I’d not seen this discussed before so I wanted to bring this up. I hope this is the right forum. If the mods feel it necessary, please more it. The article linked to is copywrited to the author and publisher. It’s a 3 M PDF file, but has no viruses. The link below goes to my Yahoo profile where you can open/download the file.
This file was part of my physical anthro class last semester (graduate class at Cal. State, Northridge). It discusses the 4 current theories about how the HIV virus came about. The last theory, Heart of Darkness, while sensationalistic, also meets all the citeria for the virus’s emergence. The date is right, as is the area. It also postualates a method of quick spreading and mutation.
What do you think? Is this the way HIV came about?
Contaminated polio vaccine
ii. Cut hunter
iii. Unsterilized syringes
iv. Heart of Darkness
b. Contaminated polio vaccine
i. Kidney cells from green monkeys used grow polio virus for use as a vaccine.
Experimental oral polio virus used in Africa between 1957 and 1960.
ii. They were contaminated with the virus that eventually became HIV
iii. Independently attributed to
Blaine Elsworth
Walter Kyle
iv. the main strength of this theory is that is falsifiable
This has not happened, yet
Genetic evidence doesn’t support the date,
a. HIV and SIV appear to have separated in the 1930s
Were the right monkeys in the right place at the right time?
c. Cut Hunter theory
i. Monkey meat is used as food, a hunter, butchering a carcass could infect himself with SIV.
ii. This would then be transferred via sexual contact.
iii. This theory doesn’t explain when SIV crossed into humans,
butchering monkeys is an old practice, yet HIV is a fairly new virus.
d. Unsterilized syringes
i. Proposed by Preston Marx, virologist.
ii. In the 1950s, new, plastic disposal syringes replace glass tubes used for vaccinations.
iii. Unfortunately, while they are cheap in 1st world countries, they are still expensive in 3rd world countries.
iv. Since they cannot be sterilized by heat, they are used over and over again, spreading viruses.
v. Re-used plastic syringes spread SIV and allowed it to mutate into HIV.
vi. Assumes the “Cut Hunter” theory for cross-over into humans.
vii. Allows for the idea that a single SIV infection can be fought off by the body, but repeated exposure.
viii. This allows for an environment for SIV to mutate into HIV
e. Heart of Darkness Theory
i. Based upon the book, King Leopold’s Ghost & Heart of Darkness
ii. Belgium presence in Africa
iii. Colonial practices of forced labor, poor living conditions
lack of sanitation
poor diet
hard work
iv. In an effort to control some diseases, inoculation were used, but without regard to sterilization practices.
v. This promoted the development and spread of many diseases or the creation of new ones.
vi. SIV from a handful of people could easily spread into a large population, allowing it to mutate into HIV
vii. This theory, while sensational, does account for all aspects of the disease:
Cross over between humans and simians
environment for rapid mutation and spreading.
Geographic location near the original source virus.
Four theories on how HIV crossed into humans.
Contaminated polio vaccine
Cut hunter
Unsterilized syringes
Heart of Darkness
Contaminated polio vaccine
Kidney cells from green monkeys used grow polio virus for use as a vaccine. Experimental oral polio virus used in Africa between 1957 and 1960. They were contaminated with the virus that eventually became HIV. Independently attributed to Blaine Elsworth and Walter Kyle.
Cut Hunter theory
Monkey meat is used as food, a hunter, butchering a carcass could infect himself with SIV. This would then be transferred via sexual contact. This theory doesn’t explain when SIV crossed into humansbutchering monkeys is an old practice, yet HIV is a fairly new virus.
Unsterilized syringes
Proposed by Preston Marx, virologist. In the 1950s, new, plastic disposal syringes replace glass tubes used for vaccinations. Unfortunately, while they are cheap in 1st world countries, they are still expensive in 3rd world countries. Since they cannot be sterilized by heat, they are used over and over again, spreading viruses. Re-used plastic syringes spread SIV and allowed it to mutate into HIV. Assumes the “Cut Hunter” theory for cross-over into humans. Allows for the idea that a single SIV infection can be fought off by the body, but repeated exposure. This allows for an environment for SIV to mutate into HIV.
Heart of Darkness Theory
Based upon the book, King Leopold’s Ghost & Heart of Darkness. Belgium presence in Africa. Colonial practices of forced labor, poor living conditions. lack of sanitation. poor diet. hard work. In an effort to control some diseases, inoculation were used, but without regard to sterilization practices. This promoted the development and spread of many diseases or the creation of new ones. SIV from a handful of people could easily spread into a large population, allowing it to mutate into HIV. This theory, while sensational, does account for all aspects of the disease: Cross over between humans and simians. Environment for rapid mutation and spreading. Geographic location near the original source virus.
About the monkeys, I read somewhere that the modern booming trade in medical research monkeys is responsible for increasing the contact between hunters and monkeys. Apparently it’s now possible for many people to have careers as professional monkey hunters, which was not possible before. Also they need to capture the monkey alive and undamaged and therefore will get bit and scratched, which obviously will not happen if you just shoot the monkey. Also modern highways connecting the jungle to the city have helped the volume of the monkey trade.
