My Theory of the origin of A.I.D.S.

(Note: This theory was written in the late 1980s, and revised in 1993 for publication in The Riverside Community College newspaper, "Viewpoints")

     For the past several years I have had a theory concerning the origin of the disease known as AIDS, but I did not discuss the theory in public. I felt it was too simple an explanation of how this deadly virus came to be.

    However, after reading in the weekly newsmagazines that Presidential candidate Pat Buchanan considers AIDS to be "...natures' retribution..." on homosexuals, I realized that he had redefined the word simple. Although I am heterosexual (that means I like women, Pat) the AIDS epidemic has affected me and everyone else in the world, and Buchanan's' simple-minded opinion makes my theory seem like a model of rational, logical thought. To me, at least. So I decided to put my theory on paper.

    Everything I have read about AIDS generally dates the beginning of this disease in the late 1960's or early 1970's, and it is usually considered to have originated in South Africa. These two points formed the basis of my theory, along with the name of the disease itself. Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome. How did we 'acquire' this syndrome, I found myself thinking. Why was the human immune system, one of Gods' greatest gifts to mankind, suddenly under attack?

     In 1967 and 1968 the worlds' first successful heart transplant operations were performed at Capetown, South Africa. Several more have been done since then, in Africa and around the world. But why were the first ones done in a South African hospital, and what do they have to do with AIDS?

     The physical procedures to remove and replace the major organs in our bodies, although complex and requiring great skill, are straightforward- take the old one out and put the new one in. The only real problem, then and now, is the body's response to a new part. Simply, to the body the new part is a foreign invader and must be destroyed- which the body's' immune system does quite well, thank you. Just as it was designed to do. So the research needed to answer just one question- how to defeat the response of the immune system. I believe the answer was found in South Africa, only too successfully.

    It is my opinion that the research and experiments necessarily conducted with human subjects to find the right combination of chemical compounds to defeat the immune system were done in South Africa because it was so risky to the health of the subjects none of the other nations would permit or allow it. I believe the subjects who took part in the experiments (obviously for money) were given various doses and combinations of chemicals until the "right" combination was found to effectively suppress the immune system reaction, but an unexpected side-effect took place. I believe this side-effect was that the chemical attack to make the immune system more deficient did not stop when the chemicals were discontinued, but that the subjects body's T-4 cells (those cells most associated with the immune system and the AIDS virus) continued to react until the immune system could no longer distinguish between its' own cells and that of a foreign cell (or group of cells, e.g. a transplanted organ) and so therefore failed to attack any substances foreign to the body. Thus, the body was now vulnerable to any of the common bacteria and viruses present in our world, of which the pneumococcus bacterium seems to claim the lives of most AIDS patients. I believe further that this "Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome" became transmittable from research subjects to the rest of the world.

   I have only done some very light reading on AIDS and on organ transplants, but I have not seen the two discussed in a cause and effect relationship before. However, to me the subject (our immune system), the location (South Africa), and the timing seem to be more than coincidence. Perhaps my theory is too simple, but also perhaps someone who refutes it will find a piece of this puzzle of AIDS to solve. As it has been said, "I would rather light a single candle..." than to react in the dark ages style of the Buchanan's of the world.