|
Playing With Fire
|
When Science Goes Bad-The True Origin of AIDS
There are many theories on how the AIDS epidemic started........
Quote:
The 'Hunter' Theory
The most commonly accepted theory is that of the 'hunter'. In this scenario, SIVcpz was transferred to humans as a result of chimps being killed and eaten or their blood getting into cuts or wounds on the hunter. Normally the hunter's body would have fought off SIV, but on a few occasions it adapted itself within its new human host and become HIV-1. The fact that there were several different early strains of HIV, each with a slightly different genetic make-up (the most common of which was HIV-1 group M), would support this theory: every time it passed from a chimpanzee to a man, it would have developed in a slightly different way within his body, and thus produced a slightly different strain.
An article published in The Lancet in 20043, also shows how retroviral transfer from primates to hunters is still occurring even today. In a sample of 1099 individuals in Cameroon , they discovered to ten (1%) were infected with SFV (Simian Foamy Virus), an illness which, like SIV, was previously thought only to infect primates. All these infections were believed to have been acquired through the butchering and consumption of monkey and ape meat. Discoveries such as this have led to calls for an outright ban on bushmeat hunting to prevent simian viruses being passed to humans.
The Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV) theory
Could production of the oral polio vaccine
have contributed to the spread of HIV?
Some other rather controversial theories have contended that HIV was transferred iatrogenically (i.e. via medical interventions). One particularly well-publicised idea is that polio vaccines played a role in the transfer.
In his book, The River, the journalist Edward Hooper suggests that HIV can be traced to the testing of an oral polio vaccine called Chat, given to about a million people in the Belgian Congo, Ruanda and Urundi in the late 1950s. To be reproduced, live polio vaccine needs to be cultivated in living tissue, and Hooper's belief is that Chat was grown in kidney cells taken from local chimps infected with SIVcmz. This, he claims, would have resulted in the contamination of the vaccine with chimp SIV, and a large number of people subsequently becoming infected with HIV-1.
Many people have contested Hooper's theories and insist that local chimps were not infected with a strain of SIVcmz that is closely linked to HIV. Furthermore, the oral administration of the vaccine would seem insufficient to cause infection in most people (SIV/HIV needs to get directly into the bloodstream to cause infection - the lining of the mouth and throat generally act as good barriers to the virus).4
In February 2000 the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia (one of the original manufacturers of the Chat vaccine) announced that it had discovered in its stores a phial of polio vaccine that had been used as part of the program. The vaccine was subsequently analysed and in April 2001 it was announced that no trace had been found of either HIV or chimpanzee SIV.5 A second analysis confirmed that only macaque monkey kidney cells, which cannot be infected with SIV or HIV, were used to make Chat.6 While this is just one phial of many, it means that the OPV theory remains unproven.
The fact that the OPV theory accounts for just one (group M) of several different groups of HIV also suggests that transferral must have happened in other ways too, as does the fact that HIV seems to have existed in humans before the vaccine trials were ever carried out. More about when HIV came into being can be found below.
The Contaminated Needle Theory
This is an extension of the original 'hunter' theory. In the 1950s, the use of disposable plastic syringes became commonplace around the world as a cheap, sterile way to administer medicines. However, to African healthcare professionals working on inoculation and other medical programmes, the huge quantities of syringes needed would have been very costly. It is therefore likely that one single syringe would have been used to inject multiple patients without any sterilisation in between. This would rapidly have transferred any viral particles (within a hunter's blood for example) from one person to another, creating huge potential for the virus to mutate and replicate in each new individual it entered, even if the SIV within the original person infected had not yet converted to HIV.
The Colonialism Theory
The colonialism or 'Heart of Darkness' theory, is one of the more recent theories to have entered into the debate. It is again based on the basic 'hunter' premise, but more thoroughly explains how this original infection could have led to an epidemic. It was first proposed in 2000 by Jim Moore, an American specialist in primate behaviour, who published his findings in the journal AIDS Research and Human Retroviruses.7
During the late 19th and early 20th century, much of Africa was ruled by colonial forces. In areas such as French Equatorial Africa and the Belgian Congo, colonial rule was particularly harsh and many Africans were forced into labour camps where sanitation was poor, food was scare and physical demands were extreme. These factors alone would have been sufficient to create poor health in anyone, so SIV could easily have infiltrated the labour force and taken advantage of their weakened immune systems to become HIV. A stray and perhaps sick chimpanzee with SIV would have made a welcome extra source of food for the workers.
