"AIDS Treatment News" online * New Issue #302 (searchable/indexed)

johnburgin at worldnet.att.net johnburgin at worldnet.att.net
Tue Nov 3 19:10:40 EST 1998


On Mon, 02 Nov 1998 14:40:25 GMT, gmc0 at ix.netcom.com (George M.
Carter) wrote:

>
>I wrote
>>>Vaccination-induced seropositivity is NOT the same as
>>>infection-induced seropositivity. 
>
>johnburgin at worldnet.att.net wrote:
>>How do you know? How do you know?
>
>Because it's different panels of antigens.  Because with some types of
>vaccines, you don't have any risk of HIV producing more of itself at
>all.
>
>> (There are many different kinds of
>>>vaccines, including whole-killed, live but disabled, subunit and other
>>>varieties; the "live but disabled" variety (my terms) 
>>would you accept the term attenuated?
>
>I didn't want to burden you with too many syllables.
>
>>>MAY represent a
>>>risk of the virus converting to "live and able" and thus causing
>>>disease).
>>>
>>>There are other risks associated with vaccines.  
>
>>So, the bottom line is, we're, um, not quite there yet?
>
>Um, no, not close yet at all.  Does that make you happy?
>
>The best vaccines we have right now are condoms and availability of
>clean syringes.
>
>>The only
>>problem with this is that we both know that when you are diagnosed
>>with being HIV positive, whether from "infection" or immunization, you
>>are still HIV+.  Why is that so complicated for you? 
>
>It is not!  And indeed, you are now raising a separate and distinct
>issue that has to be addressed in terms of the social issues you
>outline.  I agree wholeheartedly.
>
>>Is your employer or the health department or your patient, or hospital
>>that you work at going to know the difference?  How will the test be
>>able to tell, with certaintly, that the seropositive status is from
>>"non-neutralizing" antibodies(I just love that term, it's so
>>"grounding") or the real McCoy?  Obviously the only way one will know
>>for sure is if they don't develop AIDS.  Isn't that special?
>
>No, it's not the only way.  A PCR will not find replicating virus.
>
>> Look back to the early days of the polio vaccine trials.  Do you
>>recall from your reading that there were a number(but I guess they
>>weren't "statiscally" important) of individuals that developed polio
>>from the vaccine?  What a bummer.  Do you think that maybe, assuming
>>for the sake of argument that with this HIV infection we are trying to
>>prevent, we could run into a similar problem?  I mean, gosh, with all
>>the mutations!  
>
>For certain types of vaccines (attenuated), yes that represents a
>potential risk.  For subunit vaccines or those that do not use any HIV
>genetic material, there is little risk.  Do you think you are the only
>one suddenly aware of these potential risks?
>
>>Well George, thank you for the civility, it's been so
>>nice having you, Frank and the guys having pity on me these last few
>>days.  Oh, by the way, could you answer this little question?  
>
>Civility only because you're obviously seriously impaired.
>
>>You know what it takes to validate all the models/cartoons
>>about "hiv" structure, but neither you or the other guys  have the
>>ability to do it, or hasn't tried, or what?  Should be no problem to
>>get "infectious hiv" from plasma amenable to EM analysis
>>with these "viral loads" upwards of hundreds of millions,
>>right?  I'm still waiting for you to help me with this one.  Maybe
>>after you can take the magic test and prove that you can solve the
>>"elemental" problems like this one, maybe I'll start worrying more
>>about your lecture on basic immunology.  The only problem with the
>>immunology lecture George is that you guys are moving the goldposts
>>again.  You people have rewritten, molecular biology, and  immunology,
>>and found a retrovirus out of the swarm of existing retroviruses that
>>inhabit the planet that only chose NOW to become infective or NOW to
>>become lethal.  jb
>
>Your question is the usual "isolation" question, where the so-called
>"dissidents" move the goal post on what isolation is.  The fact is
>that HIV has been purified, cloned, sequenced.  Swarms of
>retroviruses? Which ones?  HERVs?  Why should ANY disease suddenly
>appear?  Like the flu?  Or plague?  It depends on vectors. 
>
>You seem to exist in some static world where things never change.
>Nothing's ever gonna happen to you, eh?
>
>I still find it impossible to believe that you are any kind of
>researcher.
I feel the same about you. jb
>
>		George M. Carter
>
>




More information about the Immuno mailing list