Ain't it funny how, out off all the parts of the world, the aids epidemic is devasting the sub cultural life of South Africans ...


Ain't it funny how most people that r effected by the aids virus in american are african - american women...

Ain't funny how there's been so many aids charity and outrach programs 2 raise money, yet there hasn't been a cure...

I think this is some kind of conspiracy, but that's just me
[This message was edited Mon Dec 9 10:06:27 PST 2002 by DigitalLisa]

I don't think it is funny at all.

I watched a special on TV this weekend on Aids in Africa..it is sad, it is sad no matter who is affected by Aids.. BLACK, WHITE, PUERTO RICAN, MEXICAN, CUBA, whomever.

I don't mean funny as in humor, I mean funny as in strange

I sincerely doubt that AIDS is a conspiracy. There is no way to cure it, as it is a VIRUS and viruses cannot be cured at this point.

AIDS spiralling out of control is because of a lack of education in the hardest hit countries.Nothing more, nothing less.

IceNine said:

Sometimes I think AIDS and Cancer have a cure but we'll never see it because of $$$. It all comes down to the almighty dollar.

CarrieLee said:

Cancer is much more likely to be cured than AIDS, as AIDS is caused by a virus and there are no cures for viruses. We may be able to suppress the effects of HIV and stop it from developing into AIDS, but the virus will be there, as it attaches itself to your DNA.

Not to make this a racial issue in anyway type of form, but there's alot of people whom I talked that believed aids was created by man to wipe out a certain class of people, aids came in effect by the late 70's at first it was a gay disease, i'm sorry but I'm just not falling for the aids was brought to america by moneky story ...
The goverment is not telling us the whole truth

CarrieLee said:

and the need for a natural cull of the world's population.

DigitalLisa said:

I believe aids was a goverment conspiracy from the get go and it's just now taking it's toll across the world

Thecherryloon said:

My thoughts exactly!

There is always the possibility of the military looking for a great biological weapon or something, but I sincerely doubt that the government created HIV.

Did the African government Ebola?

Did governments also create Lassa, Hanta and all the other horrible viruses out there?

IceNine said:

I can see the poin ur trying to make, but even if the militray did make it as a biological weapon, they would never have premission to use it in effect unless they had premissioni from the goverment of the united states of america.

Look, u don't get AIDS bcause u'r black, u get AIDS bcause u'r fucking without protection. That is a cultural, religious, mentality and education-problem, not a race-issue.

Btw, did u no 1 out of 3 girls in africa is sexually abused b4 puberty? And did u no there's a wide-spread blieve in South-Africa that having sex with a virgin will cure u from HIV?

Listen, I didn't say you get aids because your ur black, the point in which I'm trying to make is how it mysterioully appeared into this country, now nobody has the slightest ideal of what to do about and the most people it effect are people in the lower class urban area

DigitalLisa said:

As an organization, the military does more horrible things behind the scenes than we will ever know about. It is a FACT that the United States military has biological and chemical weapons... things such as Serin nerve gas, VX gas, anthrax, etc.

I have no doubt that the military has people working on developing new and interesting viruses and things of that nature as well... the problem with HIV is that it is a very slow-acting virus. What the military wants is a quick kill, thus they make things like Serin and VX, etc.

DigitalLisa said:

That's not a very comforting thought...

However there's no indication whatsoever HIV was some sort of 'government action', xcept of course 4 the destruction of the Rain Forest, which is the real reason 4 this disease.

SpcMs said:

yeah so that's what they say ...
I mean the goverment has so much power to do whatever they want and cover up the facts after they commited the crim, they could get away with murder and no one would ever know about it

Take John Lenon for example, he was against the war and established a anit war commity against president nixon.
When John Lenon didn't shut up after the white house warned him a little shortly within a year he was assinated .....
(ain't it funny?)

