But not many people actually even put it together, even at that time. For several years afterwards most people still thought that the IR1 controlled immune response is something unrelated to it. Okay, this was an explanation for K and D, but they always thought that the class II was something completely different and that it was functioning on a different principle.

[Q] Right, right.

But to me it looked like this is the apparent explanation, and since I was always favouring the similarity of the class I and class II, the principle similarity, then it seemed like it could be applied also in some way to the class II antigens, but how to specifically apply or how it could be explained with the class I and class II antigens was not clear to anybody, and for years still it would not be clear and was a lot elucidated then much later because many elements of the puzzle were still missing. It was not realized that there is a principle difference between the immune response channelled through class I antigens and class II antigens.

[Q] Of course...

This realisation came only later with... I mean it was the principle immunological question, what... how does the immune response function? And it came through studies which I originally thought were artefacts, I must admit, and studies that claimed there is so-called antigen processing. That means that macrophages or similar cells take up the antigen and destroy it into... chop it down into small pieces and that only these pieces are then used to mount the immune response.