Replies to post #121678 on Biotech Values

[DewDiligence]

is creating a mutation of HIV effectively creating the possibility of another strain of a super virus?

I’m not an expert in virology, but I don’t think that’s even a remote possibility.

[oc631]

is creating a mutation of HIV effectively creating the possibility of another strain of a super
virus?

It's a game of tennis between science and nature. Science is prone to disruption (war, economics, etc.) where nature is perfect, never takes a day off, and it will capitalize on science's shortcomings. Even if one of those shortcomings is a scientific platform based on good intention.

So yes the possibility is real but that's not what I was refering to in my post concerning Atripla.

[biomaven0]

creating a mutation of HIV effectively creating the possibility of another strain of a super
virus?

A few years ago I discussed this concept (encouraging mutations) with a neighbor who is a a well-known virologist. His point was that retroviruses like HIV already mutate like crazy (they have no error checking) and so the idea of "pushing them over the edge" by dramatically increasing the mutation rate was quite attractive. Even if you create a resistant strain it won't last long because of new mutations. But I suspect you need high forced mutation rate (well over 50%?) to make this work well.

But I don't think it addresses the issue of latent HIV infection in reservoirs.

Peter