Get what I'm trying to say
[This message was edited Mon Dec 9 10:38:44 PST 2002 by DigitalLisa]
[This message was edited Mon Dec 9 14:14:29 PST 2002 by DigitalLisa]

To be honest I'm equally disgusted that Millions are going to die of famine in Ethiopa again.

you see men, women and children weak and dying of starvation.How the hell do they have the energy to produce so many children that are only going to starve to death.Why aren't they provided with birth control and education to stop this happening?

Why do they need 10 children that are going to die?


[This message was edited Mon Dec 9 10:49:08 PST 2002 by Thecherryloon]

SpcMs said:

Tragically true

It doesn't help matters when South Africa's president Thabo Mbeki has made statements that express his doubt that HIV causes AIDS.. and that have expressed his opposition to giving cheap and simple treatment to pregnant women and their babies to help prevent the transmission of the virus to newborns. His presidential advisory panel on AIDS consists of people who also don't believe that HIV causes AIDS... which of course is alarming and harmful, since they help make public health policy decisions for the country.

His policies towards this disease, (causes and treatment) have been simply pitiful.

Meanwhile 1600 people are infected with HIV everday in South Africa, if I'm not mistaken... (sigh)

It's an extremely frustrating and tragic situation...
.
[This message was edited Mon Dec 9 11:39:41 PST 2002 by Diva]

Diva said:

GODDAMN!

Diva said:

That is truly shocking and heartbreaking. However, due to the lack of education out there i believe it.

I was thinking about the morality issue...but nevermind

I'll save it for that "other" forum.
[This message was edited Mon Dec 9 11:36:53 PST 2002 by SensualMelody]

DigitalLisa said:

I cannot provide any evidence one way or another, but in my opinion, this does sound very strange.

But a ray of hope...I saw a program on Discovery that studied AIDS in Africa. What they discovered was there are certain female Africans who were immune to the HIV virus that causes AIDS. Eventhough they were constantly expose to various stains of the virus, they did not contact the disease.

AIDS will not destroy us.


.

To back up my argument I found this interesting Article, over the net that paints a better picture then I can, just how this aids virus is not only effecting the united states, but the world in general ...



Home
Search
About Avert
Donate here
What's new
Site map
Links






How many people in Africa are infected with HIV/AIDS ?



Africa continues to dwarf the rest of the world in how the region has been affected by AIDS. Africa is home to 70% of the adults and 80% of the children living with HIV in the world. The estimated number of newly infected adults and children in Africa reached 3.5 million at the end of 2001. It has also been estimated that 28.5 million adults and children were living with HIV/AIDS in Africa by the end of the year. AIDS deaths totalled 3 million globally in 2001, and of the global total 2.2 million AIDS deaths occurred in Africa.

In sub-Saharan Africa HIV is now deadlier than war itself. In 1998, 200,000 Africans died in war, but more than 2 million died of AIDS. AIDS has become a full-blown development crisis. Its social and economic consequences are felt widely not only in health but in education, industry, agriculture, transport, human resources and the economy in general.

The overall incidence of HIV infection in Africa does however now appear to be stabilising. Because the long-standing African epidemics have already reached large numbers of people whose behaviour exposes them to HIV, and because effective prevention measures in some countries have enabled people to reduce their risk of exposure, the annual number of new infections has stabilised or even fallen in many countries. These decreases have now begun to balance out the still-rising infection rates in other parts of Africa, particularly the southern part of the continent. Overall, the total of 3.5 million infected people in 2001 was slightly less than the regional total of 3.8 million in 2000. But this trend will not continue if countries such as Nigeria begin experiencing a rapid increase.

How are different countries affected?



National HIV prevalence rates vary widely between countries. They range from under 2% of the adult population in some West African countries to around 20% or more in the southern part of the continent, with countries in Central and East Africa having ates midway between these. However, prevalence rates do not convey people's lifetime risk of becoming infected and dying of AIDS. In the eight African countries where at least 15% of today's adults are infected, conservative analyses show that AIDS will claim the lives of around a third of today's 15 year olds.

