« Drugs from Canada: Hardly a panacea | Main | Kool-Aide »

Another Nobel Laureate Embarrassment

Add her to the list of "distinguished" winners.

Nobel peace laureate claims HIV deliberately created

Kenyan ecologist Wangari Maathai, the first African woman to win the Nobel Peace Prize, today reiterated her claim that the AIDS virus was a deliberately created biological agent.

"Some say that AIDS came from the monkeys, and I doubt that because we have been living with monkeys (since) time immemorial, others say it was a curse from God, but I say it cannot be that.

"Us black people are dying more than any other people in this planet," Ms Maathai told a press conference in Nairobi a day after winning the prize for her work in human rights and reversing deforestation across Africa.

"It's true that there are some people who create agents to wipe out other people. If there were no such people, we could have not have invaded Iraq," she said.

"We invaded Iraq because we believed that Saddam Hussein had made, or was in the process of creating agents of biological warfare," said Ms Maathai.

"In fact it (the HIV virus) is created by a scientist for biological warfare," she added.

After they awarded the Peace Prize to lifelong terrorist Yasser Arafat, we knew the whole thing was a sham, but you would think they could at least make sure the recipient was not insane.


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Another Nobel Laureate Embarrassment:

» The Glittering Eye linked with HIV deliberately created?

» The Flying Space Monkey Chronicles linked with Suspicion is Fact

» The Waterglass linked with Typical Brilliance from a Nobel Laureate

» evolution linked with nobel peace prize a joke?

» One Fine Jay linked with Psychological evaluation

» Cranial Cavity linked with First it Was Arafat...

» Classical Values linked with Why Sweden is safe!

Comments (22)

The Noble Peace Prize is a ... (Below threshold)

The Noble Peace Prize is a joke these day.

After they awarded the P... (Below threshold)

After they awarded the Peace Prize to lifelong terrorist Yasser Arafat, we knew the whole thing was a sham, but you would think they could at least make sure the recipient was not insane.

Why? By giving the award to Arafat, they pretty much proved the Nobel committee's members are insane. This award only closes the loop: insane committee members giving the award to insane people.

I don't think they could have gotten anyone sane to accept it, after these past several years.

A profoundly shallow and si... (Below threshold)

A profoundly shallow and silly woman. In short an ideal recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, an award that has been completely politicized.

Much of Europe now seems do... (Below threshold)

Much of Europe now seems dominated by leftist politics. Sweden is on the cutting edge in these things. This year, we are getting a taste of what it is like, as the far left has coopted the Democratic party. Old, pink politicians like Richard Gephardt now look like they are "center-right" compared to the new look Democrats.

John Kerry has proved to be a fast learner. Say anything that will advance your cause in the moment. We no longer have a clue as to what he really believes or would do.

Now, all the non-scientific Nobel prizes are given to advance the leftist political agenda, which tends to be socialist, friendly to national liberation movements that might use terrorism to advance their cause (as if that is a reasonable possibility), anti-Semitic, and anti-Israel (related but different).

Kenya invaded Iraq?<p... (Below threshold)

Kenya invaded Iraq?

I had no idea...

Another American Basher. Sh... (Below threshold)

Another American Basher. She should set an example and donate her home as an AIDS hospital, donate all her (substantial) Nobel Prize money to aides research.

Am I crazy, or does this no... (Below threshold)

Am I crazy, or does this not even make sense as a conspiracy theory? Yes, the long incubation period gives the host plenty of time to spread the virus. But the limited avenues of transmission - blood and bodily fluids only - don't seem ideal for infecting a population. Wouldn't something that acted more quickly and spread more easily - like ebola - be more likely?

This sounds less like a true conspiracy theorist and more like someone who is pandering to the well-funded AIDS activists.

