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.
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.
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
Omarb332@aol.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. The
author can be contacted at <julian.cribb@nap.csiro.au>.
Edward Hooper, "The origin of HIV-1
Group M: The CHAT polio vaccine theory", paper presented at the conference on
the "Origin of HIV and Emerging Persistent Viruses", Accademia Nazionale dei
Lincei, Rome, 28 September 2001. A response to criticisms of The River,
plus new evidence.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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,
brian_martin@uow.edu.au, on request.
ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND
MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS
OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR
LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND
COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH
YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.
"A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth."
-- Albert Einstein, letter to a friend, 1901
"I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves, and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education."
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William C. Jarvis, September 28, 1820
"What's the point of vaccination if it doesn't protect you from the unvaccinated?"
-- Sandy Gottstein
"Who gets to decide what the greater good is and how many will be sacrificed to it?"