Sixteen African countries south of the Sahara have more than one -tenth of the adult population aged 15-49 infected with HIV. In seven countries, all in the southern cone of the continent, at least one adult in five is living with the virus.

In Botswana a shocking 38.8 % of adults are now infected with HIV
In South Africa 20.1% of adults are infected with HIV. With a total of 5 million infected people, South Africa has the largest number of people living with HIV/AIDS in the world.

West Africa is relatively less affected by HIV infection, but the prevalence rates in some large countries are creeping up.

Côte d'Ivoire is already among the 15 worst affected countries in the world.
Nigeria, by far the most populous country in sub-Saharan Africa has, 5.8% of its adult population infected with HIV.

Infection rates in East Africa, once the highest on the continent, hover above those in the West of the continent but have been exceeded by the rates now being seen in the Southern cone.

The prevalence rate among adults in Kenya has reached double - digit figures and continues to rise. In Kenya 15% of the adult population (15-49) are living with HIV/AIDS.
More detailed HIV/AIDS statistics for individual Africa countries can be found here


What is the result of this?



Over and above the personal suffering that accompanies HIV infection wherever it strikes, the virus in sub-Saharan Africa threatens to devastate whole communities, rolling back decades of progress towards a healthier and more prosperous future.

Sub-Saharan Africa faces a triple challenge of colossal proportions:

bringing health care, support and solidarity to a growing population of people with HIV-related illness,

reducing the annual toll of new infections by enabling individuals to protect themselves and others,

coping with the cumulative impact of over 17 million AIDS deaths on orphans and other survivors, on communities, and on national development.

Millions of adults are dying young or in early middle age. They leave behind children grieving and struggling to survive without a parents care. Many of those dying have surviving partners who are themselves infected and in need of care. Their families have to find money to pay for their funerals, and employers, schools, factories and hospitals have to train other staff to replace them at the workplace.

Who is most affected? What is the effect on education?



Just as the better-educated segments of the population in the industrialised countries were the first to adopt health-conscious life-styles, a similar pattern now seems to be emerging in sub-Saharan Africa. Studies focusing on 15-19 years olds, have found that teenagers with more education are now far more likely to use condoms than their peers with lower education. They are also less likely, particularly in countries with severe epidemics, to engage in casual sex.

This was not the case early in the African epidemic. At that stage, education tended to go hand in hand with more disposable income and higher mobility, both of which increased casual sex and the risk of contracting HIV. But as information about HIV has become more widely available, education has switched from being a liability to being a shield.

The effect on education is that AIDS now threatens the coverage and quality of education. The epidemic has not spared this sector any more than it has spared health, agriculture or mining.

On the demand side, HIV is reducing the numbers of children in school. HIV positive women have fewer babies, in part because they may die before the end of their childbearing years, and up to a third of their children are themselves infected and may not survive until school age. Also, many children have lost their parents to AIDS, or are living in households which have taken in AIDS orphans, and they may be forced to drop out of school to start earning money, or simply because school fees have become unaffordable.

On the supply side, teacher shortages are looming in many African countries. In Zambia teachers are increasingly dying of AIDS and for many teachers their teaching input is decreasing because they are sick. Swaziland estimates that it will have to train more than twice as many teachers as usual over the next 17 years just to keep the services at their 1997 levels.

What is the economic impact?



It is exceptionally difficult to gauge the economic impact of the epidemic. Many factors apart from AIDS affect economic performance and complicate the task of economic forecasting - drought, internal and external conflict, corruption, economic mismanagement. Moreover, economies tend to react more dramatically to economic restructuring measures, a sudden fuel shortage, or an unexpected change of government, than to long, slow difficulties such as those wrought by AIDS.

But there is growing evidence that as HIV prevalence rates rise, both total and growth in national income - gross domestic product, or GDP -fall significantly. African countries where less than 5% of the adult population is infected will experience a modest impact on GDP growth rate. As the HIV prevalence rate rises to 20% or more, GDP growth may decline up to 2% a year.

In South Africa, the epidemic is projected to reduce the economic growth rate by 0.3-0.4 % annually, resulting by the year 2010 in a GDP 17% lower than it would have been without AIDS and wiping US$22 billion off the country's economy. Even in diamond-rich Botswana, the country with the highest per capita GDP in Africa, in the next 10 years AIDS will slice 20% off the government budget, erode development gains, and bring about a 13% reduction in the income of the poorest households.

What about prevention?



Continuing rises in the number of HIV infected people are not inevitable. Early and sustained prevention efforts can be credited with the lower rates in some countries. For example in Senegal there was effective early prevention. Uganda has brought its estimated prevalence rate down to around 8% from a peak close to 14% in the early 1990s with strong prevention campaigns, and there are encouraging signs that Zambia's epidemic may be following the course charted by Uganda.


But elsewhere, where far less has been done to encourage safer sex, the reasons for the relative stability remain obscure. Research is under way to explain the differences between epidemics in different countries. Factors that may play a role include patterns of sexual networking, levels of condom use with different partners, the availability of condoms and promptness in diagnosing and curing other sexually transmitted diseases (which if left untreated can magnify 20-fold the risk of HIV transmission through sex).

The overall provision of condoms to sub -Saharan Africa is only 4.6 per man per year, so another 1.9 billion condoms need to be provided if all countries are to have the same amount as the highest six countries in Africa. Botswana, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Togo, Congo and Kenya are supplied with about 17 condoms per man aged 15 to 59 years. It would cost an estimated $47.5 million (£34m) a year to fill the 1.9 billion condom gap excluding service delivery costs and production. Relative to the enormity of the HIV/AIDS pandemic in Africa, providing condoms is cheap and cost effective.1


However condoms are not without their drawbacks, especially in the context of a stable partnership where pregnancy is desired, or where it may be difficult for one partner to suddenly suggest using condoms. For many individuals and couples in Africa, where HIV prevalence rates are high, finding out their infection status could expand their range of HIV prevention options.

How much would it cost, and what needs to be done, to make a difference?



As the illness and death from AIDS rose in Africa, some two decades ago, one or two countries reacted quickly. Other countries waited rather longer before intensifying their efforts, but they too are being rewarded for their efforts. There have been a number of success stories which include Senegal, Uganda and Zambia. But most countries in Africa lost valuable time because AIDS was not fully understood and its significance as a new epidemic was not grasped. Some action was taken, but not on the scale that was required to stem the tide of the epidemic.

The scale of action necessary does of course increase exponentially along with the epidemic. Early on in a heterosexual epidemic, most new infections are acquired and passed on by a minority of people with an especially high turnover of partners. If condoms are used in most of these transactions, the epidemic can be contained relatively easily. But once HIV has become firmly established in the general population most new infections occur in the majority of adults who do not have an especially high number of partners. This means that prevention campaigns have to be expanded greatly, making them harder and costlier, though still very worthwhile.


Most countries in Africa are at this stage. Yet few have expanded their HIV prevention programmes to the scale that would be needed to make a significant dent in the number of new infections. Since past prevention failures eventually turn into current care needs, failure to head off the epidemic early on also imposes a greater burden of care on countries where HIV prevalence is high. And as the HIV-infected fall ill and die, alleviating the impact on orphans, other survivors, families and communities becomes the third challenge.

Recently researchers have tried to determine how much money would be needed to make a real difference to the AIDS epidemic in Africa, and it is clear that scaling up the response to Africa's epidemic is not only imperative but it is affordable.

US$1.5 billion a year would make it possible to achieve massively higher levels of implementation of all the major components of successful prevention programmes for the whole of sub-Saharan Africa. These would cover sexual, mother-to-child and transfusion-related HIV transmission, and would involve approaches ranging from awareness campaigns through the media to voluntary HIV counselling and testing, and the promotion and supply of condoms.

