Canadian researcher traces AIDS to single bush hunter from 1921

“Doctors and scientists can draw a lesson in prudence and humility from this,” he said. “When you manipulate nature in a way you don’t completely understand, the consequences can be unpredictable and absolutely disastrous.”

-the law of unintended consequences

backprojection2• 15 years ago

Problems are inevitable, problems are soluble.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQliI_WGaGk

mgkimsal2• 15 years ago

"manipulating chimpanzee meat"? Is that a euphemism? What is meant by that?

masklinn• 15 years ago

> Is that a euphemism?

No? Well the chimp-fucking hypothesis is possible, but it's unlikely.

> What is meant by that?

Exactly what was said. He might have contracted it by quartering a chimpanzee (and having chimpanzee blood wash over cuts or scrapes, thereby infecting it). Having cuts, scrapes or tears is pretty likely when you're in the forest fighting chimps.

kitcar• 15 years ago

Most likely chimpanzee meat was part of the diet of the bushmen; but in order to cook the meat, you need to get it off the chimpanzee - hence the manipulation part.

breck• 15 years ago

I'm pretty sure they just meant "handling".

prawn• 15 years ago

Writing fancily for the sake of it.

scotty792• 15 years ago

Quick! Where's my time machine?

sliverstorm2• 15 years ago

If it happened once, odds are it could & would happen again.

rdl2• 15 years ago

HIV got pretty lucky a few times; it's relatively difficult to contract, so if any of those steps had been disrupted long enough for people to learn about it, we might not have tens/hundreds of millions killed by it.

Keeping it contained in Africa for a bit longer, getting rid of the infected plasma selling organization in Haiti, and a different initial population, might have made all the difference -- imagine if a monogamous/non-needle-sharing person got infected, disease ran its course with first-world medical facilities, and became a research curiosity.

scotty792• 15 years ago

I posted this comment and deleted it because you shouldn't be funny on hacker news. Before I deleted the comment I got one upvote that encouraged me to repost it again. Then I got 4 downvotes so far, even though my comment managed to spark thoughtful exchange between some hacker news users.

zyphlar• 15 years ago

Great but is this hacker news or just mini-reddit?

zeteo• 15 years ago

>When you manipulate nature in a way you don’t completely understand, the consequences can be unpredictable and absolutely disastrous

How were those doctors in the 1920s "manipulating nature"? They were just trying to treat sick people in an undeveloped region.

There are a lot of hospital-originating diseases even today (e.g. drug-resistant TB in Russia).

grannyg00se2• 15 years ago

The natural way to deal with sickness is to survive it or die.

Creating a vaccine and injecting it into people's bloodstreams to try to gain an advantage over a virus' spread can be seen as manipulating nature. There is plenty of nature manipulation that goes on in the development and reproduction of a vaccine.

burgerbrain3• 15 years ago

There is nothing "unnatural" about homo sapiens using tools to improve their condition.

fleitz• 15 years ago

Humans are products of nature, therefore whatever we do is 'natural'. There aren't natural chemicals and artificial chemicals, there are just chemicals. The whole distinction is silly. Nightshade will kill you just as a dead as synthetic atropine.

Doing anything will likely have unintended consequences, I would hazard a guess that vaccinating people has saved more lives than AIDS has claimed. Now that we have an AIDS vaccine, should we not vaccinate people for fear of causing an epidemic 80 years from now?

pyre• 15 years ago

  > How were those doctors in the 1920s "manipulating
  > nature"?

Even if you don't think that vaccines are 'manipulating nature,' I would say that mounting global campaigns to inoculate everyone and completely eradicate a disease is 'manipulating nature.'

Tycho• 15 years ago

Doesn't seem like understanding was a problem here - they were just reckless in failing to adequately sterilise medical equipment. I'd say the moral of the story is more 'beware of reckless do-gooding.'

ubasu• 15 years ago

NYT on the same:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/18/health/18aids.html?_r=2...

lizhang• 15 years ago

A bush hunter... is that a euphemism for something?

rmc2• 15 years ago

No, it describes someone who hunts wild animals in the bush. The bush is not a full jungle/rain forest, but more of light wooded bushy areas. Australia has "bush", just think of Crocodile Dundee. Africa also has bush, and some people hunt animals for food in there.

cemregr• 15 years ago

I thought HIV was the virus and AIDS was the condition, the article repeatedly says "AIDS virus"– am I mistaken?

Zaak• 15 years ago

Saying "AIDS virus" could be an example of metonymy.

Canadian researcher traces AIDS to single bush hunter from 1921

Related Stories