does chimp study show that HIV could be endogenous?
fran...@rocketmail.com
chimps and humans are similar, HIV could be an endogenous retrovirus.
enjoy:
AIDS virus came from chimps, doctors conclude
Chimpanzees do not show symptoms of the virus
January 31, 1999
Web posted at: 6:57 p.m. EST (2357 GMT)
CHICAGO (CNN) -- A chimpanzee named Marilyn that died years ago has helped
scientists solve the lingering mystery of the origin of AIDS.
Researchers at the University of Alabama at Birmingham said Sunday they have
conclusive evidence that the HIV virus has spread on at least three separate
occasions from chimpanzees to humans in Africa. One of the interspecies
transmissions launched the epidemic that now infects about 35 million people
worldwide, they said.
Chimps, which probably have carried the virus for hundreds of thousands of
years, apparently do not get sick from it. Understanding why could help in the
search for a cure, AIDS experts say.
Although scientists have long suspected chimps as the source of AIDS, the
absence of clear evidence prevented them from making the conclusion, said Dr.
Beatrice Hahn of the University of Alabama. Her report is published in this
week's issue of the journal Nature.
Whatever its origins, HIV, the human immunodeficiency virus that causes AIDS,
is a recent affliction for humans. At last year's Conference on Retroviruses
and Opportunistic Infections, Dr. David Ho and others from the Aaron Diamond
AIDS Research Center at Rockefeller University presented evidence that the
virus probably first infected people around 50 years ago.
People in some African nations contract the virus by eating 'bushmeat'
At the opening of this year's meeting, Hahn made the case that this event
almost certainly occurred in west equatorial Africa when someone caught the
virus from a chimp, perhaps after killing the ape for food.
Hahn said her team confirmed the connection by analyzing frozen tissue saved
from Marilyn, who died in 1984 at age 26 from childbirth complications at a
U.S. Air Force primate center.
The chimp version of the AIDS virus, thought to be the grandfather of HIV, is
called SIVcpz. It is extremely rare among chimps in U.S. lab colonies,
apparently because they are removed from the wild at a young age and never
exposed to the virus sexually.
"This is an important finding with significant potential," said Dr. Anthony
Fauci of the U.S. National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases
(NIAID), which helped fund the study.
"This virus infects a primate species that is 98 percent related to humans.
This may allow us -- if done carefully and in collaboration with
primatologists to protect this endangered species -- to study infected
chimpanzees in the wild to find out why these animals don't get sick,
information that may help us better protect humans from developing AIDS," he
said.
Researchers at the University of Alabama at Birmingham presented their
findings Sunday
Chance discovery helped scientists
Until recently, SIVcpz had been isolated only three times. The fourth turned
up when a colleague cleaning out a lab freezer ran across Marilyn's specimens
and sent them to Hahn. Her team was able to perform various kinds of genetic
analysis that were unavailable when the chimp died.
Then the Alabama team used molecular analysis techniques to study all four
examples of the virus. They found that three were nearly identical genetically
to the human AIDS virus.
All three samples came from Pan troglodytes troglodytes. The chimp subspecies
lives in Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, Congo and Central African Republic, the
region where AIDS is thought to have started.
The fourth sample, much less like HIV, came from a separate chimp subspecies
native to East Africa.
Among humans, there are three major groups of HIV, one of which has spread
around the world. The others exist in west- Central Africa. The researchers
believe that each group arose from a separate chimp-to-human transmission of
SIVcpz.
"We conclude that this subspecies is the natural host and reservoir for
HIV-1," the AIDS virus, said Hahn.
She said a French team, headed by Dr. Phillippe Mauclere of the Pasteur
Institute, recently found three more chimps infected with SIVcpz at a
sanctuary in Cameroon. One sample has been genetically analyzed and it, too,
closely resembles HIV.
Many viruses come from animals. Flu, for example, comes from ducks and pigs.
Often the virus does not make its natural host sick. It must undergo genetic
changes to infect another species such as humans, changes that can cause
illness.
There is a second strain of HIV that infects people, known as HIV-2. It is
believed to have started out in a monkey known as a sooty mangabey.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Marnix L. Bosch
> the follwoing is from www.cnn.com. it suggests to me that since the genome of
> chimps and humans are similar, HIV could be an endogenous retrovirus.
>
> enjoy:
>
> AIDS virus came from chimps, doctors conclude
>
> Chimpanzees do not show symptoms of the virus
etc. etc.
perhaps you could tell us what you think an endogenous virus is. The
report does not suggest the same to me.
Marnix Bosch
Bennett
fran...@rocketmail.com wrote:
> the follwoing is from www.cnn.com. it suggests to me that since the genome of
> chimps and humans are similar, HIV could be an endogenous retrovirus.
>
I get the opposite impression. If it were endogenous wouldn't more chimps
have the virus genome in their DNA?
Put forward your reasoning if you really think otherwise, since I can't fathom
it.
Cheers
Bennett
John
fran...@rocketmail.com wrote in message
<795891$kd4$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>the follwoing is from www.cnn.com. it suggests to me that since the genome
of
>chimps and humans are similar, HIV could be an endogenous retrovirus.
>
>
>AIDS virus came from chimps, doctors conclude
>
Only through the vaccines made with monkey kidneys---if the monkeys had
anything to do with it.
Marnix L. Bosch
<Edw...@elucas.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
And your evidence for this statement is????????
Marnix Bosch
ROBERT S. HOLZMAN
>
> fran...@rocketmail.com wrote in message
> <795891$kd4$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>>the follwoing is from www.cnn.com. it suggests to me that since the genome
> of
>>chimps and humans are similar, HIV could be an endogenous retrovirus.
>>
>>enjoy:
>>
>>AIDS virus came from chimps, doctors conclude
>>
>
>
> Only through the vaccines made with monkey kidneys---if the monkeys had
> anything to do with it.
>
>
Chimp kidneys are not used for this purpose. You have some evidence for
naturaly infection of african green monkeys with HIV?
DGiunti
>
>the follwoing is from www.cnn.com. it suggests to me that since the genome of
>chimps and humans are similar, HIV could be an endogenous retrovirus.
Frank, to become endogenous the virus must first infect the sex cells,
secondly integrate itself into the animal's DNA and thirdly not be lethal
enough to cause the animal to die before successful reproduction. It's a
tough trick to pull of for any virus, and there is likely a lot of genetic
evolution that needs to take in both species before this symbiosis can be
achieved.
If the new chimp virus were endogenous they would likely have found more
than the few examples that are now known.
Dave Giunti
fred
<19990202233913...@ngol01.aol.com> dgi...@aol.com
Project Inform Direktor, Marty Delaney, POZ Magazine's Father of
Treatment Activism, again dodges the bullet of accountability
under the cowardly guise of (DGiunti), as DeLooney once
again MisInformed:
>
>In article <795891$kd4$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, fran...@rocketmail.com writes:
>
>>
>>the follwoing is from www.cnn.com. it suggests to me that since the genome of
>>chimps and humans are similar, HIV could be an endogenous retrovirus.
>
> Frank, to become endogenous the virus must first infect the sex cells,
Typically weird Marty Delaney lunatic "science" -- no different than
the bizaare nonsense and non-science that forms the
basis of Delooney's drug jingoism that pours from the
drug company "hotlines" at Project Inform -- a pharmaceutical
industry subsidiary and misinformation clearinghouse.
Marty, cite your authoritative source for this weird assertion
about "sex cells" !!!
>secondly integrate itself into the animal's DNA and thirdly not be lethal
>enough to cause the animal to die before successful reproduction.
Duh -- any 10th grade science kid knows that ALL viruses
require cell reproduction.
Lethal and harmless viruses ALL require "successful
reproduction" to exist -- as this proceeds, the lethal ones
cause problems while the non-lethal ones may or may
not cause problems.
Delaney embodies all that is AIDS today: his
lack of basic science education is appalling,
yet he gets millions of drug company dollars to proffer
nonsense and lies!
> It's a tough trick to pull of for any virus, and there is likely a lot of genetic
>evolution that needs to take in both species before this symbiosis can be
>achieved.
Huh? What a stupid thing to say. One can ALWAYS claim that there
is a lot of "genetic evolution" for any organism.
> If the new chimp virus were endogenous they would likely have found more
>than the few examples that are now known.
Another MarTooney DeLooneyism -- Marty can't fathom the idea
that these "endogenous viruses" weren't "found" before for
the simple reason that nobody was looking for them!!!
Marty Delaney is also the idiot behind the Jeff Getty babboon
bone-marrow transplant fiasco. Not only did the Marty-Jeff team
put the entire human population in danger through the
xenotransplantation of an immunosuppressed human (Jeff),
the fact remains that the babboon selected for Jeff was
purportedly the one with the fewest endogenous babboon
viruses!
Fact is, they had NO IDEA how many viruses were actually
present in that babboon marrow that was injected into Jeff!
After that failed, all we got was Jeff on Tee-Wee eating a
banana and laughing !
That was a few years ago when Jeff "needed" the operation
to avert the death that he soon anticipated (as Jeff, his
mother and sister tearfully testified before the FDA
xenotransplantation committee in order to "save"
poor Jeff's life).
Of course, Jeff didn't die ... even despite his dismal
failures with the HIV cocktail drugs. In the meantime, Marty
Delaney has no idea how many men Jeff has had
unprotected sex with since that time.
I often wonder how many endogenous babboon viruses
Jeff Getty has unleashed upon the human population.
Marty, since it was your idea, please -- as Direktor of
Projekt Inform ... inform us!
fred
DGiunti
In article <36d7aed6...@news.primenet.com>, Suffering from delusions of
persecution again fred...@primenet.com (fred), who self identifies as a former
prison screw, pulls his finger out of his ass, sniffs it and is once again
inspired to write:
>
>On 03 Feb 1999 04:39:13 GMT, in
><19990202233913...@ngol01.aol.com> dgi...@aol.com
>Project Inform Direktor, Marty Delaney, POZ Magazine's Father of
>Treatment Activism, again dodges the bullet of accountability
>under the cowardly guise of (DGiunti), as DeLooney once
>again MisInformed:
Fred You really should do something about these delusions of persecution.
You are the one that was whining that the moderators of sci.med.aids wouldn't
allow you to debate me in their forum, so I came here and refuted that set of
baseless claims. You are a sore looser, but a looser none the less. You still
can't keep more than one variable at a time active. And you are delusional and
psychotic besides. Get some help while you still can.
>>
>>In article <795891$kd4$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, fran...@rocketmail.com
>writes:
>>
>>>
>>>the follwoing is from www.cnn.com. it suggests to me that since the genome
>of
>>>chimps and humans are similar, HIV could be an endogenous retrovirus.
>>
>> Frank, to become endogenous the virus must first infect the sex cells,
>
>Typically weird Marty Delaney lunatic "science" -- no different than
>the bizaare nonsense and non-science that forms the
>basis of Delooney's drug jingoism that pours from the
>drug company "hotlines" at Project Inform -- a pharmaceutical
>industry subsidiary and misinformation clearinghouse.
This is typical of Fred's delusional mindset. Unable to deal with the actual
me, he deludes himself into believing that I am someone else. Someone he
doesn't like either, and rants on about that. This is clearly transference as
well. The words are psychotic: they have no relation the subject they comment
on. Transference and delusions are signs of mental illness, and if you out
there in reader-land find yourself behaving like this it is a sure sign that
you need counceling.
>Marty, cite your authoritative source for this weird assertion
>about "sex cells" !!!
I can understand why you don't understand this, you are simply a shit head,
but there may be others here that don't know either. To be endogenous the
virus must be passed along as part of the human genome via sexual reproduction.
You likely don't know much about this part of animal biology either, but if you
have questions...