In the area of care for orphans and for people living with HIV or AIDS, costs depend very much on what kind of care is being provided. It is estimated that, with at least US$1.5 billion a year, countries in sub-Saharan Africa could buy symptom and pain relief (palliative care) for at least half of AIDS patients in need of it; treatment and prophylaxis for opportunistic infections for a somewhat smaller proportion; and care for AIDS orphans. At the moment, the coverage of care in many African countries is negligible, so reaching coverage at these levels would be an enormous step forward.

Making a start on coverage with combination anti-retroviral therapy would add several billion dollars annually to the bill.

Of course, providing AIDS prevention and care services involves more than just these funds. A country's health, education, communications and other infrastructures have to be well enough developed to be able to deliver these interventions. In some badly affected countries, these systems are already under strain, and they are likely to crumble further under the weight of AIDS. Then, too, money can only be used wisely if there are sufficient people available and the shortage of trained men, women and young is already acute.

These are some of the serious challenges that African countries and their partners in the global community will have to face if they are to make a real difference to the epidemic.


Notes

The proportion of adults (15 to 49 years of age) living with HIV/AIDS in 2001 using 2001 population numbers

These figures are estimates at the end of 2001, published by UNAIDS in the 'Report on the Global HIV/AIDS Epidemic, July 2002'. These estimates include all people with HIV infection, whether or not they have developed symptoms of AIDS, alive at the end of 2001. For each of these countries, the 1999 prevalence rate published by UNAIDS was applied to the country's 2001 adult population to produce estimates given in the table. The estimates are given in rounded numbers. However, unrounded numbers were used in the calculation of rates and regional totals, so there may be minor discrepancies between the regional/global totals and the sum of country figures.

Adults in this report are defined as men and women aged 15-49. This age range captures those in their most sexually active years. While the risk of HIV infection continues beyond the age of 50, the fast majority of people with substantial risk behaviour are likely to have become infected by this age. Since population structures differ greatly from one country to another, especially for children and the upper adult ages, the restriction of 'adults' to 15-49 has the advantage of making different populations more comparable.



Source:1)'Not enough condoms are supplied to African men' BMJ, Vol.323, 21 July 2001

UNAIDS Report on the global HIV/AIDs epidemic, July 2002

UNAIDS Report, AIDS Epidemic Update, December 2001

UNAIDS: AIDS epidemic update: December, 2000

UNAIDS: Report on the global HIV/AIDS epidemic, June 2000

UNAIDS Factsheet: AIDS in Africa, Johannesburg, 30th November 1998

For further information, see our webpages AIDS in Africa, HIV and AIDS news in Africa, AIDS Orphans in Africa, HIV and AIDS drugs in Africa and AIDS Statistics: Deaths of adults and Children in Africa.


---















Last updated October 8, 2002

And here's a little history about the diases orgin and where it came from, it says very little about just how it all got started, but then it goes into more detail about how it's important to find out where it came from to understand how to come up with a cure ...



Home
Search
About Avert
Donate here
What's new
Site map
Links






Debate around the origin of AIDS has sparked considerable interest and controversy since the beginning of the epidemic. However, in trying to identify where AIDS originated, there is a danger that people may try and use the debate to attribute blame for the disease to particular groups of individuals or certain lifestyles.

The first cases of AIDS occurred in the USA in 1981, but they provide little information about the source of the disease. There is now clear evidence that the disease AIDS is caused by the virus HIV. So to find the source of AIDS we need to look for the origin of HIV.

The issue of the origin of HIV could go beyond one of purely academic interest, as an understanding of where the virus originated and how it evolved could be crucial in developing a vaccine against HIV and more effective treatments in the future. Also, a knowledge of how the AIDS epidemic emerged could be important in both mapping the future course of the epidemic and developing effective education and prevention programme.

