HIV sequence from virus
todd33 at ix.netcom.com
Sun Jun 11 06:18:44 EST 1995
In <3re4fa$c1s at ixnews4.ix.netcom.com> srussell at ix.netcom.com (Sandra
>Comment: the photo in Virology 189:700, 1992 are of virus which has
>been sedemented along with latex sizing spheres. It is surely free,
>and the virions are not attached to the spheres. Moreover, there are
>so many virions per sphere that it is difficult to imagine any way in
>which the presense of these neutral objects is affecting the prep.
Thank you for attempting to clarify the distinction between virus
pelleted in the presence of latex spheres and virus purified by sucrose
density gradient centrifugation. While these particles do indeed have
the appearance of viruses, this does not resolve the paradox of HIV's
apparent instability in sucrose gradients; in fact it makes this more
paradoxical when one considers the physical forces in the 2 procedures.
>Nevertheless, for some odd reason Todd seems to think they invalidate
>the whole thing. What's your problem, here, Todd?
Steve, you know my problem. Do you need to borrow some sucrose?
>This photo shows cell-free HIV concentrated virus, as confirmed with
>EM and chemical tests. It also confirms what two OTHER independent
>labs (Ho's and Montagnier's) report they've seen on EM of sucrose
>gradients, and it also confirms what yet other labs finds in the way
>of HIV RT and proteins and infectious particles in a sucrose gradient.
>It also looks exactly like what people get with closely related SIV
>and FIV off sucrose gradients. Too much evidence to explain in any
>other way, I'm afraid.
> Steve Harris, M.D.
But why beat around the bush? So refute me with evidence that the
nucleic acid inside the particles that don't exist belongs to HIV.
That, by the way, is what we've moved on to in this thread.
Todd Miller, PhD
More information about the Virology