· 66 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events Apr 16, 2026 at 12:45 AM

Norway Man Cured of HIV With Brother’s Stem Cells | The Oslo patient is the first person to be cured by a family member's bone marrow transplant.

Posted by RollSafer


Norway Man Cured of HIV With Brother's Stem Cells
Gizmodo
Norway Man Cured of HIV With Brother's Stem Cells
The Oslo patient is the first person to be cured by a family member's bone marrow transplant.

🚩 Report this post

66 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
paul_h 3 days ago +281
My sister in law had the same stem cell procedure 10 years back in Sheffield uk for Multiple Sclerosis. Her own stem cells, For MS specifically not HIV nor cancer. She’s effectively cured of MS. Prof Basil Sharrock oversaw the UK participation in the study that I think involved a Canadian hospital and cohort too. It’s tens of thousands of dollars/pounds of treatment, and medicine needs to find a way of bringing the price down. There’s also a risk of death to the procedure. Edit: UK's National Health Service (NHS) not going ahead with stem cell reboot for MS matients. There's an "octopus study" underway for higher dose Metformin and Alpha Linoic Acid (ALA) to see it has a positive effect on patients (those are both c**** and well tested things) -> https://www.mssociety.org.uk/research/explore-our-research/search-our-research-projects/octopus. My SIL is not on that study cos she's effectively cured.
281
pivovy 2 days ago +8
Did she regain the things that she lost due to MS (hearing, vision, balance, etc)? Or did it only stop it from progressing further? We have considered it for my dad who has all those issues I listed above, but got scared off because it involves basically killing your entire immune system with radiation (iirc), and then rebuilding it.
8
paul_h 2 days ago +9
She regained pretty much all and is a gym-rat now. Age takes a toll to us all too, so you can't really tell what's the aging process and what's not.
9
pivovy 2 days ago +3
Thanks for replying, I saved your comment for future reference. I wanna go over some older emails to see if we're talking about the same procedure, but if it actually restores the person's functionality, that's a different story. He currently has no hearing or sight on the left side, and can barely walk using a cane. Regaining those senses and the quality of life might be worth the risk.
3
paul_h 2 days ago +3
She wasn’t that advanced with her MS at all, I’m afraid. The trial she was in wasn’t picking people that far along.. I’ve been searching quite a bit for the people that travel to Mexico and Russia to self pay for the same but there’s little info of before and after.
3
DueCellist7433 3 days ago +13
We do this in a hospital in California all the time
13
Mutelord 3 days ago +85
Well he did say 10 years ago so he didn't try to break news or anything. Your comment would add some value if it gave insight if the price has come down due to advance in medicines.
85
DueCellist7433 3 days ago +28
Thanks for reiterating that, I misread it
28
Suspicious_Place1270 3 days ago +7
stem cell tp is by far cheaper than any MS treatment or lifelong HIV meds
7
Koala_eiO 3 days ago -10
What is MS? Like everyone, I don't understand acronyms I don't already know.
-10
paul_h 3 days ago +12
Multiple Sclerosis
12
Suspicious_Place1270 3 days ago +6
multiple sclerosis
6
Remarkable_Beach_545 3 days ago +2
Multiple sclerosis
2
mantidmarvel 3 days ago +186
Finally, some good f****** news
186
Jesta23 3 days ago +48
Not really.  A “cure” with a 30% fatality rate in the first year, and a good chance of lifelong graft vs host disease (which can be pure torture.)  Vs taking some anti viral pills for the rest of your life.  The only way this will be done for anyone is if they were getting a stencell transplant for a different fatal disease like leukemia 
48
Sobrin_ 3 days ago +44
It's still good news, it just isn't perfect news. Plenty of reason to be happy
44
mantidmarvel 3 days ago +49
This disease wiped out a generation of the queer community and continues to impact people around the world. Literally any development in our understanding of it is good, even if it's not a definitive cure for everyone.
49
WTFwhatthehell 3 days ago +9
At this point its one of the most studied viruses in existence. Since it stitches itself into the DNA if your own cells it really comes down to either permanently suppressing it like modern antivirals, or fundamentally changing your immune system like getting a transplant from someone who is genetically immune.  The latter is unlikely to stop being dangerous so it's probably gonna be long term antivirals from here on out.
9
Morat20 3 days ago +19
The biggest problem with HIV is that it targets immune cells directly, and mutates massively. That is what has prevented both a successful vaccine and made finding treatments so difficult. There's some incredibly promising mRNA vaccines in trials right now at least, targeting HIV on critical surfaces that can't be mutated out of -- surfaces every known variant has, and cannot lose without losing it's ability to invade T-cells and thus it's ability to reproduce in humans. It'll obvious offer significant protection against getting HIV, but in those already infected -- it will hopefully do what this bone marrow donation did and create an immune response that targets HIV *effectively*, no matter how it changes. We're used to vaccines as preventatives, but they can also be *cures* in the right situation -- teaching your immune system exactly what to target and how, helping your body cure itself. As someone who grew up in the 80s and 90s -- I'd cheerfully line up for an HIV vaccine. That damn thing has haunted my generation, and I'd be glad to see the back of it.
19
pizzasoup 3 days ago +3
There are numerous other strategies, like lock-and-block, kick-and-kill (latency reversal), CRISPR-Cas9 focused approaches, CAR T cell approaches. We've got researchers working on all of those at present.
3
onarainyafternoon 2 days ago +2
I mean, sure, but HIV is no longer a death sentence. It's actually more manageable than diabetes. You can even take prep, which prevents you from passing it on to anyone else.
2
mantidmarvel 2 days ago
*In the West. Globally HIV-related deaths number over half a million people a year (630,000 in 2024), including about 75,000 children.
0
39MUsTanGs 2 days ago +3
That's a problem of material conditions. Not a limitation of the science.
3
DailyUniverseWriter 3 days ago +6
The first plane was a death trap that flew for twelve whole seconds. That’s not enough to be useful, and it had a high chance of killing the wrights.  Its significance wasn’t that they traveled across an ocean without a boat, it was that it proved something could be done to get people to that point.  It’s the same here. This isn’t good news because this treatment is a perfect end goal. This is good news because it proves we can cure HIV, it’s just that the first successful attempt isn’t the most successful it could be - like the first flight. If it works now but isn’t perfect, that just means we can keep editing the process until it is perfect.  Science is iterative. Breakthroughs don’t come out of nowhere, they’re built off the shoulders of giants. 
6
Jesta23 3 days ago
Except stem cell transplants have been used commonly in cancer for over 50 years.  This is not in any shape or form “the first plane” It’s been refined to a very precise science. And yes it will get better, but barring a massive break through it’s basically stagnated with minor gains every few years. 
0
DailyUniverseWriter 3 days ago +2
But this is the first time hiv was cured with this method according to the article, yeah? HIV is a different thing from cancer. Going back to the plane analogy, the first flight wasn’t the first time gasoline was used in an engine to move a vehicle. But it was the first time it was used to move a flying vehicle, something that until then was not possible.  Like how this isn’t the first time stem cells were used to cure a disease, but it is the first time it was used to cure this particular disease that until now was uncurable. 
2
palcatraz 2 days ago +3
First time using bone marrow from a relative to cure HIV (though the HIV cure was a side-effect; the original intent was to cure his cancer) Not the first time curing HIV using bone marrow. That has been done a handful of times before, but with bone marrow from strangers. (it only works if the person donating has a rare mutation)
3
Jesta23 3 days ago +2
This wasn’t “using stem cells” in some new way.  It was a bone marrow transplant.  Used in the same exact way bone marrow transplants have been used for 50 years. It just happened to be used on someone with hiv and the new immune system fought the hiv.  Was it novel and a first when I had my bone marrow transplant 9 years ago and it cured my bee allergy? I’m pretty sure that was the first time it cured a bee allergy. Atleast it’s never been documented.  Amazing break through.  The point is that we learned nothing by curing my bee allergy. (And no I’m not making that up.) it was an expected outcome from gaining a new immune system.  Just like we learned nothing from this case. It is an expected outcome. It only makes the rounds on Listnook every now and then because of the click bait title.  And btw. It’s not the first time a bone marrow transplant has cured aids. It’s been done 3 or 4 times coincidentally.  Just like this case. 
2
atchon 3 days ago +1
First bone marrow transplant for HIV was only in 2007. The key isn’t the bone marrow transplant it was the identification of the CCR5 mutation that conveyed resistance to HIV. We still are very much in the infancy because eventually we won’t need to do as extreme a procedure as a bone marrow transplant, we will just use genetic engineering to accomplish it.
1
Jesta23 2 days ago +1
There have been zero bone marrow transplants for hiv.  There will be zero going forward.  It’s not a treatment for HIV and never will be.  There have been a few instances where someone needing a bone marrow transplant also coincidentally had HIV. 
1
Morat20 3 days ago +3
I would think, long term, the goal would be to take the donor's *own* bone marrow, alter it with CRISPR, and reimplant. I know self-donation is a thing -- my brother had it before his second (and thankfully last, he's been free for 6 years now) round of chemo -- whatever it was they used, it also murdered his bone marrow in the process even though that's not where the cancer was. It was neat. Of course, he'd just completed the chemo that killed off all his bone marrow when COVID hit. He had to redo all his childhood immunizations, which thankfully he finished before measles started spiking.
3
this_dudeagain 2 days ago
He stepped on a lego barefoot leaving the hospital.
0
Gentle_method 3 days ago +46
We could do so much good in the world with further research. Even though it’s not viable to do large scale, that fact that an HIV infection is documented to be eradicated is a huge breakthrough.