>>secondly integrate itself into the animal's DNA and thirdly not be lethal
>>enough to cause the animal to die before successful reproduction.
>
>Duh -- any 10th grade science kid knows that ALL viruses
>require cell reproduction.
the endogenous ones don't need to. They become passengers of the host. Most
of the known ones are incapable of viable reproduction as actual viruses.
>Lethal and harmless viruses ALL require "successful
>reproduction" to exist -- as this proceeds, the lethal ones
>cause problems while the non-lethal ones may or may
>not cause problems.
Most viruses only require a cell to continue their lifecycle. The
endogenous ones have climbed up the evolutionary ladder a little bit and have
the host include themselves in their own reproduction.
>Delaney embodies all that is AIDS today: his
>lack of basic science education is appalling,
>yet he gets millions of drug company dollars to proffer
>nonsense and lies!
More psychotic rant with transference. This is a sure sign of mental
illness. Get some help.
>> It's a tough trick to pull of for any virus, and there is likely a lot of
>genetic
>>evolution that needs to take in both species before this symbiosis can be
>>achieved.
>
>Huh? What a stupid thing to say. One can ALWAYS claim that there
>is a lot of "genetic evolution" for any organism.
I'm not going to bother with that one. Ignorance of what symbiosis is I
guess.
>> If the new chimp virus were endogenous they would likely have found more
>>than the few examples that are now known.
>
>Another MarTooney DeLooneyism -- Marty can't fathom the idea
>that these "endogenous viruses" weren't "found" before for
>the simple reason that nobody was looking for them!!!
The paper on the chimp virus find points to other work done in this area that
has been ongoing. Just because you didn't know about it doesn't mean it didn't
happen.
>Marty Delaney is also the idiot behind the Jeff Getty babboon
>bone-marrow transplant fiasco. Not only did the Marty-Jeff team
>put the entire human population in danger through the
>xenotransplantation of an immunosuppressed human (Jeff),
>the fact remains that the babboon selected for Jeff was
>purportedly the one with the fewest endogenous babboon
>viruses!
>
>Fact is, they had NO IDEA how many viruses were actually
>present in that babboon marrow that was injected into Jeff!
>
>After that failed, all we got was Jeff on Tee-Wee eating a
>banana and laughing !
>
>That was a few years ago when Jeff "needed" the operation
>to avert the death that he soon anticipated (as Jeff, his
>mother and sister tearfully testified before the FDA
>xenotransplantation committee in order to "save"
>poor Jeff's life).
>
>Of course, Jeff didn't die ... even despite his dismal
>failures with the HIV cocktail drugs. In the meantime, Marty
>Delaney has no idea how many men Jeff has had
>unprotected sex with since that time.
>
>I often wonder how many endogenous babboon viruses
>Jeff Getty has unleashed upon the human population.
>
>Marty, since it was your idea, please -- as Direktor of
>Projekt Inform ... inform us!
More lies from our paranoid, psychoticand delusional correspondent. In his
demented mind he can transfer people like Bosch from city to city by just his
fantasy. People he can't defeat in factual argument become other people he
doesn't like. These are all signs of a disordered mind and symptoms of mental
illness.
As near as I have been able to tell the idea of the baboon transplant was
cooked up Pittsburgh Pa, where the actual transplant took place. I don't know
how Getty got involved with the project, and don't much care. If I had been an
advisor on the project it would have never taken place since the same procedure
had already failed when done with identical twins.
To a delusional like Fred these real things don't matter, it's his fantasy
that counts. And I'll bet that he is a real swinger with himself as well.
David Giunti
acja...@usa.net
fred...@primenet.com wrote:
> > If the new chimp virus were endogenous they would likely have found more
> >than the few examples that are now known.
>
> Another MarTooney DeLooneyism -- Marty can't fathom the idea
> that these "endogenous viruses" weren't "found" before for
> the simple reason that nobody was looking for them!!!
Same goes for HIV too I imagine. We've already seen Gallo, and especially
Montagnier, go from HIV as sole cause to HIV as partial cause to HIV acting as
a middleman for a mystery agent. The same applies to the ever-longer latency
periods which will no doubt reach 50 years when the current crop of HIV+
survivors hits old age.
Why is it so radical to suggest that HIV has had nothing to do with AIDS all
along? It would be a perfectly reasonable question from someone who was just
thawed after being frozen since 1984. HIV researchers are like a deck of
cards that never gets shuffled.
ACJ
Bennett
acja...@usa.net wrote in message <79ejbr$h7c$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>
>Same goes for HIV too I imagine. We've already seen Gallo, and especially
>Montagnier, go from HIV as sole cause to HIV as partial cause to HIV acting
as
>a middleman for a mystery agent. The same applies to the ever-longer
latency
>periods which will no doubt reach 50 years when the current crop of HIV+
>survivors hits old age.
All this talk of HIV not acting as a sole cause - Duesberg used the word
"co-factor", and I had the impression he was referring to the failure of
getting HIV to infect artificial CD4+ cells. That co-factor was found out
to be a second receptor protein (or more correctly, group of proteins), NOT
another infectious agent.
>
>Why is it so radical to suggest that HIV has had nothing to do with AIDS
all
>along? It would be a perfectly reasonable question from someone who was
just
>thawed after being frozen since 1984.
But not for someone who's been up to date with the literature in all that
time. You've just described yourself perfectly - someone who's ignorant of
the data of the last 15 years. If you want to catch up, just ask - there's
enough of us here who can inform you.
Cheers
Bennett
fran...@rocketmail.com
Bennett <benne...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
> I get the opposite impression. If it were endogenous wouldn't more chimps
> have the virus genome in their DNA?
define 'more'! until you do that, i can only answer your question by replying
"how the hell do i know?"
> Put forward your reasoning if you really think otherwise, since I can't fathom
> it.
the DNA of chimps and humans is about 98% similar. and the variants of SIV
found in chimps and the variants of HIV in humans are also similar. but that
does not mean that SIV jumped to humans and then mutated into HIV.
instead, since chimp DNA is similar to human DNA, but not identical, then a
valid theory is that it is possible for chimps and humans to have endogenous
retroviruses that are similar but not identical.
that's why i said that that article "suggests to me that since the genome of
chimps and humans are similar, HIV could be an endogenous retrovirus".
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Marnix L. Bosch
> In article <797dh5$f2n$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> Bennett <benne...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> > I get the opposite impression. If it were endogenous wouldn't more chimps
> > have the virus genome in their DNA?
>
> define 'more'! until you do that, i can only answer your question by replying
> "how the hell do i know?"
>
> > Put forward your reasoning if you really think otherwise, since I
can't fathom
> > it.
>
> the DNA of chimps and humans is about 98% similar. and the variants of SIV
> found in chimps and the variants of HIV in humans are also similar. but that
> does not mean that SIV jumped to humans and then mutated into HIV.
>
> instead, since chimp DNA is similar to human DNA, but not identical, then a
> valid theory is that it is possible for chimps and humans to have endogenous
> retroviruses that are similar but not identical.
No problem sofar.
> that's why i said that that article "suggests to me that since the genome of
> chimps and humans are similar, HIV could be an endogenous retrovirus".
That, however is a big leap. Endogenous retroviruses are present in the
germline and are vertically transmitted with the DNA they are embedded in.
This is not true for HIV, thus HIV is not an endogenous retrovirus.
Marnix Bosch
Bennett
fran...@rocketmail.com wrote in message
<79fad0$4k2$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <797dh5$f2n$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> Bennett <benne...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
>> I get the opposite impression. If it were endogenous wouldn't more chimps
>> have the virus genome in their DNA?
>
>define 'more'! until you do that, i can only answer your question by
replying
>"how the hell do i know?"
>
Only 4 chimps have been discovered that harbour SIV (ignoring those
artificially infected in the labs). If the virus was an endogenous virus,
every chimp tested ought to have SIV DNA sequence in their cells.
>> Put forward your reasoning if you really think otherwise, since I can't
fathom
>> it.
>
>the DNA of chimps and humans is about 98% similar. and the variants of SIV
>found in chimps and the variants of HIV in humans are also similar. but
that
>does not mean that SIV jumped to humans and then mutated into HIV.
>
Sure - it might have mutated and then jumped. It's just one possibility.
>instead, since chimp DNA is similar to human DNA, but not identical, then a
>valid theory is that it is possible for chimps and humans to have
endogenous
>retroviruses that are similar but not identical.
>
Of course, except that the HIV sequences are only found in a few people,
those exposed to HIV. It can be shown that the SIV/HIV sequence can be
acquired, so it's not as if it's a genetic factor passed on like normal
genes. The HIV sequence is not inheireted, it is only acquired through
infection, the characteristics of an exogenous, not endogenous virus.
>that's why i said that that article "suggests to me that since the genome
of
>chimps and humans are similar, HIV could be an endogenous retrovirus".
>
It might have been (such things do exist in other species), but it isn't the
case with HIV. The data suggest exactly the opposite.
Cheers
Bennett
ROBERT S. HOLZMAN
> In article <797dh5$f2n$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> Bennett <benne...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
>> I get the opposite impression. If it were endogenous wouldn't more chimps
>> have the virus genome in their DNA?
>
> define 'more'! until you do that, i can only answer your question by replying
> "how the hell do i know?"
you could read up on endogenous viruses, or you could simply look back at was
posted here (via dejanews) last imtimetime the subject came up.
By definition and genetic necessity endogenous viruses are present in 100
percent of a species.
Carlton Hogan
>the follwoing is from www.cnn.com. it suggests to me that since the genome of
>chimps and humans are similar, HIV could be an endogenous retrovirus.
Neither this notion, nor any evidence that might support it appeared in Hahn's
talk. One of the main characteristic of ERVs is that although they are
sometimes transcribed, they are not infectious.
Carlton
Carlton Hogan
>In article <36d7aed6...@news.primenet.com>,
> fred...@primenet.com wrote:
>
>> > If the new chimp virus were endogenous they would likely have found more
>> >than the few examples that are now known.
>>
>> Another MarTooney DeLooneyism -- Marty can't fathom the idea
>> that these "endogenous viruses" weren't "found" before for
>> the simple reason that nobody was looking for them!!!
>
>Montagnier, go from HIV as sole cause to HIV as partial cause to HIV acting as
>a middleman for a mystery agent.
Sorry, but this is just false. Montagnier has speculated on mycoplasma
and other agents as potential co-factors, but he has never said that HIV
was not the primary cause of AIDS.
> The same applies to the ever-longer latency
>periods which will no doubt reach 50 years when the current crop of HIV+
>survivors hits old age.
Estimates of latency have not changed for four or five years.
>
>Why is it so radical to suggest that HIV has had nothing to do with AIDS all
>along? It would be a perfectly reasonable question from someone who was just
>thawed after being frozen since 1984. HIV researchers are like a deck of
>cards that never gets shuffled.
I was unaware that "shuffling" was a desired characteristic of good science.
"Why is it so radical to suggest that HIV has had nothing to do with AIDS"?
Well, animal lentiviruses cause syndrome similar to AIDS. The entire
HIV genome has been mapped, and genes identified. Recombinant and
chimeric isolates have been used to assess the contributions of
the genes, and alterations therof. Chimps have been infected with
SHIV hybrids, which caused (tah dah!) immune deficiency. Antiretroviral
drugs have been shown to improve disease free survival many times.
Lab workers accidentally infected with HIV have developed AIDS, and
viral isolates have been compared to the index case, showing genetic
similarity. Resistance mutations seen both in the lab, after multiple
passages in cell culture with drug, or ocurring in humans taking
antiretrovirals are in accordance, and have been demonstrated to
cause phenotypic resistance. The only factor uniquely common to PWAs
is HIV positivity.Levels of HIV RNA in the blood have been clearly, and
unambiguously shown to be excellent predictors of OI or death in
literally dozens of studies.
