May 23, 2013
PARIS - Thirty years ago, on May 28, 1983, French virologist Françoise Barré-Sinoussi was the first to describe how researchers had identified the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) responsible for AIDS, in an article published in the prestigious American journal Science
Awarded the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 2008 along with Luc Montagnier, Barré-Sinoussi still works at the Pasteur Institute – a French foundation for research and public health. Ahead of an international symposium commemorating 30 years of research on HIV, she talks to Le Monde about what’s next in the fight against a pandemic that has cost the lives of 28 million people since 1981.
Nobel Prize Laureate Françoise Barré-Sinoussi - Photo: Prolineserver - GNU
LE MONDE: From the beginning of the epidemic, researchers have said that a vaccine could be developed in about ten years. After all the unsuccessful vaccine trials, do you still think this is possible?
FRANCOISE BARRE-SINOUSSI: I still believe we can find a cure for AIDS, but to do so, we need to change the way we think, change the dogma of research in this particular field. We need to find new approaches, because so far, all the empirical attempts at developing a vaccine, and a vector to carry it, have failed.
The international STEP trial – which started in 2004 with 3,000 volunteers from America and Australia and a candidate vaccine from the Merck laboratory – ended in 2007, after it was determined that it was unsuccessful at protecting against the virus. Until then, the concept was: “Let’s try and we’ll see what happens,” because that is the way many of today’s efficient vaccines were found. The problem is, this does not work for HIV. When positive results were obtained – like for instance with the 2003 “Thai” trial carried on 16,000 men and women in Thailand – the results remained modest.
What could these new approaches be?
They will result from a return to fundamental research, but as I said before, this can work only if researchers free themselves from dogmas. The usual vaccines protect us by inducting antibodies, which prevent the virus from entering the cells. None of the HIV vaccines have managed to produce that type of antibodies.
However, we have gained further knowledge on another type of antibodies. We need to understand what the best response is in order to protect patients. This is true for HIV as well as for other diseases which have no vaccine yet: malaria, hepatitis C, tuberculosis…
I like the idea of identifying on vaccines that work – like the one for yellow fever – the first signs of immune response, so that we can compare them to unsuccessful HIV vaccines.
We must also learn from the studies that have revealed a sub-category of particular antibodies, which were found on people living with VIH and for who the infection seems to have been blocked. We are still in the very early stages of research on this.
Scanning electron micrograph of HIV-1 budding (in green) - Photo: C. Goldsmith
When do you think this work could bring successful results?
I would not like to hazard a guess on the exact date.
What have you learnt from these 30 years of research?
We have witnessed a great example of what is called translational research – all the sectors of medical research have come together to find the best solutions of diagnosis, treatment and prevention for people suffering from HIV. This was the prevailing spirit from the start.
We had to go through a very hard period of time during which infected people where dropping like flies. Lab researchers like me were not used to being in contact with patients. But here, relationships and stories were formed. It made us re-evaluate our work. The everyday relationship with patients and civil society representatives had a real impact on research programs priorities. Today, I could not imagine my job without this contact with patients.
The International Aids Society (IAS) – of which you are president – and scientists working on HIV in general had a very militant position from the start…â€¨â€¨
Scientist do everything they can, as fast as possible, so that the prevention, diagnosis and treatment tools can be accessible everywhere. So when this is not the case, it becomes unbearable. It makes us angry, and this anger does not subside with time… But with the help of militants, I think we were able to raise awareness much better.
In 2012, The IAS launched a campaign called Towards an HIV Cure. What are its objectives?
Our objective is to accelerate cross-disciplinary research. We wish to integrate basic research with clinical research, social sciences. Contrary to other initiatives, this one was not instigated by silent partners or international agencies, but by scientists. Our goal is to get funds for specific projects.
One of our biggest problems right now is getting physical access to HIV-positive people so that we can offer them the existing solutions that can give them a quasi-normal life expectancy. This will cost a lot of money, but there is no doubt that it is the best way forward.
Moreover, in many countries, the fight against HIV is a way of raising the general quality of health systems by developing more comprehensive health programs. Such a strategy means exponential costs – because it means a longer life expectancy for patients – but it is eventually profitable.
Over the years, there have been different points of views on what the best treatment was for people living with HIV. What is the accepted theory today?
There is an ongoing debate about what is the best time to start the antiviral treatment. Now we know that the HIV virus infiltrates different areas of the organism at a very early stage, and remains latent in these hidden areas… until the moment it is reactivated. This is the reason why treatment needs to be stronger, and start earlier than it did in the past.
There are also difficulties arising from the fact that for now, the treatment remains a life-long one. In France, a group of patients know as the “Visconti cohort” started a three-year treatment within ten weeks of being infected. For most of them, the infection is still under control, sometimes seven years after the end of the treatment. This is an encouraging result.
