T Nation

New Info on AIDs?

"In the mid-1990s molecular biologists identified at least 8 different subtypes (or “clades” or “strains”) of HIV that were infecting various people around the world. Remarkably, it turns out that the “B” strain is the predominant strain infecting gays in the U.S.

Even more remarkable is that this strain of HIV has an “affinity” to infect rectal tissue, thus explaining why gays are more likely to get AIDS than straights.

In contrast, the HIV strains common in Africa have an affinity for vaginal and cervical cells, as well as for cells of the foreskin of the penis. Thus, HIV is more likely to infect heterosexuals in Africa.

How do we know this? Max Essex (a Harvard veterinarian who performed pre-AIDS experiments transferring feline leukemia virus between cat populations) tested subtype E strains of HIV from Thailand. He discovered that this Asian strain readily infected women’s genital cells of the vagina and cervix. But the “gay” B strain of HIV did not infect them as easily.

AIDS experts tell us American AIDS came from Africa, but the strain of HIV prevalent in gay men is almost never seen in Africa! How is this possible?

Were strains of HIV engineered to adapt easily to cells likely to be infected in gay sex? Or adapted to genital cells involved in vaginal sex?"

It does seem odd that the AIDs is predominantly heterosexual binding in Africa and homosexual binding in the USA.

http://www.meta-religion.com/Secret_societies/Conspiracies/AIDS/secret_origin_of_aids.htm

(Yeah I know its a kooky website, but it is an interesting topic to me)

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
It does seem odd that the AIDs is predominantly heterosexual binding in Africa and homosexual binding in the USA.
[/quote]
So women who contract AIDS in the US must have had “homosexual intercourse”?

Didn’t Iran already cure AIDS?

[quote]
In particular, subtype B is spread mostly by homosexual contact and intravenous drug use (essentially via blood), while subtype C and CRF A/E tend to fuel heterosexual epidemics (via a mucosal route).[\quote]

From another page, this gives an interesting clue. Since anal sex frequently causes tears in the lining of the anus, blood is mixed with the ejaculatory fluid which carries the HIV virus, and since B type HIV spreads better via blood contact, anal sex can cause serious problems.

I’d imagine that the rate of infection is much higher for needles than anal sex, if only because the ejaculatory fluid isn’t the preferred method of delivery for the HIV virus.

On the other hand, the HIV B strain may have just adapted itself to better propagate in this particular instance. Obviously if there was an original HIV virus that became common in two, non-contacting populations, ie American Homosexuals vs African Heterosexuals, the virus would adapt itself to better survive in each population.

Comes right down to natural selection.

It could also be a kind of selection bias. B type HIV will infect through the anus easier, therefore people who have anal sex will be more likely to get B type HIV. Similarly C type HIV spreads preferentially through a mucosal route, via semen and female lubrication (there’s gotta be a word for that), therefore people who engage in vaginal sex will be more likely to get C type HIV.

Its VERY hard to distinguish between the scenarios.

-Gendou

I don’t know if you guys seen this movie before, but it’s well worth checking out.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-266890172132861595

I don’t particularly agree with the prevailing message in it, but it sure taught me some interesting facts I was unaware of about AIDS.

Sounds more like religious persecution of homosexuality than facts to me.

[quote]Fitnessdiva wrote:
Sounds more like religious persecution of homosexuality than facts to me.[/quote]

The study points out that the HIV here in the States is different from the HIV in Africa. If so, why? How do you get religious persecution out of that?

Welcome to the Politics Forum, btw. Its an interesting and novel place — right-wing loons (one of which is yours truly), leftists who froth with Bush-hatred, and other assorted folks!

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Fitnessdiva wrote:
Sounds more like religious persecution of homosexuality than facts to me.

The study points out that the HIV here in the States is different from the HIV in Africa. If so, why? How do you get religious persecution out of that?

Welcome to the Politics Forum, btw. Its an interesting and novel place — right-wing loons (one of which is yours truly), leftists who froth with Bush-hatred, and other assorted folks!

[/quote]

Don’t disagree, HH. Anyone that hot can’t be wrong.

If this country were run by models, I would never complain about anything.

[quote]nephorm wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Fitnessdiva wrote:
Sounds more like religious persecution of homosexuality than facts to me.

The study points out that the HIV here in the States is different from the HIV in Africa. If so, why? How do you get religious persecution out of that?

Welcome to the Politics Forum, btw. Its an interesting and novel place — right-wing loons (one of which is yours truly), leftists who froth with Bush-hatred, and other assorted folks!

Don’t disagree, HH. Anyone that hot can’t be wrong.

If this country were run by models, I would never complain about anything.[/quote]

Nephorm are you another man that will be walked over by his wife later on?

[quote]John S. wrote:
Nephorm are you another man that will be walked over by his wife later on?
[/quote]

No, I’m just a guy who likes to make jokes.

[quote]nephorm wrote:
John S. wrote:
Nephorm are you another man that will be walked over by his wife later on?

No, I’m just a guy who likes to make jokes.[/quote]

As am I.

[quote]pat36 wrote:
Didn’t Iran already cure AIDS? [/quote]

If its anything like the whole “have sex with a virgin” wide-spread treatment they have in Africa… then yes.

Its proven to be 100% effective in making people think it works.