What type of virus is HIV?

HIV is part of a family or group of viruses called lentiviruses. Lentiviruses other than HIV have been found in a wide range of nonhuman primates. These other lentiviruses are known collectively as simian (monkey) viruses (SIV) where a subscript is used to denote their species of origin.

So where did HIV come from? Did HIV come from an SIV?

It is now generally accepted that HIV is a descendant of simian (monkey) immunodeficiency virus (SIV). Certain simian immunodeficiency viruses bear a very close resemblance to HIV-1 and HIV-2, the two types of HIV.

For example, HIV-2 corresponds to a simian immunodeficiency virus found in the sooty mangabey monkey (SIVsm), sometimes known as the green monkey, which is indigenous to western Africa.

The more virulent strain of HIV, namely HIV-1, was until very recently more difficult to place. Until 1999 the closest counterpart that had been identified was the simian (monkey) immunodeficiency virus that was known to infect chimpanzees (SIVcpz), but this virus had significant differences between it and HIV.

So what happened in 1999?
Are chimpanzees now known to be the source of HIV?

In February 1999 it was announced1 that a group of researchers from the University of Alabama had studied frozen tissue from a chimpanzee and found that the simian virus it carried (SIVcpz) was almost identical to HIV-1. The chimpanzee came from a sub-group of chimpanzees known as Pan troglodytes troglodytes, which were once common in west-central Africa.

It is claimed by the researchers that this shows that these chimpanzees were the source of HIV-1, and that the virus at some point crossed species from chimpanzees to human. However, it is not necessarily clear that chimpanzees are the original reservoir for HIV-1 because chimpanzees are only rarely infected with SIVcpz. It is therefore possible that both chimpanzees and humans have been infected from a third, as yet unidentified, primate species.2 In either case at least two separate transfers into the human population would have been required.

How could HIV have crossed species?

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 from the University of Alabama have suggested that HIV could have crossed over from chimpanzees as a result of a human killing a chimp and eating it for food.

Some other rather controversial theories have contended that HIV was transferred iatrogenically i.e. via medical experiments. One particularly well publicised theory is that polio vaccines played a role in the transfer.

The journalist Edward Hooper has suggested that HIV could be traced to the testing of an oral polio vaccine called Chat as batches of the Chat vaccine may have been grown in chimp kidney cells in the Congo, the Wistar Institute and Belgium. That could have resulted in the contamination of the vaccine with chimp SIV, the simian version of HIV-1. This vaccine was then given to about a million people in the Belgian Congo, Ruanda and Urundi in the late 1950s.

However, in February 2000 the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia announced that it had discovered in its stores a phial of polio vaccine that had been used as part of this polio vaccination program. The vaccine was subsequently analysed and in April 2001 it was announced3 that no trace had been found of either HIV or chimpanzee. A second analysis4 confirmed that only macaque monkey kidney cells, which cannot be infected with SIV or HIV, were used to make Chat.

What is crucial in regard to the credibility of any theory is the question of when the transfer took place.

Is there any evidence of when the transfer took place?

During the last few years it has become possible not only to determine whether HIV is present in a blood or plasma sample, but also to determine the particular subtype of the virus. Studying the subtype of virus of some of the earliest known instances of HIV infection can help to provide clues about the time of origin and the subsequent evolution of HIV in humans.

Three of the earliest known instances of HIV infection are as follows:

A plasma sample taken in 1959 from an adult male living in what is now the Democratic Republic of Congo

HIV found in tissue samples from an African-American teenager who died in St. Louis in 1969.

HIV found in tissue samples from a Norwegian sailor who died around 1976.



Analysis in 1998 of the plasma sample from 1959 was interpreted5 as suggesting that HIV-1 was introduced into humans around the 1940s or the early 1950s, which was earlier than had previously been suggested. Other scientists have suggested that it could have been even longer, perhaps around 100 years or more ago.

