Send response to journal:
Re: Re: Re: Show me the photo please
While those are interesting pictures, they can't be 'HIV' because of the date of
publication (1981). In addition, these appear to be cell-culture EMs. To quote
from the Tahi/Montagnier:
DT: When one looks at the published electron microscope photographs, for
you as a retrovirologist it is clear it's a retrovirus, a new retrovirus?
LM: No, at that point one cannot say. With the first budding pictures it could
be a type C virus. One cannot distinguish.
However, since we're talking about a lentivirus, where are the
gp120 spikes? We've all scene artistic renditions of 'HIV' showing gp120
spikes studding the surface (which we're told of course are quite necessary
for infection). It would be highly beneficial to see pictures of:
a: 'HIV' with gp120 spikes.
b. 'HIV' with all the other morphological characteristics said to be that of a
b: 'HIV' from the density gradients. Should be no problem considering it's
been claimed this is 'purified, labeled virus' material.
c. 'HIV' from fresh, uncultured (no oxidising agents, PHA, etc.) blood. Since if
a person is given a viral load test, and said to have a high viral load, that
person is told he has a lot of virus swimming around his blood. Why not take
that person's high viral load blood and find these gp120 spiked, 100-120nm
with cylindrical core particles with an electron micrograph?