Moore also believes that many of the labourers would have been inoculated with unsterile needles against diseases such as smallpox (to keep them alive and working), and that many of the camps actively employed prostitutes to keep the workers happy, creating numerous possibilities for onward transmission. A large number of labourers would have died before they even developed the first symptoms of AIDS, and those that did get sick would not have stood out as any different in an already disease-ridden population. Even if they had been identified, all evidence (including medical records) that the camps existed was destroyed to cover up the fact that a staggering 50% of the local population were wiped out there.
One final factor Moore uses to support his theory, is the fact that the labour camps were set up around the time that HIV was first believed to have passed into humans - the early part of the 20th century.
The Conspiracy Theory
Some say that HIV is a 'conspiracy theory' or that it is 'man-made'. A recent survey carried out in the US for example, identified a significant number of African Americans who believe HIV was manufactured as part of a biological warfare programme, designed to wipe out large numbers of black and homosexual people.8 Many say this was done under the auspices of the US federal 'Special Cancer Virus Program' (SCVP), possibly with the help of the CIA. Linked in to this theory is the belief that the virus was spread (either deliberately or inadvertently) to thousands of people all over the world through the smallpox inoculation programme, or to gay men through Hepatitis B vaccine trials. While none of these theories can be definitively disproved, the evidence given to back them up is usually based upon supposition and speculation, and ignores the clear link between SIV and HIV or the fact that the virus has been identified in people as far back as 1959.
|
http://www.avert.org/origins.htm
I was particularly interested in the OPV theory especially since chimpanzees were captured, caged together & no doubt used for tissue culture.....
Quote:
Overview of the theory
One theory of the origin of AIDS is that it developed from contaminated vaccines used in the world's first mass immunisation for polio. There are a number of reasons why this theory is plausible enough to be worthy of further investigation.
The location coincides dramatically. The earliest known cases of AIDS occurred in central Africa, in the same regions where Koprowski's polio vaccine was given to over a million people in 1957-1960.
The timing coincides. There is no documented case of HIV infection or AIDS before 1959. Centuries of the slave trade and European exploitation of Africa exposed Africans and others to all other diseases then known; it is implausible that HIV could have been present and spreading in Africa without being recognised.
Polio vaccines are grown (cultured) on monkey kidneys which could have been contaminated by SIVs. Polio vaccines could not be screened for SIV contamination before 1985.
Another monkey virus, SV-40, is known to have been passed to humans through polio vaccines. A specific pool of Koprowski's vaccine was later shown to have been contaminated by an unknown virus.
In order for a virus to infect a different species, it is helpful to reduce the resistance of the new host's immune system. Koprowski's polio vaccine was given to many children less than one month old, before their immune systems were fully developed. Indeed, in one trial, infants were given 15 times the standard dose in order to ensure effective immunisation.
If this theory is correct, it has serious ethical, health and policy implications. In particular, it points to the danger of interspecies transfer of material through vaccinations, organ transplants, etc., which could lead to new variants of AIDS as well as other new diseases. As well, studying the theory may lead to insights about responding to AIDS and preventing new diseases.
On several occasions, critics have claimed that the theory has been refuted. The Wistar Committee in 1992 said the death of a British sailor in 1959, whose tissues later tested positive for HIV, made the theory implausible. However, several years later, more sensitive tests showed no HIV in the tissues.
In 2001, reports were published that polio vaccine samples held in Philadelphia from the 1950s showed no immunodeficiency viruses. This was trumpeted as a refutation of the theory. Edward Hooper later produced evidence that US-produced vaccines had been amplified in Africa using chimpanzees as a substrate, thus showing the theory could be correct.
Scientists have spent a lot of effort trying to refute the polio-vaccine theory of the origin of AIDS, but very little trying to refute the conventional view, that blood from an SIV-infected chimpanzee got into humans via hunting or eating. There is very little direct evidence to support the conventional view, which explains neither the timing nor the location of the origin.
