It's kind of impossible to determine that. CRISPR gene editing has been in use for the better part of the last decade, and recently a Chinese doctor got jail time for editing a human genome to have HIV resistance. With CRISPR IIRC there isn't really a trace left. With old genetic engineering techniques, there would be something left behind, like with Zinc Finger Gene editing. Even though I technically went over this last semester, it is just so boring and I lacked all interest.
Anyway, viruses aren't that complex compared to living organisms. It's feasible that a genetic sequence (or a similar genetic sequence) could arise through mutations. Homology can be found across completely unrelated species as a trait evolved for a specific function.
HIV infects through a COMPLETELY different mechanism. It infects CCR5 receptors on T lymphocytes. That's why there's a rare mutation in some people where they lack that receptor, and are thus immune to HIV. Having a "spike protein" is a trait that many viruses share.
That virologist also said that nature rejects the manipulation and as the virus spreads, the unnatural parts will get removed and it will become less deadly.
That's not too too off base. Any organism as it evolves will edit out anything that isn't necessary for it to thrive. Currently with medicine, we edit cells (like CHO) to produce a monoclonal antibody, or one of the new drugs on the market. Think Humira or Stelara. These are more complex molecules than your typical aspirin where someone just mixes chemicals together. Problem with this is the CHO cells don't need to make that drug to survive, and through many many cell divisions will eventually edit the gene out that makes the drug. In a similar sense, a bacteria that is antibiotic resistant that is allowed to grow in an environment without antibiotic, will eventually lose that resistance (there are exceptions but I'm not going to write a book).
To be clear, I don’t know what I’m talking about. Rather, I’m saying that I read an article about what this guy said, and that guy sounded like he knew what he was talking about. Or, you know, I’m spreading hearsay or gossip. :-)
His name is Luc Montagnier. Sounds like you might know what he was saying in more detail than I. I’ve heard of crispr as a term, but have never looked into the details of what it is or how it works, so I’m ignorant about a lot of what you just said about that.
What you described about losing the bacterial resistance makes a lot of sense. I had an ah-ha moment similar to that when I studied genetic algorithms in CompSci. Would take a bit to explain. Just that I have had similar experiences and that makes total sense.
Yeah, I dabbled in bioinformatics in undergrad. I could never sit in front of a computer all day for a living, haha. Bioinformatics is especially boring, though.
Luc Montagnier
I don't know much about him, and he is an expert in his field. I'd like to see the basis behind his claims, but he hasn't exactly gone into detail, from what I can find. If you make a claim like that in this field, you either provide substantial evidence or you've committed heresy - especially because a lot of people including scientists are in China's pocket nowadays. Just about all pharmaceutical companies I've worked at talked about branching into China because they have so much money to spend. Seems almost like the Climate Change hoax - you deny that it exists and don't provide damning evidence, then your career is over (actually it's pretty much over from the point you say "I'm skeptical"). Which is why most people who come out against it are retired.
It's kind of impossible to determine that. CRISPR gene editing has been in use for the better part of the last decade, and recently a Chinese doctor got jail time for editing a human genome to have HIV resistance. With CRISPR IIRC there isn't really a trace left. With old genetic engineering techniques, there would be something left behind, like with Zinc Finger Gene editing. Even though I technically went over this last semester, it is just so boring and I lacked all interest.
Anyway, viruses aren't that complex compared to living organisms. It's feasible that a genetic sequence (or a similar genetic sequence) could arise through mutations. Homology can be found across completely unrelated species as a trait evolved for a specific function.
HIV infects through a COMPLETELY different mechanism. It infects CCR5 receptors on T lymphocytes. That's why there's a rare mutation in some people where they lack that receptor, and are thus immune to HIV. Having a "spike protein" is a trait that many viruses share.
That's not too too off base. Any organism as it evolves will edit out anything that isn't necessary for it to thrive. Currently with medicine, we edit cells (like CHO) to produce a monoclonal antibody, or one of the new drugs on the market. Think Humira or Stelara. These are more complex molecules than your typical aspirin where someone just mixes chemicals together. Problem with this is the CHO cells don't need to make that drug to survive, and through many many cell divisions will eventually edit the gene out that makes the drug. In a similar sense, a bacteria that is antibiotic resistant that is allowed to grow in an environment without antibiotic, will eventually lose that resistance (there are exceptions but I'm not going to write a book).
To be clear, I don’t know what I’m talking about. Rather, I’m saying that I read an article about what this guy said, and that guy sounded like he knew what he was talking about. Or, you know, I’m spreading hearsay or gossip. :-)
His name is Luc Montagnier. Sounds like you might know what he was saying in more detail than I. I’ve heard of crispr as a term, but have never looked into the details of what it is or how it works, so I’m ignorant about a lot of what you just said about that.
What you described about losing the bacterial resistance makes a lot of sense. I had an ah-ha moment similar to that when I studied genetic algorithms in CompSci. Would take a bit to explain. Just that I have had similar experiences and that makes total sense.
Yeah, I dabbled in bioinformatics in undergrad. I could never sit in front of a computer all day for a living, haha. Bioinformatics is especially boring, though.
I don't know much about him, and he is an expert in his field. I'd like to see the basis behind his claims, but he hasn't exactly gone into detail, from what I can find. If you make a claim like that in this field, you either provide substantial evidence or you've committed heresy - especially because a lot of people including scientists are in China's pocket nowadays. Just about all pharmaceutical companies I've worked at talked about branching into China because they have so much money to spend. Seems almost like the Climate Change hoax - you deny that it exists and don't provide damning evidence, then your career is over (actually it's pretty much over from the point you say "I'm skeptical"). Which is why most people who come out against it are retired.