I would submit that it's q... (Below threshold)

I would submit that it's quite likely that, just like Ebola, AIDS has been around a lot longer than anyone suspects. It was only recently that we've been able to see viruses, we can see how poorly the HIV virus replicates itself exactly, that's why it's so damned hard to come up with a vaccine, as opposed to Smallpox, for instance.
It is the advances in travel, communication and medecine that allows us to know about Ebola, a hundred years ago if a remote villiage in Africa died out, the outside world never knew about it. By the time even neighboring villages knew something was wrong, scavenger animals had eaten the evidence and the jungle had started reclaiming the village.
Who knows when the HIV virus made the jump to humans? It's not like there weren't a bazillion unexplained and unknown deaths before anyone knew about it.
The late discovery was also compounded by the custom of expelling the very old and very sick from the village among many African tribes, this custom was found in many other primitive cultures, it was not restricted to Africa. It's hard to tell the age of many diseases if the victims, in some places even today, become hyena poop before they're ever examined by a doctor.
Let me say, before anybody starts screaming, it's quite understandable that these tribes, both in Africa and elsewhere, did expell the very sick and very old. When there's no medicine and no way to store food for lean times, when death by starvation and malnutrition is common, the survival of the tribe becomes far more important th a the survival of the weaker individuals.

I think Peter is on the rig... (Below threshold)
Steve L.:

I think Peter is on the right track. How would someone 50 years ago known to comapre the immune systems of two people that seemed to have died of dissimilar diseases? Remember, AIDS doesn't kill people. It's the other diseases that they contract due to their lowered immune system that kill. Only when doctors began to see patterns did they begin to hunt for a problem. Even then, they initially disagreed on what they were dealing with. In fact, different groups tried to prove that their "pet" disease was somehow the key.

In an unsophiticated society, a person contracts pneumonia and dies. No one thinks much of why he got pneumonia. It's disease that happens. Every disease has a starting point. I would suspect that there has never been a disease doctors knew was different from the very first case. It's only after patterns and trends do they start to suspect anythign is amiss.

Alfred Noble is probably sp... (Below threshold)

Alfred Noble is probably spinning in his grave. I assume he never intended the prize to be used as a political statement. I would say that the Noble Foundation has been hijacked by radicals who serve another higher power.

I assume he never inten... (Below threshold)

I assume he never intended the prize to be used as a political statement.

No, that was his exact intention. He was horribly ashamed of inventing dynamite, which he considered a major contributor to the horrors of war.

Now, whether he intended it to be political in the way it currently is used is another matter.

You males are suffering fro... (Below threshold)

You males are suffering from your own occidentalist bias towards the patriarchal concept of "logic." This noble woman sees the America-caused suffering in her continent, and has the courage to overcome the blinders of western-created male-dominated "science" and call it as it is!

Nice parody, Miss Truett. ... (Below threshold)

Nice parody, Miss Truett. You almost had me going there for a moment.

What Jim Bender and Peter w... (Below threshold)

What Jim Bender and Peter wrote (^^).

Another thing: human populations everywhere, whether starving or not, have all grown in numbers exponentially. Meaning, there are just far more millions of human beings alive today and being born today than ever before, so there are more occurences -- everywhere -- of every condition and influence, good and bad, and that goes for diseases, afflictions, malformations, disturbances, excellences, all of it.

More individual numbers of any population equals more opportunities for any/all incidents of everything related to populations to exist.

Another thing: Us humans CONTRACT viral infections from, almost always, other humans and often other mammals (or from bodies of water or contaminated food stuffs but then again, the viral agent is just hosting a ride on those substances and originated from some other human or mammal individual).

So, behavior has everything in the world to do with who contracts what virus and how they contract it/them...the "Prize winner" here completely overlooks the fact that behaviors in Africa as to sexuality are the issue for the rapidly spreaded and spreading HIV (among others) in the populations there. They can boil their water for to avoid SOME viruses, but they can't avoid HIV when engaging in sexual contact with someone who harbors the virus (or others).

I heard from some guy who was both paranoid and a chiropractor years ago that it was his decision (this was about 1982) that "the American Medical Association invented HIV inorder to eradicate gay people." Oh, the guy was also "gay."

So, it's a case of someone with prejudice about and against some other human type who perceives them as arch enemies, planners and presenters of conspired anhiliation...in the case of this lady from Africa, a black person, it's the White Man who has brought this terror upon them, and damn any further examination of the science involved. And, in the case of that chiropractor, who was educated and encouraged to distrust "standard medicine," and probably also heterosexuals, it was "the American Medical Association" (a member organization of American practitioners) who "invented AIDS."