Scientific journals have been reluctant to publish articles about the polio-vaccine theory. For example, Nature has received substantial submissions about the theory from at least six scholars but has not published any of them. Opponents of the theory have used defamation threats and legal actions to discourage publication. The result is that editorial prerogative and legal action have given the false impression that critics of the theory have been unanswered.
To help rectify this situation, key documents presenting the theory and commenting on it are provided here. Also given is a list of publications about the theory. This material is provided by Brian Martin who as a social scientist has been following the origins debate since 1991. It is part of a page on suppression of dissent. Comments and additional contributions are welcome.
Some key publications about the theory
(in reverse chronological order)
BOOKS
Edward Hooper, The River: A Journey Back to the Source of HIV and AIDS (Harmondsworth: Penguin; Boston: Little, Brown, 1999; revised edition, Penguin, 2000). This is an enormous but highly readable scientific blockbuster, providing the most detailed examination of the polio vaccine theory yet available, including many new findings. It has generated widespread discussion and debate and has established the polio-vaccine theory of the origin of AIDS as by far the strongest contender to the cut-hunter orthodoxy.
Dozens of articles, reviews, commentaries and responses concerning The River.
The River is available from Penguin Books in the UK, www.amazon.com in the US and Standish Prideaux & Pye in Australia.
Omar Bagasra, HIV and Molecular Immunity: Prospects for the AIDS Vaccine (Natick, MA: Biotechniques Books, 1999). This technical scientific book presents a new theory of molecular immunity for the origin and history of HIV-1, which, it is argued, most likely derived from polio vaccinations in Africa.
Kiley R. Prilliman reviews the book in the prestigious journal Cell. Julian Cribb has provided insightful comments on the book for nonspecialists. The author, Omar Bagasra, can be contacted at omarb@sc.rr.com. The book is available from Eaton Publishing, 154 East Central Street, Natick MA 01760, USA, phone 508-653 6272, fax 508-653 2706.
Julian Cribb, The White Death (Sydney: Angus & Robertson, 1996). An engaging book focussing on both the polio-vaccine-AIDS theory and its reception by the scientific community. Full text available.
ARTICLES
Edward Hooper has his own website, http://www.aidsorigins.com/. See it for his latest contributions.
Brian Martin, "Contested testimony in scientific disputes: the case of the origins of AIDS",The Skeptic, Vol. 13, No. 3, 2007, pp. 52-58.
Edward Hooper, commentaries, February-August 2006
Three warnings about potential future malpractice by members of "the bushmeat group", 13 August 2006
Science magazine rejects yet another submission that opposes the bushmeat hypothesis of AIDS origin, 27 July 2006
"The Hollywooding of Science". Beatrice Hahn's latest SIV sequences from Cameroonian chimps: an alternative interpretation, 5 August 2006
How to View the "Origins of AIDS" Documentary, 30 June 2006
The Emperor's New Clothes: Beatrice Hahn and The Latest Mumbo Jumbo, 26 May 2006
New claims from Paul Sharp - but has the source of HIV-1 really been located? February 2006.
New material about the origin of AIDS published in November 2005 in Narrow Roads of Gene Land: The Collected Papers of W. D. Hamilton, Volume 3: Last Words, edited by Mark Ridley, Oxford University Press.
Brian Martin, "The Politics of a Scientific Meeting: the Origin-of-AIDS Debate at the Royal Society", Politics and the Life Sciences, Vol. 20, No. 2, September 2001, pp. 119-130 [published 2005]. Also available in pdf.
Edward Hooper, commentaries, October-November 2004
The annexing of the Stanleyville samples: potential 'fossil evidence' of ancient HIV-1 falls into the wrong hands
Untruths, misrepresentations and spin: the dubious methods and tactics used by Stanley Plotkin's group in the "Origins of AIDS" debate
Dr Hilary Koprowski - The Man of Many Ideas
The allegation that The River has damaged modern attempts to eradicate polio: more fabrications by doctors Koprowski and Plotkin
The new round of legal threats by doctors Koprowski and Plotkin
Plotkin's chums (1): Eminent scientists sign their names to falsehoods, in a bid to protect Stanley Plotkin and Hilary Koprowski
April 2004: Is the contaminated polio vaccine theory refuted?
