not be fully explored by this mass media report.
It's really a testament to nature and Darwin's theories that after all the time, effort and money we've been spending on AIDS research, the most successful antibody so far was not created by man, but by his DNA.
So if there's eventually an HIV vaccine that's 91% effective should everyone take it just in case? Even if you never expect to contract HIV this seems like a bit of a Pascal's Wager situation. Why risk it when there's a vaccine available?