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.
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.
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.
The River is available from Penguin Books in the UK, www.amazon.com in the US and Standish Prideaux & Pye in Australia.
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 email@example.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 <firstname.lastname@example.org>.
Edward Hooper has his own website, http://www.aidsorigins.com/. See it for his latest contributions.
Edward Hooper, commentaries, October-November 2004
Yes: Michael Worobey et al.,
polio vaccine theory refuted", Nature,
Vol. 428, 22 April 2004, p. 820.
No: a reply by Edward Hooper, "Contaminated polio vaccine theory not refuted", April 2004.
Worobey et al. supplementary information and map. Hooper's comments.
Hooper gives further comments, and a short version of further comments.
Edward Hooper, "The dirty side of the origin-of-AIDS debate": a series of commentaries, February-March 2004.
Stanley A. Plotkin, "Chimpanzees and journalists" (editorial), Vaccine, Vol. 22, 2004, pp. 1829-1830. Introduction to Osterrieth's article.
Paul Osterrieth, "Oral polio vaccine: fact versus fiction", Vaccine, Vol. 22, 2004, pp. 1831-1835. Denial of Hooper's claims about production of polio vaccine in Africa.
Maria Luisa Bozzi, "Truth and science: Bill Hamilton's legacy", pp. 21-26.
Edward Hooper, "Dephlogistication, Imperial Display, Apes, Angels, and the Return of Monsieur Émile Zola", pp. 27-230. This massive paper is a response to criticisms of The River, plus new evidence.
Mikkel H. Schierup and Roald Forsberg, "Recombination and phylogenetic analysis of HIV-1" (in pdf), pp. 231-245.
R A Weiss, "Concluding remarks: emerging persistent infections, family heirlooms and new acquisitions" (in pdf), pp. 305-314.
Brian Martin, Investigating the origin of AIDS: some ethical dimensions, Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 29, No. 4, August 2003, pp. 253-256.
Edward Hooper, "The Story of a Man-Made Disease", April 2003. A shortened version appeared in the London Review of Books, followed by a series of letters to the editor.
Edward Hooper deals with "Opposition to the OPV theory"
Robin Weiss, "Reflections on the origin of human immunodeficiency viruses", AIDS & Hepatitis Digest, January 2002. Critical commentary on the polio-vaccine theory. Robin Weiss can be contacted at <email@example.com>.
Stanley A. Plotkin, "CHAT oral polio vaccine was not the source of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Group M for humans", Clinical Infectious Diseases, Vol. 32, 2001, pp. 1068-1984. A detailed rebuttal of the claims in Edward Hooper's The River. This is almost the same paper as published in the Royal Society meeting proceedings.
Billi Goldberg and Raphael B. Stricker, "Bridging the gap: human diploid cell strains and the origin of AIDS", Journal of Theoretical Biology, Vol. 204, 2000, pp. 497-503. The hypothesis that polio vaccine produced using human cells was responsible for AIDS.
Brian Martin, "Political refutation of a scientific theory: the case of polio vaccines and the origin of AIDS", Health Care Analysis, Vol. 6, 1998, pp. 175-179. How legal action and editorial decisions mean that the published record gives the misleading impression that the polio-vaccine-AIDS theory has been refuted.
Brian Martin, "Sticking a needle into science: the case of polio vaccines and the origin of AIDS", Social Studies of Science, Vol. 26, No. 2, May 1996, pp. 245-276. A personal account of how the author as a social scientist intervened in the debate over the polio-vaccine-AIDS theory.
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.
Brian Martin, "Polio vaccines and the origin of AIDS: the career of a threatening idea", Townsend Letter for Doctors, #126, January 1994, pp. 97-100. An account of the theory and its implications.
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.
Brian Martin, "Peer review and the origin of AIDS -- a case study in rejected ideas", BioScience, vol. 43, no. 9, October 1993, pp. 624-627. An account of the theory and the response to it.
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.
Louis Pascal, "Preliminary notes concerning shortcomings of a correspondence by Y. Ohta, et al.", 8 May 1993 (previously unpublished). A critique of a scientific paper cited by Koprowski and by Basilico et al. in the case against the polio-vaccine theory.
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.
Raanan Gillon, "A startling 19,000-word thesis on the origin of AIDS: should the JME have published it?", Journal of Medical Ethics, vol. 18, 1992, pp. 3-4. The editor of the Journal of Medical Ethics summarises Pascal's argument, explains why JME rejected it, and notes its importance and availability.
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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
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, email@example.com, on request. Please include your postal address.