JANE KELLEY was thinking about Adhd and keyed into cyberspace:
JK>Thanks for proving what I said in this one essentially true:
JK>MP>JK>MP>JK>Finding a virus is just about an impossible job. They are
JK>MP>JK>MP>JK>very, very tiny when compared to other microbes.  I had a
JK>MP>JK>MP>JK>researcher as a patient one time at Swedish who told me
JK>MP>JK>MP>JK>what had to be done.  It is worse than looking for a
JK>MP>JK>MP>JK>needle in a haystack! At least the needle can be seen.
JK>MP>JK>MP>Jane, I deal with a virus every day. Your information is
JK>MP>JK>MP>woefully out of date. The use of various types of electron
JK>MP>JK>MP>microscopes, etc. has made the job quite easy.
JK>MP>JK>I was told that the virus itself isn't seen, the "shadow" it
JK>MP>JK>makes is. If this is now untrue, what is? And why does it still
JK>MP>JK>take a long time to find any "new" virus?
JK>MP>It is an electron image. Sort of like a "shadow".
JK>The virus itself is not seen, which is what I was told.
JK>MP>As for finding a new virus, I have no solid experience. My bugs
JK>MP>are well known, and really are easy to find. They are quite
JK>MP>plentiful. 
JK>MP>However, to find a new virus, you first have to find a location
JK>MP>where they might be. The area scanned by a e-scope is so small it
JK>MP>makes anything, even the area scanned, hard to find.
JK>In short, they are hard to find, which is also what I was told.
JK>So why is my information so out of date?
Because it is YOUR information, gathered from sitting on hard chairs in 
hard science courses in the 1940's.
If you have the appropriate sample, you can find a virus. It takes a 
brain, however, to know if it is "new" virus. IOW, it is not the 
finding, but the knowing that is hard.
                ===>The Voice of Reason<===
                     mark.probert@juno.com
---
 * CMPQwk #1.4 * UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY
---------------