Viral-Exososme Neutralization - (May/20/2015 )

I know I'm wrong however if someone could explain why that would be very greatly appreciated. For the sack of argument Im going to stick to HIV, as a know the most about this virus. HIV binds the the CD4 receptor, located on CD4+ T cells. However its important to note that the virus does not bind to cell but the receptor. This means that a genetically modified bacteria containing the CD4 receptor could also become infected by the virus. But what if that bacteria was an exosome producing one. Specifically, a bacterial exosome containing a protein of some sorts would be ideal. Then if the receptor was over-expressed then a exosome with a high receptor density could be generated. As long as the there are a enough exosomes present and the exosomes have a higher receptor density than the CD4+ cell. Then the virus would bond to the exosome instead of the cell. Since there are not functional units in the exosome then the reverse transcriptase would not be able perform its effects thus neutralizing the virus. 

I believe that a potential fault here is that there is not endosome pathway in a exosome. However, many virus work by entering through a transport protein, such as HTLV. For these types of viruses I can't seem to reason why an exosome could not neutralize the virus.

BTW Im not high right now.

As well if a chemical could be designed to bind covalently to the viral protein(specifically the viral attachment protein) would this not also neutralize the virus?

Yes, and yes, these sorts of things are both avenues being currently pursued by researchers...but what about drug effects (toxicity etc) and the immune response to having a foreign bodies added to your circulatory system