Didn't mean to imply such. I'm reasoning by analogy with known examples of retrovirus transmission within mammalian species. Besides, I don't know anyone who drinks cat's milk except kittens. Thinking about the problem of transmission from the standpoint of the virus caused me to concentrate on what may seem unlikely requirements for transmission. Transmission of HIV to infants reveals that this is still a young pathogen, poorly adapted to our species. Active HIV infection in an infant makes that infant unlikely to survive until sexual maturity, when the infection is most likely to be passed on. If the virus were intelligent this would be called a major strategic blunder. A well-adapted pathogen would never kill an individual host before infection is passed on. The ideal strategy for such a pathogen would be to transmit an infection when a neonate is immunologically naive which would remain latent until sexual maturity. It would infiltrate the immune system without provoking a strong response. I simply asked myself if this were possible. Published research gave me answers, it also revealed that a virus using such a strategy would be more likely to escape detection. Every link in the chain is not solid, yet. This can be criticized as speculative. I never called the hypothesis anything else, though it rests on facts. It has served to guide me to interesting discoveries within published literature. I'll drop it when and if it stops being productive.