Origin of HIV/Aids

The Origin of HIV (the “AIDS Virus”)

An honest investigation into the Origin of HIV/AIDS reveals that only one theory meets all the known facts but the medical establishment is avoiding any mention of it.

I have had cause recently to search the Internet to see what was being said about the origin of a disease which has caused millions of deaths, most especially among the poorer peoples of Africa and South East Asia, and as a result is having disastrous affects on economies and societies. To my astonishment, the most obvious explanation – one which I came to at least 15 years ago – is not mentioned anywhere. This is political correctness taken to the most ludicrous extreme. We have here an international medical crisis of the utmost gravity which should be discussed openly with all the relevant facts included and conclusions should be drawn on that basis.

To exclude certain possibilities because a certain section of the community would be “offended” and because it is not “politically correct” is to fly in the face of all the accepted criteria of scientific investigation. One should always seek the truth, whatever it may be. Avoiding the truth because it is unwelcome or uncomfortable for whatever reason is totally irrational and does a disservice to medicine, science, and humanity.

Definitions

HIV stands for Human Immunodeficiency Virus. It is a virus, like many others (to be precise a retrovirus) but it has a unique ability to attack the very mechanism – the immune system - which is designed to protect the human body from outside attack – put at its simplest, the white T-cells in the blood. Thus HIV does not itself damage or kill humans, but it leaves them defenceless against attack by other organisms.

·	HIV+ (or HIV positive) indicates a person who has the virus. They may not be suffering any affects.

AIDS stands for Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome. This was the name first given when it was discovered that some people were dying from various, often unusual, conditions because their immune systems had been destroyed. “Acquired” because it was recognised from the start that these people had “picked up” something or other that had destroyed immune systems that were originally quite normal. The term remains as the one universally used to describe an immune system badly damaged by HIV and therefore no longer able to ward off disease. Thus, one can be HIV+ but not suffering from AIDS.

Early History of the Epidemic

It so happens that I remember reading of the progress of this epidemic from the very start, although it was not until 1986 that I had reason to look at the subject more closely. The following summary from a BBC website is pretty good although the exact timescale is not too clear. The italics are my insertions.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1981: Mystery disease kills homosexuals
A mysterious epidemic, which has been discovered in homosexual men, is causing increasing concern in the United States. The unknown condition, which consists of two separate diseases - a form of pneumonia and skin cancer, has been found in 180 patients in 15 states since last July (but as I remember it, California was the first state to experience this problem).

It has claimed around 75 lives so far in the US and up to 92% of the victims are homosexual men. One death has been reported from the virus in London. Although doctors have identified what appears to be a new disease, they have yet to devise a cure (nor a cause).

The epidemic is being investigated by the Centre for Disease Control in Atlanta. The specialist unit has already discovered the causes of two other diseases, the toxic shock syndrome and Legionnaires' disease. Dr James Curran, who is investigating the condition, said: "It is a very serious problem and it does not seem to be on the wane." (boy, what an understatement that turned out to be)

Three studies in the New England Journal of Medicine show that the immune systems of victims are severely weakened, leaving them vulnerable to serious infections from germs which most people normally shrug off. Homosexuals who have developed either of the two conditions have shown a low resistance to standard tests on their immune system. Four victims also had rare skin ulcers normally caused by the herpes simplex virus. Researchers claim that their findings are "part of a nationwide epidemic of immunodeficiency among male homosexuals".

Doctors are unsure of the cause of the epidemic which is carried in semen and other body secretions. A study at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) suggests that homosexuals may be repeatedly infected with the virus. One case also involved an intravenous drug user which implies that the disease could be spread by sharing needles.

The unknown condition was eventually named as Aids (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome) virus.

The disease caused widespread panic in the United States where 4,000 people were infected in the space of two years. During that time it also became apparent that the epidemic was not restricted to homosexuals. Cases of Aids were also discovered among heterosexuals, drug users and blood transfusion patients. (this was because some men were bisexual and contracted the virus homosexually but then passed it on to women; moreover homosexuals were major blood donors for which in the United States they were paid [in Britain payment for blood donation has never been practised, but HIV-infectedblood products from the US were given to British haemophiliacs with disastrous results])

The virus which was isolated as the cause of the disease was called Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and it was first discovered in 1983. (previous to this, the existence of a virus cause was suspected and there was a race between French and US researches to identify it. There is still argument as to which group won the race).