Just so’s you know, that article is from an issue of American Scientist published within the past year. I’ve got the issue.
I was pleased that someone had written this, because I’ve been curious about the issue. Rolling Stone had published two articles suggesting the “contamination through polio vaccine” theory, which seemed to have a lot to recommend it. Polio vaccine people denounced it as ludicrous – but woulsdn’t tell you why, and everyone acted as if the issue was settled. This article explains the facts (and points out that, while this probably isn’t the correct explanation, the issue still isn’t settled). The alternative theories that I’d heard sounded even more ludicrous, so an article that accurately explained the theories was most welcome.
American Scientist is the magazine of Sigma Xi, the national Science honor society, and isd pretty trustworthy. Great mag.
Although this may not pass as particularly convincing, it is verifiable. Search through the academic journals on the origin of HIV. The hunter infection theory is by far the most likely and is now widely accepted as the origin of HIV. All the other theories have yet to provide a sound enough explanation to be viable origin stories. The medical and research establishment accepts that hunters were contaminated with SIV and it mutated. So far everything else just doesn’t add up well enough.
As I said before, while the Heart of Darkness theory is a bit sensationalistic, it does put all the pieces together:
how SIV mutated into HIV. The living conditions in the camp were horrific. The forced innoculations without proper cleaning between patients. All of this provides the perfect environment for SIV to mutate into HIV. I’ve never heard any other theory that would account for this.
the timing is right. According to genetic analysis, SIV mutated into HIV around 1930, give or take 20 years (from 1910 to 1950). That’s right in the period when the Belgium Congo operations were working. It’s also the right place as best as we can tell for SIV to cross over and for HIV to spread out into the rest of the human population.
If anyone else has a better idea that fits all the facts, I’d love to hear it.
Do we have similar innoculation stories regarding chickenpox? Swine flu? Avian flu? Bubonic plague? Lyme disease? West Nile Virus?
Why do we need forced innoculations to “explain” a mutation from SIV to HIV? I am not claiming that the theory is worthless, but you seem to be investing it with more regard than you have so far explained.
My explanation is only a summary of what’s in the article. The mutation of SIV into HIV was caused by a variety of factors, of which the forced innoculations were only part. Poor living conditions, poor sanitation, people who were over worked and underfed. As the author states, this is a fertile breeding ground for diseases.
Add to this the forced innoculations of the working force. Those innoculations could quickly transmit the virus from one individual to the next. This would force the virus to cope with a rapidly changing environment, which is the prime force of evolution. Go and read the article, especially from page 6 onward. Jim Moore explains it very convincingly.
Interesting thread…a while back I read that the first verified case of human AUIDS/HIV was a european man, who died in 1957 (tissue samples kept in storage revealed the infection.
Of course, nobdy knew what AIDS was bbefore the 1970’s, so probably other cases had existed.
Since the AIDS virus seems to be capable of mutating rapidly , what are the chances of its evolving into a less deadly strain? It seems to me that a successful virus would be one that is less likely to kill the host animal…ths would insure the virus staying alive .
I read this Rolling Stone article YEARS ago and still remember the map included: The area of original outbreak overlayed with the area where certain batches of vaccine had been used. They matched nearly identically. I don’t think that this is the only explanation, but that map made quite an impression.
I don’t think that situation is really necessary to “force” the evolution from SIV to HIV. Both viruses mutate extremely rapidly due to the poor fidelity of reverse transcriptase. Current research shows that after a few years of infection, a single host contains a highly divergent population of viruses called quasispecies. I once read that a single HIV+ individual can have more viral diversity in HIV than the entire circulating influenza population (can’t find the cite right now. Sorry.)
Transmission studies have supported the idea that a new infection generally reflects transmission of a single donor quasispecies to the recipient. Once this virus starts to replicate, a new starburst of evolution begins in the new host, generating new quasispecies. Eric Hunter is doing excellent research in this area from a clinic in Zambia. Unfortunately, he hasn’t published this data yet. He’s also showing that there seems to be only a subpopulation of the quasispecies which are transmissable.
All of this background is leading up to this: the mutation from SIV to HIV that you are questioning probably occured in the simian host, not the human. Think about it. The virus that is transmitted (by whatever route) needs to be able to immediately replicate or it will be cleared by the immune system. So, you can factor mutation (or, more appropriately, evolutionary selection) out of your theories. That happened in the monkey.
Now, some evolution probably did occur to make the virus more transmissable and evolutionarily fit. That process would be encouraged by high risk activities, like injections with unsterile needles and generally poor living conditions. In this respect, I think the Heart of Darkness theory could play a role, possibly significant. In addition to the high risk activities you related, this type of living tends to go hand-in-hand with prostitution at the work site, then going home to the wife. This would also facilitate the spread of a new virus.
As for the polio vaccine theory, that’s been pretty much debunked. This site has more information and cites to the original articles in Nature.
And, personally, I think the “cut hunter” theory is the most likely. In my mind, there are no holes in this theory. We know SIV became HIV. We know monkey hunting occurs in most areas of Africa. We know hunters get cut from time to time. We know the virus would transmit this way. In contrast, the other theories require assumptions (i.e.- contaminated vaccines).
