HIV entered U.S. through single immigrant from Haiti: scientists

[Praxius]

HIV entered U.S. through single immigrant from Haiti: scientists

CTV.ca | HIV entered U.S. from Haiti as early as '69: study

The AIDS virus entered the United States via Haiti in about 1969 -- earlier than previously believed -- concludes new research. "Once the virus got to the U.S., then it just moved explosively around the world," said senior study author Michael Worobey, an assistant professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at The University of Arizona. The research, published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, is the first to definitively pinpoint when and from where HIV-1 entered the United States and shows that most HIV viruses in the U.S. descended from a single common ancestor. The timeline laid out in the study suggests that HIV infections were occurring in the U.S. for roughly 12 years before AIDS was first recognized by scientists as a disease in 1981. By that point, of course, many people had died. Worobey believes HIV developed in central Africa, perhaps as early as 1930, then moved to Haiti in the 1960s, where it mutated and flourished. It then moved to the U.S. and from there, the rest of the world. The strain that migrated to the U.S. is called HIV-1 group M subtype B, and was the first human immunodeficiency virus discovered. It is the dominant strain of the AIDS virus in most countries, except sub-Saharan Africa. To conduct the study, Worobey's team performed a genetic analysis of stored blood samples from the earliest AIDS patients, all of whom were recent immigrants from Haiti. The researchers also looked at genetic data from 117 more early AIDS patients from around the world. Once all the genetic data was assembled, the researchers loaded it into a computer and used Bayesian statistics to analyze it. For the hypothesis that HIV went from Africa to the U.S. first, the probability turned out to be 0.003 per cent -- virtually nil. For the hypothesis that HIV went from Africa first to Haiti and then on to the U.S., the probability is 99.8 per cent. Worobey's team believes that HIV was brought to Haiti by an infected person from central Africa in about 1966, which matches earlier estimates. That unknown single infected Haitian immigrant then likely arrived in a large U.S. city like Miami or New York in 1969. Since it can take several years after infection for a person to develop AIDS, the virus likely circulated for years before it manifested itself in AIDS. HIV has gone on to infect tens of millions around the world and AIDS has killed more than 25 million people. Learning more about the genetic make-up of the various strains of HIV could help vaccine development, Worobey said. "The main challenge of developing a vaccine against HIV is its tremendous genetic diversity," he said.

So does this make sense to you?

To me, the only thing that doesn't make sense is it being just one person who infected the country. I would think it'd be a bit more logical that a few came to Hati and then to the US.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Praxius HIV entered U.S. through single immigrant from Haiti: scientists CTV.ca | HIV entered U.S. from Haiti as early as '69: study So does this make sense to you? To me, the only thing that doesn't make sense is it being just one person who infected the country. I would think it'd be a bit more logical that a few came to Hati and then to the US.

I thought it was the Jews and/or the American government that created it! J/K

Why is the percentage that 0.003% directly from Africa to America. I mean how many Africans immigrate to Haiti? How many of any people immigrate to Haiti?

It is hard to pin-point and I think more than likely it was came from a gay American explorer, businessman or humanitarian in Africa (I say gay, because that was the first victims of the disease and was the more effected community in the beginning) that came directly from Africa to America!

[Alive]

Quote by: Praxius To me, the only thing that doesn't make sense is it being just one person who infected the country. I would think it'd be a bit more logical that a few came to Hati and then to the US.

Why doesn't it make sense? Since STDs spread exponentially, the difference between one infected person and "a few" in the US could just be a matter of a couple of days (or even just a single intense encounter).

[5010]

Quote by: Alive Why doesn't it make sense?

I agree with Praxius. Why would the virus in Haiti decide to stop infecting visiting Americans after the 1st one brought it to America?

[Alive]

Quote by: 5010 I agree with Praxius. Why would the virus in Haiti decide to stop infecting visiting Americans after the 1st one brought it to America?

What? Maybe because no more Haitan AIDS sufferers immigrated to America, or those that did didn't have sex, or those that did have sex didn't pass it on because their partners were lucky?

This team of researchers came to a conclusion based on their evidence. Unless you find a specific problem with their evidence, why reject their findings? Their conclusion is entirely plausible.

[Praxius]

Quote by: Alive What? Maybe because no more Haitan AIDS sufferers immigrated to America, or those that did didn't have sex, or those that did have sex didn't pass it on because their partners were lucky?

:rolleyes: Are you serious?

Not only does that just sound kinda silly, but speaking of lucky... how did this one guy get so damn lucky to get a trip from Africa to Hati.... then another nice trip to the US, only to start scoring it with all kinds of people to start the spread?

