History of the Definition of AIDS

[coptersoisoi]

I grew up near Oakland across from San Francisco. I believe it was 1981 when I was sitting with a neighborhood friend when the news talked about it. My friend heard about it on thje news a day or two before. He said it was in LA first then showed up in San Francisco gay bath houses in the SoMa region (South of Market/South Slot). It was called GLID aka Gay Cancer, which was a type of SID (monkey AIDS). This fucked up the free love movement of SF. People were scared to have sex most of the 1980s

[100PercentGreen]

Many HIV conspiracy theorists never seem to acknowledge FIV and SIV. Sk8tergnome87 links the formation of computer viruses with viruses in nature. Oh the ignorance! With this reasoning every virus that affects humans (influenza, rhinoviruses, HPV, etc) were made by man because they "don't just pop up from nowhere". I'm not saying that this conspiracy is impossible, but when suggestions are used in place of evidence, and there is plenty of evidence to the contrary, their boldness is undeserved.

[100PercentGreen]

Many HIV conspiracy theorists never seem to acknowledge FIV and SIV. Sk8tergnome87 links the formation of computer viruses with viruses in nature. Oh the ignorance! With this reasoning every virus that affects humans (influenza, rhinoviruses, HPV, etc) were made by man because they "don't just pop up from nowhere". I'm not saying that this conspiracy is impossible, but when suggestions are used in place of evidence, and there is plenty of evidence to the contrary, their boldness is undeserved.

[AIDSvideos]

I wasn't influenced by "people with power." I was influenced by a study: Reeves JD, Doms RW. "Human immunodeficiency virus type 2." J Gen Virol. 2002 Jun;83(Pt 6):1253-65. Viruses *do* "pop up" all the time; look at SARS and novel H1N1. The fact that computer viruses are man-made doesn't mean that biological viruses are. Go to the AIDSvideos site and read "Myths" and "FAQ" for more info.

[elielsolis]

I heard Aids was a man made virus .

[AIDSvideos]

There's no evidence that HIV was created by humans. It has been found in stored blood samples as far back as 1959. At that time, humans hadn't even discovered retroviruses, much less developed the technology to design a new one. Genetic studies provide evidence that it jumped to humans from a similar virus in primates. For some old stored samples, we even have the clinical history of patients who died of then-unexplained symptoms which in retrospect were clearly clinical AIDS.

[trufbetold]

Great answer, thanks for clearing that up. You said that in 1959 we didn't have the have the knowledge or the technology to design a virus. Are you inferring that we do now?

[AIDSvideos]

I'm not asserting that we have the technology now to design a new virus from scratch. We now have the technology to construct a short viral genome like the polio virus from nucleotides, so we can "construct following a known template" for short genomes. If we can synthesize a given genome from base pairs, we can obviously also modify any nucleotides along it, so we can construct a mutated version. So now we're closer, and you can at least debate the point. But in 1959? Forget it!

[barakHobama]

it was cultured by man and either spread by accident or to kill black people make your choice thoughs are the only two posiblitys

[MIGUELSAGITTA]

@AIDSvideos What is truth? For it is said that in December 1981 detected the first case of AIDS in the world, if the June 5 of that year, first recognized in the USA. in 1988 he was appointed on December 1 st day of struggle against AIDS because that date was detected for the first time in the world, the better it would have placed the date as June 5? alguein I can clarify?

[AIDSvideos]

@MIGUELSAGITTA: No, it is not believed that the first case of AIDS in the world occurred in December 1981. Genetic studies indicated HIV-1 jumped from chimps to humans around 1931 and has been spreading exponentially since then. HIV has been found in stored human blood samples from decades before 1981. The Western medical community first noticed AIDS cases in the U.S. in the early 80s. They'd been happening in Africa and Haiti before then.

[MelanieLouM]

No...thats a lie created by black racists to discredit and demonize whites and to lessen personal responsibility. >:(

[redshift919]

Many thanks!! You are working so hard to help make this virus understandable, while exploding all the crazy myths and "research" stories that pass as truths.

[Chubbsman7]

According to my research, AIDS is the result of a Polio Vaccine that was made inside of live Chimpanzee Muscle Tissues. When this occured, they administered the Vaccine as a test to over 1 Million African's.

Therefore, you can blame Hilary Koprowsky, the developer of the "Vaccine" for Polio. So it is relevant to Polio. My Hypothesis is that if you can find a more powerful Vaccine for Polio, you can possibly find a strand of Non-Changing RNA material to Vaccine for.

[AIDSvideos]

No. That's the discredited "Oral Polio Vaccine" hypothesis for the origin of HIV. See the Wikipedia article on "AIDS origin" for a debunking of that theory.

[redshift919]

Check out this month's NATURE mag for GREAT info on the history and evolution of the HIV virus. You are spreading GARBAGE and LIES!!! Get your facts straight BEFORE running at the mouth!

