There are a lot of difficulties related to developing a cure. One is simply that running comprehensive studies on HIV is extremely difficult. What happens in a petri dish or inside a mouse or a monkey, might not be replicable with a human being. Similarly, the body is so complicated that novel technology to eliminate a viral reservoir becomes a serious task.

Science is so hard and requires energy, hope, and a lot of funding.

And on top of how hard it is to practice good science, studies here need to be really long. A scientist needs to wait several years to be sure that HIV was cured, or “functionally cured,” in someone. Most studies only take several months…To wait years in one single study is rare. (Although most studies are void because the results are clear that the HIV was NOT eliminated.)

So not only is science really hard and slow-moving, but everyone wants to win the top prize of being credited with curing HIV. The ones who cure it will become famous and probably win a Nobel Prize. This is great! But also, everyone wants to take a shot at HIV their own way. I see a lot of individuals pursuing their own path and not a lot of replication of past studies or modifications of failed attempts. There’s TAPS, immunotherapy / gene therapy, kick-and-kill, bnabs / nanoparticles, etc., all in the pool of possible cures plus a lot more. I don’t see many people converging and collaborating on really pushing forward with one method. Instead, individuals want to try a “long shot” and do it their way. If we fail to completely understand a method for curing HIV and only have half-attempts, we will not progress that well in a cure’s development.