I could go on and on - but you might find it rewarding to read the actual
literature yourself, rather than relying on suspect sources like
virusmyth or Duesberg's books for the lay public to summarize and distort
the findings.
Carlton
__________________________________________________________________________
| |
| Carlton Hogan (car...@gopher.ccbr.umn.edu) |
| Community Programs for Clinical Research on AIDS Statistical Center |
| Coordinating Center for Biometric Research |
| Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health |
| University of Minnesota http://www.biostat.umn.edu/~carlton |
| 2221 University Ave SE, Suite 200 Voice: (612) 626 8899 |
| Minneapolis MN 55414 FAX: (612) 626 8892 |
|________________________________________________________________________|
Affilation provided for purpose of identification, not representation.
Dgor233
defining afflictions.
The same literature produced by the likes of Gallo who was fired from his old
job at the NIH. The same one who stole Luc's virus and called it his own?
This is the self same KS that was responsible for this whole AIDS mess in the
first place. Reminds me some of Ken Starr. He started out investigating land
deals. Ended up in someone elses bedroom.
Your AIDS literature is as useful to the public health as days of our lives
soap opera.
This is the same literature that reports experimental results without
controls.The same literature that has chimpanzees spreading AIDS (or is it
HIV?). Phylogenetic trees. Relatedness. You must not know any mammalian cell
biology to dismiss the existence of endogenous retroviral related DNA. I'm am
not sure what you are capable of educating us on.
Dgor233
>drugs have been shown to improve disease free survival many times.
>Lab workers accidentally infected with HIV have developed AIDS, and
>viral isolates have been compared to the index case, showing genetic
>similarity. Resistance mutations seen both in the lab, after multiple
>passages in cell culture with drug, or ocurring in humans taking
>antiretrovirals are in accordance, and have been demonstrated to
>cause phenotypic resistance. The only factor uniquely common to PWAs
>is HIV positivity.Levels of HIV RNA in the blood have been clearly, and
>unambiguously shown to be excellent predictors of OI or death in
>literally dozens of studies.
What is HIV RNA doing in the blood. Are you talking about the RNA that can only
be detected after amplification in a PCR? Since when was RNA a virus? You are
full of RNA. Are you a virus? These studies are shoddy. Experiments have no
controls. The mediocrity is incredible. Nobody has even purified an HIV. Nobody
even thought to attempt it before 1997 with disasterous results. No HIV in the
1.17 density banded material.
The viral particles cannot be isolated. You want to ignore these flaws in AIDS
science, its your pleasure. The work is tacky and support of mediocrity is
tacky.
Dgor233
On what authority does the statement come that HIV is not present in the
germline of human beings as an endogenous virus?
HIV are amplified from cellular soups using guessmers. Some work, some don't.
You simply have no basis for excluding HIV as a bonafide endogenous virus.
Dgor233
exclude the presence of HIV related material in the human genome? If you guess
wrong and fail to detect it, or refuse to bother to do the experiment obvoiusly
you will not detect it.
Dgor233
story of the day is HIV RNA. Nobody can find or purify a virus from a single
patient without intense ex-vivo manipulations. So little of anything exists (if
it exists at all) that a pcr amplification has to be performed to get any type
of result at all. Is viral RNA infectious?
Carlton Hogan
Dgor233 <dgo...@aol.comdog> wrote:
>Oh you must mean the literature that saw KS removed from the list of AIDS
>defining afflictions.
Not true. KS is still part of the case definition. You should check facts
before you mindlessly parrot dissident swill
>
>The same literature produced by the likes of Gallo who was fired from his old
>job at the NIH. The same one who stole Luc's virus and called it his own?
Is this some sort of claim that all scientific literature is somehow
suspect just because Gallo is a swine? Hope you like living in unlit
caves and eating dirt. If you exclude the whole scientific literature
because you don't like Gallo, this is where you will end up.
>
>This is the self same KS that was responsible for this whole AIDS mess in the
>first place. Reminds me some of Ken Starr. H
Oh my god!! It's Emily LaTella (SNL) ."..and another thing...What's all
this i hear about viral kin net tricks? There are already so many different
tricks on the net, why do we..oh. Kinetics? Oh. That's different."
ne started out investigating land
>deals. Ended up in someone elses bedroom.
And this has WHAT to do with HIV science?
>
>Your AIDS literature is as useful to the public health as days of our lives
>soap opera.
Perhaps if you actually read the literature, you might be able to make
some specific and thoughtful comments about it.
>
>This is the same literature that reports experimental results without
>controls.
Excuse me? Go to igm.nlm.nih.gov. Go to AIDS line and type "control"
as a key word. You will get more abstracts than your browser's cache can
hold.
The same literature that has chimpanzees spreading AIDS (or is it
>HIV?).
You don't even know, but claim they are wrong anyway?
Phylogenetic trees. Relatedness. You must not know any mammalian cell
>biology to dismiss the existence of endogenous retroviral related DNA.
Nobody disputed the existence of HERVs. It's just that HIV isn't one.
If it is, it would be much more widely prevalent, and certainly not
disproportionately seen in risk groups.
>I'm am
>not sure what you are capable of educating us on.
That's OK, big boy. You take a nap, and we'll wake you up to tell you
when you understand.
Carlton
Dgor233
specific detection reagents in the form of antibodies to the same HIV, All
these things we have Gallo to thank for. I am glad that you call him whatever
you did. Do you realise now that all the mountain of dung that comprises AIDS
lit is built on Gallos foundation? The entire research community has taken his
word for the provenance of HIV and used this as a premise on which to construct
ever imbecilic hypotheses. Do you know for instance that HIV has never been
purified?
Dgor233
>If it is, it would be much more widely prevalent, and certainly not
>disproportionately seen in risk groups.
How do you suppose HIV is demonstrated in populations?? Have you ever heard of
genomic southerns?
Carlton Hogan
Oh my. I don't know where to start on your ignorance. Built on Gallo's
foundation? Perhaps a moment or two studying the literature *might*
educate you.
Nobody needs to take Gallo's word. His initial work (or Luc Montagnier's)
has been replicated, and vastly improved on.
As to the never been "purified" (we scientists call that "isolated")
That is a load of crap spread by the Perth Group. There are HUNDREDS
of articles involving HIV isolation.
Continuum Magazine offered a hefty cash prize to anyone who could
demonstrate HIV isolation. Guess who applied? Peter Duesberg.
Duesberg, based on the AVAILABLE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE, with no new
work made an elegant case for the isolation of HIV. Continuum,
which up to the then had been one of Duesberg's biggest advocates
"moved the goalposts", and said that Duesberg's expertise in
laboratory virology (which nobody doubts - it's the medicine, epi,
immunology and molecular biology he falls down on) was for nought.
Do you see what a nest of thugs, liars, and lunatics you have fallen in with?
Carlton
PS:
One of the things
that dissidents don't seem to acknowledge (or maybe grasp) is that
HIV is one of the most-studied viruses ever. HIV has 9 characteristic
genes, with fully characterized gene products. It shares regulatory
genes with previously known retroviruses, although HIV has a couple
of unique regulatory genes, which make it's life-cycle more complex.
HIV has been sequenced, cloned, detected by PCR, bDNA, NASBA, and
in situ hybridization. It has been cultured, and antigenemia (p24)
has been detected in human carriers. The separate genes have been
characterized, and phenotypic alterations have been linked to
genotypic alterations. In short, HIV has been totally torn down
and built up again. It has been taken apart, and put together like
lego. it is always 9,000 some base pairs, and has unique envelope
and capsid proteins. Antibodies to these proteins have been detected
in human hosts, and generated in hybridoma lines. The "insides" of
HIV have been wrapped in an SIV envelope, and thus made infectious
to primates otherwise immune. Thousands of the world's most eminent
microbiologists, molecular biologists, and virologists have poked,
prodded, and pinned down HIV. Alterations in RT, or it's template
have been characterized, and antiretroviral treatments induce
predictable, consistent alterations in RT and protease. Don't you
think more people working in the field would have noticed something
was off? Researchers working on HIV eat, drink, and sleep virus.
If any glaring inconsistencies manifested, don't you think that
most would try and reconcile the data? If HIV was a chimera, then
pulling at the loose threads should unravel the whole sweater.
In fact, inconsistencies with prior models have impelled
greater refinement in our understanding of the virus. "Dissidents"
hold that changes in HIV/AIDS models somehow invalidate the
whole of HIV science: on the contrary, the rapid evolution of our
understanding demonstrates that this is a thriving and vital field.
If all HIV science descended from an initial "big lie", then
HIV science would have to be moribund and static, to prevent
the accumulating contradictions from tearing the whole model
apart.
Carlton Hogan
Dgor233 <dgo...@aol.comdog> wrote:
>>Nobody disputed the existence of HERVs. It's just that HIV isn't one.
>>If it is, it would be much more widely prevalent, and certainly not
>>disproportionately seen in risk groups.
>
>How do you suppose HIV is demonstrated in populations??
I don't need to suppose. There is data
>Have you ever heard of
>genomic southerns?
Is there some point you are trying to make?
Carlton
ROBERT S. HOLZMAN
In that case no one whould have a negative viral load. On what authority to
you express the opinion that the probes are "guesmers"? Is it as shaky as the
rest of your opinions?
GMCarter
Why do I get the feeling you're one of the folks in denial who either
is HIV+ and doesn't want to believe the potential consequences (in
which case I hope you get over your delusion real damn quick) or just
an asshole who wants to justify fucking without a condom?
One thing we definitely know about HIV. It IS infectious. If you're
not already positive, you just go on your merry way and one day you
may discover for yourself how HIV is infectious and can result in
AIDS. Meantime, if you are infected, I pray that you aren't infecting
other people because of your absurd delusions.
George M. Carter
Dgor233
>is HIV+ and doesn't want to believe the potential consequences (in
>which case I hope you get over your delusion real damn quick) or just
>an asshole who wants to justify fucking without a condom?
>
Do you think one's HIV status has anything to do with the truth of anything?
You sound like one of those HIV awareness welfare recipients. It is just this
type of person who clings desperately to disproven theory. Go to Medline and
look up Nancy Padian. She will set you straight on the transmisibility of HIV.
>One thing we definitely know about HIV. It IS infectious.
You know the answer to that one fool. it is NOT. See Padian.
>Meantime, if you are infected, I pray that you aren't infecting
>other people because of your absurd delusions.
This is what makes your type of person truly dangerous. Extremely ignorant and
extremely loud. Loud and stupid. You are exactly the type of fool who cheered
people being poisoned to death by AZT.
These cycles of HIV replication, transmissible by sex and all that crap exist
only in your head. The truth of my statement doesn't change bearing on my HIV
status.Are you are trying to rope me in as another co-dependant? Fool.
Scientific studies exist demonstrating no transmissibility of HIV by sex.
You will be happy to hear that prostitutes do not get HIV provided they are not
drug users. So much for fucking, condom, no condom, no fucking difference. But
plenty of true STDs are transmitted, believe me.
Go get your ass educated before coming here to spew that imbecilic rot.
Denial my ass. Where do they find these people?
Dgor233
>that dissidents don't seem to acknowledge (or maybe grasp) is that
>HIV is one of the most-studied viruses ever. HIV has 9 characteristic
>genes, with fully characterized gene products. It shares regulatory
>genes with previously known retroviruses, although HIV has a couple
>of unique regulatory genes, which make it's life-cycle more complex.
>HIV has been sequenced, cloned, detected by PCR, bDNA, NASBA, and
>in situ hybridization.
