Unfortunately, the Chinese claims do not bear much credibility and have to be taken with a "large chunk of salt". First of all, China does not have a solid research and experimental scientific base. Secondly, the country does not even have the facilities for advanced research.
The country has, oftentimes, come up with "cures" that have turned out to be hoax.
Yes, mutations definitely play a role and will be the major obstacle to overcome in the fight to defeat HIV. Another obstacle will be to overcome the HIV dormant state such as the one HIV goes into in the gut.

I am of the strong belief that NANOTECHNOLOGY will play a major role in the fight. I recently saw a Discovery Channel program where they mentioned nanotechnology use for targeted drug delivery. So, why not have engineered molecules that target the dorman virus and "inject" it with the drug. This could be coupled with the drug that we come up with.

Just my 2c...

Dear ditactylos,:). i do have to defend my post.

The news about aids its real been on Reuters news feed and many others,

here is a link couse u got judgmental only because the word paranormal,

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-08/18/content_4980121.htm


Like that was the case, its is with Aubrey DE Grey, u called him a nutcase

only proves Ur ignorance in general, and particularly towards the aging
process in particular.

If u ar half as smart as u think u are be world famous, and win
20000$, cash. Just by writing a simple essay proving his s.e.n.s plan

is worthless, pseudosciense, nutcase wathever u wanna call it.

MIT is waiting, common don't be shy.???? what u waiting for?

http://www.technologyreview.com/sens/index.aspx

http://www.mprize.org/index.php?pagename=newsdetaildisplay&ID=0104

im lookin forward to hearing about, you

here is the chance u can prove himself a nut, be world faimous for it

win 20,000.00 cash

should be a pice of cake for u?

no execuses just do it:)

I'm all for the progress of science, especially medical science. There are some concerns (ethical and other) with nanotechnology though. I found this article pretty interesting (I don't agree with all of it, but it's interesting nonetheless):

I, Nanobot

One of the hallmarks of good research is the ability to replicate results independently. It is easy to claim the prize at first, but let us wait until phase III trials are complete and if they can be replicated elsewhere before jumping to a conclusion. I also note it was a non infectious snippet of the DNA which was used. Let us wait until the full picture emerges before a judgement is made. Remember the "cold fusion" fiasco. I'm with Didactylos on this one.

Joe