>smori at nmsu.edu (Shahram Mori) writes:
> >The scientific community criticized this
> >experiment saying that he can't be sure that the virus that he sees was
> >replicated inside the cell or just the virus that was put in cell culture.
> >Hovanessian disagrees because he used a strain that had a high replication
> >rate which is easier to detect in a short time.
Can this not be easily proved by the synthesis of viral proteins
using a radioactive tag followed by immunoprecipitation. It may even
be possible to affinity purify the viral particles using one of these
antibodies and then comparing the RT values with the background cells
which have not been transfected?
> >What I have a problem with are the cells that can't be infected unless
> >both of thses receptors are present. We all know that cells that lack CD4
> >receptors can be infected by HIV. Thus the notion of Co-receptor is
> >illogical in this respect.
I know that there are reports concerning infection of epithelial
cells which may or may not harbor CD4 molecules. Also, we do know that
the cells that are supposed to lack CD4 might in fact have these molecules
in such low numbers that we may not be detecting them?
I would be grateful if someone has any explanation on this.
bsh at med.pitt.edu
>>> THE HIGHER THE LEVEL, THE GREATER THE CONFUSION