So could you please direct me to a reference wherein the HIV genome (RNA) of 9
kB has been demonstrated? From those numerous purifications that you claim
surely you can supply 1 reference. The point I am trying to make is that
regardless of how complex HIV is allegded to be, It cannot be too complex to
have its own genome. Yet to date nobody has demonstrated from density gradient
banded material a 9 kB RNA that corresponds to hiv. This is a critical point
that nobody 100,000 = papers later has demonstrated. Can you spell GIVE ME A
SCIENTIFIC BREAK?
Without this genome you cannot know if you have amplified HTLV-1 gag,
endogenous retrovirus gag, or whatever. Examine some of the principles of PCR
and the characteristics of genomic DNA. A great deal of manipulation is needed
to make sure this amplifies, and not that. So how do you know if you have this
or that if you don't know what this is? You have no standard copy to compare it
to? Its a little troublesome explaining but it is something very clear to all
the folks who perform PCRs in 'dirty systems'. If you are ignorant of the
methodology, then so be it >made infectious
>to primates otherwise immune. Thousands of the world's most eminent
>microbiologists, molecular biologists, and virologists have poked,
None of those things make the primates sick. And one other thing, "mock virus"
i.e. a preparation of cellular material from non virus infected cells
"protects" against infectivity. How can that be?
>HIV has been sequenced, cloned, detected by PCR, bDNA, NASBA, and
>in situ hybridization. It has been cultured, and antigenemia (p24)
>has been detected in human carriers. The separate genes have been
>characterized, and phenotypic alterations have been linked to
If you are aware that p24 is used as marker for HIV replication are you aware
that p24 is most likely cellular myosin? Or that antibody to p24 cannot be used
to assign a status of HIV positive?>template
>have been characterized, and antiretroviral treatments induce
>predictable, consistent alterations in RT and protease. Don't you
All those thousands of HIV scientists allowed their colleagues to lie that AZT
is a quote antiretroviral end quote that does not harm living cells. Are these
the people you are talking about? If you know anything about this subject then
you know that AZT is a chain terminator. Analogues of it are used to sequence
DNA. The most popular DNA sequencing technique relies on chain termination
byanalogues of these antiretrovirals.
>invalidate the
>whole of HIV science: on the contrary, the rapid evolution of our
>understanding demonstrates that this is a thriving and vital field.
>If all HIV science descended from an initial "big lie", then
>HIV science would have to be moribund and static, to prevent
>the accumulating contradictions from tearing the whole model
>apart.
If my livelihood depends on maintaining the status quo, would I "buck the
system"
Do you realize that all the people who spent energy looking for a human cancer
virus are the same ones now studying HIV. Are you with me, or are you gonna
duck your head in the sand too. Can you spell Failure of the war on cancer?
Good. Now can you spell NO AIDS EPIDEMIC OUTSIDE RISK GROUPS? Aren't you
curious? Really and truly, wouldn't you just like to hear one of the HIV
superstars come out from behind big mama's petticoats, stop hiding behind
Africa and tell us why we, a country full of promiscuous sexual activity have
no HIV epidemic outside risk groups? Really and truly. Aren't you curious?
Aren't you tired of giving yet another coming to a theater near you excuse?
I do not know if you will choose to answer this post. It is not important. What
is really important to me is how much effort you will expend trying to explain
any inconsistency. How much hand waving you will have to invoke to make your
theory tenable. Keep in mind that some of the more fantastic hypothesising
backed by much hand waving came from the human cancer virus people. Keeping in
mind that inconsistencies are exactly how hypotheses get falsified. Because I
suspect you are a scientist of some kind, I would like you to question your
capacity to be scientifically duped by "high falutin' theorizing" in the face
of marked deviation of real time data. If nothing else, you will be able to
decide as a scientist if you are one of those " me too" wastes of taxpayer
money, or a different sort.
GMCarter
>>Why do I get the feeling you're one of the folks in denial who either
>>is HIV+ and doesn't want to believe the potential consequences (in
>>which case I hope you get over your delusion real damn quick) or just
>>an asshole who wants to justify fucking without a condom?
>>
dgor:
>Do you think one's HIV status has anything to do with the truth of anything?
Yes. It has to do with the truth that a person who is HIV+ has an
extremely high risk of seeing all their CD4+ T lymphocytes disappear,
becoming ill and dying too young.
>You sound like one of those HIV awareness welfare recipients. It is just this
>type of person who clings desperately to disproven theory. Go to Medline and
>look up Nancy Padian. She will set you straight on the transmisibility of HIV.
Thank you for sharing. I have been reading journal articles on the
pathogenesis, molecular biology, epidemiology, immunology and virology
of HIV for 10 years. I have been living in an epicenter of the
pandemic and watched lots of friends die.
And I'm gay so I doubt this Padian woman will set me straight.
Besides, her data do not dissuade me regarding the infectiousness of
HIV.
> >One thing we definitely know about HIV. It IS infectious.
>
>You know the answer to that one fool. it is NOT. See Padian.
Your reliance on misinterpretations of one researcher are remarkable.
You go right ahead and believe that....
>>Meantime, if you are infected, I pray that you aren't infecting
>>other people because of your absurd delusions.
>
>This is what makes your type of person truly dangerous. Extremely ignorant and
>extremely loud. Loud and stupid. You are exactly the type of fool who cheered
>people being poisoned to death by AZT.
To the contrary. I actually tried to convince a couple of friends to
stop taking it. One had used AZT as monotherapy for five years. It
didn't help.
By contrast, you defend bizarre notions that can result in fatal
infection based on aggressive ignorance.
>These cycles of HIV replication, transmissible by sex and all that crap exist
>only in your head. The truth of my statement doesn't change bearing on my HIV
>status.Are you are trying to rope me in as another co-dependant? Fool.
>Scientific studies exist demonstrating no transmissibility of HIV by sex.
You go ahead and share that data. Sadly, you'll only continue to
convince only yourself. Beat your breast as hard as you like dear, it
won't change the horrible truth. I wish to god it would.
>You will be happy to hear that prostitutes do not get HIV provided they are not
>drug users. So much for fucking, condom, no condom, no fucking difference. But
>plenty of true STDs are transmitted, believe me.
Aside from possibly banging one or two, have you ever known any sex
workers? I have. This statement is absurd. However, we do agree that
other STDs are transmitted. And I agree that substance abuse may
increase the risk of HIV infection.
>Go get your ass educated before coming here to spew that imbecilic rot.
>
>Denial my ass. Where do they find these people?
Hmm....very defensive. I'm worried for you dgor. I understand your
fear.
George M. Carter
GMCarter
> >One thing we definitely know about HIV. It IS infectious.
On 27 Feb 1999 02:17:03 GMT, dgo...@aol.comdog (Dgor233) wrote:
>You know the answer to that one fool. it is NOT. See Padian.
OK. So I've looked up Padian. This is your champion? I append all
abstracts obtained (30) using Padian and HIV in Medline. (I believe
one or two N. Padians are not the same person.) To the contrary, her
groups consistently find that HIV is infectious. Maybe they're finding
some evidence that it is not easy to transmit (this ain't news) but it
sure does get around.
Your comment that HIV is not a risk to the general North American
heterosexual population is partly true--but may also be perceived as
racist bullshit. Epidemics are not static. They change. You sound
like a devotee of that asshole Fumento. Picking data that suit your
fantasy of the moment to either sustain your denial and/or justify
fucking without a condom.
George M. Carter
Padian, HIV, 2/27/99 30 citations found
First: study that shows discordant couples, HIV is infectious. It
happens. No mention is made in the abstract as to the use of barrier
protection (i.e., condoms):
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol 1998 Dec 15;19(5):527-35
Epidemiologic evidence for time variation in HIV infectivity.
Shiboski SC, Padian NS
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of
California-San Francisco, 94143-0560, USA. st...@biostat.ucsf.edu
Data from three epidemiologic studies of heterosexual transmission of
HIV among monogamous couples are used to assess evidence for time
variation in HIV infectivity, possibly related to varying levels of
infectiousness following infection in the primary infected partner.
Analyses are based on statistical techniques that account for the
inherent incompleteness of exposure information from such studies, and
that allow direct assessment of the hypotheses that infectivity varies
with time since infection and across partnerships. Data include
findings from 302 couples from the California Partners' Study and 51
and 31 couples, respectively, from two U.S. Center for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC)-sponsored studies of infection in partners of
transfusion recipients. Results indicate weak evidence for higher
infectivity following infection of the primary partner, decreasing to
relatively lower levels from 2 to 10 years after. Although these
findings are consistent with biologic observations of time variation
in viral levels, other explanations of the observed pattern (e.g.,
heterogeneity of infectivity) are equally plausible, pointing out some
inherent limitations of data from such studies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another study. Small sample size. Not relative to infectiousness of
HIV--but an important issue. (Clearly, it also recognizes that HIV
exists, causes disease, etc.)
AIDS Care 1998 Oct;10(5):533-48
Managing HIV among serodiscordant heterosexual couples: serostatus,
stigma and sex.
van der Straten A, Vernon KA, Knight KR, Gomez CA, Padian NS
Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, University of California San
Francisco 94105, USA. avdst...@psg.ucsf.edu
A qualitative study was conducted with 28 men and women in
HIV-serodiscordant couples to explore the management of HIV in their
relationship. Content analysis of the interviews revealed the role of
serostatus and stigma in shaping partners' experience of HIV, sex and
risk. Partners' differing serostatus often created feelings of
alienation within the relationship. Compounding this interpersonal
dynamic, the HIV service community was experienced as segregating
because they were not funded or prepared to work with seronegative
partners. Thus many, particularly seronegative women, felt invisible
both within and outside of the relationship. Yet, the uninfected
partners shared the burden of a stigmatizing illness because of the
serodiscordant relationship. Stigma hindered communication about HIV
and sex, disclosure to others and access to services. Many experienced
HIV as a loss of their sexuality. Seronegative partners spoke about
'keeping sex alive' and often had to push to continue having sex.
Couples used multiple strategies to manage HIV, including developing
strict behavioural guidelines, connecting with other couples,
accessing scientific information and becoming educators and activists.
These altruistic activities, which also included participation in
research, helped to transcend external and internalized stigma.
Implications for developing interventions for HIV-serodiscordant
couples are discussed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This one looks interesting; I'd like to review the full article if I
get a chance. But clearly, here again, the conclusion of your icon is
unequivocal: HIV is infectious.
AIDS 1998;12 Suppl A:S87-94
Genetic and immunological host factors associated with susceptibility
to HIV-1 infection.
Buchacz KA, Wilkinson DA, Krowka JF, Koup RA, Padian NS
Department of Epidemiology, University of California, Berkeley, USA.
The probability of HIV transmission depends on the interplay of many
different factors related to infectiousness of the HIV-infected
partner, susceptibility of the HIV-uninfected partner, and biological
characteristics of HIV strains. Here, we review recent studies of host
immunological and genetic factors which may affect susceptibility to
HIV-1 infection. These factors are summarized in Table 1. We propose
how to explore biological correlates of susceptibility to HIV-1
infection in epidemiological studies, discuss the strengths and
limitations of this research, and address the implications for public
health.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AIDS 1998 Mar 5;12(4):444-5
CCR-5 genotype and sexual transmission of HIV-1.
O'Brien TR, Padian NS, Hodge T, Goedert JJ, O'Brien SJ, Carrington M
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Irrelevant to the question of the infectiousness of HIV; it relies on
that reality to suggest what I think are sensible proposals for
spending public funds to try to reduce infection rates in highest risk
populations.
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol 1997 Oct 1;16(2):127-36
Strategies for universalistic and targeted HIV prevention.
Des Jarlais DC, Padian N
Beth Israel Medical Center, New York, New York 10003, U.S.A.
The controversy over "targeted" versus "universalistic" programs for
HIV prevention has persisted throughout the history of the HIV/AIDS
epidemic in the United States and in some European countries. Building
on previous analyses, we outline methods for integrating
universalistic and targeted HIV prevention programming. The outline
considers possible synergy between targeted and universalistic
programs, rather than a forced choice between the two. Components
within this framework include a continuum of the intensity of targeted
programs, specification of local risk behavior populations, categories
of risk behavior, and HIV seroprevalence within local risk-behavior
populations. Given the scarce resources currently available,
preventing all new HIV infections is not a realistic public health
goal, but with better use of current scientific knowledge, it should
be possible to greatly reduce the rate of new HIV infections.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, while this study shows a low transmission rate, clearly HIV is
infectious. STDs can increase the risk and condoms can reduce the
risk of HIV infection. Your argument is absurd and based on your
twisted misinterpretations. The validity of this study's findings
would be better established if the results were replicated elsewhere.
Am J Epidemiol 1997 Aug 15;146(4):350-7
Heterosexual transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in
northern California: results from a ten-year study.
Padian NS, Shiboski SC, Glass SO, Vittinghoff E
Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences,
University of California, San Francisco, USA.
To examine rates of and risk factors for heterosexual transmission of
human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), the authors conducted a
prospective study of infected individuals and their heterosexual
partners who have been recruited since 1985. Participants were
recruited from health care providers, research studies, and health
departments throughout Northern California, and they were interviewed
and examined at various study clinic sites. A total of 82 infected
women and their male partners and 360 infected men and their female
partners were enrolled. Over 90% of the couples were monogamous for
the year prior to entry into the study; < 3% had a current sexually
transmitted disease (STD). The median age of participants was 34
years, and the majority were white. Over 3,000 couple-months of data
were available for the follow-up study. Overall, 68 (19%) of the 360
female partners of HIV-infected men (95% confidence interval (CI)
15.0-23.3%) and two (2.4%) of the 82 male partners of HIV-infected
women (95% CI 0.3-8.5%) were infected. History of sexually transmitted
diseases was most strongly associated with transmission.
Male-to-female transmission was approximately eight-times more
efficient than female-to-male transmission and male-to-female per
contact infectivity was estimated to be 0.0009 (95% CI 0.0005-0.001).
Over time, the authors observed increased condom use (p < 0.001) and
no new infections. Infectivity for HIV through heterosexual
transmission is low, and STDs may be the most important cofactor for
transmission. Significant behavior change over time in serodiscordant
couples was observed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
J Infect Dis 1996 Oct;174 Suppl 2:S176-81
Human immunodeficiency virus testing for patient-based and
population-based diagnosis.
Albritton WL, Vittinghoff E, Padian NS
Provincial Laboratory of Public Health, University of Alberta
Hospitals, Edmonton, Canada.
Laboratory testing for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has been
introduced for individual patient-based diagnosis as well as high-risk
and low-risk population-based screening. The choice of test,
confirmatory algorithm, and interpretative criteria used depend on the
clinical setting. In the context of general population-based testing,
factors affecting test performance will have to be considered
carefully in the development of testing policy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
J Infect Dis 1996 Oct;174 Suppl 2:S127-33
Overview: individual and population approaches to the epidemiology and
prevention of sexually transmitted diseases and human immunodeficiency
virus infection.
Aral SO, Holmes KK, Padian NS, Cates W Jr
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of STD
Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, USA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think this study is your Padian. Might be. But here again, the
study shows HIV is infective--but that the infectivity of HIV varies
dependent at least partly upon its tropism and host immune factors.
Nat Med 1996 Apr;2(4):412-7
Relative resistance to HIV-1 infection of CD4 lymphocytes from persons
who remain uninfected despite multiple high-risk sexual exposure.
Paxton WA, Martin SR, Tse D, O'Brien TR, Skurnick J, VanDevanter NL,
Padian N, Braun JF, Kotler DP, Wolinsky SM, Koup RA
Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center, New York, New York 10016, USA.
Some individuals remain uninfected with human immunodeficiency virus
type-1 (HIV-1) despite multiple high-risk sexual exposures. We studied
a cohort of 25 subjects with histories of multiple high-risk sexual
exposures to HIV-1 and found that their CD8+ lymphocytes had greater
anti-HIV-1 activity than did CD8+ lymphocytes from nonexposed
controls. Further studies indicated that their purified CD4+
lymphocytes were less susceptible to infection with multiple primary
isolates of HIV-1 than were CD4+ lymphocytes from the nonexposed
controls. This relative resistance to HIV-1 infection did not extend
to T-cell line-adapted strains, was restricted by the envelope
glycoprotein, was not explained by the cell surface density of CD4
molecules, but was associated with the activity of the C-C chemokines
RANTES, MIP-1alpha, and MIP-1beta. This relative resistance of CD4+
lymphocytes may contribute to protection from HIV-1 in multiply
exposed persons.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet another study showing HIV is infectious. Here, they do a
cross-sectional, not prospective, study that yields that conclusion
and observes that certain conditions--here smoking, vaginal pain and
bleeding, are associated with increased risk. Perhaps part of
targetted prevention programs should include getting folks to quit
smoking!
J Infect Dis 1995 Oct;172(4):1084-7
Risk factors for postcoital bleeding among women with or at risk for
infection with human immunodeficiency virus.
Padian NS, Abrams J, Skurnick JH, Van Devanter NL, O'Brien TR
Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences,
University of California, San Francisco 94110, USA.
Risk factors for postcoital bleeding were examined in 475 women who
were enrolled in a study of heterosexual transmission of human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV). In bivariate analyses, history of
sexually transmitted diseases (STDs; P = .03), HIV infection (P =
008), and dyspareunia or pain during intercourse (P = .0001) were
significant risk factors. In multivariate analysis, the two latter
factors remained significant (for HIV, odds ratio [OR] = 2.1, P = .02,
95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.1-4.0; for dyspareunia, OR = 3.5, P <
..001, 95% CI = 1.8-6.6), as did the interaction term of STD history
and heavy smoking (OR = 2.4, P = .02, 95% CI = 1.2-5.0). Pain during
intercourse was the strongest predictor of postcoital bleeding but may
be part of the same phenomenon. Similarly, because this study relied
on cross-sectional data, the direction of the causal pathway linking
HIV to postcoital bleeding cannot be established. However, these data
suggest that smoking, a modifiable risk factor, may increase risk of
postcoital bleeding and contribute to susceptibility for HIV and other
STDs.
Comments: * Comment in: J Infect Dis 1996 Jun;173(6):1520-1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Merely shows the vicissitudes of self-reporting as a data gathering
method--particularly when it comes to matters of sex (e.g., the
difficulty in ascertaining the "monogamousness" of couples).
Sex Transm Dis 1995 May-Jun;22(3):169-72
Reliability of sexual histories in heterosexual couples.
Padian NS, Aral S, Vranizan K, Bolan G
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California, San
Francisco, USA.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Reliability of responses between partners
was used as a surrogate to examine the validity of self-reported
sexual histories in two samples with different risk and demographic
profiles and different intensities of contact with study staff. STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective self-report data were compared between partners
and between samples. RESULTS: Despite differences between the two
groups, reliability of the sexual history data was comparable.
CONCLUSIONS: Further study is needed to examine other methodologies
for collecting sensitive data. Intensive contact and rapport building
may not be necessary.
Comments: * Comment in: Sex Transm Dis 1995 May-Jun;22(3):162-3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
N Engl J Med 1994 Dec 22;331(25):1718; discussion 1718-9
Heterosexual transmission of HIV.
Padian NS, Vittinghoff E, Shiboski S
Comments: * Comment on: N Engl J Med 1994 Aug 11;331(6):341-6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
N Engl J Med 1994 Nov 24;331(21):1451-3
Targeted HIV-prevention programs.
Des Jarlais DC, Padian NS, Winkelstein W Jr
Beth Israel Medical Center, New York, NY 10013.
An effective program to prevent HIV infection must have both universal
and targeted components. The universal component includes reducing
HIV-related discrimination, removing commercial restrictions on the
materials necessary for safer behavior, and providing information
about the risk of HIV. The targeted component involves focusing the
limited resources for intensive programs of behavioral change on
situations in which the risk of HIV transmission is highest. Such a
strategy would follow the dictum "Warn widely and spend wisely."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This one merely raises interesting questions--although the first
question is kind of stupid. "Are all individuals equally at risk for
sexually transmitted diseases (STD) and infection with human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV)? " Clearly, the answer is no. Risk varies
depending on a variety of factors. Anyway...feel free to read the
rest. I think it's pretty well established that for you to consider
Padian as a resource for the idiotic claim that HIV is not infectious
is an indication of your intellectual bankruptcy.
Sex Transm Dis 1994 Mar-Apr;21(2 Suppl):S53-4
Sexually transmitted disease and human immunodeficiency virus. Is
everyone at risk and does everyone have to pay?
Padian N, Aral SO, Holmes KK
University of California, San Francisco.
The pattern of disease within populations depends on the complex
interaction between individuals. For example, the linking of
individuals to form social and sexual networks affects disease
incidence and prevalence. As described by Potterat, the formation of
these networks results in various patterns of disease spread. However,
phenomena that occur among individuals do not necessarily mirror those
observed in groups or populations. The interactions that characterize
the relationship between individual and group level phenomena were
considered during this session of the Tenth International Meeting of
the International Society for STD Research. By examining these
interactions we hoped to address the following two questions: Are all
individuals equally at risk for sexually transmitted diseases (STD)
and infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)? and Must the
costs and benefits of interventions designed to prevent these outcomes
be divided equally among all individuals to ensure the success of such
interventions?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care 1994;:20-4
A computer-based interview to identify HIV risk behaviors and to
assess patient preferences for HIV-related health states.
Sanders GD, Owens DK, Padian N, Cardinalli AB, Sullivan AN, Nease RF
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Palo Alto, CA.
We developed a computer-based utility assessment tool to assess the
preferences of patients towards HIV-related health states and identify
risk behaviors (both sexual and drug related) of the patient being
interviewed. The reliability of the computer-based interview was
assessed through comparison with person-to-person interviews. Our
pilot study included 22 patients. Twelve of these patients were also
interviewed by the research assistants in person-to-person interviews.
The agreement between the person-to-person and computer-based
interviews was excellent (3 discrepancies of 180 compared answers),
and the majority of the patients preferred to use the computer to
disclose sensitive information regarding risk behaviors. Our study
suggests that assessment of patient preferences and risk factors can
be performed reliably through a computer-based interview.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 1993 Sep;6(9):1043-8
Prevention of heterosexual transmission of human immunodeficiency
virus through couple counseling.
Padian NS, O'Brien TR, Chang Y, Glass S, Francis DP
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California-San
Francisco 04110.
In the absence of an effective vaccine, behavior change remains the
most effective means to prevent the spread of HIV. We examined
behavior change over time and rates of HIV seroconversion in a cohort
of HIV individuals and their heterosexual partners recruited since
1985. Participants were recruited from various HIV counseling and
testing sources throughout California and were usually interviewed and
tested in their own homes. Couple counseling and risk assessments were
conducted at average intervals of six months. Data from 144 couples
who were discordant for HIV serostatus are reported. Of the index
cases, 78% were men. Most male index cases were bisexuals, and most
female index cases were infected through heterosexual intercourse with
a previous sexual partner. The mean duration of the relationship for
the couple at intake was 5.6 years. Both condom use and sexual
abstinence increased over time (p < 0.001 for both), and most behavior
change occurred between intake and first follow-up visit. We observed
no seroconversion after 193 couple-years of follow-up. Couple
counseling in combination with social support appears to be an
effective means to promote and sustain behavior change among
HIV-infected individuals and their heterosexual partners.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAMA 1992 May 27;267(20):2769-74
Effects of disease stage and zidovudine therapy on the detection of
human immunodeficiency virus type 1 in semen.
