Andrew Stimpson: Science Hero

CFLarsen

Penultimate Amazing
C
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
42,371
SCOT IS FIRST IN WORLD TO BEAT HIV

A SCOT last night claimed to be the first person in the world to be cured of HIV.

Andrew Stimpson tested negative for the deadly condition after having it for more than a year.

...

Andrew, a sandwich maker, who lives in London with his gay partner Juan Gomez, 44, was first diagnosed HIV positive in June 2002. Further tests confirmed it.

...

But in October 2003 at a routine check-up at London's Victoria Clinic, the tests came back negative. Three more tests gave him the all-clear.

...

Andrew has offered himself as a guinea pig for tests which he hopes will provide hope for millions of AIDS sufferers.

He added: "I can't help wondering if I hold the cure for AIDS. It is scary and confusing but makes me feel very special. That would be remarkable, astounding."
Full story
Click to expand...
(Emphasis mine)

Way to go, Andrew!
 
I don't get it. According to the report, he was "cleared" in 2003.
And this momentous event is only now being reported in a tabloid
newspaper (The Sunday Mail)?
 
His call - his medical records are private after all. Assuming he did delay on purpose, I think he was wise to do so. An early announcement might have been wrong. Remember the babies born with HIV who fought off the virus within a few months of birth? It eventually transpired that they never had it in the first place, but tested positive due to the presence of antibodies produced by their HIV-positive mothers.

It's exciting news, though. This guy might - just might - hold the key to beating the virus, but let's hope people don't get complacent in the meantime.
 
On the radio it was reported that he had tried to sue for compensation for the distress caused by what was at first assumed to be a false positive. (He had apparently contemplated suicide.) It was only when his original result was conclusively proved to be correct, thus invalidating his suit, that the story started to get interesting.

Rolfe.
 
Okay, so if this guy first tried to sue for distress, then came to the conclusion that the diagnosis had been correct, then somehow managed to fight off the disease, and finally concluded that he should allow himself to be studied ... that's just plain impressive.

~~ Paul
 
Paul C. Anagnostopoulos said:
Okay, so if this guy first tried to sue for distress, then came to the conclusion that the diagnosis had been correct, then somehow managed to fight off the disease, and finally concluded that he should allow himself to be studied ... that's just plain impressive.

~~ Paul
Click to expand...
I think you've not quite got the order right. He tested positive, believed it, and became depressed, making enquiries about voluntary euthanasia. For some reason his doctor recommended a retest. This came up negative. At that point, it was assumed that the earlier result had been wrong, and that was when he decided to mount an action for damages - because the "wrong" result had caused him so much distress. However, it was subsequently proved that the original result and the second result were both correct, as regards the true status of the blood samples in question. (The lab person in me still wonders about misidentification of the original sample, but on the other hand they are fanatically careful about that so it may be it can be discounted.)

What I'm wondering is, was the correct nature of the original result only discovered because the testing lab had to defend a lawsuit? In that case, is it possible that there may be others around like this, who accepted a revision of their diagnosis on the grounds that nobody's perfect, and so never had the original result verified?

Rolfe.
 
So... if he has somethign funny in his blood that can kill HIV. and some company figures it out(and most likely patents it *grrr*) and create some medication for the masses. Will the godfearing christians of america take this?

I mean, HIV and AIDS was a disease brought down on the SODOMISTS by the most holy SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST.

I mean, can a good christian accept medication derived from a... a... a soul so perverted by SATAN. Wouldn't the sickness of HOMOSEXUALITY pervert the medication.

All godfearing christians must unite in the spirit of the holly TRINITY and prevent this perversion. His cure is surely a sign that he have made a pact with THE DEVIL.

Sincerely
Tobias

Hiding from reality behind humor, because i know someone will say this and mean it. :(
 
It's interesting. Like Rolfe, I tend to worry that there was a lab error somewhere, but maybe not. What concerns me is that a claim will appear for some environmental factor- miraculous or not- which may have "cured" him between tests 1 and 2.
Barr's Irn Bru, maybe?
 
Soapy Sam said:
It's interesting. Like Rolfe, I tend to worry that there was a lab error somewhere, but maybe not. What concerns me is that a claim will appear for some environmental factor- miraculous or not- which may have "cured" him between tests 1 and 2.
Barr's Irn Bru, maybe?
Click to expand...

