HIV reversal

Marnix L. Bosch marnix at
Wed Apr 5 15:53:04 EST 1995

In article <NEWTNews.22299.797070356.grenard at>,
grenard at wrote:

> The child that tested HIV+ for 14 months did so because the test is
> an ELISA for antibodies.  As was said maternal antibodies may be in
> the baby. 

I did not yet read the aricle (yes, I know, I should have by now) but the
press reports stated VIRUS ISOLATION at 19 and 51 days after birth. This
would prove infection of the white blood cells of the infant rather than
just transfer of antibodies. Oddly enough, as far as I understand it, The
child never appeared to make anti-HIV antibodies by himself, despite the
presence of (presumably)
replicating virus. Maybe it is the absence of a Th2 response that actually
protected the infant as some people claim to have evidence for from other
studies (sorry, no references handy right now, but either Schearer or
Romagnani would be a good starting poin for those interested). 

Any other thoughts


Marnix L. Bosch
marnix at

More information about the Virology mailing list