Yes: Michael Worobey et al., "Contaminated polio vaccine theory refuted", Nature, Vol. 428, 22 April 2004, p. 820.
No: a reply by Edward Hooper, "Contaminated polio vaccine theory not refuted", April 2004.
Worobey et al. supplementary information and map. Hooper's comments.
Hooper gives further comments, and a short version of further comments.
Edward Hooper, "The dirty side of the origin-of-AIDS debate": a series of commentaries, February-March 2004.
The latest scientific evidence supports the OPV theory
As far as is known, modern polio vaccines are safe
Robin Weiss, professor of virology, doctor of spin
Could an ancient sample of HIV-1 be faked?
Stanley A. Plotkin, "Chimpanzees and journalists" (editorial), Vaccine, Vol. 22, 2004, pp. 1829-1830. Introduction to Osterrieth's article.
Paul Osterrieth, "Oral polio vaccine: fact versus fiction", Vaccine, Vol. 22, 2004, pp. 1831-1835. Denial of Hooper's claims about production of polio vaccine in Africa.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lincei meeting papers
Origin of HIV and Emerging Persistent Viruses,
Rome, 28-29 September 2001
Published as Atti dei Convegni Lincei, 2003, Vol. 187, ISBN 88-218-0885-8
Maria Luisa Bozzi, "Truth and science: Bill Hamilton's legacy", pp. 21-26.
Edward Hooper, "Dephlogistication, Imperial Display, Apes, Angels, and the Return of Monsieur Émile Zola", pp. 27-230. This massive paper is a response to criticisms of The River, plus new evidence.
Full paper in pdf
Paper in 4 pdf files: part a; part b; part c; part d
Figures 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 in pdf
Review of Hooper's paper by Lawrence Hammar in Papua New Guinea Medical Journal, 2004
Mikkel H. Schierup and Roald Forsberg, "Recombination and phylogenetic analysis of HIV-1" (in pdf), pp. 231-245.
R A Weiss, "Concluding remarks: emerging persistent infections, family heirlooms and new acquisitions" (in pdf), pp. 305-314.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian Martin, Investigating the origin of AIDS: some ethical dimensions, Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 29, No. 4, August 2003, pp. 253-256.
Edward Hooper, "The Story of a Man-Made Disease", April 2003. A shortened version appeared in the London Review of Books, followed by a series of letters to the editor.
Edward Hooper deals with "Opposition to the OPV theory"
1. The odd case of Professor John P. Moore
2. The Marx/Drucker theory of iatrogenic spread through unsterile needles, and the recent intervention by Professor David Gisselquist, who claims that most HIV infections in Africa are caused through this same route
3. The papers by Stanley Plotkin and Hilary Koprowski presented at the Royal Society meeting on "Origins of HIV and the AIDS Epidemic" in September 2000
Robin Weiss, "Reflections on the origin of human immunodeficiency viruses", AIDS & Hepatitis Digest, January 2002. Critical commentary on the polio-vaccine theory. Robin Weiss can be contacted at <r.weiss@ucl.ac.uk>.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Royal Society Discussion Meeting (and subsequent events)
Origins of HIV and the AIDS Epidemic, London, 11-12 September 2000
Papers, press releases, media stories and responses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stanley A. Plotkin, "CHAT oral polio vaccine was not the source of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Group M for humans", Clinical Infectious Diseases, Vol. 32, 2001, pp. 1068-1984. A detailed rebuttal of the claims in Edward Hooper's The River. This is almost the same paper as published in the Royal Society meeting proceedings.
Billi Goldberg and Raphael B. Stricker, "Bridging the gap: human diploid cell strains and the origin of AIDS", Journal of Theoretical Biology, Vol. 204, 2000, pp. 497-503. The hypothesis that polio vaccine produced using human cells was responsible for AIDS.
Brian Martin, "Political refutation of a scientific theory: the case of polio vaccines and the origin of AIDS", Health Care Analysis, Vol. 6, 1998, pp. 175-179. How legal action and editorial decisions mean that the published record gives the misleading impression that the polio-vaccine-AIDS theory has been refuted.