To schizonphrenics, there really, truly ARE people who they can see speaking to them, who are otherwise invisible to everyone else. Sometimes, schizophrenics even think that those people aren't invisible to everyone else, but that everyone else is lying to the schizophrenic about "not seeing" those "people" inorder to conspire against the schizophrenic and "drive them crazy" and the like.

I think the lady with the Nobel Peace Prize sounds borderline mentally ill, despite her prize. As did that chiropractor who, in all seriousness, really believed that the evil doctors of America were all working together to conspire to infect and destroy both chiropracors and gay people.

I agree that the HIVirus has more than likely always been present in our world, at least as long as there have been bacteria and viruses, life in existence here on the planet. It's just a case, with HIV -- as with other infectious agents -- of that/those becoming more prevalent among an ever increasing population number, and presto, you have more infections because you have more people who are more infected. But, the agents themselves are certainly almost always been present on the Earth, in other species more prevalently also, but in and among humans.

Who up until very recently, particularly in Africa, for Heaven's sake, have always maintained isolated groups living with less contact to one another. In the last hundred years, we now have a planet of people who are all interacting and intermingling, and this is a new phenomenon of human existence, not that the infections us humans have are, just that we're in greater contact with one another, at higher numbers, higher than ever before as to populations worldwide.

But, it does come back to behavior by every individual and that's the key issue that most people never consider: it's how they behave and the actions they engage in that exposes them to whatever they are later exposed to, or, they aren't because they refrain from actions which expose them to whatever. It's a matter of behavior if you do whatever, so it's still a case of most health concerns being related to behaviors, or, not, even inherited issues...still can make choices as to the behaviors involved to produce and maintain the conditions, or, not, and also, how you live with what conditions, or what treatment, preventions you seek for them.

Personal responsibility. Something the lady from Africa completely avoids discussing.

About the Nobel Peace Prize, ever since Jimmy Carter received what he did and how, I've perceived that "Prize" as either a caustic sarcasm, or, a caustic barb. Either way, still a caustic process, awarding bad behavior, trying to label it something it isn't.

She should stick to <a href... (Below threshold)

She should stick to planting trees.

I don't believe HIV was alw... (Below threshold)

I don't believe HIV was always around in humans. AIDs was discovered In the early 80's, and the CDC started monitoring it. They gradually refined their understanding of what to monitor, then went backwards to check whether there were undiagnosed cases. They did not find a great number.

The number of new AIDs cases each year went from less than 100 to over 10,000 in just a few (maybe 5) years. If it had been with us all along, there would have been more cases discovered in the early years by reviewing diagnoses of cases with similar symptoms, and correcting the diagnoses.

Africa is definitely a different scenario than the US. The transmission modes must be different there, because they are up to 10% to 20% infected with AIDs in certain areas. One big difference is their medical practices. They don't use a new needle each time. They don't sterilize the needle between uses. This is due to the poverty there. In 1985 the Reader's Digest wrote about the epidemic of AIDs in Africa, which the WHO (U.N.) was denying. The theory was that the backwards medical system was actually transmitting the disease.

If you look at the CDC data year to year in the US, you'll realize that the disease cannot be sustained by heterosexual activity alone. It requires shared needle use (drugs use) and homosexual behavior. If you don't believe this, ponder why there are so few females who are infected heterosexually, even though the researchers claim that it is 10 or 20 times easier for a women to get it from an HIV positive partner than vice versa.

There is one way that it may have been here all along. Maybe infection requires exposure to combinations of different strains of the virus. Maybe exposure to one version of the virus doesn't often infect you. A society becoming more promiscuous would create more exposures to multiple strains, causing the transmission rate to become great enough to support AIDS in humans.

Thanks, Mr. Bowen; I've had... (Below threshold)

Thanks, Mr. Bowen; I've had my training by listening to people who say such things in all seriousness.

I cannot help but wonder if... (Below threshold)

I cannot help but wonder if there is some diabolical plot to kill "Rock" stars? Just look at the AIDS deceased roll call: Rock Hudson, Freddie Mercury, Liberace, Andy Gibb, and Rod Stewart?

Ken:While I can ap... (Below threshold)


While I can appreciate your comments (^^), they do represent, even as you express, your 'BELIEF' that you'd rather not or prefer to think of HIV as being some "modern' introduction into human life on Earth.

