Who,when & where does AIDS virus took birth.?This is a pet topic of mine...
The origin of AIDS and HIV has puzzled scientists ever since the illness first came to light in the early 1980s. For over twenty years it has been the subject of fierce debate and the cause of countless arguments, with everything from a promiscuous flight attendant to a suspect vaccine program being blamed. So what it the truth? Just where did AIDS come from?
The first 'officially recognized' cases of "AIDS" occurred in the USA in the early 1980s (the real origin was later recognized to be Africa and a lot earlier than 1980). A number of gay men in New York and San Francisco suddenly began to develop rare opportunistic infections and cancers that seemed stubbornly resistant to any treatment. At this time, AIDS did not yet have a name, but it quickly became obvious that all the men were suffering from a common syndrome. The discovery of HIV, the Human Immunodeficiency Virus that causes AIDS was made soon after. While some were initially resistant to the connection (and indeed remain so today), there is now clear evidence to prove that HIV does cause AIDS. So, in order to find the source of AIDS, it is necessary to look for the origin of HIV, and find out How, When and Where HIV first began to cause disease in humans.
One theory of the origin of AIDS is that it developed in the Belgian Congo from contaminated vaccines used in the world's first mass immunization for polio. There are a number of reasons why this theory is plausible enough to be worthy of further investigation.
1. 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.
2. 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 recognized.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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 immunization.
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.
However, there has been no sustained attempt to test the theory. This could be done, for example, by testing stocks of polio vaccine for the presence of SIV. An offer to undertake tests was made as early as 1991; only in 2000 were some samples tested, and then only US-made vaccine. Another possibility would be to test stored blood samples in Africa from before 1950. If HIV is found, this would undermine the theory.
Although the theory has not been properly examined, many people seem to believe it has been refuted. Hilary Koprowski published a letter in Science in 1992 attacking the theory. In 1993, Rolling Stone, which had published a widely publicized article by Tom Curtis about the theory, published an "update", interpreted by Science as a retraction. The public record thus suggests that these contributions have been the final word.
Actually, this appearance of "refutation" was due to the exercise of power, not scientific judgement. Science refused to publish a reply to Koprowski's letter by Curtis and, later, another reply by eminent biologist W. D. Hamilton. Nature has received substantial submissions about the theory from at least six scholars but has not published any of them. Rolling Stone's "update" was the aftermath of a legal action for defamation by Koprowski against Rolling Stone and Curtis. Thus, it has been editorial prerogative and legal action that have given the impression that critics of the theory have been unanswered.
To help rectify this situation, provided here are a number of key documents presenting the theory and commenting on it. 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 theory since 1991. It is part of a page on suppression of dissent. Comments and additional contributions are welcome. It came from monkeys africa ofcourse, I dont know when,where and who braught it to america though, africans
1975ish
africa That is a matter of great debate. The most popularly accepted theory right now is that Patient 0 (the first recorded case of HIV/AIDS) contracted HIV from eating monkey meat in Africa. Unaware that he had the disease he had sex with many partners, many of whom were men (which is how it got spread so prolifically in the gay community which, at the time, was unconcerned with safer sex). This all happened sometime in the mid to late 1970s. If you mean where it originated, it is not clear I guess. But some ppl say the first cases of the disease was seen among those against whom the US used the first nuclear bomb. Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome- in early 1980s
who cant be answered as it is always misleading, in africa it orginated first is the general perception the first case was analysed in monkeys from africa, now how the hell didi it *** into human.... guesss u know..hardcore sex addicts may hav done that This question is miscategorized.
Special Education refers to the education and parenting of children with special needs. i think the scientist is working out? |