Around 24 million people (this is the 2004 figure) have died from Aids since it first emerged and it is the leading cause of death in sub-Saharan Africa. There is still no cure for the disease despite numerous trials in North America, Europe and Thailand. (the number living with HIV is estimated at about 40 million, but the number could be much, much larger as many do not show symptoms until they have been HIV+ for ten years).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You will note that this summary does not mention Sub-Saharan Africa until the last paragraph where it suddenly appears as the worst hit area. Let me fill in the gap.

When I first went live in Zambia (south-central Africa) in 1983 at just about the time the virus was first identified, no-one thought that AIDS was a problem in Africa at all. Why should it be? This was a disease which for some reason attacked active homosexuals and drug-injectors and both of these were rare in Africa. Drugs there were, but not usually injected. Homosexual activity was illegal and culturally disapproved, and very secretive, and therefore a rarity and involving few partners.

During 1984-5 it gradually became clear that something very dire was happening In Uganda in particular; quite possibly in next door Eastern Zaire (Congo) also but conditions there were in a constant state of chaos anyway, so facts were more difficult to establish. It was only in 1985 that it was established that the sudden rise in debilitating disease and deaths in Uganda was due to the same HIVirus that had hit the USA. At the same time, the spread of the problem into other African nations was being recorded.

This in turn lead to the realisation that heterosexual sex could be a far more potent method of dissemination than had previously been realised.- long-distance truck drivers, prostitutes, and malnourished populations being major factors.

In Zambia, there were two significant events in 1986. Testing of blood for transfusions was begun for the first time in June of that year and the 30-year-old son of the then President Kaunda died of AIDS. Most of the blood for transfusions in Zambia comes from the prisons and the incidence of HIV infection once testing began was reputed to be about 30%. That was some “double whammy” because until then even the best hospitals, owned by the mines and run at European standards, had been giving untested blood; and the death of such a prominent figure brought the problem to sudden attention.

I might add that as I was myself in hospital with malaria in 1985 and as some malaria patients need transfusions, I came perilously close to infection myself. It should be remembered that the blood received in a transfusion is not all from one donor, so only a small percentage of infected donors can lead to ALL the blood given being infected. So here was yet another agency which had led to the very rapid spread of the virus throughout Sub-Saharan Africa.

Then, of course, began the process of “tracking back” to find out when and where the virus originated from in Africa. The irrefutable conclusion was that AIDS appeared in the Uganda-Eastern Congo area at exactly the same time as in the USA. This was acknowledged as a fact beyond doubt in the prestigious “Scientific American” magazine in a March 1996 article "The African AIDS Epidemic.”

The Pathological Origins of HIV

Some time in the late ‘80’s researchers established that the Human Immunodefiency Virus was closely related to the Simian Immunodefiency Virus (Simian refers to primates – monkeys and apes). Strains of this virus are present among chimpanzees in Eastern Congo and green monkeys in a more distant westerly part of that country. The SIV does not have the same devastating effect on its hosts as does SIV on humans, but the geographical proximity plus the pathological proximity leads to the obvious conclusion that somehow SIV made the “species barrier leap” that involved it mutating in such a way that it became viable and infectious in humans.

It should be fully understood that such “species barrier leaps” are very rare and only occur in special and unusual circumstances, for most bacteria and viruses are specific to a particular species, and the necessary co-incidence of the precise mutation and the opportunity to attach to a new host are statistically very low. As I write (October 2005) the world is “threatened by a pandemic of avian ‘flu,” according to the media hype. The facts are that a new strain of an influenza virus that has long existed in birds, has appeared and proved itself able to infect humans also – but so far only those who have been working closely with infected birds. In other words, it can affect humans if they breathe in a huge amount of virus over a sustained period.

This new strain appeared about two years ago in South East Asia, has spread very widely among domestic and wild birds, but it has killed only 60 people. This because it has not made the second part of the species leap – it has not enabled itself to pass from human to human. It is feared that it might do in the future, but only if someone is infected directly from infected birds and AT THE SAME TIME catches “human ‘flu.” In that case, it is thought possible that the two viruses might in some way combine their characteristics to become a virus that can pass from human to human. It would have to take from the avian virus the elements that make it particularly virulent, and take from the human virus the elements that make it able to survive and multiply in humans. It could then become very dangerous and create a pandemic because the human immune system would have less than normal resistance.

