Re: AIDS/POLIO-Not Much Econ
William T. Dickens wrote: > >The article did grant that there > >remains the strange puzzle of the coincidence in timing of the various > >strands of AIDS all being transmitted from primates to humans within a > >close period, which I suppose that Hooper will emphasize when backed > >into a corner. The article suggests theories of population increases > >or the introduction of cheap syringes, both of which might explain why > >infection didn't happen earlier. > >I'm probably way in over my head here, but I thought that there was still >a lot of controversy over exactly when and where AIDS first emerged in the >human population. I seem to remember hearing it claimed that there were >confirmed cases in humans before the polio vaccination campaign. I thought >I've also heard it claimed that the wave of reports around the time of the >vaccine could be explained by a reporting anomaly -- that there was a buzz >in the medical community that caused people to recognize what they were >seeing as a single disease whereas before that time the pattern of >symptoms might not have been seen as a unique disease. -- Bill I'm admittedly in over my head as well, but it seems clear that there are several distinct strands of AIDS, which all seem to have been in humans since near the start of the epidemic. And since it is unlikely that a single primate or human was infected with more than one of these strands, there have to have been multiple transmission events from primates to humans. The issue isn't about reports of when people said they saw the disease, but about what we can now infer about who had what when. Robin Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hanson.gmu.edu Asst. Prof. Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030- 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323
Re: AIDS/POLIO-Not Much Econ
> The article did grant that there >remains the strange puzzle of the coincidence in timing of the various >strands of AIDS all being transmitted from primates to humans within a >close period, which I suppose that Hooper will emphasize when backed >into a corner. The article suggests theories of population increases >or the introduction of cheap syringes, both of which might explain why >infection didn't happen earlier. I'm probably way in over my head here, but I thought that there was still a lot of controversy over exactly when and where AIDS first emerged in the human population. I seem to remember hearing it claimed that there were confirmed cases in humans before the polio vaccination campaign. I thought I've also heard it claimed that the wave of reports around the time of the vaccine could be explained by a reporting anomaly -- that there was a buzz in the medical community that caused people to recognize what they were seeing as a single disease whereas before that time the pattern of symptoms might not have been seen as a unique disease. -- Bill Dickens William T. Dickens The Brookings Institution 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036 Phone: (202) 797-6113 FAX: (202) 797-6181 E-MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AOL IM: wtdickens
Re: AIDS/POLIO-Not Much Econ
Alexander Tabarrok wrote: >... Furthermore as Robin pointed out >there was "a claimed strong correlation between where CHAT was given and >the earliest HIV cases. But this correlation is only described via some >maps. This cries out for a more formal statistical analysis..." >According to the Economist (Sept. 16, 2000) a "closer analysis" (don't >know if this is the same as Robin's formal analysis) suggests that the >correlation is spurious. Yes, I saw that and was curious to know whether the analysis critical is any better than Hooper's analysis. The article did grant that there remains the strange puzzle of the coincidence in timing of the various strands of AIDS all being transmitted from primates to humans within a close period, which I suppose that Hooper will emphasize when backed into a corner. The article suggests theories of population increases or the introduction of cheap syringes, both of which might explain why infection didn't happen earlier. But I'm not sure they can explain why we haven't seen more such transmissions since then. Robin Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hanson.gmu.edu Asst. Prof. Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030- 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323
AIDS/POLIO-Not Much Econ
List regulars may recall a side discussion that occurred some time ago on the possibility that polio vaccination loosed the AIDS epidemic on the world. As Robin pointed out the case is made in a big book by Edward Hooper. As I mentioned then, some samples of the oral polio vaccine from original batches in the late 1950's still existed. They have just recently been tested by three separate and independent laboratories and shown to be HIV free. Furthermore as Robin pointed out there was "a claimed strong correlation between where CHAT was given and the earliest HIV cases. But this correlation is only described via some maps. This cries out for a more formal statistical analysis..." According to the Economist (Sept. 16, 2000) a "closer analysis" (don't know if this is the same as Robin's formal analysis) suggests that the correlation is spurious. Thought you would want to know. Alex --- Dr. Alexander Tabarrok Vice President and Director of Research The Independent Institute 100 Swan Way Oakland, CA, 94621-1428 Tel. 510-632-1366, FAX: 510-568-6040 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
