Re: Re: Re: Show me the photo please 24 June 2004
Previous Rapid Response Next Rapid Response Top
Christopher J Noble,
postdoc
Australia

Send response to journal:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Show me the photo please

Christopher Tyler wrote: 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.

Indeed, they are not of HIV but rather HTLV-1(ATLV). They are taken from papers by Japanese researchers that independently isolated this retrovirus.(1,2) To quote from these papers: All these observations fitted the requirements for retroviruses.

These researchers have never heard of the Perth Group "rules of retrovirus isolation". This is primarily because it is still 1981. The Perth Group have not heard of retroviruses and have not yet invented rules for their isolation. The Perth Group invented these rules only after it became clear that HIV exists and causes AIDS and that their pet oxidative stress theory of AIDS was untenable.

The real question is why don't the Perth Group apply their "rules" and their arguments to other viruses?

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).

If you think there are no EMs of HIV showing spikes you have been deceived by the Perth Group. Early work by Hans Gelderblom shows nice EMs of HIV showing spikes and cone shaped central core. (3) If you can't tell the difference between this and microvesicles then you need to get your eyes checked.

If you want something more recent look at this paper by Zhu et al (4).It shows nice 3D tomograms of sucrose gradient-purified preparations of SIV and HIV-1 virion where you can clearly see the spikes and can even resolve the trimer structure.

If you spent as much time researching other retroviruses as you do reading Perth Group writings you wouldn't ask these questions. You also wouldn't pretend like Pennee to be the adjudicator of what is and isn't a retrovirus.

1) Y Hinuma, K Nagata, M Hanaoka, M Nakai, T Matsumoto, K I Kinoshita, S Shirakawa, and I Miyoshi, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981 October; 78 (10): 6476-6480 pubmed

2) M Yoshida, I Miyoshi, and Y Hinuma, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1982 March; 79 (6): 2031-2035 pubmed

3) Gelderblom HR, Hausmann EH, Ozel M, Pauli G, Koch MA. Virology. 1987 Jan;156(1):171-6.pubmed

4) Zhu P, Chertova E, Bess J Jr, Lifson JD, Arthur LO, Liu J, Taylor KA, Roux KH.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Dec 23;100(26):15812-7 pubmed

Competing interests: None declared