Pharmac. & Ther. Vol. 55: 201-277, 1992


Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, 229 Stanley Hall, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, U.S.A.

Abstract -- The hypothesis that human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is a new, sexually transmitted virus that causes AIDS has been entirely unproductive in terms of public health benefits. Moreover, it fails to predict the epidemiology of AIDS, the annual AIDS risk and the very heterogeneous AIDS diseases of infected persons. The correct hypothesis must explain why: (1) AIDS includes 25 previously known diseases and two clinically and epidemiologically very different epidemics, one in America and Europe, the other in Africa; (2) almost all American (90%) and European (86%) AIDS patients are males over the age of 20, while African AIDS affects both sexes equally; (3) the annual AIDS risks of infected babies, intravenous drug users, homosexuals who use aphrodisiacs, hemophiliacs and Africans vary over 100-fold; (4) many AIDS patients have diseases that do not depend on immunodeficiency, such as Kaposi's sarcoma, lymphoma, dementia and wasting; (5) the AIDS diseases of Americans (97%) and Europeans (87%) are predetermined by prior health risks, including long-term consumption of illicit recreational drugs, the antiviral drug AZT and congenital deficiencies like hemophilia, and those of Africans are Africa-specific. Both negative and positive evidence shows that AIDS is not infectious: (1) the virus hypothesis fails all conventional criteria of causation; (2) over 100-fold different AIDS risks in different risk groups show that HIV is not sufficient for AIDS; (3) AIDS is only "acquired," if at all, years after HIV is neutralized by antibodies; (4) AIDS is new but HIV is a long-established, perinatally transmitted retrovirus; (5) alternative explanations disprove all assumptions and anecdotal cases cited in support of the virus hypothesis; (6) all AIDS-defining diseases occur in matched risk groups, at the same rate, in the absence of HIV; (7) there is no common, active microbe in all AIDS patients; (8) AIDS manifests in unpredictable and unrelated diseases; and (9) it does not spread randomly between the sexes in America and Europe. Based on numerous data documenting that drugs are necessary for HIV-positives and sufficient for HIV-negatives to develop AIDS diseases, it is proposed that all American/European AIDS diseases, that exceed their normal background, result from recreational and anti-HIV drugs. African AIDS is proposed to result from protein malnutrition, poor sanitation and subsequent parasitic infections. This hypothesis resolves all paradoxes of the virus-AIDS hypothesis. It is epidemiologically and experimentally testable and provides a rational basis for AIDS control.

"It's too late to correct," said the Red Queen. "When you've once said a thing, that fixes it, and you must take the consequences."

- Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass


1. Virus-AIDS Hypothesis Fails to Predict Epidemiology and Pathology of AIDS

2. Definition of AIDS

2.1. AIDS: 2 epidemics, sub-epidemics and 25 epidemic-specific diseases

2.1.1. The epidemics by case numbers, gender and age

2.1.2. AIDS diseases

2.1.3. AIDS risk groups and risk-group specific AIDS diseases

2.2. The HIV-AIDS hypothesis, or the definition of AIDS

2.3. Alternative infectious theories of AIDS

3. Discrepancies Between AIDS and Infectious Disease

3.1. Criteria of infectious and noninfectious disease

3.2. AIDS not compatible with infectious disease

3.3. No proof for the virus-AIDS hypothesis

3.3.1. Virus hypothesis fails to meet Koch's postulates

3.3.2. Anti-HIV immunity does not protect against AIDS

3.3.3. Antiviral drugs do not protect against AIDS

3.3.4. All AIDS-defining diseases occur in the absence of HIV

3.4. Noncorrelations between HIV and AIDS

3.4.1. Only about half of American AIDS is confirmed HIV-antibody positive

3.4.2. Antibody-positive, but virus-negative AIDS

3.4.3. HIV: just one of many harmless microbial markers of behavioral and clinical AIDS risks

3.4.4. Annual AIDS risks of different HIV-infected risk groups, including babies, homosexuals, drug addicts, hemophiliacs and Africans, differ over 100-fold

3.4.5. Specific AIDS diseases predetermined by prior health risks

3.5. Assumptions and anecdotal cases that appear to support the virus-AIDS hypothesis

3.5.1. HIV is presumed new because AIDS is new

3.5.2. HIV-assumed to be sexually transmitted-depends on perinatal transmission for survival

3.5.3. AIDS assumed to be proportional to HIV infection

3.5.4. AIDS assumed to be homosexually transmitted in the U.S. and Europe

3.5.5. AIDS assumed to be heterosexually transmitted by African "lifestyle"

3.5.6. HIV claimed to be abundant in AIDS cases

3.5.7. HIV to depend on cofactors for AIDS

3.5.8. All AIDS diseases to result from immunodeficiency

3.5.9. HIV to induce AIDS via autoimmunity and apoptosis

3.5.10. HIV assumed to kill T-cells

3.5.11. Antibodies assumed not to neutralize HIV

3.5.12. HIV claimed to cause AIDS in 50% within 10 years

3.5.13. HIV said to derive pathogenicity from constant mutation

3.5.14. HIV assumed to cause AIDS with genes unique among retroviruses

3.5.15. Simian retroviruses to prove that HIV causes AIDS

3.5.16. Anecdotal AIDS cases from the general population

3.6. Consequences of the virus-AIDS hypothesis

4. The Drug-AIDS Hypothesis

4.1. Chronological coincidence between the drug and AIDS epidemics

4.2. Overlap between drug-use and AIDS statistics

4.3. Drug use in AIDS risk groups

4.3.1. Intravenous drug users generate a third of all AIDS patients

4.3.2. Homosexual users of aphrodisiac drugs generate about 60% of AIDS patients

4.3.3. Asymptomatic AZT users generate an unknown percentage of AIDS patients

4.4. Drug use necessary for AIDS in HIV-positives

4.4.1. AIDS from recreational drugs

4.4.2. AIDS from AZT and AZT plus confounding recreational drug use

4.5. Drug use sufficient for AIDS indicator diseases in the absence of HIV

4.5.1. Drugs used for sexual activities sufficient for AIDS diseases

4.5.2. Long-term intravenous drug use sufficient for AIDS-defining diseases

4.6. Toxic effects of drugs used by AIDS patients

4.6.1. Toxicity of recreational drugs

4.6.2. Toxicity of AZT

4.7. Drug-AIDS hypothesis correctly predicts the epidemiology and heterogeneous pathology of AIDS

4.8. Consequences of the drug-AIDS hypothesis: Risk-specific preventions and therapies, but resentment by the virus-AIDS establishment

5. Drugs and Other Noncontagious Risk Factors Resolve all Paradoxes of the Virus-AIDS Hypothesis

6. Why did AIDS Science go Wrong?

6.1. The legacy of the successful germ theory: a bias against noninfectious pathogens

6.2. Big funding and limited expertise paralyze AIDS research

Note Added in Proof