It might yet happen, but you can see how unlikely it is. Indeed, if humans don’t work with infected birds, it can’t happen.

If we now return to the HIvirus, we immediately see that we have to explain a triple process – mutation to a more virulent strain of SIV, access to humans, further mutation to a form that will pass from human to human. We can see that the first process did occur and how the second process has operated in avian ‘flu because there are many millions of people in constant and close proximity to domestic fowl in the Far East, and we can see how the third process might occur because humans already carry a related virus that might lead to some combination.

The factors do not apply in the case of SIV-HIV. There are not millions of people working in close contact with infected primates, indeed very few working with any primates, and there is no virus previously present in humans which could have combined with SIV.

So how did it happen?

(I should at this point say that the SIV-HIV explanation is almost universally accepted – almost but not quite. There are a few who deny this pathological origin and put forward a more sinister origin in the deliberate planning of malignant human minds. These are the conspiracy theorists as explained below).

THE COMMON CURRENT EXPLANATIONS

I have found that there are currently two generic explanations, each with variations.

1.	The SIV-HIV leap. There are four main variations, none of which explain the historical facts.

2.	The Conspiracy Theories which accuse various agencies of the US Government of creating the virus either deliberately or accidentally and spreading it among humans in various ways.

The SIV-HIV Leap Theories (of which there seem to be four)

(a)

has some of the elements of a conspiracy theory but it is alleged that it was done by accident. “The OPV theory proposes that HIV-1 crossed via an oral polio vaccine (OPV) called CHAT that was prepared in chimpanzee cells and administered to nearly one million "volunteers" in central Africa (the Belgian Congo and Ruanda-Urundi) in the late 1950s. The main problem here is that the leading scientists who prepared CHAT vaccine and who helped organise the African vaccination trials (Hilary Koprowski, Stanley Plotkin and Paul Osterrieth) deny that they used chimp cells to prepare the vaccine. (Koprowski and Plotkin were based at the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia, while Osterrieth headed the virology lab at the Laboratoire Medical de Stanleyville in the Belgian Congo, the headquarters of the African CHAT operation. All three men also conducted research at the nearby chimpanzee camp at Lindi, where up to 600 chimps were housed, nearly 400 of which were "used" during the polio research.)” from http://www.aidsorigins.com/badscience/bm7b.shtml

This theory dates from as early as 1987 and is still going strong, with a recent film made on the subject. In fact there is considerable and rancorous dispute (to put it mildly) over what records of the research are available and how accurate they are and over exactly what the chimps were used for, but “the main problem” is twofold – why the disease did not appear for 20 years – it appears to be true that “no stored human-tissue samples taken from Africans during the 1970s are hiv-positive," - nor does it explain how AIDS appeared simultaneously among African heterosexuals and American homosexuals.

(b) The “bushmeat” theory. This postulates that some hunter killed chimpanzees and in skinning and butchering the carcasses blood from his prey mingled with his own in a cut hand. I believe that I am correct in saying that it has never been shown that HIV has passed even from human to human in this way, so for SIV to mutate to HIV at that point is beyond reasonable belief. It also fails on the transmission to US homosexuals question. Nor could it be explained why this did not happen until the late 1970’s; why not at any time in the previous 5,000 years?

[c ] and (d) are mere variations of (b) in an attempt to explain how certain modern conditions overcome the 5000 year problem suggested above, but lack both evidence and credibility and they still fail to explain both the simultaneous appearance in the USA and the absence of HIV in pre-1980 stored human tissue.

There are various other claims and counterclaims that do not amount to separate theories. It is astonishing that there is so much contradiction over matters that should be easily established matters of fact. At http://www.bigbendcares.org/origins.shtml we find the following, which amounts to a variation of (a): “The findings of this 10-year long research into the origin and evolution of HIV by Paul Sharp of Nottingham University and Beatrice Hahn of the University of Alabama were published in 2003. They concluded that wild chimps became infected simultaneously with two simian immunodeficiency viruses (SIVs) which had "viral sex" to form a third virus capable of infecting humans and causing AIDS.