Minus the HIV/AIDS, I'd like to have this guys luck.

If this is the case, then clearly we're aware that he or she was quite the slut, pardon my french, and apparently was quite the catch.

This team of researchers came to a conclusion based on their evidence. Unless you find a specific problem with their evidence, why reject their findings? Their conclusion is entirely plausible.

Because like most scientists, they're narrow in their views of their evidence, and more often then not, they forget a few key factors. Either that or they rely on statistics and the one thing they explain, and use that limited information to come to their final conclusion, and this one sounds kinda silly.

I mean, sure... logically they probably came through the way they did.... but to narrow it down to just one person sounds completely stupid, as I imagine back then the virus wasn't discriminate on who it traveled in, the odds that it was a number of people at once seems more plausable.

So I guess we're in another Chicken/Egg Debate.... only was it one or many people with HIV who began the infection?

I'll tell you what I think.... I think they dumbed it down to just one person, because they wouldn't want it to sound like the borders were slack way back then and didn't check the health of people coming in.

One person coming in with a virus or sickness is a rarity but sometimes unavoidable...... to allow many people to come in with a virus, let alone a new unknown one around the same time, would be negligence.

[Alive]

Reading other news accounts of the study (I can't find the original), I can't find any other sources that say the person who spread the disease from Africa to Haiti is the same who spread it from Haiti to the US. Indeed, that seems to contradict the method the researchers used to determine the lineage. The researchers seem to claim that one person spread the disease from Africa to Haiti, where it mutated a bunch, then one other person spread it from Haiti to the US, from whence it spread to the rest of the world. I don't trust the press to adequately report science; I'll read the actual paper when it comes out.

I'll tell you what I think.... I think they dumbed it down to just one person, because they wouldn't want it to sound like the borders were slack way back then and didn't check the health of people coming in.

:rolleyes:

These are scientists publishing in a peer reviewed journal. They have no stake in how porous the borders were in the 1960s! You have a messed up view of science.

[Praxius]

I never said what I thought was right.... it was a thought. And my view on science is only messed up to those who don't understand my view.

[5010]

Quote by: Praxius I'll tell you what I think.... I think they dumbed it down to just one person, because they wouldn't want it to sound like the borders were slack way back then and didn't check the health of people coming in. One person coming in with a virus or sickness is a rarity but sometimes unavoidable...... to allow many people to come in with a virus, let alone a new unknown one around the same time, would be negligence.

Back then they didn't even know HIV existed. We're talking about a virus that is so subtle people have to go to a lab months after catching it to see if they have it even though they can spread it, and won't feel anything bad for possibly years.

Of course, there is a different explanation other than the virus deciding not to infect visitors after the 1st one went back to the US. The tourists took a vow of celibacy. To me that's equally ludicrous.

In other words, if the scientists are right, they've discovered a bonafide miracle! Rejoice!!!

[Praxius]

Quote by: 5010 Back then they didn't even know HIV existed. We're talking about a virus that is so subtle people have to go to a lab months after catching it to see if they have it even though they can spread it, and won't feel anything bad for possibly years.

I realize they had no clue what HIV was, but even back then they had blood work done on people and they knew what a virus looked like.... or at least what shouldn't be in the body. I imagine standard proceedures back then would have brought something up...... then again, I guess it all depends on exactly how it was run back then, which could be much different then today.... it was a speculation.

[BionicArmofDeth]

This seems more like a way to single out black people as being responsible for something bad. If AIDS causes one to die from the common cold, then perhaps HIV was around for longer than we think, its just that we didnt know it was HIV, we just thought it was the common cold that killed the person.

[Nono]

Interesting. Not insignificantly, 1969 was the year the Boeing 747 first took to the air, bringing to airlines the advent of the extremely efficient high-bypass turbofan engine, which suddenly made worldwide travel affordable to many millions of people.

Nothing like ease of travel to hasten the spread of a hitherto small-time virus.

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: BionicArmofDeth This seems more like a way to single out black people as being responsible for something bad. If AIDS causes one to die from the common cold, then perhaps HIV was around for longer than we think, its just that we didnt know it was HIV, we just thought it was the common cold that killed the person.

I don't think its meant to put blame on black people. If that were the case shouldn't we put the blame on the US government for allowing the immigration from Haiti in the first place?

Many people think that HIV started from the gay community, and spread out from there. I would guess thats only half right. I think once the virus came over gay culture with rampant sex and drug use caused the quickest expansion of the virus.

HIV could have been around for a long time, it just needed the right conditions to spread.