this really is weird. where did the gp120 protein come from/ Do we know yet?
where does this virus that carries this protein come from? Oh yeah how do we dispose of the victims that died from aids.

meg, you are fucked in the head. I'm sorry, but I just don't buy whatever conspiracy theory you believe in (government? aliens? russian terrorists?). And you know why? Because if our best scientists haven't been able to find a cure for this thing yet, then they probably didn't engineer it, either.
Also- yes, we do know where it came from. Monkeys.

Oh- and we bury them in the ground.

I just want to make sure I understand this. A person with the CCR5 mutation can only get it from both parents. Is that because mutations are, by nature, recessive?

Or is it more like, as a human's DNA gets mutations, when they rejoin, the DNA elements check themselves. So, the mutation could be in the father's DNA. But, when the mother's DNA sees it, it says, "Nope, that's not right. It should be like this" and the father's DNA says "You're right. Let's fix that." Thus, the mutation is corrected?

Also, how are mutations different than traits like blond hair and blue eyes? Those can be passed on without having both parents have those genetics, though they are generally recessive.

Thank you for responding to my question. :-)

No, the CCR5 mutation is recessive, so if there is one correct copy of the gene (say from the mother) and one mutated copy (from the father), then the offspring will have some correct CCR5 and some mutated CCR5. In practice, this gives them heightened resistance to HIV.

The CCR5 protein product seems to be affected by a single gene, as opposed to some things like height, which is the product of many different genes and external factors as well.

About checking DNA, the cells have lots of mechanisms for checking DNA, but these checks don't catch everything. Mutations in these genes are usually the basis for cancers.

I had a question though. What is the purpose of the CCR5 protein? I'm assuming it has a need. Wouldn't the absence of a working copy of CCR5 put these individuals at a higher risk for certain other diseases? Also, isn't the CCR5 receptor just one of the methods of HIV transmission?

so...this is an urban legend? because if he had HIV for a while, it was already using the CxCr4 receptor on T cells and a new set of HIV resistant macrophages (CCR5)would be too late. CCR5 mutants are resistant to sexual contact infection, not continued disease should they have blood to blood contact (infected T-cells)

yes. one copy from each parent. in the cases of some genes, for example eye color, brown overrides the blue copy if you have one copy of each. For CCR5 if you have one copy of each, you have a mixed population of CCR5 receptors. One version is not dominant over the other.
CCR5 is part of the immmune system trafficking and communication system. The funny one works just fine, except as an entry point for HIV. HIV will probably get around it eventually, it mutates incredibly fast (hence the switching from macrophages to T-cells in each individual host).

NZG: HIV won't necessarily get "around" using the CCR5 receptor, in the same way that many diseases remain susceptible to common antiobiotic or antiviral drugs after years and years of use. Evolution is not a directed process, it's random, so, while it may mutate quickly, it can't do anything and everything it needs to do to survive, necessarily. The CCR5 receptor is a very promising subject of HIV treatment research.

Also, the treatment could very well have cured this patient of AIDS/HIV. The bone marrow transplant he received allowed his body to produce new white blood cells of all types that would be immune to the virus. Also remember that white blood cells, like every other cell in your body, do not live forever. Indeed, your entire collection of immune cells are replaced many times in your life by new ones. And, finally, you have to keep in mind that, even in a normal person without the CCR5 mutation, the immune system CAN ATTACK AND DESTROY the HIV virus and cells infected with it, it just isn't as likely to occur and the patient isn't likely to be cured because of the virus attacks and dupes the very system fighting it. A fresh set of new immune cells, without the CCR5 receptor, might tip the fight in favor of your body.

And, finally, not everyone with HIV in their system has AIDS.

This is why I'm in Arts.

@NzG -- You rightly point out that HIV can come in flavors that use the CCR5 and/or CXCR4 co-receptor to infect cells. CCR5 is by far the most common and important to natural HIV infection, and while some patients infected with a CCR5-friendly virus eventually develop a CXCR4-friendly strain, this can happen after an unpredictable amount of time, or not all.

The why's and how's of co-receptor switching are currently under research, as is how HIV hides in patients on intense anti-HIV therapy. Interestingly, patients treated with experimental anti-CCR5 drugs didn't develop much CXCR4-friendly virus, which is an optimistic sign. Also, since HIV hasn't re-emerged in this patient after a couple years, things look good. However, you're right in pointing out that scientists can't totally exclude the possibility that a CXCR4-friendly variant might crop up someday.

Apropos of very little - your columns (and explanations) are excellent, Golob. Very few scientists are able to explain things to non-scientists - this is why there is so much boneheaded science journalism out there. I'd like to see your stuff picked up by a publication with a bigger national profile...