46
Admirable-Drama-432 3 days ago +28
Imagine your sibling not just saving your life but accidentally having the exact genetic cheat code to delete HIV
28
Least_Inflation4567 3 days ago +4
They would win literally every argument from now on
4
exor0110 3 days ago +11
Amazing!!
11
Jabulon 3 days ago +5
Is this HIV being cured in our lifetime?
5
salty_gemini74 3 days ago +3
FANTASTIC NEWS
3
herodha 3 days ago +3
This could be huge
3
MelpomeneAndCalliope 2 days ago +2
Sucks to be an only child.
2
[deleted] 3 days ago +1
Love this
1
95Ricosuave 2 days ago +1
Wow!
1
VodkaSoup_Mug 3 days ago +2
🥹❤️🙌🏽
2
SovKom98 3 days ago +1
I wonder if this could help those people in Pakistan that recently got infected?
1
chewbaccaballs 3 days ago -9
All you need is a family member with a rare mutation that makes them immune to HIV, why didn't we think of this sooner? Good for him and all but this seems like a niche case for a cure.
-9
hextanerf 3 days ago +13
or you can mutate a family member's stem cell *in vitro* with CRISPR. Why so cynical?
13
chewbaccaballs 3 days ago -6
Because i only read until it was mutated brother blood
-6
illicit_losses 3 days ago +5
Keep going, might learn something.
5
chewbaccaballs 3 days ago +2
>Sadly, these transplants are not a viable approach for curing HIV en masse. I learned this
2
hextanerf 2 days ago +1
because it has to be compatible with the patient like every other transplant therapy
1
l0ud_Minority 3 days ago -5
I thought descendants of vikings had a rare mutation that made them resistant to HIV
-5
Cute-Difficulty6182 3 days ago +2
the prevalence of HIV resistance alele in Scandinavia is 16%. Very high, but over 80% of the populatoon can get infected
2
[deleted] 3 days ago -7
[removed]
-7
That_OneOstrich 3 days ago +9
Just the other day, HIV was spread to a bunch of children because the hospital they were at didn't follow good medical procedures.
9
Suspicious_Place1270 3 days ago -2
where do you think these kids got their HIV from? patient zero for that case was most probably a kid that got it from their mother, who probably contracted HIV because of miserable sex ed some women are raped, indeed, but the vast majority of cases is contracted by sexual contacts which then spreads secondarily through bad practices one condom could have probably mitigated this
-2
That_OneOstrich 3 days ago
These kids got HIV from shared needles. Sex is not the exclusive pathway for transmission of HIV. It's just fluid transmissible. Condoms can help control its spread but it's not a magical solution. You can even get HIV while using a condom, it's just significantly less likely.
0
Suspicious_Place1270 3 days ago -2
I'm talking about WHO got the HIV onto the needle in the first place HIV does not just get spawned on the needle... and actually they were talking about syringes (the thing you put the needle on) that were shared condoms would solve more than half of the HIV cases
-2
That_OneOstrich 3 days ago
More than half still leaves a lot of HIV transmission. And the person initially was the one infected could have been infected in many different ways. Maybe they're a junkie and got it from sharing a needle. I never said the HIV was growing on the needle by chance. I don't understand why you have this odd, grumpy, stance. Curing any disease is cool. You're not seeming all that cool.
0
Suspicious_Place1270 3 days ago -1
transplanting stem cells to cure HIV is not effective because you'll then be definitely immunocompromised wit antiretroviral therapy you can regain your immune system and be healthy
-1
That_OneOstrich 3 days ago +1
I know someone who's had stem cell therapy. It worked. Yes they were immunocompromised for a bit, they're completely fine now. You wind up immunocompromised for about 2 years. We have antivirals, but those just stop the spread and symptoms. Cure is still cool. You appear more and more like a freak of some sort. Don't know why you're so against cures for disease.
1
Suspicious_Place1270 3 days ago
cures are great stem cell transplantation has a high risk though if you had a risk of dying of 20% but got cured OR you take antiretroviral therapy and have basically the same life as before with just one pill a day, which one would you pick remember, antiretroviral therapy does not kill you in that rate and stop the derogatory terms, i work in the field.
0
That_OneOstrich 3 days ago +1
You work in the field and you're THIS weird about an article that is just plain good news? Treatment options are better than not having them. Stem cell therapies are pretty new. Why would this treatment have taken place if those with HIV didn't want more/better options? And stem cell therapies are new. I'd wager as we get better at them, that 20% mortality is going to significantly drop. What was the surgical mortality rate in the 1920s? Much higher than it is now, no? When you don't act like a freak who thinks advancements in medical science are somehow negative, I won't call you a freak.
1
pishposhpoppycock 3 days ago -3
Those children should've worn condoms then! /s
-3
ABigCoffee 3 days ago +2
Porque no los dos
2
Strict-Strength-5011 3 days ago -3
The Oslo patient is actually the third person ever cured of HIV this way, after the Berlin and London patients. It's a massive deal because it proves you don't need a donor with that specific HIV-resistant mutation.
-3
mtaw 3 days ago +9
Don’t comment about how big a deal you think this is when you didn’t read the article. The brother did have the mutation.
9
← Back to Board