Anderson DJ, O'Brien TR, Politch JA, Martinez A, Seage GR 3d, Padian
N, Horsburgh CR Jr, Mayer KH
Fearing Research Laboratory, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and
Reproductive Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115.
OBJECTIVE--To determine the prevalence and temporal expression of
infectious human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) in the semen of
HIV-1 seropositive men and to determine whether the detection of HIV-1
in semen is associated with disease stage, zidovudine treatment
status, or other clinical factors. DESIGN--A microculture technique
was used to detect infectious HIV-1 in semen from a cohort of 95
seropositive men. In addition, semen cultures were performed monthly
for at least 6 months for 14 of the men. Information was obtained by
interview and extracted from medical records to identify clinical
variables associated with HIV-1 in semen. PATIENTS--Sixty HIV-1
seropositive homosexual men participating in clinical studies at the
Fenway Community Health Center, Boston, Mass, and 35 HIV seropositive
bisexual or heterosexual men participating in the California Partner
Study of the University of California, San Francisco. MAIN OUTCOME
MEASURES--Semen HIV-1 culture results, seminal leukocyte counts,
Centers for Disease Control (CDC) disease stage, peripheral CD4+ cell
counts, zidovudine therapy, HIV risk category. RESULTS--In the
cross-sectional study, HIV-1 was cultured from the semen of nine (9%)
of 95 men. Factors associated with detection of HIV-1 in semen were
peripheral CD4+ cell counts of 0.20 x 10(9)/L (200/microL) or less
(adjusted odds ratio [OR], 23.33; 95% confidence interval [Cl], 2.89
to 175.63); symptomatic (CDC class IV) disease (adjusted OR, 6.56; 95%
Cl, 1.02 to 66.76); and seminal leukocytosis (greater than 1 x 10(9)
white blood cells per liter of semen) (adjusted OR, 7.02; 95% Cl, 1.28
to 39.29). Zidovudine therapy was associated with decreased detection
of HIV-1 in semen (adjusted OR, 0.04; 95% Cl, 0.00 to 0.63). In the
longitudinal study of 14 men who had neither peripheral CD4+ cells
counts of 0.20 x 10(9)/L or less nor seminal leukocytosis, seminal
HIV-1 was detected in at least one sample from six men (43%).
CONCLUSION--HIV-1 is more commonly found in semen from men with
advanced HIV-1 infection and seminal leukocytosis but can also be
cultured from semen of men with neither of these conditions.
Zidovudine therapy may decrease the prevalence and/or titer of seminal
HIV-1. However, all HIV-1-infected persons should continue to assume
that they are potentially infectious through sexual contact.
Comments: * Comment in: JAMA 1992 Nov 18;268(19):2651-2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AIDS Clin Rev 1992;:301-28
Management of HIV disease in women.
Wofsy CB, Padian NS, Cohen JB, Greenblatt R, Coleman R, Korvick JA
University of California, San Francisco.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAMA 1991 Sep 25;266(12):1664-7
Female-to-male transmission of human immunodeficiency virus.
Padian NS, Shiboski SC, Jewell NP
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of
California, San Francisco.
OBJECTIVE.--To examine rates of heterosexual transmission of human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and associated risk factors and to
determine the relative efficiency of female-to-male and male-to-female
transmission. DESIGN.--Survey of infected individuals and their
heterosexual partners recruited since 1985. SETTING.--Participants
were recruited from various HIV counseling and testing sites
throughout California but were generally interviewed and tested in
their homes. PARTICIPANTS.--Data from 379 couples at entry to the
study are reported: 72 male partners of infected women and 307 female
partners of infected men. The infected index case had a
well-established source of risk; couples were eliminated if the
direction of transmission could not be established. The majority of
couples were monogamous since 1978, white, and in their 30s. Most
partners did not know their serostatus at entry into the study. MAIN
OUTCOME MEASURE.--HIV serostatus in the exposed sexual partner.
RESULTS.--We observed one probable instance (1%) of female-to-male
transmission compared with 20% transmission rates in the female
partners of infected men. All couples were sampled in the same way.
Male index cases were more likely to be symptomatic than female index
cases. CONCLUSION.--The odds of male-to-female transmission were
significantly greater than female-to-male transmission. The one case
of female-to-male transmission was unique in that the couple reported
numerous unprotected sexual contacts and noted several instances of
vaginal and penile bleeding during intercourse.
Comments: * Comment in: JAMA 1991 Sep 15;266(12):1695-6 * Comment
in: JAMA 1992 Apr 8;267(14):1917; discussion 1918-9 * Comment in:
JAMA 1992 Apr 8;267(14):1918; discussion 1918-9 * Comment in: JAMA
1992 Apr 8;267(14):1919 * Comment in: JAMA 1992 Oct
14;268(14):1855; discussion 1856-7 * Comment in: JAMA 1992 Oct
14;268(14):1855-6; discussion 1856-7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lancet 1991 Aug 31;338(8766):573-4
White blood cells and HIV-1 in semen from vasectomised seropositive
men.
Anderson DJ, Politch JA, Martinez A, Van Voorhis BJ, Padian NS,
O'Brien TR
Publication Types: * Letter
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Am J Public Health 1990 Aug;80(8):990-1
Sexual histories of heterosexual couples with one HIV-infected
partner.
Padian NS
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, San Francisco General
Hospital, CA 94110.
Ninety-eight heterosexual couples enrolled in a HIV transmission
study, at least one of whom was HIV-infected, were interviewed about
sexual behavior. Although males and females were interviewed
separately, there was agreement between them on the number of sexual
contacts, the practice or anal intercourse, and condom use. These
findings of strong reliability are encouraging, but do not necessarily
imply that the data are valid.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
J Infect Dis 1990 May;161(5):883-7
The effect of number of exposures on the risk of heterosexual HIV
transmission.
Padian NS, Shiboski SC, Jewell NP
Epidemiology Program, San Francisco General Hospital, University of
California 94110.
Several studies of the heterosexual transmission of human
immunodeficiency virus have reported no association between
transmission and number of exposures. In contrast, this study showed
that for a susceptible sex partner, the number of exposures to an
infected index case is indeed associated with transmission, but in a
nonlinear fashion. Factors that can dilute an association between
transmission and number of exposures include measurement error in
calculating number of exposures, use of inappropriate statistical
models, and failure to account for variations in transmission rates.
For example, the practice of anal intercourse and the experience of
bleeding during intercourse increase the likelihood of transmission.
We also observed that transmission occurred with fewer exposures among
couples who did not use condoms compared with couples who did. The
number of exposures also affects the independent association between
other risk factors and transmission and thus should be considered when
analyzing other sources of risk.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AIDS 1990;4 Suppl 1:S99-103
Sexual transmission of HIV and the epidemiology of other sexually
transmitted diseases.
Cameron DW, Padian NS
Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Canada.
Publication Types: * Review * Review, tutorial
------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAMA 1989 Nov 10;262(18):2572-6
Targeting AIDS prevention and treatment toward HIV-1-infected persons.
The concept of early intervention.
Francis DP, Anderson RE, Gorman ME, Fenstersheib M, Padian NS, Kizer
KW, Conant MA
Center for Prevention Services, Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta,
Ga.
We propose establishing private and public outpatient facilities where
persons with human immunodeficiency virus, type 1 (HIV-1), infection
can receive state-of-the-art clinical and behavioral follow-up,
treatment, and assistance. The possible advantages of enrolling
HIV-1-positive persons into long-term follow-up are early treatment of
clinical conditions and resulting gains in life quality and life
expectancy, decreased transmission of HIV-1 to uninfected persons,
more efficient use of scarce patient-care resources, and improved
estimates of the total number of HIV-infected persons. The possible
disadvantages of such a program are adverse psychological reactions to
knowledge of HIV-1 infection, adverse societal actions against
infected persons, and, finally, the economic cost of the program.
These facilities, with the proper expertise and safeguards of
confidentiality and trust, could prolong and improve the lives of
infected persons while preventing infection of others.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stat Med 1989 Jan;8(1):93-102
Heterogeneity in the probability of HIV transmission per sexual
contact: the case of male-to-female transmission in penile-vaginal
intercourse.
Wiley JA, Herschkorn SJ, Padian NS
Survey Research Center, University of California, Berkeley 94720.
Recent studies have indicated variation in the infectivity beta of HIV
among heterosexual couples. We represent this heterogeneity by
modelling beta as a random variable. Using data on the number of
contacts and seroconversion of couples, we fit the model by
maximum-likelihood estimation with a beta distribution and a discrete
distribution for beta. The estimates indicate the heterogeneity is
extreme. The limitations of the model and the implications of the
results for epidemiologic spread and further research are discussed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Am J Public Health 1988 Nov;78(11):1472-4
The San Francisco Men's Health Study: continued decline in HIV
seroconversion rates among homosexual/bisexual men.
Winkelstein W Jr, Wiley JA, Padian NS, Samuel M, Shiboski S, Ascher
MS, Levy JA School of Public Health, University of California,
Berkeley 94720.
The incidence of infection by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)
has been monitored since 1984 in an area probability sample of
homosexual/bisexual men drawn from a six-kilometer square area of San
Francisco where the epidemic of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome
(AIDS) has been most severe. Annualized HIV seroconversion rates in
previously uninfected cohort members have declined by 88 per cent from
5.9 per cent during the first six months of 1985 to 0.7 per cent
during the last six months of 1987. Concurrent declines of
approximately 80 per cent in the prevalence of sexual behaviors
associated with HIV transmission were also observed in the sample.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAMA 1987 Aug 14;258(6):788-90
Male-to-female transmission of human immunodeficiency virus.
Padian N, Marquis L, Francis DP, Anderson RE, Rutherford GW, O'Malley
PM, Winkelstein W Jr
Ninety-seven female sexual partners of 93 men infected with human
immunodeficiency virus were studied. All of the women had sexual
contact within the year before their partner had been diagnosed as
having acquired immunodeficiency syndrome or was found to have a
positive reaction on the human immunodeficiency virus serologic test.
Fifty-seven percent were the partners of bisexual men. Overall, 23% of
the women were infected (95% confidence interval, 15% to 32%). The
total number of exposures to the index case (sexual contacts with
ejaculation) and the specific practice of anal intercourse, also with
the infected partner, were associated with transmission. Neither
condom use, total number of sexual partners since 1978, nor lifetime
number of sexually transmitted diseases was associated with infection.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Am J Public Health 1987 Jun;77(6):685-9
The San Francisco Men's Health Study: III. Reduction in human
immunodeficiency virus transmission among homosexual/bisexual men,
1982-86.
Winkelstein W Jr, Samuel M, Padian NS, Wiley JA, Lang W, Anderson RE,
Levy JA
The prevalence and incidence of infection by the human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has been under study in a cohort of 1,034
single men recruited by area probability sampling from a six kilometer
square area of San Francisco where the epidemic of acquired
immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) has been most severe. Prevalence of
infection among homosexual/bisexual study subjects increased from an
estimated 22.8 per cent during the last half of 1982 to 48.6 per cent
during the period July through December 1984. During three subsequent
six-month periods, prevalence remained stable at approximately 50 per
cent. Annual infection rates, measured by seroconversion among
seronegative study subjects, decreased from an estimated 18.4 per cent
per year from 1982 to 1984, to 5.4 and 3.1 per cent during the first
and second halves of 1985, and to 4.2 per cent during the first six
months of 1986. These declines were associated with reductions of 60
per cent or more in the prevalence of high-risk sexual practices
associated with both acquiring and disseminating infection by the
human immunodeficiency virus.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAMA 1987 Jan 16;257(3):321-5
Sexual practices and risk of infection by the human immunodeficiency
virus. The San Francisco Men's Health Study.
