HIV Think Tank

[Skye]

I read two actors have tested positive, others who slept with them are being tested again now.

[psi20]

Hey if you put the virus into another animal, say a dog, will it mutate to attack that dog?

 

What if the DIV, doggy immunodeficiency virus, was placed into someone with HIV? Would the DIV and HIV attack each other?

[Skye]

A virus has no control over whether it mutates or not. The HIV virus might, by chance, be able to function within a dog, or maybe a random mutation would allow it to do so.

 

Viruses have no ability to attack each other, only other cellular life.

[Simon]

I'm not a biology expert but i've been thinking about the best way to combat the HIV virus for a while. Why does HIV attack specifically T cells? What if a prokaryotic cell (bacteria) was engineered to attract the HIV virus. The immune system should recognise the invader and attack. The immune system should then be able to adapt to the Imbedded HIV virus too (in theory). Is this a good idea?

[Mr Skeptic]

Hey if you put the virus into another animal, say a dog, will it mutate to attack that dog?

 

What if the DIV, doggy immunodeficiency virus, was placed into someone with HIV? Would the DIV and HIV attack each other?

 

Actually, HIV originated with monkeys. I don't want to think about how it spread to humans. Regardless, we can study HIV in monkeys, either to experiment or because they have had it for longer. Apparently some monkeys have a protein called TRIM5-alpha that can fight HIV. Humans have a similar but less effective (against HIV) version of the protein as monkeys.

[Revenged]

Actually, HIV originated with monkeys. I don't want to think about how it spread to humans. Regardless, we can study HIV in monkeys, either to experiment or because they have had it for longer. Apparently some monkeys have a protein called TRIM5-alpha that can fight HIV. Humans have a similar but less effective (against HIV) version of the protein as monkeys.

 

More interesting is that some humans are resistant to HIV infection...

 

I have have heard stories of Narobi prostitutes having very high levels of killer T cells that can stop the virus in it's very early tracks...

 

I have also heard about a some Sweeds who have DNA mutation that makes them resistant to the virus... They have a mutated form of glycoproteins within their CD4 T cell membranes, which means that the HIV virus cannot adhere to the glycoproteins and so cannot infect CD4 T cells...

 

I'm not a biology expert but i've been thinking about the best way to combat the HIV virus for a while. Why does HIV attack specifically T cells? What if a prokaryotic cell (bacteria) was engineered to attract the HIV virus. The immune system should recognise the invader and attack. The immune system should then be able to adapt to the Imbedded HIV virus too (in theory). Is this a good idea?

 

There have been a lot of hypothetical ideas... Particularly vaccination, which has got nowhere...

 

The only way we can combat it is by HAART (highly active anti-retroviral therapy)... It works by preventing the replication of HIV virus and it is very effective since it is no longer the death sentence it once was...

[John Cuthber]

An interesting and potentially useful thread but I think it's aimed at the wrong disease.

HIV is causing and will continue to cause massive harm in the world but, from the point of view of anyone reading this thread, it's almost completely avoidable.

 

Wouldn't it be more sensible to apply our minds to the problem of malaria?

With global warming clearly happening (whatever the cause), many areas that were previously almost unaffected will be at risk. Currently both diseases cause something like 2 or 3 million deaths a year so perhaps we should worry about both.

[Mr Skeptic]

An interesting and potentially useful thread but I think it's aimed at the wrong disease.

HIV is causing and will continue to cause massive harm in the world but, from the point of view of anyone reading this thread, it's almost completely avoidable.

 

Wouldn't it be more sensible to apply our minds to the problem of malaria?

With global warming clearly happening (whatever the cause), many areas that were previously almost unaffected will be at risk. Currently both diseases cause something like 2 or 3 million deaths a year so perhaps we should worry about both.

 

Malaria is also completely avoidable -- just wear insect netting The difference is that malaria has been around and is more or less stable, while HIV is new and still spreading. Also, HIV causes a slower death. Also, malaria is curable.

 

The reason we have not exterminated malaria is for socio-economic reasons.

[pioneer]

I was reading about the structure of HIV and its various genes and proteins. It is actually quite complicated but very facinating. HIV begins as RNA. It carries its own enzymes that can turn RNA into DNA and insert the DNA into the host. Its original RNA is a little messed up at first, due to a hairpin turn that makes it hard to make the DNA. But there is enough RNA exposed to make a little protein, first, that will straighten the RNA out. Then the RNA can make the DNA and insert the DNA. This inserted DNA can sit and wait, or become active, causing more of the original RNA.

 

Many of its genes make the proteins it needs to fortify the new RNA, so it can exit, reattach and enter. When it enters, it will sacrifce its shell. While the cell is busy munching, the stuff in the middle gets down to business.

 

HIV's outer most surface is composed, in part, of membrane material it scavenged from its previous host cell. This membrane is studded with the protein that it uses to attach to a new cell. HIV is strange in that these little surface proteins start out very long. HIV has an enzyme that cuts that long protein into a bunch of similar bite size pieces. HIV seems very well prepared.

 

One of its biggest assets of HIV and biggest problems for researchers, is that because HIV forms DNA from RNA, it tends to be error prone. The result is the DNA can come out in a wide number of ways, causing the final RNA to mutate . Once we get a handle on one vulnerability, HIV can changes the rules of the game.

 

The one thing I don't understand, is why the cell makes the monomers for DNA, so the HIV's RNA can form DNA. The cell is not in the cell cycle, such that DNA monomers floating around could be a problem, otherwise. RNA and DNA differ only by two minor things. The RNA has an -OH group on the pentose sugar, while DNA has -H. One of the bases of DNA differs by an -CH3 group, where RNA has an -H group.

 

To get the DNA monomers, implies HIV causing a reduction potential within the cell or at least near where these materials are made? HIV is not fully affective at copying the RNA to DNA. Does the number of defects result from using more of the three common nucleic acids or too much of the fourth where RNA and DNA differ? Is it hard or easy to add the -CH3?

 

Treatment Strategy

 

The more I learn about things, the easier I can come up with ideas. Biology has so much data and observation, where to begin??

 

Irregardless, I think I have an HIV strategy. It is sort of an extrapolation of my final questions. The immune system cells that HIV infests, are not the type of cells that will typically divide. So what we do is remove the critical gene (enzyme) or two, which are needed to make one or more parts of the DNA monomers. Essentially we modify the host cell, and restrict it making only be able to make RNA. It doesn't ever really need to make DNA, so it should not miss what we remove. All else should be go.

 

What this does is screw up HIV. The only thing HIV can now do, is the precursor foreplay, but it will now be unable to convert its RNA into DNA, since there are no raw materials to work with. This should cause its affect to be much more restricted within the infested cell, such that the cell may be able to figure it out, since the problem is simpler, with much lower concentrations of materials being made by the lonely HIV virus.