“Professor Sharp and his colleagues discovered that the chimp virus was an amalgam of the SIV infecting red-capped mangabeys and the virus found in greater spot-nosed monkeys. They believe that the hybridisation took place inside chimps that had become infected with both strains of SIV after hunting and killing the two smaller species of monkey. It has been known for a long time that certain viruses can pass from animals to humans, and this process is referred to as zoonosis.

“The researchers concluded that HIV could have crossed over from chimpanzees as a result of a human killing a chimp and eating it for food.” The great problem with this is that it postulates that three times the retrovirus has been passed to another species in the process of digestion, but there exists no evidence that I have ever seen that this is possible. HIV is known to pass in the same species (human) only directly into the blood, through sexual intercourse (and maybe blood has to be involved here), and through mother’s milk. It is true that the latter means that the virus is initially introduced into the digestive system, but that in a baby, designed only to absorb milk, is very different to that in an adult. There is simply no evidence that a retrovirus of this kind can be passed on through the digestion of meat – even in the same species, let alone making at the same time a species leap. It should be pointed out that in Britain “mad cow disease” (BSE) (variant CJD in humans) which was contracted in this way is not a virus at all, but a prion protein. Even in this case, there have been very few transfers despite an enormous consumption of infected beef during the period of official denial.

The Conspiracy Theories

have a number of forms but the central idea is that laboratories in the USA owned or funded by various Government Agencies deliberately or accidentally produced the HIVirus by artificial means. A favourite suggested means of spreading the disease was contaminated smallpox vaccine (not polio vaccine this time) which was widely distributed in Africa 1960-1977 by the WHO (World Health Organisation) and led to the elimination of that disease.

At http://aidsbiowar.com/page2.htm we read, “There is in fact a mass of circumstantial and scientific evidence that proves absolutely that American gays and black Africans were targeted for genocide via vaccine programs by America's military-medical-industrial complex and agents of the CIA.” It considers the WHO to have been a knowing part of this conspiracy, but it gives no clue as to the motive for this mass murder and genocide. Neither does it explain how a vaccine which was administered to whole populations in Africa was also given exclusively to “gays” in America, and the timing contradicts the statement on the same page, ““no stored human-tissue samples taken from Africans during the 1970s are hiv-positive.”

Boyd E. Graves in http://www.boydgraves.com/timeline/ produces a long history starting with the 1878 Federal Quarantine Act in the US and claiming to show a step by step Government plan to develop a disease which would selectively wipe-out black populations. It’s early success was the development of the mycoplasma in 1889, which led 88 years later (1977) to a stock pile of “15,000 gallons of AIDS” (whatever that means). He also claims the smallpox vaccine as the carrier although the programme ended that year. He does try to explain the “US-gays” dimension by also claiming that the virus was put into an experimental Hepatitis B vaccine administered in Manhattan. Why something designed to depopulate negroid races should be given to the general population in Manhattan, and how this led to the first appearance of AIDS amongst white homosexual males on the West Coast are questions not addressed.

Canadian medical campaigner Donald W. Scott in another long, and rather persuasive, story at http://www.consumerhealth.org/articles/display.cfm?ID=20000830164126 considerably widens the malign effects of the mycoplasma. He says, “According to Dr. Shyh-Ching Lo, one of America's top, top researchers, this disease agent, the mycoplasma, causes among other things, AIDS, chronic fatigue syndrome, multiple sclerosis, Wegener's disease, Parkinson's disease, Crohn's colitis, Type I diabetes, and collagen-vascular diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and Alzheimer's,” (and later on Gulf War Syndrome) depending, apparently, on the strength of the dose received. He links this in, somehow, with the brucellosis bacteria, or an artificially mutated form of it, “brucellosis toxin in crystalline form” used in bombs during the Korean War, and claims that it, and other carcinogenic chemicals, were tested by seeding from the air over Canadian and US cities and by infected mosquitoes released in Florida causing multiple sclerosis and myalgic encephalomyelitis (acute fatigue syndrome.) He claims that the HIV was deliberately created as a part of this long-term programme and sent to Africa in the smallpox vaccine; “Five years after receiving this smallpox vaccination, 60% of them were suffering from AIDS,” and it was all “for the purpose of population control.”
But, again, there is no mention of why it first appeared, not in East Africa, but in California exclusively amongst homosexual men.

