You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
engineering a virus
- Thread starter Enigma'07
- Start date
The russians used to specialize in bacterophages as substitute for anti-biotics. Worked quite well actually apparently.
loki_ghost
Registered Senior Member
i guess ''actavir'' is gaining.
regards,
loki
regards,
loki
loki_ghost
Registered Senior Member
sorry i mean ''zovirax''.
Unfortunately, I don't think you can cure a virus with another virus. Although, in a simular manner to insulin manufacture you might be able to knock-up some bacteria that produce the necessary antibodies.we could cure HIV/AIDS, Avian Flu Virus, and a host of other
antibodies attack bacteria. and it wouldn't even be fighting a virus with a virus, it would more be like the actual virus infect the cell, but then an engineered virus could insert a cassett piece of R/DNA which would prevent the original virus' R/DNA from being able to function. the whole idea of using a virus is that they are effiecient at spreding their R/DNA to so many other cells which then replicate the altered DNA
Well yes, but the question posted is "why can't scientists take a virus that is harmful, and engineer it so that it was no longer harmfull." I think we are on the verge of this being a possibility without just fighting the virus through our immune system or through anti-virals.Blue_UK said:Unfortunately, I don't think you can cure a virus with another virus. Although, in a simular manner to insulin manufacture you might be able to knock-up some bacteria that produce the necessary antibodies.
Ah, I see what you're thinking, but you're not really thinking carefully:
If you could 'collect up' all of the harmful viruses, then you wouldn't have a problem anymore as you could just dispose of them and that would be the end of that. If you collected only a few to make a pointless virus, then the harmful ones would still be spreading about regardless of what you introduce. And, of course, your virus would not survive as well as the other one nor have any affect on it.
If you could 'collect up' all of the harmful viruses, then you wouldn't have a problem anymore as you could just dispose of them and that would be the end of that. If you collected only a few to make a pointless virus, then the harmful ones would still be spreading about regardless of what you introduce. And, of course, your virus would not survive as well as the other one nor have any affect on it.
insight1234
Registered Member
valich said:If we could do that in biogenetics engineering, we could cure HIV/AIDS, Avian Flu Virus, and a host of other diseases. We just have not advanced that far yet.
Nope!... It's not that easy. The viruses/bacterias can be used as "tools" or veichles or even synthesisers for different chemicals and they could EVENTUALLY bind to other viruses and destroy them.... BUT it would be a HEEELL of a hard job and not like "Oh, let's extinguish aids! :bugeye: "
insight1234
Registered Member
PS: You COULD make a virus that'd bind to the same places as the original one, or over-rule the old one with the new and have a cure for that virus...
i think the T cells are the ones that eat up the harmful cells through pahgocytosis, while B cells mass produce markers for specific types of harmful cells and dump them into the bloodstream for use in the T cells targeting the intruders.
and viruses bond to a specific site on the cell surface, so if you could render a type of the virus inert, wouldn't it take up the site and thus prevent the dangerous version from attaching to the cell?
or we could just quit science and let natural selection do its work :m:
and viruses bond to a specific site on the cell surface, so if you could render a type of the virus inert, wouldn't it take up the site and thus prevent the dangerous version from attaching to the cell?
or we could just quit science and let natural selection do its work :m:
cyber_indian
Registered Senior Member
Do you fall from Mars ???
Encyclopedia:
-In gene therapy, a virus itself may serve as a vector, if it has been re-engineered and is used to deliver a gene to its target cell. A "vector" in this sense is a vehicle for delivering genetic material such as DNA to a cell.
http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/info=gene_therapy/show/procedures
http://www.radonc.vcu.edu/health_professional/treatment_tech_adv/gene_therapy.html
Encyclopedia:
-In gene therapy, a virus itself may serve as a vector, if it has been re-engineered and is used to deliver a gene to its target cell. A "vector" in this sense is a vehicle for delivering genetic material such as DNA to a cell.
http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/info=gene_therapy/show/procedures
http://www.radonc.vcu.edu/health_professional/treatment_tech_adv/gene_therapy.html
I woulk think that the body uses killer B(?) cells to kill...
The body, after having detecting a pathogen (soething nasty), will produce antibodies which can attack pathogens in number of ways:
* Making them stick together in lumps (bacteria will die if they stick together)
* Destroying the cell membrane of the intruder (viri do not have cell membranes, but they are held together by other stuff)
* Stick on and act as a marker so that white blood cells know to 'eat' them if found.
I can't remember the rest but there were six or so ways in my text book (eight years ago sorry)
I do not know if viruses can be used to fight viruses, but (repeating myself) I do wonder if you could whip up some antibodies 'insulin style' in some bacteria and inject into patients (on reflection, this would be hard - since you'd also have to whip some suitable DNA-code). Or perhaps that thing they do with mice, where they farm antibodies in them.