Rod, at 08:10 on Jun 01 1996, you wrote to Bill Grimsley...

RS> There has in fact been a strain of HIV found here too which
RS> looks like it may well be useful as an HIV vaccine etc.

BG> Pass, thanks all the same.

RS> Oh sure, no argument there.

There is a limit to how far I will go in the name of scientific research,
and sticking needles with dodgy strains of HIV inside me, exceeds that
limit.

RS> Its main value is in places like africa and SE Asia where the dominant 
RS> strain is a lot easier to get infected with, and its primarily a 
RS> heterosexual disease, unlike here where its almost entirely just poofters 
RS> and bisexuals etc.

True, our social structure in Australia is such that I feel fairly
confident that I won't be contracting HIV any time soon.

BG> it'll be interesting if they manage to find
BG> out why those women are immune to HIV too.

RS> Its a different strain which produces that. Strain
RS> of HIV. HIV is rather easy to work the DNA out with,
RS> thats what determines the strain, the DNA sequence.

What's the actual scenario though?  Haven't they just basically contracted
a certain viral strain which doesn't sero-convert, which means that they'll
not develop full-blown AIDS from just THAT particular virus?  I presume
also that HIV antibodies are still present, regardless?

BG> I'd have expected scores of different strains by now though.

RS> There are. Its just that its extremely rare that
RS> you have a strain which does not ever sero convert.

OK, so does that mean they can never progress beyond a certain stage?

BG> Why is it that HIV appears not to mutate as
BG> frequently or as quickly as most other viruses?

RS> In fact it mutates a lot faster than most.

Mainly lethal though, or do they mutate into relatively harmless starins?

RS> The only common ones that mutate faster are flu and colds etc.

True, makes me wonder why I really bother with my annual Fluvax...

Regards, Bill
@EOT:

--- MsgedSQ/2 3.30