Skip to comments.
Relapse of 'cured' HIV patients spurs AIDS science on
reuters.com ^
| Jan 2, 20114
| Kate Kelland
Posted on 01/04/2014 2:06:58 PM PST by ransomnote
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-22 last
To: ransomnote
So might this indicate that the AIDS tests commonly in use are not sensitive enough to accurately report whether bone marrow donation or blood has the aids virus? Is it that they couldn't test in a system as complex as the human body? If so, wouldn't the tested population in the US actually have higher levels of aids than currently reported? It might also mean that it doesn't take as high a concentration of the virus to infect someone - they thought there was a cure because they couldn't detect it and the undetectable amount was sufficient to reinfect. I wonder if there are other factors that occur with having been infected that make it easier for a smaller amount of the virus to propagate.
21
posted on
01/05/2014 5:04:31 AM PST
by
trebb
(Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
To: ransomnote
I don’t think that either Steve Deeks or Dan Kuritzkes ever said anything other than “maybe” about these two.
And, yes, it’s quite significant, but not at all surprising, that a test cutoff of 20 copies per mL of blood is not sensitive enough to detect a very significant total body viral burden.
22
posted on
01/05/2014 5:14:05 AM PST
by
Jim Noble
(When strong, avoid them. Attack their weaknesses. Emerge to their surprise.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-22 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson