Dr.Bob, how are you doing? I just want praise you for being such an inspiration and spirit-lifter for so many people despite having to overcoming your own "virally enhanced" life.
I've asked this question twice already and i'm starting to think that you simply don't know because it's actually a really good question!
All these HIV websites say that ARS almost always occurs with a fever. but there's that word.. "almost". And correct me if im wrong, but isnt the purpose of the fever to "jump start" the body's immune system to create antibodies to the virus.
So is it logical to say that those who experience ARS without a fever would develope antibodies later than those that do have a fever because they lack that initial "jump start". You say that the vast majority of HIV infected individuals will have detectable antibodies by 4-6 weeks (***but MAY take up to 3 months).. so if you don't develope a fever during ARS, would you be more likey to develope antibodies perhaps 10 weeks after exposure, instead of earlier?
Thank you Dr.Bob for all that you do! Go OBAMA!!
AND GO NY GIANTS!!! (if you a new england fan, sorry!)
OK, I do know and I will correct you, because you are indeed wrong.
The purpose of a fever is not to "jump start" the body's immune system to create antibodies to the virus. Where did you come up with that notion? Temperature elevation can occur as a consequence of certain infections, but has nothing to do with specific antibody production. Consequently your second assumption/hypothesis that folks with ARS, but without fever, are more likely to develop antibodies later than those with fever is also wrong.
So as you can see, the reason I didn't answer your question the first couple of times you submitted it was not because I didn't know and certainly not because it was "a really good question!"
Yes, GO OBAMA! As for the Super Bowl, I didn't watch it. I attended a stunning piano concert given by Richard Goode at Berkeley's Zellerbach Hall instead.