[alohacaramia]

Today we had a guest speaker who had AIDS he had survived it for 20 years, he was in the 1 percent. In Nursing school we say you on an earlier video produce by CE. I told our class of 70 nurses this morning that you are on Youtube, it's great that you are currently active, education the public.

[naika123]

AIDS did not exist before the 80s, that is why it is definitely a man-made disease. If monkeys were carriers of it, surely people would have had it in tropical areas way before the 80s.

[AIDSvideos]

HIV has been detected in stored blood samples dating all the way back to 1959. [Nahmias et al. Evidence for human infection with an HTLV III/LAV-like virus in Central Africa, 1959 (letter). Lancet 1986;31,1(8492):1279-80.] At that time, humans hadn't even discovered retroviruses, much less developed the technology to design a new one. For some old samples, we have the clinical history of patients who died of then-unexplained symptoms which in retrospect were clearly clinical AIDS.

[AIDSvideos]

HIV-1 jumped to humans from the related SIV in chimpanzees. HIV-2 jumped to humans from the related SIV in the sooty mangabey monkey. [Reeves JD, Doms RW. "Human immunodeficiency virus type 2." J Gen Virol. 2002 Jun;83(Pt 6):1253-65.] Go to AIDSvideos dot org and read "Myths" and "FAQ" for more info.

[kingnando]

You are right. I ve done some research and I agree with your comments. The story of the man-made virus is just an urban legend that floated around for years but thanks to technology we have proved the long history of this disease, which probably has its roots as far back as the 1930s, but gradually started adapting to larger societies. The earliest case Confirmed is from 1959.

[redshift919]

HIV has also been detected in stored tissue samples from various parts of Africa that date back to 1959.  My daughter is 2nd author of this month's article about the virus in NATURE. She and her mentor, Dr. Mike, have spent years sampling tissues and blood. I've watched as they have experienced the up's and down's of discovery, and the evolution of HIV ultimately revealed. I also watched as she gave the presentation in Minn. in June. AIDSvideos is absolutely correct!

[M3ridius]

Good vid

[xXAkridXx]

I heard the HIV retro virus (whatever that is)was never isolated, and the method of idenifying it is flakey.

[AIDSvideos]

HIV denialists (people who deny the scientific evidence that HIV causes AIDS) often say that, but it's not true. I'll post a couple of comments with references for studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals showing that (a) HIV has been isolated, and (b) the tests for HIV status are highly reliable. See the "Myths" page at the AIDSvideos dot org web site for more info.

[AIDSvideos]

NIAID "Relationship Between HIV and AIDS:" "Improvements in co-culture techniques have allowed the isolation of HIV in virtually all AIDS patients, as well as in almost all seropositive individuals with both early- and late-stage disease." [Coombs et al, "Plasma viremia in human immunodeficiency virus infection," N Engl J Med 1989;321(24):1626-31. Schnittman et al, "The reservoir for HIV-1 in human peripheral blood ...," Science 1989;245(4915):305-8." Also Ho et al 1989, Jackson et al 1990]

[AIDSvideos]

Testing is specific & accurate. "A large study of HIV testing in 752 U.S. laboratories reported a sensitivity of 99.7% and specificity of 98.5% .... and studies in U.S. blood donors reported specificities of 99.8% and greater than 99.99% (46, 47). With confirmatory Western blot, the chance of a false-positive identification in a low-prevalence setting is about 1 in 250 000 (95% CI, 1 in 173 000 to 1 in 379 000) (48)." (Chou et al, Annals of Internal Medicine, 5 July 05, vol 143, #1, p 55-73)

[xXAkridXx]

1 in 250? thats a lot of people falsly diagnosed. Well these austraillian scientist say that HIV can only be tested for in sombody by looking for antibodies to it. I read both sides to the arguments and they are saying the complete opposite things, its like I have to run the test myself to know for certain.

[AIDSvideos]

No, "about 1 in 250 000" (two hundred and fifty thousand). That's not a lot! The beauty of the scientific method, where you publish your methodology and your results, is that anyone who wishes is free to replicate the experiment and confirm the results. The studies on HIV testing have been repeatedly replicated. Also, anyone claiming antibody tests are the only way to test for HIV in a person is wrong. PCR can detect presence of HIV virus and count viral load.

[xXAkridXx]

Ok, thanks for the info, I'll keep researching this.

[xXAkridXx]

Also I found this on the internet; Why You Cannot Count on Viral Load * Viral load tests detect and multiply only fragments of genes, not HIV. * Test manufacturers warn that viral load cannot confirm the presence of HIV. * The FDA has not approved viral load tests for diagnostic use.

[AIDSvideos]

You'll find all manner of nonsense "on the Internet" including claims that the earth is flat and that the moon landings were faked. These statements are misleading, half-truths, or outright false. See "Myths" page on AIDSvideos dot org web site please. Debunking follows ...