In January 2000, the results of a new study presented at the 7th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, suggested that the first case of HIV infection occurred around 1930 in West Africa. The study was carried out by Dr Bette Korber of the Los Alamos National Laboratory. The estimate of 1930 (which does have a 20 year margin of error), is based on a complicated computer model of HIV's evolution.

Is it known where the emergence of HIV in humans took place?

Many people now assume that because HIV has apparently developed from a form of SIV found in a type of chimpanzee in West Africa, that is was actually in West Africa that HIV first emerged in humans. It is then presumed that HIV spread from there around the world.

However, as discussed above, chimpanzees are not necessarily the original source of HIV and it is likely that the virus crossed over to humans on more than one occasion.2 So it is quite possible that HIV emerged at the same time in say both South America and Africa, or that it even emerged in the Americas before it emerged in Africa.

We will probably never know exactly when and where the virus first emerged, but what is clear is that sometime in the middle of the 20th century, HIV infection in humans developed into the epidemic of disease around the world that we now refer to as AIDS.

What caused the epidemic to spread so suddenly?

There are a number of factors that may have contributed to the sudden spread including international travel, the blood industry, and widespread drug use.

International Travel

The role of international travel in the spread of HIV was highlighted by the case of 'Patient Zero'. Patient Zero was a Canadian flight attendant called Gaetan Dugas who travelled extensively worldwide. Analysis of several of the early cases of AIDS showed that the infected individuals were either direct or indirect sexual contacts of the flight attendant. These cases could be traced to several different American cities demonstrating the role of international travel in spreading the virus. It also suggested that the disease was probably the consequence of a single transmissible agent.

The Blood Industry

As blood transfusions became a routine part of medical practice, this led to a growth of an industry around meeting this increased demand for blood. In some countries such as the USA paid donors were used, including intravenous drug users. This blood was then sent worldwide. Also, in the late 1960's haemophiliacs began to benefit from the blood clotting properties of a product called Factor VIII. However, to produce the coagulant, blood from thousands of individual donors had to be pooled. Factor VIII was then distributed worldwide making it likely that haemophiliacs could become exposed to new infections.

Drug Use

The 1970s saw an increase in the availability of heroin following the Vietnam War and other conflicts in the Middle East, which helped stimulate a growth in intravenous drug use. This increased availability together with the development of disposable plastic syringes and the establishment of 'shooting galleries' where people could buy drugs and rent equipment provided another route through which the virus could be passed on.




What other theories have there been about the origin of HIV?

Other theories put forward about the origin of HIV include a number of conspiracy theories. Some people have suggested that HIV was manufactured by the CIA whilst others believe that HIV was genetically engineered.

References

F Gao, E Bailes, DL Robertson, Y Chen et al Origin of HIV-1 in the chimpanzee Pan troglodytes troglodytes Nature, 1999: 397: 436-441
P M Sharp, DL Robertson, F Gao, B Hahn Origins and diversity of human immunodeficiency viruses AIDS 1994, *: S27-S42
Blanco, P. et al. Nature 410, 1045-1046 (2001)
Berry, N. et al. Nature 410, 1046-1047 (2001)
Zhu, Tuofu, Bette Korber, Andre J Nahinias An African HIV-1 Sequence from 1959 and Implications for the Origin of the Epidemic Nature, 1998: 391: 594-597
Authors

Annabel Kanabus & Sarah Allen.

---















Last updated June 26, 2002

DigitalLisa said:

I for one do not believe this story, I mean if you look at the statics and the number amount of it's victims, the numbers just don't add up. ... The truth is I think they know where it really came from, but they use the monkey story as a cover up just to save themselves. They probably had no ideal the aids/hiv virus would get out of hand the way it did, this is just my oppion though...

DigitalLisa said:

Somebody had to effect that moneky with a needle or something,but that's only my oppion

Ain't it funny ?
[This message was edited Mon Dec 9 14:47:43 PST 2002 by DigitalLisa]