f.raaphorst at worldonline.nl wrote:
>> In article <361626C9.1FF8 at ix.netcom.com>,
>todd33 at ix.netcom.com wrote:
> > fm.raaphorst at azvu.nl wrote:
> > > you can identify the antibodies
> > > that recognize them. For instance, you screen the collection of
> > > antibodies you generated against uninfected cells and infected
> > > cells. Immunofluorescence will do the trick. Antibodies specific
> > > for common cellular antigens will bind to both infected and
> > > uninfected cell lines. Antibodies specific for an HIV-encoded
> > > protein, for instance the envelope proteins, will only bind to
> > > the infected cell lines.
> >
> > This could be done, although some experiments would have to be
> > performed to show that antigens unique to the infected cell line
> > were truly viral, and not some endogenous protein induced by the
> > experiment/infection.
Todd is a fucking idiot.
Endogenous protein induced by the experiment was
ruled out by the technique described above.
Endogenous protein induced by infection is what
has been proven. Viral proteins are produced
within the host. It doesn't get any more
endogenous than that.
Your continued trolling and dancing your
incompetence and incontinent, incomplete
education from a dimestore doctorate
program reflects an ego-dystonic
condition beyond repair.
Are you sure one of your Miami hookers
hasn't infected you?
Only denial would explain your continued
disregard for the lives of others for
your self-satisfaction.
PANDOC
