I have a potential issue in my family

[crashtestdummy]

It doesn't make sense. HIV is considered a new disease but Africans have been eating bushmeat since forever. If they've been eating it for tens of thousands of years then HIV should've been far more prevalent than it is today or even 100 years ago when people believe it came onto the scene.

A few things changed:

1) More urban environments mean that a disease that before might have been limited to a small village somewhere now has the chance to spread.

2) The increased presence of other STDs that create genital ulcers that make transmission far easier. These came from increases in trade and especially the European presence. Disease transmission was one of the earliest consequences of globalization.

In order to become HIV, people had to acquire SIV through bushmeat. It's thought that this has been happening for a long time, but that SIV isn't nearly as virulent in humans. Then, the SIV needs to be transmitted around a human population rapidly enough that it is able to remain active and slowly mutate into a form that is more effective in humans.

What's most impressive is that it looks like this has actually happened twice. HIV-1, the one that we know of in this country, comes from chimps while HIV-2 comes from sooty mangabeys.

 

[Locut0s]

A few things changed:

1) More urban environments mean that a disease that before might have been limited to a small village somewhere now has the chance to spread.

2) The increased presence of other STDs that create genital ulcers that make transmission far easier. These came from increases in trade and especially the European presence. Disease transmission was one of the earliest consequences of globalization.

In order to become HIV, people had to acquire SIV through bushmeat. It's thought that this has been happening for a long time, but that SIV isn't nearly as virulent in humans. Then, the SIV needs to be transmitted around a human population rapidly enough that it is able to remain active and slowly mutate into a form that is more effective in humans.

What's most impressive is that it looks like this has actually happened twice. HIV-1, the one that we know of in this country, comes from chimps while HIV-2 comes from sooty mangabeys.

Nice review. I've read up on this before.

 

[zinfamous]

I was having a beer with my uncle. He has a son that's 15 or 16. He's complaining that his son is gay.
"He's too big to be gay" --he says

"I'm going to beat the gayness out of him" --he says

"Poppy's rolling in his grave right now. Why did he choose to be gay?" --he says

I don't know what it was (maybe the beer?) but I was laughing so hard that I didn't take it seriously. But I think he's serious. My wife is appalled that I found it funny but I don't want to educate my uncle on something like this. It's not my place, I think.

EDIT: Even if I could say something I wouldn't know what to say. I don't have any gay friends but my female cousin does and she says that those who grew up with hostile parents usually end up addicted to drugs. My wife is pushing me to intervene but this is very uncomfortable for me.

Nothing you can say.

if your uncle actually loves his son, then he will come around and accept who is son is.

If he doesn't, then he will continue being doucheface McGee.

 

[zinfamous]

A few things changed:

1) More urban environments mean that a disease that before might have been limited to a small village somewhere now has the chance to spread.

2) The increased presence of other STDs that create genital ulcers that make transmission far easier. These came from increases in trade and especially the European presence. Disease transmission was one of the earliest consequences of globalization.

In order to become HIV, people had to acquire SIV through bushmeat. It's thought that this has been happening for a long time, but that SIV isn't nearly as virulent in humans. Then, the SIV needs to be transmitted around a human population rapidly enough that it is able to remain active and slowly mutate into a form that is more effective in humans.

What's most impressive is that it looks like this has actually happened twice. HIV-1, the one that we know of in this country, comes from chimps while HIV-2 comes from sooty mangabeys.

One thing Dad and I were discussing last night, was the early days of the Polio vaccine, and the Belgian medical influence in what was then the Belgian Congo.

It appears that much of that virus for the vaccine was grown via monkey liver--the head micro biologist has denied this, repeatedly and into the grave, though many of the technicians working on that project have provided detailed accounts of how they kept live monkeys for tissue culture and were chopping up liver and kidney on a daily basis.

This went on for years.

Eradicate Polio = create HIV.

....win? :hmm:

probably debunked?

http://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/debunked-polio-vaccine-and-hiv-link

 

[maziwanka]

appreciate the well thought out and informative responses from crashtestdummy, especially as a response to some of the more ignorant posts i've read in a while on this forum

 

[zinfamous]

In that situation, both are bigots.

Respect has to go both ways. You expect the uncle to respect his sons sexual preference, but you would not respect the uncles opinion?

That is like the pot calling the kettle black.

lol. I always love this argument.

Oh wait..no I don't. it's patently stupid.

 

[Locut0s]

lol. I always love this argument.

Oh wait..no I don't. it's patently stupid.

It's like asking someone to respect the views of a Neo Nazi who is abusing his adopted Jewish son.

"You want us to respect the views of the Jewish son but you would not respect the uncles view that he's less than a dog turd."

Umm... yeah...