Winkelstein W Jr, Lyman DM, Padian N, Grant R, Samuel M, Wiley JA,
Anderson RE, Lang W, Riggs J, Levy JA
The San Francisco Men's Health Study is a prospective study of the
epidemiology and natural history of the acquired immunodeficiency
syndrome in a cohort of 1034 single men, 25 to 54 years of age,
recruited by multistage probability sampling. At entry, June 1984
through January 1985, the seropositivity rate for human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection among homosexual/bisexual study
participants was 48.5%. No heterosexual participants were HIV
seropositive. Among homosexual/bisexual men reporting no male sexual
partners in the two years before entry into the study, seropositivity
was 17.6%. For those reporting more than 50 partners, seropositivity
was 70.8%. Only receptive anal/genital contact had a significantly
elevated risk of HIV infection. Douching was the only ancillary sexual
practice that contributed significantly to risk of infection.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lancet 1986 Mar 8;1(8480):527-9
Isolation of AIDS-associated retrovirus from genital secretions of
women with antibodies to the virus.
Wofsy CB, Cohen JB, Hauer LB, Padian NS, Michaelis BA, Evans LA, Levy
JA
The AIDS-associated retrovirus (ARV) was isolated from vaginal and/or
cervical secretions from 4 out of 8 women whose sera contained
antibodies to the virus. The quantity of virus recovered initially was
so low that identification of ARV was accomplished only after passage
of the isolates to cultured mitogen-stimulated normal human peripheral
blood mononuclear cells. The results indicate that the vaginal canal
under certain conditions could be a source of transmission of ARV.
Bennett
>>One of the things
>>that dissidents don't seem to acknowledge (or maybe grasp) is that
>>HIV is one of the most-studied viruses ever. HIV has 9 characteristic
>>genes, with fully characterized gene products. It shares regulatory
>>genes with previously known retroviruses, although HIV has a couple
>>of unique regulatory genes, which make it's life-cycle more complex.
>>HIV has been sequenced, cloned, detected by PCR, bDNA, NASBA, and
>>in situ hybridization.
>
>So could you please direct me to a reference wherein the HIV genome (RNA)
of 9
>kB has been demonstrated? From those numerous purifications that you claim
>surely you can supply 1 reference. The point I am trying to make is that
>regardless of how complex HIV is allegded to be, It cannot be too complex
to
>have its own genome. Yet to date nobody has demonstrated from density
gradient
>banded material a 9 kB RNA that corresponds to hiv. This is a critical
point
>that nobody 100,000 = papers later has demonstrated. Can you spell GIVE ME
A
>SCIENTIFIC BREAK?
>
I suggest you look at the reply I made to your question in the "...lot of
sense..." thread. The full-length genome is isolated on a regular basis in
experiments designed to investigate HIV replication.
Not only that but a paper published a year ago gave >95% pure virions - a
"homogenous" view of intact virions under EM - which contained all
structural proteins and RNA.
Viral RNA is isolated and characterised every day in the field of HIV -
here's another paper where that was achieved (written, not coincidentally,
by my PhD supervisor). It's the first paper investigating viral RNA
packaging I can find.
***************
J Virol 1989 Sep;63(9):4085-7
Identification of a sequence required for efficient packaging of human
immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA into virions.
Lever A, Gottlinger H, Haseltine W, Sodroski J
Laboratory of Human Retrovirology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston,
Massachusetts.
Sequences required for efficient packaging of human immunodeficiency virus
type 1 (HIV-1) genome RNA into virus particles were identified. Deletion of
19 base pairs between the 5' long terminal repeat and the gag gene
initiation codon of HIV-1 resulted in a virus markedly attenuated for
replication in human T lymphocytes. The mutant virus was characterized by
nearly wild-type ability to encode viral proteins and to produce virion
particles. The mutant virions exhibited a significant reduction in the
content of HIV-1-specific RNA. These results identify an important component
of the HIV-1 packaging signal.
PMID: 2760989, UI: 89342656
*********************
Notice that even in 1989 the fact that the virions contained RNA was well
established. Note also the inbuilt control for requiring full-length RNA -
the virus had to replicate.
>None of those things make the primates sick. And one other thing, "mock
virus"
>i.e. a preparation of cellular material from non virus infected cells
>"protects" against infectivity. How can that be?
>
Have you got a ref for that? Sounds interesting... Are you sure you're not
referring to the failed vaccine attempts where they discovered they were, in
fact, immunising against the MHC molecules on the virions that had been
captured during budding?
>>HIV has been sequenced, cloned, detected by PCR, bDNA, NASBA, and
>>in situ hybridization. It has been cultured, and antigenemia (p24)
>>has been detected in human carriers. The separate genes have been
>>characterized, and phenotypic alterations have been linked to
>
>If you are aware that p24 is used as marker for HIV replication are you
aware
>that p24 is most likely cellular myosin? Or that antibody to p24 cannot be
used
>to assign a status of HIV positive?>template
>
p24 = myosin ?? I can find no reference linking those two agents, in fact
only papers that refer to myosin specifically as "non-viral". How can
myosin be p24 when it is more than 8 times as heavy? You're talking out of
your bottom.
>>have been characterized, and antiretroviral treatments induce
>>predictable, consistent alterations in RT and protease. Don't you
>
>All those thousands of HIV scientists allowed their colleagues to lie that
AZT
>is a quote antiretroviral end quote that does not harm living cells. Are
these
>the people you are talking about? If you know anything about this subject
then
>you know that AZT is a chain terminator.
It's a chain terminator that is remarkably specific for RT.
**************************
J Biol Chem 1990 Jul 15;265(20):11914-8
Selective action of 3'-azido-3'-deoxythymidine 5'-triphosphate on viral
reverse transcriptases and human DNA polymerases.
Huang P, Farquhar D, Plunkett W
Department of Medical Oncology, University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer
Center, Houston 77030.
The action of 3'-azido-3'-deoxythymidine 5'-triphosphate (N3dTTP) on DNA
strand elongation catalyzed by human immunodeficiency virus type 1 reverse
transcriptase was evaluated in comparison with human DNA polymerase alpha
and proliferating cell nuclear antigen-independent DNA polymerase delta.
Sequencing gel analysis demonstrated that the human immunodeficiency virus 1
reverse transcriptase preferentially incorporated N3dTTP into the T sites of
the growing DNA strands and caused chain termination in a dose-dependent
manner. This effect was observed even when the N3dTTP concentration was 0.3
microM, 100-fold less than dTTP. Studies with reverse transcriptases from
avian myeloblastosis virus and Moloney murine leukemia virus showed that
N3dTTP was also efficiently incorporated into DNA by these enzymes and
terminated DNA strand elongation. In contrast, human DNA polymerases alpha
and delta did not incorporate detectable amounts of N3dTTP into the DNA and
were not inhibited by 300 microM N3dTTP. The selective incorporation of the
chain-terminating nucleotide by the viral reverse transcriptases appears to
be a molecular basis for the positive therapeutic index of
3'-azido-3'-deoxythymidine.
PMID: 1694849, UI: 90307721
*****************
Sure, in some cell lines there are toxic effects, and the clinical trials of
AZT did report myopathies (later linked to mitochondrial effects, not
cellular DNA damage). But even this, probably the worst antiviral (since
it's so old) is pretty good. It's main limitation is that the RT gene
mutates easily enough to become resistant.
Analogues of it are used to sequence
>DNA. The most popular DNA sequencing technique relies on chain termination
>byanalogues of these antiretrovirals.
>
The difference being that in sequencing the nucleotide analogues are
selected so that they are recognised by the enzymes, and in antivirals
they're _not_. Note also that newer drugs are only developed if they
_better_ than AZT. If they weren't, why bother developing them? Eg...
****************
Verh K Acad Geneeskd Belg 1991;53(4):387-418
[Synthesis and anti-retroviral activity of various new
2',3'-dideoxynucleoside analogs].
[Article in Dutch]
Van Aerschot A
Laboratorium voor Farmaceutische Scheikunde, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
About 40 new 2',3'-dideoxynucleoside analogues with different basic
structures have been synthetized with the aim of finding more potent and
selective inhibitors of HIV and the associated pathogenicity. Some new
synthesis techniques were developed and existing ones were used for the
preparation of these analogues. Among the 3'-fluorinated
2',3'-dideoxynucleosides several potent inhibitors of HIV were found and
especially 3'-fluoro-2',3'-dideoxy-5-chloro-uridine (81) is endowed with a
high selectivity index, comparable to the selectivity displayed by
3'-azido-3'-deoxythymidine (AZT). Because of its substantially reduced
toxicity profile compared to AZT, this compound deserves further evaluation
as a possible alternative for the treatment of AIDS. Likewise, the
5-chlorinated cytidine analogues 102 and 103 should be further examined
because of their lack of toxicity in vitro.
PMID: 1719712, UI: 92057167
J Biol Chem 1998 Oct 16;273(42):27250-8
Selective inhibition of HIV-1 reverse transcriptase by an antiviral
inhibitor, (R)-9-(2-Phosphonylmethoxypropyl)adenine.
Suo Z, Johnson KA
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, the Pennsylvania State
University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA.
(R)-9-(2-Phosphonylmethoxypropyl)adenine (PMPA) is an acyclic nucleoside
phosphonate that has been shown to be effective in the treatment of AIDS
although it has a shorter separation between the adenine and phosphorus than
dideoxy-AMP and dAMP. By using pre-steady state kinetic methods, we examined
the incorporation of the diphosphate of PMPA, 2',3'-dideoxyadenosine
5'-triphosphate (ddATP), and dATP catalyzed by wild-type human
immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) reverse transcriptase, an
exonuclease-deficient T7 DNA polymerase (T7 exo-), and wild-type rat DNA
polymerase beta in order to evaluate the selectivity of PMPA as an antiviral
inhibitor. With a DNA/DNA or DNA/RNA 22/43-mer duplex, the diphosphate of
PMPA (PMPApp) is as effective as ddATP in reactions catalyzed by HIV-1
reverse transcriptase in that both analogs have similar substrate
specificity constants (kp/Kd) which are only 5-fold lower than dATP. In
contrast, PMPApp is a much weaker inhibitor of the reaction catalyzed by T7
exo- (with the DNA/DNA 22/43-mer duplex) in that PMPApp has a 5 x
10(-4)-fold lower kp/Kd than ddATP and dATP. The lower kp/Kd of PMPApp is
due to a 1000-2000-fold lower incorporation rate (kp) and a 35-45-fold lower
binding constant (Kd). Similarly, PMPApp is 800-fold less inhibitory toward
polymerase beta with the DNA/DNA 22/43-mer duplex, whereas in studies with a
single nucleotide gapped DNA (22-20/43-mer) PMPApp is 13-fold less
inhibitory than ddATP. Although parallel studies will need to be performed
using appropriate human polymerases, these results begin to define the
mechanistic basis for the reported lower toxicity of PMPA in the treatment
of AIDS.
PMID: 9765248, UI: 98438493
***************
>
>>invalidate the
>>whole of HIV science: on the contrary, the rapid evolution of our
>>understanding demonstrates that this is a thriving and vital field.
>>If all HIV science descended from an initial "big lie", then
>>HIV science would have to be moribund and static, to prevent
>>the accumulating contradictions from tearing the whole model
>>apart.
>
>If my livelihood depends on maintaining the status quo, would I "buck the
>system"
>
>Do you realize that all the people who spent energy looking for a human
cancer
>virus are the same ones now studying HIV. Are you with me, or are you gonna
>duck your head in the sand too. Can you spell Failure of the war on cancer?