This leading French daily newspaper Le Monde ("The World") was founded in December 1944 in the aftermath of World War II. Today, it is distributed in 120 countries. In late 2010, a trio formed by Pierre Berge, Xavier Niel and Matthieu Pigasse took a controlling 64.5% stake in the newspaper.
Keep up with the world. Break out of the bubble.
Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter!
A neo-Nazi has been buried in the former grave of a Jewish musicologist Max Friedlaender – not an oversight, but a deliberate provocation. This is just one more example of antisemitism on the rise in Germany, and society's inability to respond.
Eva Marie Kogel
October 24, 2021
BERLIN — If you want to check the state of your society, there's a simple test: as the U.S. High Commissioner for Germany, John Jay McCloy, said in 1949, the touchstone for a democracy is the well-being of Jews. This litmus test is still relevant today. And it seems Germany would not pass.
Incidents are piling up. Most recently, groups of neo-Nazis from across the country traveled to a church near Berlin for the funeral of a well-known far-right figure. He was buried in the former grave of Jewish musicologist Max Friedlaender, a gravesite chosen deliberately by the right-wing extremists.
The incident at the cemetery
They intentionally chose a Jewish grave as an act of provocation, trying to gain maximum publicity for this act of desecration. And the cemetery authorities at the graveyard in Stahnsdorf fell for it. The church issued an immediate apology, calling it a "terrible mistake" and saying they "must immediately see whether and what we can undo."
There are so many incidents that get little to no media attention.
It's unfathomable that this burial was allowed to take place at all, but now the cemetery authorities need to make a decision quickly about how to put things right. Otherwise, the grave may well become a pilgrimage site for Holocaust deniers and antisemites.
The incident has garnered attention in the international press and it will live long in the memory. Like the case of singer-songwriter Gil Ofarim, who recently claimed he was subjected to antisemitic abuse at a hotel in Leipzig. Details of the crime are still being investigated. But there are so many other incidents that get little to no media attention.
The grave of Jewish musicologist Max Friedlaender
Crimes against Jews are rising
Across all parts of society, antisemitism is on the rise. Until a few years ago, Jewish life was seen as an accepted part of German society. Since the attack on the synagogue in Halle in 2019, the picture has changed: it was a bitter reminder that right-wing terror against Jewish people has a long, unbroken history in Germany.
Stories have abounded about the coronavirus crisis being a Jewish conspiracy; meanwhile, Muslim antisemitism is becoming louder and more forceful. The anti-Israel boycott movement BDS rears its head in every debate on antisemitism, just as left-wing or post-colonial thinking are part of every discussion.
Jewish life needs to be allowed to step out of the shadows.
Since 2015, the number of antisemitic crimes recorded has risen by about a third, to 2,350. But victims only report around 20% of cases. Some choose not to because they've had bad experiences with the police, others because they're afraid of the perpetrators, and still others because they just want to put it behind them. Victims clearly hold out little hope of useful reaction from the state – so crimes go unreported.
And the reality of Jewish life in Germany is a dark one. Sociologists say that Jewish children are living out their "identity under siege." What impact does it have on them when they can only go to nursery under police protection? Or when they hear Holocaust jokes at school?
Germany needs to take its antisemitism seriously
This shows that the country of commemorative services and "stumbling blocks" placed in sidewalks as a memorial to victims of the Nazis has lost its moral compass. To make it point true north again, antisemitism needs to be documented from the perspective of those affected, making it visible to the non-Jewish population. And Jewish life needs to be allowed to step out of the shadows.
That is the first thing. The second is that we need to talk about specifically German forms of antisemitism. For example, the fact that in no other EU country are Jewish people so often confronted about the Israeli government's policies (according to a survey, 41% of German Jews have experienced this, while the EU average is 28%). Projecting the old antisemitism onto the state of Israel offers people a more comfortable target for their arguments.
Our society needs to have more conversations about antisemitism. The test of German democracy, as McCloy called it, starts with taking these concerns seriously and talking about them. We need to have these conversations because it affects all of us. It's about saving our democracy. Before it's too late.
From Your Site Articles
- Mein Kampf And The Nazi Role In Arab Anti-Semitism - Worldcrunch ›
- Anti-Semitism In German Rap, A Loaded Question - Worldcrunch ›
- Why Sweden Has An Antisemitism Problem - Worldcrunch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Die Welt ("The World") is a German daily founded in Hamburg in 1946, and currently owned by the Axel Springer AG company, Europe's largest publishing house. Now based in Berlin, Die Welt is sold in more than 130 countries. A Sunday edition called Welt am Sonntag has been published since 1948.
Keep up with the world. Break out of the bubble.
Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter!