#retrovirology

[6ft10]

As a fool with a thesis on retroviruses, it vexes me that only in the context of the target cell that intricate viral machinery comes alive.

Retroviral reverse transcription requires the presence of the cellular pools of dNTPs to function.

Envelope biogenesis requires cleavage by cellular furin proteases.

Envelope-mediated Membrane fusion requires interactions with a receptor on a target cell.

Reverse transcribed viral genomes have to be integrated into the target cell’s nuclear DNA.

I’m so mad that a t4 bacteriophage actually looks like that and that it’s appearance isn’t made up

[vasanthasworld]

Hepatitis Viruses Virology Short And Long Essay Question And Answers

[austinpublishinggroup]

Austin Virology and Retrovirology by Austin Publishing Group

Via Flickr: Austin Virology and Retrovirology is an international scholarly peer reviewed Open Access journal, aims to promote the research in the field of Virology. Austin Virology and Retrovirology is a comprehensive Open Access peer reviewed scientific Journal that covers multidisciplinary fields. We provide limitless access towards accessing our literature hub with colossal range of articles. The journal aims to publish high quality varied article types such as Research, Review, Case Reports, Short Communications, Perspectives (Editorials), Clinical Images Austin Virology and Retrovirology supports the scientific modernization and enrichment in virology research community by magnifying access to peer reviewed scientific literary works. Austin also brings universally peer reviewed member journals under one roof thereby promoting knowledge sharing, collaborative and promotion of multidisciplinary science.

[icarus-suraki]

Oh my gosh, like, all of my words from this Time Traveler thing on the Merriam Webster site are amazing. I’m old as dirt but look at this shit!

acesulfame-K, acquired immune deficiency syndrome, acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, AIDS, alt-rock, backstory, barista, B-boy, bias crime, biochip, biturbo, boy toy, break dancing, bright-line, co-brand, codependent, complementary medicine, concealed carry, conjunto, contact hitter, convo, cyberspace, deer tick, designated driver, dollarization, domain name, domoic acid, electroporation, elepidote, enalapril, escape key, executive control, expansion card, face-plant, filovirus, flip off, flow-through entity, food secure, frisee, gaydar, G-spot, hard drive, home theater, immersion blender, impostor syndrome, interferon gamma, in-your-face, jump hook, learning difference, letterboxed, lysergic, managed care, marionberry, merch, metalhead, microbrewery, micropolitan, mind frame, minilab, misoprostol, MRI, multitasker, narco-terrorism, netiquette, nonbaryonic, party animal, pheo, phone sex, photoaging, pixelated, pleather, poutine, PPO, preferred provider, preferred provider organization, prion protein, product placement, quantum computer, ras, relational grammar, retrovirology, ribozyme, road warrior, rosy periwinkle, RU-486, rufiyaa, rust belt, sabermetrics, shake out, Shiba Inu, skanky, snail mail, snow tube, soukous, speed dial, spoiler alert, squark, SRAM, standard model, super G, supermicro, surrogacy, taqueria, teensploitation, text messaging, tiramisu, transgenic, T. rex, triathlete, triple-double, turducken, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, unoaked, up-fake, VAD, vaginosis, Valley girl, vestimentiferan, VJ, water park, wedge issue, wordie, world music, WYSIWYG, xeriscape, Yukon Gold, zone out

I bolded my favorites because these words and I are the same age and that’s not so bad. Just call me Wizzywig.

[jeraliey]

Holy shit, this is a FASCINATING glimpse of medical history too.

In 1982, we get acquired immunodeficiency syndrome/AIDS, complimentary medicine, enalapril, filovirus, food secure, GERD, G-spot, imposter syndrome, interferon gamma, lysergic, managed care, misoprostol, MRI, PPO, preferred provider, prion protein, retrovirology, ribozyme, RU-486, surrogacy, transgenic, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, and vaginosis!

Excuse me while I think about proposing an inset series to a medical journal somewhere.

i just found out merriam webster has a time traveler feature that tells you some of the words that were “born” the same year as you. it’s pretty neat yall should do this

[koreaunderground]

(2014/06/11) Scientists condemn 'crazy, dangerous' creation of deadly airborne flu virus

[theguardian.com][1]

  [1]: <https://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/jun/11/crazy-dangerous-creation-deadly-airborne-flu-virus>

# Scientists condemn 'crazy, dangerous' creation of deadly airborne flu virus

Ian Sample

6-8 minutes

* * *

Scientists have created a life-threatening virus that closely resembles the 1918 Spanish flu strain that killed an estimated 50m people in an experiment labelled as "crazy" by opponents.

US researchers said the experiments were crucial for understanding the public health risk posed by viruses currently circulating in wild birds, but critics condemned the studies as dangerous and called on funders to stop the work.

Scientists at the University of Wisconsin-Madison used a technique called reverse genetics to build the virus from fragments of wild bird flu strains. They then mutated the virus to make it airborne to spread more easily from one animal to another.

"The work they are doing is absolutely crazy. The whole thing is exceedingly dangerous," said [Lord May][2], the former president of the Royal Society and one time chief science adviser to the UK government. "Yes, there is a danger, but it's not arising form the viruses out there in the animals, it's arising from the labs of grossly ambitious people."

  [2]: <http://www.zoo.ox.ac.uk/people/view/may_r.htm> ()

Influenza viruses circulate freely in wild bird populations. Most remain in chickens, ducks and other birds, but occasionally strains mutate into a form that can infect humans. The H5N1 bird flu strain has killed at least 386 people since 2003, according to WHO figures. The Spanish 1918 flu is thought to have come from birds too.

Writing in the journal [Cell Host and Microbe][3] Yoshihiro Kawaoka describes how his team analysed various bird flu viruses and found genes from several strains that were very similar to those that made up the 1918 human flu virus. They combined the bird flu genes into a single new virus, making a new pathogen that was only about 3% different from the 1918 human virus.

  [3]: <http://www.cell.com/cell-host-microbe/abstract/S1931-3128(14)00163-2> ()

The freshly made virus – the first of several the team created – was more harmful to mice and ferrets than normal bird flu viruses, but not as dangerous as the 1918 strain. It did not spread between ferrets and none of the animals died. But the scientists went on to mutate the virus, to see what changes could make it spread. Seven mutations later, they had a more dangerous version that spread easily from animal to animal in tiny water droplets, the same way flu spreads in humans.

[Kawaoka][4], who led the research in a high-security lab at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said the work highlighted how flu viruses found in wild bird populations had the potential to adapt to humans and cause a pandemic.

  [4]: <http://www.vetmed.wisc.edu/people/kawaokay/> ()

Follow-up experiments showed that the 2009 swine flu vaccine and the anti-viral drug tamiflu should be effective against the virus. "This is important information for those making decisions about surveillance and pandemic preparedness," Kawaoka told the Guardian.

The work is the latest in a series of controversial studies that have split the scientific community. On the one side are researchers who create dangerous viruses in secure labs in the hope of learning how existing strains could mutate to make them a potential threat to humans. On the other are scientists who argue the work does little or nothing to help protect people, but instead puts the global population in more danger.

[Marc Lipsitch][5], professor of epidemiology at Harvard School of Public Health, said: "I am worried that this signals a growing trend to make transmissible novel viruses willy-nilly, without strong public health rationale. This is a risky activity, even in the safest labs. Scientists should not take such risks without strong evidence that the work could save lives, which this paper does not provide," he added.

  [5]: <http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/marc-lipsitch/> ()

In [an article][6] published last month, Lipsitch argued that experiments like Kawaoka's could unleash a catastrophic pandemic if a virus escaped or was intentionally released from a high-security laboratory.

  [6]: <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/20/virus-experiments-risk-global-pandemic> ()

But Kawaoka defended the work, saying that critics failed to appreciate the impact of his and others' work on dangerous viruses. "There were discussions on the usefulness of stockpiling H5N1 [bird flu] vaccines until our H5N1 papers were published. Similarly, this paper strongly supports stockpiling anti-influenza drugs. If this is not a 'lifesaving benefit', what is?" he said.

Many of the groups that create dangerous viruses to understand their workings are funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). Lord May said he suspected the NIH supported the work because officials there were "incompetent" and believed the justifications that scientists told them. "This is work that shouldn't be done. It's as simple as that," he said.

The experiments show that a 1918-like flu virus could emerge in the wild as bird viruses swap genes and mutate. "Influenza viruses readily swap genes to generate new viruses, so something like this could happen, especially since many of these viruses have circulated in recent years," Kawaoka said. The viruses "have the potential to become adapted to mammals and possibly cause a human pandemic," he added.

The study identifies particular mutations that made the virus spread so easily. But that is not much use for surveillance, said Lipsitch, because there are scores of other mutations that could have the same effect. "The chance that a virus very similar to the one they study will appear in nature is extremely remote," he said. Kawaoka argues that his team is fully aware of this, and that the underlying mechanisms that make the virus so dangerous are more important for preventing future pandemics.

[Simon Wain-Hobson][7], a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, said he feared that governments and funding bodies would only take the risks seriously once an accident had happened. "It's madness, folly. It shows profound lack of respect for the collective decision-making process we've always shown in fighting infections. If society, the intelligent layperson, understood what was going on, they would say 'What the F are you doing?'"

  [7]: <https://www.pasteur.fr/ip/easysite/pasteur/en/research/scientific-departments/virology/units-and-groups/molecular-retrovirology> ()

Carole Heilman, director of microbiology and infectious diseases at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (Niaid) in the US, said: "This study was conducted as part of a research project on understanding the molecular mechanisms of virulence of the 1918 influenza virus. NIH peer review determined that the research was scientifically meritorious. It was also determined that the information gained had the potential to help public health agencies in their assessment of circulating and newly emerging strains. In addition, NIH determined that all the research was being done under appropriate biosafety conditions and with appropriate risk mitigation measures."

[wdbrkbrmghm]

〈外出中は手で目を触らない、鼻を手でさわるな、ましてや鼻くそはほじらない。（かくれてやってもダメ！）唇触るのもだめ。口に入れるのは論外〉

　〈人と集まって話をする時は、マスクしろ。他人と食事する時は、黙れ。食事に集中しろ！��わえ！友達との会話は食事後でマスクして話せ。それで十分だ！家に帰ったら、速攻手を洗え。アルコールあるなら、玄関ですぐに吹きかけろ。ドアノブも拭いとけ〉

〈酒？やめとけ。そもそも体に悪い〉

〈酒を飲んだら、会話するだろ。大声になるだろ。それが危険なことわからんやつは、とっとと感染しちまえ。一ケ月会社休んで回復したら、みんなの代わりに仕事しろ。ただ、爺（じい）ちゃんばあちゃんの前には治るまで絶対でるな〉

〈いつかはお前もかかる。かかった時助かるように、いまからなるべく栄養つけろ。よく寝ろ。タバコはこれを機にやめろ〉

宮沢孝幸准教授：京都大学ウイルス・再生医科学研究所

論文審査：

Journal of Virology

Journal of General Virology

Retrovirology

Virus Research

Viruses

Microbes and Infection

Microbiology and Immunology

Archives of Virology

Virus Genes

Journal of Veterinary Medical Science

Xenotransplantation

DNA Research

Biologicals

[altairlira]

Comemorado em 10 de novembro, o Dia Mundial de Combater ao Vírus HTLV é um alerta para uma infecção pouco conhecida, com sinais e sintomas imperceptíveis na maioria dos casos. A Infecção causada pelo vírus T-linfotrópico humano (HTLV) atinge as células de defesa do organismo, os linfócitos T. A data foi escolhida pela Associação Internacional de Retrovirologia (IRVA - International Retrovirology Association) com o objetivo de informar e mobilizar a sociedade e o poder público para of significado da infecção, as doenças a ele associadas, seu impacto na saúde pública e os meios de contê-lo. O HTLV foi o primeiro retrovirus humano isolado (no inicio da década de 1980) e é classificado em dois grupos: HTLV-le HTLV-II. Dez por cento das pessoas infectadas apresentam doenças neurológicas, oftalmológicas, dermatológicas, urológicas e hematológica s(neste caso, a leucemia e linfoma) associadas ao vírus. O contágio do HTLV ocorre por via sexual em relações desprotegidas, por compartilhamento de seringas e agulhas e via transmissão vertical (da gestante para o bebê) principalmente pelo aleitamento materno. O tratamento é direcionado de acordo com a doença relacionada ao HTLV. A pessoa deverá ser acompanhada nos serviços de saúde do SUS e, quando necessário, receber seguimento em serviços especializados para diagnóstico e tratamento precoce de doenças associadas ao HTLV. É recomendado o uso de preservativo masculino ou feminino (disponiveis gratuitamente na rede pública de saúde) em todas as relações sexuais, e o não compartilhamento de seringas e agulhas. Fonte: Departamento de Doenças de Condições Crônicas e Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis - Ministério da Saúde @htlvida @htlvchannel @minsaude @opspaho @smssalvador @saudegovba @laib.ufba @vigilanciadasistdesalvador https://www.instagram.com/p/CWHPJSfpJ9J/?utm_medium=tumblr

[hivaidsupdates]

The latest HIV/AIDS Update Magazine! https://t.co/7ioAJ42TVR Thanks to @Retrovirology @aidsmap_news @ninecircleschc #hiv #news

— HIV & AIDS Update (@HIVAIDSupdate) September 5, 2018

from Twitter https://twitter.com/HIVAIDSupdate

[metaphysicalpistolsoraclemine]

It all began after a 3 hour interview with whistleblower & scientist, Judy Mikovits. Her testimony shines light on the depth of corruption behind key players in our global healthcare system, after this discussion, there was no turning back.

Dr. Judy Mikovits is a modern-day Rosalind Franklin, a brilliant researcher shaking up the old boys’ club of science with her groundbreaking discoveries. And like many women who have trespassed into the world of men, she uncovered decades-old secrets that many would prefer to stay buried.

From her doctoral thesis, which changed the treatment of HIV-AIDS, saving the lives of millions, including basketball great Magic Johnson, to her spectacular discovery of a new family of human retroviruses, and her latest research which points to a new golden age of health, Dr. Mikovits has always been on the leading edge of science.

With the brilliant wit one might expect if Erin Brockovich had a doctorate in molecular biology, Dr. Mikovits has seen the best and worst of science. When she was part of the research community that turned HIV-AIDS from a fatal disease into a manageable one, she saw science at its best. But when her investigations questioned whether the use of animal tissue in medical research were unleashing devastating plagues of chronic diseases, such as autism and chronic fatigue syndrome, she saw science at its worst. If her suspicions are correct, we are looking at a complete realignment of scientific practices, including how we study and treat human disease.

Recounting her nearly four decades in science, including her collaboration of more than thirty-five years with Dr. Frank Ruscetti, one of the founders of the field of human retrovirology, this is a behind the scenes look at the issues and egos which will determine the future health of humanity.

"One of the main problems of our time is the public loss of confidence in the scientific community because of a too often corrupt coalition of  governmental and corporate entities. Judy Mikovits's and Kent Heckenlively's book delves into the midst of this rampant corruption, which hides  from the public scientific truths which might go against these corporate economic interests."

—Dr. Luc Montagnier, 2008 Nobel Laureate for the isolation of the HIV retrovirus

“Kent Heckenlively and Judy Mikovits are the new dynamic duo fighting corruption in science.”   

Guided by the meticulous work of Dr. David E. Martin, Plandemic II: Indoctornation, tracks a three decade-long money trail that leads directly to the key players behind the COVID 19 pandemic. Plandemic II connects the dots between all forms of media, the medical industry, politics and the financial industry to unmask the major conflicts of interests with the decision makers that are currently managing this "crisis."

HAVEN'T SEEN PART 1 or 2 ?

WATCH & SHARE HERE.

[vasanthasworld]

Mycology Virology Short And Long Essay Question And Answers

[austinpublishinggroup]

Austin Virology and Retrovirology by Austin Publishing Group Via Flickr: Austin Virology and Retrovirology is an international scholarly peer reviewed Open Access journal, aims to promote the research in the field of Virology. Austin Virology and Retrovirology is a comprehensive Open Access peer reviewed scientific Journal that covers multidisciplinary fields. We provide limitless access towards accessing our literature hub with colossal range of articles. The journal aims to publish high quality varied article types such as Research, Review, Case Reports, Short Communications, Perspectives (Editorials), Clinical Images Austin Virology and Retrovirology supports the scientific modernization and enrichment in virology research community by magnifying access to peer reviewed scientific literary works. Austin also brings universally peer reviewed member journals under one roof thereby promoting knowledge sharing, collaborative and promotion of multidisciplinary science.

[sierracortney011]

The letter that should have destroyed CDC Director Robert Redfield

CDC Director Robert Redfield: the letter that should have destroyed his career

Long before Robert Redfield ascended to the CDC directorship, and also assumed a key post on the White House COVID Task Force, he was a US Army researcher working on an AIDS vaccine.

He ran into a great deal of trouble. His career was almost derailed. The Army finally saved him, through what some investigators assert was a complete whitewash.

On June 7th, 1994, two doctors from Public Citizen, Peter Lu, and the relentless consumer advocate, Sidney Wolfe, wrote a long letter to Congressman Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Subcommittee on Health and the Environment. If Waxman had followed up with decisive action, Redfield might have been finished for good in the field of public health. Here are excerpts from the devastating letter:

“We are writing to request that your Subcommittee hold a hearing, as soon as possible, to investigate charges of grave impropriety committed by U.S. Department of Defense’ AIDS researchers. We have obtained Internal memoranda, not previously made public, from the Department of Defense that alleges a systematic pattern of data manipulation, inappropriate statistical analyses, and misleading data presentation by Army researchers in an apparent attempt to promote the usefulness of the GP160 AIDS vaccine…The Phase I and Phase II studies in which this alleged misconduct occurred was conducted by researchers at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR), led by Lt. Col. Robert Redfield, M.D., Chief of the Department of Retroviral Research and misleading results from these trials were reported in…the New England Journal of Medicine in June 1991, the Journal of AIDS Research and Human Retroviruses in June 1992, and the annual International AIDS Conference in Amsterdam in July 1992. In addition, overstated conclusions have been presented on two occasions at hearings before your Subcommittee.

“Meeting on October 23, 1992, to discuss the allegations by two Air Force research physicians (see below) of scientific misconduct by Dr. Redfield, a subcommittee of the Institutional Review Committee at the Wilford Hall U.S. Air Force Medical Center, San Antonio, Texas reached the following conclusion:

“The committee agreed the information presented by Dr. Redfield seriously threatens his credibility as a researcher and has the potential to negatively impact AIDS research funding for military institutions as a whole. His allegedly unethical behavior creates false hope and could result in premature deployment of the vaccine…

“That meeting was called to review an October 21, 1992 memorandum…from Maj. Craig W. Hendrix, M.D., Director of the HIV Program in the Air Force, and Col. R. Neal Boswell, MD., Associate Chief of the Division of Medicine in the Air Force, to Col. Donald Burke, M.D., Director of the Division of Retrovirology at WRAIR and Dr. Redfield’s immediate supervisor. The memorandum decried ‘The problem of misleading or, possibly, deceptive presentations by Dr. Redfleld, which overstate the GP160 [vaccine] Phase I data…’ and recommended that the following action be taken:

“(1) publicly correct the record in a medium suitable for widespread dissemination to our civilian scientific colleagues;

“(2) censure Dr. Redfield for potential scientific misconduct which should at least include temporarily suspending his involvement on the current immunotherapy protocols; and

“(3) initiate an investigation by a fully independent outside Investigative body…to evaluate the facts of the case and recommend appropriate actions.

“Senior Department of Defense scientists have known of this misconduct since at least October 1992, and Dr. Redfield has acknowledged that his analyses were faulty on at least three occasions to internal Department of Defense audiences (the earliest admission was on August 28, 1992)…”

This is a VERY damning letter. Vaccine fraud.

But Redfield not only avoided professional devastation, but he also rose through the political hierarchy, eventually becoming CDC director. At the CDC—let’s be frank—lying about vaccines in order to promote and sell them is job number one.

Redfield now also serves on the White House COVID Task Force, an organization dedicated to gaining rapid approval for a pandemic vaccine, come hell or high water.

Charges of extreme scientific fraud on an issue of vaccines THEN; the man occupies two high posts where pushing vaccines is paramount NOW.

But don’t worry, all you pod people wearing masks and waiting for the messianic COVID vaccine. All is well. Sure it is. The vaccine won’t harm or kill you or your children. Resume your pacified slumber.

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

The article was originally created by Jon Rappoport on August 5, 2020.

The post The letter that should have destroyed CDC Director Robert Redfield appeared first on First Coast News.

from First Coast News https://firstnewsclick.com/the-letter-that-should-have-destroyed-cdc-director-robert-redfield/9812006/ from First Coast News https://firstnewsclick.tumblr.com/post/625617701910511616

[koreaunderground]

(2014/05/20) Virus experiments risk unleashing global pandemic, study warns

[theguardian.com][1]

  [1]: <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/20/virus-experiments-risk-global-pandemic>

# Virus experiments risk unleashing global pandemic, study warns

Ian Sample

6-7 minutes

* * *

Public health experts have warned that controversial experiments on mutant viruses could put human lives in danger by unleashing an accidental pandemic.

Several groups of scientists around the world are creating and altering viruses to understand how natural strains might evolve into more lethal forms that spread easily among humans.

But in a report published on Tuesday, researchers at Harvard and Yale universities in the US argue that the benefits of the work are outweighed by the risk of pathogenic strains escaping from laboratories and spreading around the world.

They calculate that if 10 high-containment labs in the US performed such experiments for 10 years, the chance of at least one person becoming infected was nearly 20%. If an infected person left the laboratory, the virus might then spread more widely.

"We are not saying this is going to happen, but when the potential is a pandemic, even a small chance is something you have to weigh very heavily," said [Marc Lipsitch][2], an epidemiologist at Harvard School of Public Health, who wrote the report with [Alison Galvani][3], an epidemiologist at Yale.

  [2]: <http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/marc-lipsitch/> ()   [3]: <http://galvani.medicine.yale.edu/index.aspx> ()

The report threatens to reignite [a crisis in science][4] that erupted in 2012 when a US biosecurity panel ruled that two separate studies on mutant bird flu were too dangerous to publish. They described the creation of new mutant strains that spread among ferrets – a proxy for humans – held in neighbouring cages. One fear was that the recipe for the pathogens might fall into the hands of bioterrorists.

  [4]: <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/mar/28/bird-flu-mutant-strains> ()

Those studies, led by [Ron Fouchier][5] at Erasmus medical centre in Rotterdam, and [Yoshihiro Kawaoka][6] at the University of Wisconsin-Madison respectively, were eventually published after months of delays. Other researchers have now begun similar experiments.

  [5]: <http://www.erasmusmc.nl/MScMM/faculty/CVs/fouchier_cv?lang=en> ()   [6]: <http://www.vetmed.wisc.edu/people/kawaokay/> ()

Both Fouchier and Kawaoka criticised the latest report, [published in Plos Medicine][7], and said their work had full ethical, safety and security approval, with the risks and benefits taken into account.

  [7]: <http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001646> ()

Last year, the US government, which funds most of the controversial work, [revised its guideline][8]s for "dual-use research of concern", or DURC. Under the new rules, work can be funded if the potential benefits are substantial and the risks considered to be manageable.

  [8]: <https://www.phe.gov/s3/dualuse/Pages/h5n1-framework.aspx> ()

But Lipsitch said there was no evidence that the risks and benefits had been weighed up properly. "To my knowledge, no such thing has been done, but funding for these experiments continues," he said.

Lipsitch said that the US government and other funding bodies must commission comprehensive risk assessments from independent experts before deciding which studies to support.

Lipsitch and Galvani are most concerned about what are called gain-of-function studies, which aim to create highly virulent strains of viruses in secure laboratories so their genetic codes can be studied. Mutations that make a respiratory virus lodge in the throat, for example, can make the virus more transmissible through coughing.

The rational for gain-of-function studies is twofold. If scientists can work out which mutations make a virus more dangerous to people, they can improve surveillance by looking out for those mutations in natural strains. The work might also help to steer vaccine development. But Lipsitch argues that neither justification stands up: surveillance is not good enough to use the information, and vaccine developers can do without it, he says.

Rather than creating dangerous viruses in high-containment laboratories, Lipsitch and Galvani urge scientists to pursue alternative routes, for example, comparisons of seasonal human flu strains and other respiratory viruses that have jumped from animals into humans. These are not only safer, the authors claim, but the studies are scientifically sound, because they do not rely on small numbers of animals.

The report was roundly rejected by Fouchier and Kawaoka, two of the leading scientists in gain-of-function studies. Fouchier said the authors were wrong on both points they made – that alternative experiments could provide answers about the transmissibility of viruses, and that the risk of an outbreak or pandemic was high.

"The research agenda they propose is important and currently ongoing, but alone will never lead to solid conclusions about mammalian adaptation and transmission: the proof of the pudding will need to come from gain-of-function studies using infectious viruses. This is why the department of health and human services has approved our research, taking into account all ethical, safety and security issues, and weighing the risks of the research against the benefits," Fouchier said.

He said the authors had misinterpreted published data to arrive at their risk of someone picking up a virus in the laboratory. "The truth is that scientific research has never triggered a virus pandemic." Lipsitch and Galvani point out that a flu strain that spread around the world from 1977 to 2009 was probably released in a laboratory accident.

Kawaoka was similarly unimpressed with the report. "The authors imply that gain-of-function studies are going on without proper reviews. This is not so and suggests they do not understand how highly regulated this work is and the approvals and planning required to conduct this research," he said. "This commentary lists many experiments they think we should be doing. We are doing many of those experiments already."

[Simon Wain-Hobson][9], a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, said that scientists working on the controversial virus studies should be less defensive. "There are times when we have to open up and face our critics. Marc is articulating what many of us feel is obvious," he said.

  [9]: <https://www.pasteur.fr/ip/easysite/pasteur/en/research/scientific-departments/virology/units-and-groups/molecular-retrovirology> ()

[healthtimetaylor]

Griffithsin tandemers: flexible and potent lectin inhibitors of the human immunodeficiency virus

PMID:  Retrovirology. 2015 Jan 23 ;12:6. Epub 2015 Jan 23. PMID: 25613831 Abstract Title:  Griffithsin tandemers: flexible and potent lectin inhibitors of the human immunodeficiency virus. Abstract:  BACKGROUND: The lectin griffithsin (GRFT) is a potent antiviral agent capable of prevention and treatment of infections caused by a number of enveloped viruses and is currently under development as an anti-HIV microbicide. In addition to its broad antiviral activity, GRFT is stable at high temperature and at a broad pH range, displays little toxicity and immunogenicity, and is amenable to large-scale manufacturing. Native GRFT is a domain-swapped homodimer that binds to viral envelope glycoproteins and has displayed mid-picomolar activity in cell-based anti-HIV assays. Previously, we have engineered and analyzed several monomeric forms of this lectin (mGRFT) with anti-HIV EC50 values ranging up to 323 nM. Based on our previous analysis of mGRFT, we hypothesized that the orientation and spacing of the carbohydrate binding domains GRFT were key to its antiviral activity.RESULTS: Here we present data on engineered tandem repeats of mGRFT (mGRFT tandemers) with antiviral activity at concentrations as low as one picomolar in whole-cell anti-HIV assays. mGRFT tandemers were analyzed thermodynamically, both individually and in complex with HIV-1 gp120. We also demonstrate by dynamic light scattering and cryo-electron microscopy that mGRFT tandemers do not aggregate HIV virions. This establishes that, although the intra-virion crosslinking of HIV envelope glycoproteins is likely integral to their activity, the antiviral activity of these lectins is not due to virus aggregation caused by inter-virion crosslinking.CONCLUSIONS: The engineered tandemer constructs of mGRFT may provide novel and powerful agents for prevention of infection by HIV and other enveloped viruses.

read more

[kathleenseiber]

How HIV dodges our immune defenses

New research reveals how a protein that specializes in killing off invading viruses latches on to attackers, as well as how some viruses like HIV evade capture and death.

Humans have evolved dynamic defense mechanisms against the viruses that seek to infect our bodies—proteins that specialize in identifying, capturing, and destroying the genetic material that viruses try to sneak into our cells.

Revealing the precise mechanism that makes the protein, called ZAP (short for zinc-finger antiviral protein), an effective antiviral in some cases is a critical first step in the path toward better methods for attacking viruses that manage to dodge it.

Cells make ZAP to restrict a virus from replicating and spreading infection. When cells detect a virus, the ZAP gene turns on and produces more of the protein. ZAP then singles out the virus’s genetic material, RNA, from the cell’s native RNA and targets the viral RNA for destruction.

The researchers wanted to determine how ZAP recognizes the virus’s genome and how some viruses avoid it.

ZAP vs. HIV

A previous study revealed that ZAP grabs onto only one specific sequence of neighboring nucleotides (the building blocks of DNA and RNA): a cytosine followed by a guanine, or a CG dinucleotide. Human RNAs have few CG dinucleotides, and HIV RNA has evolved to mimic this characteristic.

“The main motivation for the study was, ‘How does HIV avoid this antiviral protein?'” says co-lead author Jennifer Meagher, a researcher at the Life Sciences Institute at the University of Michigan. “And because we’re structural biologists, we wanted to determine how ZAP ‘sees’ a CG dinucleotide—and how, structurally, it binds the RNA.”

Using a piece of viral RNA that researchers genetically altered to include extra CG sequences, Meagher and her colleagues determined the structure of the ZAP protein bound to RNA, exposing the mechanisms that enable the protein to be so selective.

The researchers discovered that ZAP binds to the viral RNA at only one of the four “zinc fingers” on the protein that they considered potential binding sites. They further demonstrated that even a tiny change to that one binding site—altering just a single atom—hampered ZAP’s binding ability.

A ‘molecular arms race’

Working in cells, researchers found similar results when they altered ZAP’s composition. They created mutant versions of ZAP that cells infected with either normal HIV or a version of the virus enriched with CG sequences expressed.

The mutant ZAP proteins hard a harder time recognizing CG-enriched regions of the viral RNA in cells. They also exhibited increased binding to areas of the RNA that were not rich in CG dinucleotides, indicating that alterations impair ZAP’s ability to distinguish viral RNA from human RNA.

“Natural selection appears to have shaped the ZAP protein structure in such a way to optimize the discrimination of nonself from self RNA, based on CG dinucleotide content,” says Paul Bieniasz, an investigator in the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and head of the Laboratory of Retrovirology at Rockefeller University . “However, successful viruses are often one step ahead in a molecular arms race.”

“This is the crucial first step in a complicated story of how the cell eventually degrades the virus’s RNA,” says Janet Smith, an research professor at LSI and a professor of biological chemistry at the University of Michigan Medical School. “And now we know how the step is executed, and why it is not effective on HIV and other viruses that lack this CG sequence.”

The paper appears in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The research was done through the Center for HIV RNA Studies and received support from the National Institutes of Health, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Michigan Economic Development Corporation, and the Michigan Technology Tri-Corridor. X-ray crystallography data came from the US Department of Energy’s Advanced Photon Source at Argonne National Laboratory.

Source: University of Michigan

The post How HIV dodges our immune defenses appeared first on Futurity.

How HIV dodges our immune defenses published first on https://triviaqaweb.weebly.com/