>Good. Now can you spell NO AIDS EPIDEMIC OUTSIDE RISK GROUPS?
Can you spell 20% OF LAST YEARS AIDS CASES IN THE US WERE IN WOMEN? It was
the same in Europe. In 1997 410 out of the 1387 reported new cases of AIDS
in the UK were acquired through heterosexual sex. 741 were through
homo/bisexual sex, 123 through drug abuse, and 34 through contaminated blood
products. Contained to the risk groups? I think not.
Cheers
Bennett
GMCarter
snip...
>Scientific studies exist demonstrating no transmissibility of HIV by sex.
snip...
>
>Go get your ass educated before coming here to spew that imbecilic rot.
You might consider taking your own advice. Others have provided other
clear data regarding HIV transmissibility.
The study below shows a low but not negligible rate of HIV infection
among clients of female sex workers in the Atlanta area. It also
shows STDs need to be identified and/or treated. (Or, in the case of
Hepatitis B, vaccinated against.)
The rate of HIV infections must drop for all.
George M. Carter
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol 1999 Feb 1;20(2):195-200
HIV seroprevalence and risk factors among clients of female and male
prostitutes.
Elifson KW, Boles J, Darrow WW, Sterk CE
Department of Sociology, Georgia State University, Atlanta 30303, USA.
soc...@langate.gsu.edu
OBJECTIVES: To document the HIV and STD infection rates among clients
of female (CFP) and clients of male prostitutes (CMP) and to identify
the risk factors for HIV among CFP and CMP. METHODS: Structured
interviews were conducted with 82 CMP and 69 CFP in 1990 and 1991 in
Atlanta, Georgia, U.S.A. Blood samples were tested for HIV, syphilis,
and hepatitis B. RESULTS: The HIV-positive rate was 36.6% among CMP
and 2.9% among CFP. Syphilis seromarkers were found in 15.9% of CMP
and 10.1% of CFP; hepatitis B seromarkers were identified in 58.0% of
CMP and 24.6% of CFP. Key risk factors for HIV among CMP included
serologic history of syphilis, serologic history of hepatitis B,
receptive anal sex with a male prostitute, ever injecting drugs, ever
using crack cocaine, and little education. CFP had no significant risk
factors for HIV in the logistic analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Several studies
have focused on risk factors for HIV among female and male
prostitutes; however, research on their clients has been limited.
Although HIV infection rates among CFP are relatively low, their
infection rate for syphilis and hepatitis warrants serious health
education efforts. Even more critical are harm-reduction programs
targeting CMP. Generic health and HIV risk reduction messages on
heterosexual transmission might be insufficient.
PMID: 10048908, UI: 99139930
Carlton Hogan
Dgor233 <dgo...@aol.comdog> wrote:
>>One of the things
>>that dissidents don't seem to acknowledge (or maybe grasp) is that
>>HIV is one of the most-studied viruses ever. HIV has 9 characteristic
>>genes, with fully characterized gene products. It shares regulatory
>>genes with previously known retroviruses, although HIV has a couple
>>of unique regulatory genes, which make it's life-cycle more complex.
>>HIV has been sequenced, cloned, detected by PCR, bDNA, NASBA, and
>>in situ hybridization.
>
>So could you please direct me to a reference wherein the HIV genome (RNA) of 9
>kB has been demonstrated?
Many references have been posted here again, and again. Probably a good
place for you to start would be Dr. Peter Duesberg's attempt to cliam the
Continuum prize, which he was cheated out of.
>regardless of how complex HIV is allegded to be, It cannot be too complex to
>have its own genome.
Gee. That's a deep thought. Ther point I was making was *NOT* that the issue
is primarily a lot of complex, misuderstood data. On the contrary, the data
from molecular biology, virology, immunology, and epidemiology all line
up. Basic scientists are not sitting around gazing absently into chemical
soup - they are systematically using site-directed mutagenesis to edit
HIV genes toward various outcome. Antiretroviral drugs directed at HIV
not only reduce infections and death on persons with AIDS - they also
interfere with HIV killing in vitro cell lines. Interestingly enough,
persons failing antiretroviral treatment show the exact same escape
mutations as occur after multiple passages in the lab, in the presence
of the same drug.
Yet to date nobody has demonstrated from density gradient
>banded material a 9 kB RNA that corresponds to hiv. This is a critical point
>that nobody 100,000 = papers later has demonstrated. Can you spell GIVE ME A
>SCIENTIFIC BREAK?
I can. Please explain the antiretrviral drug scenario above, the fact that
only the HIV kids of HIV+ mothers develop AIDS, and the fact that there
have been no new blood-products-related AIDS cases since we started
screening for HIV, and finally the work of Mellors, O Brien, and others
showing that HIV RNA levels are an accurate, consistent predictor of
AIDS/Death risk. If you can come up with a single clear explanation
other than HIV that covers all this information, and is actually supported
by data, I would love to see it.
>
>Without this genome you cannot know if you have amplified HTLV-1 gag,
>endogenous retrovirus gag, or whatever. Examine some of the principles of PCR
>and the characteristics of genomic DNA. A great deal of manipulation is needed
>to make sure this amplifies, and not that. So how do you know if you have this
>or that if you don't know what this is? You have no standard copy to compare it
>to? Its a little troublesome explaining but it is something very clear to all
>the folks who perform PCRs in 'dirty systems'. If you are ignorant of the
I am not. YOu really don't need to explain PCR to me. The primers are derived
from purified HIV, something you claim doesn't exist. As long as you
remain ignorant, PCR will look like black magic to you.
If PCR isn't amplifying HIV sequences, then please explain how PCR
PROSPECTIVELY predicts your risk of AIDS and death?
>methodology, then so be it >made infectious
>
>>to primates otherwise immune. Thousands of the world's most eminent
>>microbiologists, molecular biologists, and virologists have poked,
>
>None of those things make the primates sick. And one other thing, "mock virus"
>i.e. a preparation of cellular material from non virus infected cells
>"protects" against infectivity. How can that be?
Duh. Gee.. Maybe it's ANTIGENS? That stimulate an IMMUNE RESPONSE?
And by the way, you are simply wrong. There's lots of data on SHIV
chimeric viruses, which become acutely pathogenic after a few simian
passages. Not to mention all the data on Visna-Maedi virus, Equine
encephalitis, caprine immunodeficiency virus, Feline immundeficiency
virus etc. These are all lentivirus, sharing many feature with HIV,
including the fact that they rarely cause disease in multiple species.
All of theses viruses have had the experiment done on them that would be
unethical in the case of HIV: animals have been experimentally infected
to see if they got disease.
>
>>HIV has been sequenced, cloned, detected by PCR, bDNA, NASBA, and
>>in situ hybridization. It has been cultured, and antigenemia (p24)
>>has been detected in human carriers. The separate genes have been
>>characterized, and phenotypic alterations have been linked to
>
>If you are aware that p24 is used as marker for HIV replication are you aware
>that p24 is most likely cellular myosin?
Data?
> Or that antibody to p24 cannot be used
>to assign a status of HIV positive?>template
That's true: not all HIV+ will be p24+. But if you look at viral loads,
well, hey! odds of being p24 positive go up as your viral load does.
These two tests correlate wih a great agreement. If one is amplifying
meaningless genomic garbage, and the other myosin, then please explain this
data.
>
>>have been characterized, and antiretroviral treatments induce
>>predictable, consistent alterations in RT and protease. Don't you
>
>All those thousands of HIV scientists allowed their colleagues to lie that AZT
>is a quote antiretroviral end quote that does not harm living cells. Are these
>the people you are talking about? If you know anything about this subject then
>you know that AZT is a chain terminator. Analogues of it are used to sequence
>DNA. The most popular DNA sequencing technique relies on chain termination
>byanalogues of these antiretrovirals.
I know a great deal about these drugs, including all the major trials
that show improved survivcal and disease free status in persons who take
greater numbers of these drugs simultaneously. Sure AZT is poison,
at the right dose. So are all drugs that do anything. Look in the PDR
for data on the specificity of AZT for virus w/ respect to the cell.
>
>
>>invalidate the
>>whole of HIV science: on the contrary, the rapid evolution of our
>>understanding demonstrates that this is a thriving and vital field.
>>If all HIV science descended from an initial "big lie", then
>>HIV science would have to be moribund and static, to prevent
>>the accumulating contradictions from tearing the whole model
>>apart.
>
>If my livelihood depends on maintaining the status quo, would I "buck the
>system"
Well my life depends on accurate information on HIV/AIDS.
>
>Do you realize that all the people who spent energy looking for a human cancer
>virus are the same ones now studying HIV.
Stupid little weenie. You just recycle this virusmyth stuff wholesale.
Most of the people that this claim refers to have left NIH AIDS work
(Gallo, Broder, Mitsuyaha, etc). The big names in AIDS now (Bartlett,
Fauci, Ho, Markowitz, Levy, Kotler, Richman, Fleming, etc) come from a WIDE
range of disciplines with a majority from infectious disease. Haven't you
learned yet not to repeat apealing sounding stuff when there is no
factual basis?
Are you with me, or are you gonna
>duck your head in the sand too.
Neither. How can I be "with you", when you have ABSOLUTELY no new ideas
of your own - you just recycle virusmyth crap, without bothering to read
the opposing arguments. I won't confuse you with facts any longer. You
clearly have your mind made up.
Can you spell Failure of the war on cancer?
>Good. Now can you spell NO AIDS EPIDEMIC OUTSIDE RISK GROUPS?
Even if that was so (which it really isn't when you look at the actual
data rather than virusmyth's fabrications), sop what? Are you saying
that it's not an epidemic if it's only in risk groups? Do you know
what a risk group is?
Aren't you
>curious? Really and truly, wouldn't you just like to hear one of the HIV
>superstars come out from behind big mama's petticoats, stop hiding behind
>Africa and tell us why we, a country full of promiscuous sexual activity have
>no HIV epidemic outside risk groups? Really and truly. Aren't you curious?
>Aren't you tired of giving yet another coming to a theater near you excuse?
If you can rein in your hysterical polemic, you might want to look at
some of the very solid epidemiologic studies of HIV and heterosexual sex.
Yeah, it's a lot less risky than gay sex. The difference between that
statement, and yours is that it is based in empiric research.
Don't believe me? Go to http://igm.nlm.nih.gov, select AIDSLINE,
give it "epidemiology" as a MeSH term, then search on the keyword
"heterosexual"
>
>I do not know if you will choose to answer this post. It is not important.
Then why are you babling on?
What
>is really important to me is how much effort you will expend trying to explain
>any inconsistency.
You have had no original thoughts. Every single one of your claims
has been dealt with many time in this NG. Spend a couple of hours
on Dejanews and cath up.
>How much hand waving you will have to invoke to make your
>theory tenable. Keep in mind that some of the more fantastic hypothesising
>backed by much hand waving came from the human cancer virus people.
You really have a kind of comic-book "good guys/bad guys" way of thinking,
don't you? Again, I would refer you to the major researchers who are out there
...they are not what virusmyth claims.
>Keeping in
>mind that inconsistencies are exactly how hypotheses get falsified. Because I
>suspect you are a scientist of some kind, I would like you to question your
>capacity to be scientifically duped by "high falutin' theorizing" in the face
>of marked deviation of real time data. If nothing else, you will be able to
>decide as a scientist if you are one of those " me too" wastes of taxpayer
>money, or a different sort.
Hmm. Oh I get it...Your claim is that if I don't agree with you, then I am
wasting the taxpayer's money? The Institute of Medicine, The US PHS,
the National Academy for Advancement of the Sciences, the AMA, and others
disgree with you.
But hey. You read it on a web site, so it must be true, right?
Carlton