Polio vaccines and the origin of AIDS

[Elysian]

HIV in humans developed from contaminated polio vaccines?

A highly interesting theory!

 

The scientific community has rejected this theory, not because (according to me that is) they have solid proof that contradicts it, but rather because scientist tend to back one another up and now in particular when the advocates of the theory was first introduced by laymen.

 

It doesn’t take a scientist to come to the conclusion, based on the circumstances, that maybe there could be a link between the polio vaccine and the emergence of HIV among humans. Nonetheless, to test the hypothesis requires scientific investigation. This has the scientific community uncared for until a highly respected biologist considered that the probability for when the polio vaccine first developed and where the HIV first appeared, to be merely a coincidence is almost equal to zero.

 

This man died before any tests were made, but to honour his memory a test was made, and it was done on a US-made vaccine, not African! Shouldn’t it have been more relevant to test the African-made vaccine?? And by this non-satisfactory test they concluded that the Polio vaccine did not give rise to the HIV epidemic.

 

Why are the scientists so reluctant to properly investigate this theory? Are they afraid of the outcome that it could be so that one of the worst epidemics is caused by a scientist?

 

I'm not saying that the theory is true, but I think it raises some interesting questions.

 

More information about this 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.

 

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 publicised 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."

http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/dissent/documents/AIDS/

[Shirwac]

Good article, making you wonder doesn't it.

This guy will give you more details about the genesis and purpose of the virus. http://www.boydgraves.com/ he would be believable if he didn't sell the information too bad.

[Paragon]

Elysian - This seems to be the era of theoretical speculation, but so far (and judging from the timing and location where first HIV case appeared) the connection of polio-vaccine and the appearance of HIV seems plausible. If future scientific tests, done ethically and professionally, prove the existence of such a connection then the moral implications alone (on the west) will be huge. Questions such as, what sort of a people are they, will arise. But I doubt the likelihood of such test results becoming public knowledge, even if they were to exist.

 

Let us hope the tests are carried out sooner than later.

[Elysian]

Shirwac, thank you for the link. I have just glanced through Boyd Graves homepage. He claims that the HIV virus was developed by scientists with the aim to minimize the black population. I find this assertion to be a bit thick. I know history have shown us how cruel scientists can be, but I don’t think they can be that unintelligent. You simply cannot control how virus spread or mutate, and you simply don’t design something deadly you won’t be able to master.

 

Jamaal11, I agree with you, if this turns out to be true the consequences are immense. When so much is at stake, every effort will be made to oppose any further investigations.