Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yeah, but after that window closes, our treatment options for rabies are essentially Hail Mary, "Well, it's not like it can get any worse..." level treatments.

That's not a big deal in the U.S. because rabies is quite rare, but in the developing world it's still a thing.



Rabies is a virus - antibiotics don't have any effect on viruses.

Ceol may also be referring to the incubation time for rabies usually being more than a week - if you've just been infected with it and you present at day 7, then a prophylaxis will be administered.


Of which I am well aware, and has absolutely zero to do with the content of my post. Someone disputed that a rabies infection is "curtains" - I posed the circumstances where it is.


You used the wrong term. What's lethal is not "infection" with rabies -- but a full-blown case of rabies.

Rabies infection is very survivable if caught before symptoms start to show up. We have a post-infection vaccine that can be used during the incubation period. We've had a vaccine for over a hundred years, and it works very well. In fact, the original rabies vaccine was the second vaccine ever developed, after smallpox.

What's lethal is symptomatic rabies -- but even that is not 100% lethal. There have actually been a few (under a dozen) documented cases of human survival after symptomatic rabies. Look up the Milwaukee Protocol.

Problem is, the treatment lies within the realm of heroic medicine, works less than 10% of the time, and requires a long period of physical therapy afterwards. The cost easily goes into the seven figures. And we don't even know if the treatment works. Survival might simply be the luck of the genetic draw.

So, $10 million to save the life of one patient with symptomatic rabies, vs. $2000 for the vaccine. So you can see why the treatment protocol emphasizes post-infection vaccination.


When I suggested that there are some "Hail Mary" treatments once the post-exposure prophylaxis window closes, I was talking about the Milwaukee Protocol. Or the, I believe, single reported case of someone surviving a untreated rabies infection with no clear treatment.

As for whether or not I used the right term, I'd actually suggest that "infection" is kind of a fussy term to begin with. But I also never used it in my post, so I'm curious as to how I could have used it wrongly.

I stated that after the treatment window closes for PEP, we're in the realm of very difficult treatments that are really only workable in the developed world. I don't see anywhere that your post and mine are contradictory.


I realize you're probably playing devil's advocate, but there are more issues with the original statement anyway. He implied this was new. Rabies has always been a 100% mortality rate past a certain point in the infection. In addition, he implied that if you're infected, it's game over. It's definitely not. As you've said, there is a window in which you'll most likely be fine with treatment.


Less devil's advocate and more talking about just that particular point. There's a reason I haven't talked about the rest of his post.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: