Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Questions for Christopher Noble & Nicholas Bennett 23 September 2004
Previous Rapid Response Next Rapid Response Top
Mark Bartlett,
CD Investigator
Canada

Send response to journal:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Questions for Christopher Noble & Nicholas Bennett

To Peter Flegg:

My comment re the complete eradication of HIV was not intended as support for the arguement that HIV may not cause AIDS. I was simply trying to suggest that even if one eradicates the virus (assuming it is the cause of AIDS) the damage may have already been done to the immune system.

<<There are many other examples of this phenomenon [irreversible damage due to an infection] taking place in the field of infection>>

I agree. Many other infections do cause damage that can not be reversed -- and that is exactly my point and concern.

Perhaps trying to rebalance the immune system and being less focused on "viral suppression" may yeild more benefits. First and foremost, if HIV does not happen to cause AIDS, then at least we are attempting to correct the immune problem. Where has it been shown that correcting the immune problem can NOT be done even in the presence of HIV?

You said "it is possible to induce complete suppression of viral replication with modern anti-HIV drug regimens"

Yes - and we both agree that despite this, disease pathology continues. Seems to be more support that virus suppression/eradication itself may not be enough.

Competing interests: None declared