 

[crashtestdummy]

Nice review. I've read up on this before.

appreciate the well thought out and informative responses from crashtestdummy, especially as a response to some of the more ignorant posts i've read in a while on this forum

Thanks. :$ I sometimes feel as if I'm howling at the moon with these posts, so I'm glad some people find them useful.

 

[crashtestdummy]

One thing Dad and I were discussing last night, was the early days of the Polio vaccine, and the Belgian medical influence in what was then the Belgian Congo.

It appears that much of that virus for the vaccine was grown via monkey liver--the head micro biologist has denied this, repeatedly and into the grave, though many of the technicians working on that project have provided detailed accounts of how they kept live monkeys for tissue culture and were chopping up liver and kidney on a daily basis.

This went on for years.

Eradicate Polio = create HIV.

....win? :hmm:

probably debunked?

http://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/debunked-polio-vaccine-and-hiv-link

The vaccine hypothesis, on the face of it, isn't entirely implausible. That particular vaccine was live, so if the tissue were infected, there is a chance the vaccine serum could be contaminated. Evidence points away from it in this case, though.

That review that I linked previously explains it better than I can, but it seems like HIV likely began before 1940. There are no reported cases from that early, but it is possible to estimate how long ago HIV must have started by measuring the genetic diversity, and using the known rate of mutation to trace the time to a "common ancestor". This is the same approach that tells us that the common genetic ancestor of humans and apes split about 8 million years ago.

There is also some regional inconsistency. Namely, HIV-1M (the most common category) most closely resembles SIV from a subspecies of chimp different from that used in the vaccine trials, indicating that it probably didn't come from the vaccine.

 

[AreaCode707]

Thanks. :$ I sometimes feel as if I'm howling at the moon with these posts, so I'm glad some people find them useful.

And interesting. I haven't done much research on the history of HIV so it's fascinating to read your commentary. Thanks for the writeup!

What's your background, btw? Is medical research a hobby or profession?

 

[crashtestdummy]

And interesting. I haven't done much research on the history of HIV so it's fascinating to read your commentary. Thanks for the writeup!

What's your background, btw? Is medical research a hobby or profession?

YHPM. I enjoy my anonymity too much to divulge too many details here, but my research is only tangentially related to epidemiology (I'm more interested in biomolecular interactions). The biggest advantage I have, though, is access to the literature out there. It's really a shame that scientific journals aren't more accessible. I feel like open access would really do a lot to quell the insecurities people have about science.

 

[Dari]

YHPM. I enjoy my anonymity too much to divulge too many details here, but my research is only tangentially related to epidemiology (I'm more interested in biomolecular interactions). The biggest advantage I have, though, is access to the literature out there. It's really a shame that scientific journals aren't more accessible. I feel like open access would really do a lot to quell the insecurities people have about science.

It's not just a shame, it's a crime, IMHO. The information in the journals are given free of charge to the publishers. Then the publishers turn around and sell it to the public. All these research, at least the ones that are given federal grant, should be freely accessible online.

 

[Gibsons]

The vaccine hypothesis, on the face of it, isn't entirely implausible. That particular vaccine was live, so if the tissue were infected, there is a chance the vaccine serum could be contaminated. Evidence points away from it in this case, though.

That review that I linked previously explains it better than I can, but it seems like HIV likely began before 1940. There are no reported cases from that early, but it is possible to estimate how long ago HIV must have started by measuring the genetic diversity, and using the known rate of mutation to trace the time to a "common ancestor". This is the same approach that tells us that the common genetic ancestor of humans and apes split about 8 million years ago.

There is also some regional inconsistency. Namely, HIV-1M (the most common category) most closely resembles SIV from a subspecies of chimp different from that used in the vaccine trials, indicating that it probably didn't come from the vaccine.

Also, the original vaccine stocks are still around and have been tested for HIV, all negative.
http://www.nature.com/nature/links/010426/010426-4.html

New evidence from three separate laboratories pours cold water on claims that contaminated polio vaccines may have introduced the AIDS virus into humans. It was suggested that chimpanzee kidney cultures allegedly used in the preparation of oral polio vaccine stocks used in Africa during the late 1950s could have introduced a precursor of HIV-1 into humans. But now PCR amplification of frozen samples of the suspect vaccine has failed to reveal any HIV-1-related nucleic acids or chimpanzee mitochondrial DNA. In addition the evidence points to the use of macaque monkey cells, rather than chimpanzee in the vaccines in question. And finally, a phylogenetic study of modern HIV-1 strains identifies the last common ancestor of HIV-1 group M as a virus present in a human host, rather than as a single transfer from another primate.

 

[mikeymikec]

So you admit that HIV is considered a "gay disease"? Can you prove that it came from eating "bushmeat"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV#Origins

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

I think all guys have doubts about their heterosexuality at some time in their life. Especially the times they're touching another guy's penis.