Do we know that he was tested more than once as a positive? If not then sadly one might still say the odds of cock-up are higher than the odds of a miracle.


On the other hand, one might want to check, but he may have seen a fully qualified classical homeopath. (Americans and recent lurkers, please note:- this is called irony.)
 
Ahemn:

"Andrew, a sandwich maker, who lives in London with his gay partner Juan Gomez, 44, was first diagnosed HIV positive in June 2002. Further tests confirmed it."
 
CFLarsen said:
Way to go, Andrew!
Click to expand...

That's funny, because according to an article on the BBC website, our dear friend Andrew is anything but the science hero... Unfortunately, I can't post a link because I'm far too much of a lurker, and I haven't yet notched up 15 posts.. but the article is currently on the BBC News frontpage, and I'm sure you clever chappies can find it by searching...

Here's a quote:
Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust confirmed the tests were accurate but were unable to confirm Mr Stimpson's cure because he had declined to undergo further tests.

A statement from the trust said: "This is a rare and complex case. When we became aware of Mr Stimpson's HIV negative test results we offered him further tests to help us investigate and find an explanation for the different results.

"So far Mr Stimpson has declined this offer."

A trust spokeswoman added: "We urge him, for the sake of himself and the HIV community, to come in and get tested.

"If he doesn't feel that he can come to Chelsea and Westminster then he should please go to another HIV specialist."
Click to expand...
 
"A letter from the Chelsea and Westminster NHS Trust Hospital said: "The doctors were in no doubt that you were HIV positive."

Rolfe, Had he taken any treatment?

How it can effect?
"He tested positive, believed it, and became depressed, making enquiries about voluntary euthanasia."
 
Thanks for posting the link...

Well, I've actually just watched the video clip attached to the BBC article, and near the end the reporter does say "Mr Stimpson says he will do anything he can to help find a cure.."

So it seems as though the BBC is contradicting itself! Who knows!.. But hopefully some small (or even better BIG) breakthrough will come of this, and we'll be able to one day have an HIV-free world!
 
CFLarsen said:
Ahemn:

"Andrew, a sandwich maker, who lives in London with his gay partner Juan Gomez, 44, was first diagnosed HIV positive in June 2002. Further tests confirmed it."
Click to expand...

I'd seen that, but we need to be told specifically that there were separate blood samples not just confirmatory tests on the same sample supposedly from him.

And as the BBC piece says it does look more complex now.

I hope we see some follow-up stories. This could disappear into the background indefinitely, i.e. even if it is true there may be nothing much to report for some time and "Previous version of story found to be true" won't make a very snappy headline although that's what we, interested outsiders, want to read.
 
So far Mr Stimpson has declined this offer.
Click to expand...
Possible explanations:

1. He's been misquoted or misunderstood
2. It's some kind of elaborate hoax
3. He's a sadistic/amoral lunatic
4. He's holding out for the highest bidder

I'm sure there are more, but I go for 4.

Something strange seems to have happened to him; he tried to sue and failed; he's gone to the media without submitting himself for tests.

This says "show me the money" to me.
 
Rolfe, BSM, Emotion impact immunity, unmedicine, that healing agent as I mentioned very much related to sucidal tendency, fear of death etc.

Whether getting sucidal tendency, fear of death, depression,loathing of life,not to take any medicine, food etc. are natutal emotions & if meant for self healing?
 
Last edited:
There was a bit more on the TV news. He's saying that the request to have more tests done was recent, and he's happy to do anything he can to help others.

The spokesman said that this was the first case where there was no remaining doubt about the results both being correct - other cases that had been suspected had been found to involve sample miz-ups or people lying or things like that. But there was still some doubt expressed about what was going on in relation to virus status as opposed to antibody status. (Antibodies don't usually go away just because a person eliminates an infection, and the standard HIV tests are antibody tests.) But it seemed as if this was just that the expert being interviewed didn't know all the details. The impression seemed to be that the case had been properly investigated and was genuine.

BSM, there were at least two samples. Kumar, he had not taken any treatment.

Rolfe.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom