Immunity
In 1983, FIV (Feline Immunodeficiency Virus) was discovered by Neils Pederson, doing research on a cat that seemed to be showing AIDS-like symptoms. A close relative of AIDS, it led to an immediate scare that it could spread to a number of wild cat species which are already endangered. Tests for the disease began on various African wild cat species. To the surprise of most involved, the disease was turning up everywhere. The infected wild cat species simply were not showing symptoms like the housecats were. This led to a high level of curiosity as to how the wild species were managing to be infected without this happening.
The initial theories - that the disease was remaining inactive in their systems, that the disease was only present in small amounts, or that the disease wasn't killing the cells that it infected - were all proven wrong. It turned out that the virus was present in huge quantities, and was killing many T-cells. Infected cats from species that didn't show symptoms, however, were simply replacing them as quickly as they were destroyed. It appeared that the wild cat species that were studied had a genetic adaptation to the disease. Housecats, which had not contracted the disease until recently, had no such immunity.
Despite the initial expectation of the researcher, it has since been determined that FIV has no particular relationship to HIV except in its name.
Research in primates has found a variable level of susceptibility to SIV between chimpanzees from different regions of Africa. This has profound implications for research on HIV, not only in ensuring equal natural resistance to the disease amongst laboratory animals. Although SIV and HIV have some similarities, humans can not be infected with SIV, and primates do not get sick from HIV.
In some parts of Africa, HIV infects more than one in every four people.
Prior reports of resistance in humans have proven disappointing in the end: For example, among populations of African prostitutes who were regularly exposed to the virus through unsafe sex practices, some apparently immune individuals were described during the early 1990s and made the subjects of intensive research into mechanisms of natural resistance. However, eventually, each woman in the study became infected with HIV, and no useful data was produced to help with a vaccine.
Similarly, a handful of babies born to HIV+ mothers were described at birth as being HIV+ and later tested negative. Subsequent studies have shown that the testing method was at fault, and these babies never were infected with HIV. The earlier studies checked for antibodies against HIV, not the virus itself, and -- like all other kinds of antibodies in breast-fed babies -- these infants tested positive on the basis of their mothers' antibodies, which had been transmitted to them during feeding.
Related Articles