Sorry guys, it wasn't Coffin, it was Goff. Someone kindly gave me the correct bit from his interview with Vincent Racaniello. TWIV broadcast on 4/4/2010 -
http://www.virology.ws/2010/04/04/tw...tephen-goff/):
-19:30
VR: This virus seems to be sensitive to AZT,
SG Correct
VR: But I don’t think any of the other anti retrovirals, right?
SG: I think there’s a little paper surveying the RT drugs, that’s right. AZT is the one that’s best. It tracks with the behavior of all of the murine leukemia viruses in that regard.
VR: ”A number of people with the disease (cfs) have wondered if they should take AZT, even now when still we don’t know exactly but is there any up or down side to doing that?”
SG: “So, the people that I’ve talked to say they think that the side effects of AZT, at this point anyway, out weight the benefits, the potential benefits.”
RV: So you’ll feel worse.
SG: You’re more likely to have difficulty just taking the AZT as of course many people do. It’s not as thought you couldn’t live with it. People do, but?
RV: With HIV, which was fatal…
SG: You took the side effects.
RV: Here? Although people with CF would say that their lives are ruined without something , so…you could almost equate it to being HIV fatality, so maybe they’re willing to take the risk.
SG: Right
RV I get a lot of e-mail about this and a lot of comments
SG: I certainly wouldn’t take AZT without knowing that I was viremic at least. If I was convinced firmly that I was actively replicating virus, and I was at the end of my rope with the disease, I guess I might consider AZT as a treatment of last resort.
RV: As long as you understand that the side effects might be terrible.