[AIDSvideos]

PCR is used in this context to detect genetic sequences that are specific to HIV. You don't need to match against the entire genome of HIV; a subsequence that is unique will do. The manufacturer labels you refer to are just standard legal disclaimers; they don't invalidate the scientific studies on this topic. PCR is used to detect HIV before the person turns seropositive & for counting viral load. A positive PCR test for HIV is confirmed later with a subsequent antibody test.

[AIDSvideos]

"HIV-1 PCR and HIV-1 culture were compared in testing the PBMC of 59 HIV-1 antibody-positive and 20 HIV-1 antibody-negative hemophiliacs. Both methods were found to have sensitivities and specificities of at least 97 and 100%, respectively .... the sensitivities and specificities .... for the detection of HIV-1 appear to be equivalent, and both methods are superior to testing for HIV-1 antigen in serum for the direct detection of HIV-1." [Jackson et al. J Clin Microbiol 1990;28:16)]

[xXAkridXx]

continued....

* Viral loads are found in healthy people who test HIV negative. * High viral loads do not correlate with low T cells or illness. * Low viral loads do not correlate with high T cells or wellness.

[AIDSvideos]

If you were just infected with HIV but are asymptomatic and have not developed antibodies (turned seropositive) yet, then viral load will be detected by PCR, you'll appear healthy, and you'll test negative on an antibody test. So this assertion is completely consistent with our understanding of HIV. Note that within six months a subsequent antibody test would show that this person was HIV positive. Please see "Myths" page at AIDSvideos dot org for debunking of denialist claims.

[AIDSvideos]

Viral load IS correlated with disease progression to clinical AIDS and death. NIAID: "the risk of a patient developing AIDS with six years was strongly associated with levels of HIV RNA in the plasma." [Mellors et al. Ann Intern Med 1997;126:946] "Similar associations .... have been observed in HIV-infected children in both developed and developing countries." [Palumbo et al. JAMA 1998;279:756; Taha et al. AIDS 2000;14:453].

[AIDSvideos]

NIAID: "Clinical trials in both HIV-infected children and adults have demonstrated a link between a good virologic response to therapy (i.e. much less virus in the body) and a reduced risk of developing AIDS or dying." [Montaner AIDS 1998;12:F23; Palumbo JAMA 1998;279:756; O'Brien NEJM 1996;334:426; Katzenstein NEJM 1996;335:1091; Marschner J Infect Dis 1998;177:40; Hammer NEJM 1997;337:725; Cameron Lancet 1998;351:543]

[xXAkridXx]

Hmm GW is peer reviewed also but thats certainly corrupted by polititions also. Not saying that peer review is a bad thing just that that reason alone isnt as convincing as it otherwise would be.

[AIDSvideos]

True that peer review alone isn't a guarantee of everything. Replication is a better check, and the studies on testing for HIV and showing HIV causes AIDS have been replicated many times.

[crakkakilla88]

also can you explain the difference between HIV-1 and HIV-2 which is found in Africa i understand the geography but not sure of the aggressiveness of the other strand

[AIDSvideos]

YouTube comments are too short to answer this. Go to the "FAQ" page on my AIDSvideos web site. It includes links to scientific articles explaining the origins of HIV-1 and HIV-2. Also see article on "HIV" at Wikipedia. HIV-1 came from chimp SIV, and HIV-2 came from sooty mangabee SIV. Loosely speaking, they are cousins.

[crakkakilla88]

i also heard that aids was scientifically created as a polio vaccine by a Dr Koprowski and this vaccine was used on children in Kinshasa is this fact or myth and why was none of these children getting sick with Aids before the 1980s and not in the 1950-60s

[AIDSvideos]

The "polio vaccine" theory of HIV has been debunked. See "HIV" article at Wikipedia for a summary of the reasons.

[AIDSvideos]

"HIV did not become epidemic until 20 to 30 years later [after known infection in 1959], perhaps because of the migration of poor and young sexually active individuals from rural areas to urban centers in developing countries, with subsequent return migration and, internationally, due to civil wars, tourism, business travel and the drug trade" (NIAID citing Quinn, "Population migration and the spread of types 1 and 2 human immunodeficiency viruses," Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1994;91(7):2407-14.)

[crakkakilla88]

the controversy caused delay and maybe we could have stopped or slowed it with the fighting over discovery in fact Gallo actually used the same isolate that the French sent and renamed it Htlv-iii is that correct

[AIDSvideos]

I have read that there may have been cross-contamination within Gallo's lab of the French isolate into Gallo's samples. I'm not qualified to decide whether Gallo or the French discovered it first and won't attempt to. There are books and online articles about that controversy; see them.

[crakkakilla88]

i heard that the french discovered the cause of aids first

[AIDSvideos]

My understanding is that's essentially correct. Wikipedia's take from the Robert Gallo article: "Today it is generally agreed that Montagnier's group first identified HIV, although Gallo's group is credited with having contributed, not only to the science which made the discovery possible, but also significantly to demonstrating that it causes AIDS .... The two scientists continued to challenge each other's claims until 1987, when they agreed to share credit for the discovery of HIV."