In general, the real challenge, and it's a nice challenge to have, is how do we build on the scientific progress that's been made, really, over the last two and a half years? Dr. Carver mentioned one, and I'll go into it for a moment for the committee, because I think it's illustrative.
Quite recently, a number of groups have identified broadly neutralizing antibodies that are made by people infected with HIV. Why is that so exciting? You all know that every year, when a new flu strain comes out, we have to make a new flu vaccine. When H1N1 came on the scene, there was a big rush here and elsewhere in the world to make an H1N1 vaccine. Flu is a cakewalk compared to HIV. The flu virus does not change very quickly. It changes about once a year. HIV changes extremely rapidly. So you can build a vaccine against one strain of HIV, but if HIV changes every time it infects a new individual, then that vaccine will be useless against that individual who has just been infected.
So how do you make a vaccine that's broadly neutralizing? Is it possible? What's so exciting about this result that was referred to is that we, as humans, actually make antibodies, proteins in our body, that are broadly neutralizing. So that's a proof of concept as well, that it is possible. Not only is it a proof of concept, but the next question is, how do those antibodies work? What are they recognizing on the virus that allows those antibodies to be broadly neutralizing? If we can identify that, and it should not be that difficult, then we can go the next step, and can we incorporate that knowledge into making a vaccine?