Brian Martin, "Sticking a needle into science: the case of polio vaccines and the origin of AIDS", Social Studies of Science, Vol. 26, No. 2, May 1996, pp. 245-276. A personal account of how the author as a social scientist intervened in the debate over the polio-vaccine-AIDS theory.
Blaine F. Elswood and Raphael B. Stricker, "Polio vaccines and the origins of AIDS", Medical Hypotheses, vol. 42, 1994, pp. 347-354 and Correspondence, vol. 44, 1995, p. 226. This is the first major paper in the scientific literature presenting the theory. Blaine Elswood can be contacted at Blaine.Elswood@snow.edu.
W. D. Hamilton, unpublished letter to Science, 27 January 1994. Hamilton attempted to publish a letter in Science responding to Koprowski's 1992 letter. Included here is both the letter itself and Hamilton's correspondence with Science.
Brian Martin, "Polio vaccines and the origin of AIDS: the career of a threatening idea", Townsend Letter for Doctors, #126, January 1994, pp. 97-100. An account of the theory and its implications.
Rolling Stone, "'Origin of AIDS' update", 9 December 1993, p. 39. Publication of this "Clarification" was part of the settlement of Koprowski's defamation action against Rolling Stone and Tom Curtis.
Brian Martin, "Peer review and the origin of AIDS -- a case study in rejected ideas", BioScience, vol. 43, no. 9, October 1993, pp. 624-627. An account of the theory and the response to it.
B. F. Elswood and R. B. Stricker, "Polio vaccines and the origin of AIDS", Research in Virology, vol. 144, 1993, pp. 175-177. A letter to the editor presenting the theory plus a critical reply from the editorial board. Blaine Elswood can be contacted at Blaine.Elswood@snow.edu.
Louis Pascal, "Preliminary notes concerning shortcomings of a correspondence by Y. Ohta, et al.", 8 May 1993 (previously unpublished). A critique of a scientific paper cited by Koprowski and by Basilico et al. in the case against the polio-vaccine theory.
Tom Curtis, unpublished letter to Science, 30 September 1992. This letter rejected by Science was a response to Koprowski's letter in Science attacking the polio-vaccine theory.
Claudio Basilico et al., Report from the AIDS/Poliovirus Advisory Committee, 18 September 1992. Stimulated by Curtis's article in Rolling Stone, the Wistar Institute set up an independent committee to examine the theory. This is its report, which was never formally published.
Hilary Koprowski, "AIDS and the polio vaccine" (letter), Science, vol. 257, 21 August 1992, pp. 1024, 1026-1027; correction, 11 September 1992, p. 1463. This is a reply to Tom Curtis's article in Rolling Stone and is one of the few published critiques of the theory.
Raanan Gillon, "A startling 19,000-word thesis on the origin of AIDS: should the JME have published it?", Journal of Medical Ethics, vol. 18, 1992, pp. 3-4. The editor of the Journal of Medical Ethics summarises Pascal's argument, explains why JME rejected it, and notes its importance and availability.
Tom Curtis, "The origin of AIDS", Rolling Stone, Issue 626, 19 March 1992, pp. 54-59, 61, 106, 108. This article gave the theory its first wide visibility. Based on a version of the theory developed independently by Blaine Elswood, it was investigated and reported on by Tom Curtis. Tom Curtis can be contacted at tcurtis@utmb.edu.
Louis Pascal, "What happens when science goes bad", Science and Technology Analysis Working Paper #9, University of Wollongong, December 1991. This was the first major published account of the theory. Hard copies are available free from Brian Martin, bmartin@uow.edu.au, on request. Please include your postal address.
|
http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmart...ocuments/AIDS/
Another interesting "theory".........
Quote:
The Origin of AIDS and HIV May Not Be What You Have Learned
Most people believe that the origin of HIV, the AIDS virus, derives from some natural evolutionary event. Key among these HIV origin theories is the so called "cut hunter theory" in which a human, allegedly African native, received a bloody wound or infected splash while preparing a chimpanzee carrying a similar virus (i.e., SIVcpz). Most recent research, along with the scientific consensus, holds that the origin of HIV and AIDS could never have happened this way.