You know, I would love to believe all this stuff; I certainly believe that the USA is the greatest threat to world peace and stability, and even possibly to the survival of civilisation. I also accept that it has many shady agencies and off-shoots which evade any proper political control, but even I cannot bring myself to swallow all this. There are too many unanswered questions, too many apparently unconnected bits of information thrown together to make a case.

The Most Likely Explanation

So after all this where have we got to? Let’s sum up.

Pathologically, the species leap from some form of SIV to HIV seems to have the greatest supporting evidence, but the theories generally put forward to explain the species leap fail completely to meet all the historical facts.

Even the wacky conspiracy theories, which don’t postulate a species leap, fail to explain the dual initial incidence of HIV over 9,000 miles apart and why it was a heterosexual disease in one place and a homosexual disease in the other.

So, let us look more closely at how we know HIV is transmitted. Basically the means are direct insertion into the blood stream – transfusion or injection needles – by mother’s milk, or by sexual intercourse. Of course, the latter is by far the most common and potent.

We also know that transmission is far more likely by anal intercourse. This is because the anus is not biologically designed for intercourse. The female vagina is so designed with thick mucous to protect the vagina wall and an acid environment which kills a lot of sperm and the seminal liquid. The wall of the anus, lacking these, is very easily torn in intercourse. Moreover the presence of infected faeces in the anal tract adds to the likelihood of transmission of virus.

We should add the facts that the vagina’s protection can and is broken down by very frequent and rough intercourse, by the presence of other sexually transmitted diseases such as syphilis, gonorrhoea, and clamydia, and by malnutrition. All of these factors apply to many poor African prostitutes. This is why they are known to be a major factor in the heterosexual transmission of HIV through Africa.

But how could SIV pass to humans and become HIV? And how did it then pass at the same time to homosexual men only in California. The only theory that easily meets all the known facts is the following:

An actively homosexual man from the USA, probably from California, visited Uganda or East Congo in the later 70’s and had anal sex with a chimpanzee or green monkey. Probably the animal would have to be sedated, but that would not be difficult. We know that such practices do occur. This would create the circumstance in which the SIV could transfer and also mutate. Possibly there were other STD pathogens such as those listed above already present in this man and which would assist the mutation. This man then paid poor and desperate men in the area to allow themselves to be subjected to anal sex. We also know that this happens. These men were normally heterosexual and soon passed the retrovirus on to local prostitutes. Once that happened, the floodgates were opened ..... Meanwhile the original host of the newly mutated retrovirus HIV went home to the United States with its thriving and rampantly promiscuous “gay community” and passed it on to many “partners,” opening another floodgate....

This scenario explains a) how the SIV-HIV species leap could happen and b) how the disease erupted from two far distant epicentres at the same time and c) why it was originally heterosexual at one centre and homosexual at the other. None of the other theories, even the conspiracy theories, explain ALL of these factors. In fact, this has been the “blooming obvious” explanation for at least 15 years but, as I said at the beginning, the medical and political establishment are afraid to say so because the homosexual propaganda lobby is very powerful and very spiteful in its pursuit of those it deems its enemies.

The investigation here is not motivated in any way by “homophobic” prejudice, it is merely an investigation of all the known facts and the proposal of a conclusion which meets those facts.

However, it certainly illustrates the principle that we humans ignore the basics of human biology at our peril. Anal intercourse is unnatural because the pathology is not designed for it, nor has it any biological purpose, and therefore it brings about physical, mental, and emotional damage. But also heterosexual intercourse with many and frequent partners spreads diseases and causes emotional damage because the human body and psyche are not designed for it. Cows are not designed to be carnivorous, so feeding them ground up sheep led to them contracting BSE which in turn led to variant CJE in humans. There are two needs, in addition to sustenance and warmth, that are necessary for children - love and play. Children brought up without them tend to be inadequate and warped humans. Animals produced by a cloning process turn out not to be normal, healthy, and reproductive but subject to faulty pathology. Many of the proposals for genetic engineering are likely to have the same unexpected and unpredictable results.

This is all of one pattern – we tamper with the proper order of God’s creation (or of Nature if you prefer) at our peril and the ills unleashed by just one person ignoring this principle can fall in fury upon millions.