Brian Martin
Polio vaccines and the origin of AIDS
Tue Nov 18 14:20:48 2003
64.140.158.78

Polio vaccines and the origin of AIDS
http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/dissent/documents/AIDS/

Overview of the theory

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.

* The location coincides dramatically. The earliest known cases of AIDS occurred in central Africa, in the same regions where Koprowski's polio vaccine was given to over a million people in 1957-1960.
* The timing coincides. There is no documented case of HIV infection or AIDS before 1959. Centuries of the slave trade and European exploitation of Africa exposed Africans and others to all other diseases then known; it is implausible that HIV could have been present and spreading in Africa without being recognised.
* Polio vaccines are grown (cultured) on monkey kidneys which could have been contaminated by SIVs. Polio vaccines could not be screened for SIV contamination before 1985.
* Another monkey virus, SV-40, is known to have been passed to humans through polio vaccines. A specific pool of Koprowski's vaccine was later shown to have been contaminated by an unknown virus.
* In order for a virus to infect a different species, it is helpful to reduce the resistance of the new host's immune system. Koprowski's polio vaccine was given to many children less than one month old, before their immune systems were fully developed. Indeed, in one trial, infants were given 15 times the standard dose in order to ensure effective immunisation.

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.
MUCH MORE:
http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/dissent/documents/AIDS/

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

AIDS [HIV]

AIDS: 'The Manufactured Virus'

From the Official U.S. Govt. Documents House of Rep.

American Masses Hoodwinked
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/aids2.pdf

Proof: Department of Defense Appropriations for 1970
H.B. 15090
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/aids.pdf

================================

"The transcript that follows is taken from the June 9, 1969 Senate
testimony of Dr. Donald MacArthur, a high-level Defense Department
biological research administrator. For those who hold the theory that
AIDS is the result of a U.S. biological weapons program--discussed in
chapter 40 of 60 Greatest Conspiracies of All Time--this testimony is a
smoking gun, or smoking petri dish as the case may be. We present it
without further comment. Judge for yourself."

Funding was approved in 1970 - $10 million to the DOD.
MUCH MORE:
http://www.apfn.org/APFN/AIDS.HTM

Ralph Torello mailto:rtorello38@hotmail.com
AIDS as a weapon of war
Thu Jun 28 10:59:13 2001

While I do believe that AIDS is a weapon being used by the Federal Fraud Machine (FFM) and its allies, I disagree that it is a contagious disease caused by a little retrovirus, many types which exist in the normal human system. There are hundreds of well known doctors, microbiologists, professors, laymen who have proved that AIDS is not caused by HIV but by drugs end/or other immuno suppresive factors. AIDS is really a psyop weapon that actually gets "the AIDS victim" to kill him or herself. Rather than go into a lengthy and detailed explanation, I suggest you visit www.duesberg.com or aidsmyth.com or virusmyth.com. The AIDS dissidents like Dr. Duesberg, Professor of Microbiology at UC, Kerry Mullis, Noble Prize winner for the PCP test, Walter Gilbert of Harvard, Dr. Charlie Thomas formally at John Hopkins and Harvard, and many others get almost no publicity for their views. Dr. Duesberg has paid for his views by losing a $3 million research contract plus almost all of his other non professor revenues. As he told me "If I would come out and say that maybe HIV is partially responsible for AIDS, I could be paid like an NBA star, like Gallo (who stole the HIV virus from Montagnier) is currently. Now I'll just have to get by on my tenured professor salary." Most of the biological research at Fort Detrick has been bogus and led nowhere. Yet, a lot of people and companies continue to get rich with such research.

The Federal Fraud Machine loves the idea that people think that HIV was a deadly virus concocted at Fort Detrick, since that reinforces the mainstream idea that AIDS is a sexually transmitted disease. The HIV antibody test will show positive if you have a weakened immune system, regardless of whether you have the relatively harmless HIV virus in your system. Since no one has ever isolated this retrovirus, but have confirmed its existence through antibodies, the AIDs test checks for a protein that normally shows up in your blood when you have the flu. Just thonk of all those poor Africans that have been fed the deadly chemotherapy AIDS cocktails that destroy the immune system. Thank heaven for people like Mbeki of South Africa who are not buying the attempted genocide of Africa by the FFM and its allies
AIDS: 'The Manufactured Virus'
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/aids.htm