In 2001, The Royal Society of London's conference proceedings, which sought to determine the initial cause of AIDS and the origin of HIV, were published for the world to behold. The most highly respected scientists and academicians debated the possibility that HIV-1, the most widespread and deadly human AIDS virus, evolved from accidental vaccine contaminations and subsequent transmissions to mostly to African villagers. The oral polio vaccine (OPV) received the focus of interest here since that vaccine was partially derived from growing live polio viruses in monkey kidney cells that have historically proven to be contaminated with cancer viruses such as SV40 -- the 40th monkey virus ever discovered -- currently linked by medical scientists to widespread human cancers. By the end of the symposium, the esteemed delegates concluded the HIV origin and AIDS was not likely to have come from polio vaccine transmissions as chimpanzees were not proven to have been used during the manufacture of this vaccine.
More importantly, among the most respected of all HIV/AIDS origin theorists, the U.S. Government's chief DNA sequence analyst at the Los Alamos Laboratory in New Mexico, Dr. Gerald Myers, reported with his colleagues that the origin of HIV could not have begun with "cut hunters" or other single isolated cross species transmissions (called "zoonosis"). He reported that genetic sequencing studies prove some "punctuated origin of AIDS event" took place during the mid-1970s giving rise, virtually simultaneously, to at least ten different HIV "clades" (or genetic subtypes) associated with ten different distinguishable AIDS epidemics in Africa alone. The most likely cause of this widespread bizarre zoonosis was some man-made (i.e., iatrogenic) event involving chimpanzees, this group reckoned.
Myers and his colleagues offered the following best explanation for the origin of HIV: "It is not far-fetched," they wrote, "to imagine the ten or so clades deriving from a single animal (perhaps immunosuppressed and possessing a swarm of variants) [as might have been the case with chimpanzees used in the process of vaccine manufacture] or from a few animals that might have belonged to a single troop or might have been gang-caged together. The number of animals required is secondary to the extent of variation in the source at the time of the zoonotic or iatrogenic event. The [vaccine] hypothesis makes a case for such a punctuated origin . . ." (See: Burr T, Hyman JM and Myers G. The origin of acquired immune deficiency syndrome: Darwinian or Lamarchkian? Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B (2001) 356:877-887.)
So if chimpanzees were not used to make the polio vaccine, and therefore the origin of HIV and AIDS did not come from this vaccine nor time period (1950s-early 1960s), then what other vaccine, given during the early to mid 1970s, might have used one or more SIVcpz-infected chimpanzees in the manufacturing process?
The answer to this question was singularly advanced by a Harvard-degreed independent investigator, Dr. Leonard Horowitz in the award winning book Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola -- Nature, Accident or Intentional? (Tetrahedron Press, 1998; 1-888-508-4787; http:www.tetrahedron.org) Dr. Horowitz unearthed and reprinted stunning scientific documents and National Institutes of Health contracts proving that chimpanzees, contaminated with numerous viruses, were used to produce hundreds of hepatitis B vaccine doses administered to central African Blacks along with homosexual men in New York City at precisely the time Dr. Myers and colleagues claim the origin of HIV "punctuated event" occurred.
Unfortunately, as another Royal Society conference presenter, Dr. Julian Cribb, protested, too little attention is given by drug-industry-influenced medical journals, and the mainstream media, to controversial truths in science regarding the origin of HIV and AIDS. (See: Cribb J. The origin of acquired immune deficiency syndrome: can science afford to ignore it? Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond B (2001) 356:935-938.) As a result, documents such as those published by Dr. Horowitz, and others, showing AIDS apparently derives from contaminated hepatitis B vaccines, have never received adequate attention.
|
http://www.originofaids.com/
But of course this is all just the product of over active imaginations & has no basis in fact.......the paranoia section is so appropriate.....(insert sarcasm....)
Any thoughts??? Sarcastic or pseudo-witty comments??? Idiotic U tube videos??? 
__________________
Syriana...have you ever tried liquid MDMA?....Liquid MDMA? No....Arash, when you wanna do this?.....After prayer...
|
12-06-2007, 07:03 AM