The human population has only even been aware of something called "bacteria" and later, "viral"/"virus" existence for a very short time...our capacity to perceive, much less understand, these forms (baceria are regarded as a "lifeform" while "viruses" are not considered a "lifeform," but it's an ongoing argument in science as to the definition of viral forms, given our existing definitions of what is "life" and what is not), our very capacity to even understand much less study and understand viral individuals is immensely juvenile, academically.

There is no way of assuming, one way or another -- certainly not upon personal interpretation or opinion -- whether HIV has been present in human life before the last twenty or so years. My assumption, also an opinion, is that it has existed with and in relationship to human life for longer than we are currently aware, just because it is LIKELY (or, rather, more likely) to me than it is NOT likely that it's been an infectious agent affecting human life for a long time, as long as humans have been in intimate contact with the blood of one another and other life (thus, providing the liklihood for all possibility of all viral and bacterial infections in all mutual contact).

That HIV was somehow isolated in the blood of chimpanzees for all of their existence and our existence is unreliable an idea...given our close genetic relationship with chimpanzees, more than likely, the virus (as with others) likely as not became isolated within one population of chimpanzees and then replicated to such a "load" or number in presence within that population, that it spread in greater dose or lethal presence to other chimpanzee populations and then eventually humans came into contact with it in smaller isolated populations where it lingered and multiplied and then spread to a visiting individual or individuals and then spread and then spread, etc.

Which is exactly how both bacteria and virus replicate once they've infected first one host, then another, then another...they multiply within one host to such an extent as to cause the host noticable "problems" of health and then do likewise to populations, based upon numbers infected.

Same thing with ebola and others...people just come into contact intermittently with these infectious agents and then other human individuals do likewise, unaware of the bacteria and/or virus in whoever they share close contact with.

The most significant aspect to the current presence of HIV (as with other terrible infectious agents in human populations) is due to human population numbers and because of those numbers, the inherent capacity for individuals to be in close contact with other humans.

IF we were, as a species, as isolated as, say, grizzly bears, living isolated lives in wilderness with only contact once a year with a mate and offspring, but sharing no food sources, sharing no mutual interactions beyond that...THEN it's far less likely that diseases even have an opportunity to contact other individuals.

BUT, that's not the case. With HIV, surely it was in the human population a while ago but MOST of the rest of us never were aware of it. As was science itself, as it was not even aware of other viral agents and not so long ago. So, it's more a case of (1.) increasing scientific awareness of infectious agents, including HIV and (2.) increasing human populations with inherent increasingly close contact with all others that has allowed HIV to be pose the dangerous presence that it does.

Like ebola, like small pox, like "the plague," (some of those are bacteria, some are viral agents), there's no one to die if there are only isolated, lone infected individuals dying and lying to waste somewhere remotely than if those infected with such deadly agents are coughing on a closed airflight travelling the globe, and infecting increasing numbers outwardly infected others. Which is only now possible in our "modern" lifestyles from the past twenty, thirty years.

But, unless you can or cannot isolate HIV in million year old chimpanzee remains, there's no way to prove that it didn't exist earlier in mammal life, but, rather, it is more likely that it did, than that it did not, based upon what is likely compared to what is not likely about the virus itself.

Hello -S-,To clari... (Below threshold)

Hello -S-,

To clarify: I don't think that HIV was intentionally created by man. I believe it appeared in nature, probably just a mutation of an existing virus.

Though our medical experience with viruses is short, medical science had known about immune disorders for at least 10 or 20 years before AIDs was discovered. Thus I don't believe doctors were simply missing earlier AIDs cases.

My beef regarding the AIDs issue is how it is treated as a political issue rather than a medical one. If there is to be success against AIDs, there must be intellectual honesty so we can gather accurate data, analyze it accurately, determine where the real risks reside, and determine what will actually work against it.

Going through the contribut... (Below threshold)
Dee Dee:

Going through the contributions on this thread i am baffled at the extent of naivety that compounds internet contributors, who unlike the villager have a large knowledge database at their proposal for analytical analysis and fundamental judgement thereof.

Wangari Maathai for the record is right. Thambo Mbeki was on this trail too, that HIV aids cannot cause a syndrome.. that is simple medicine. but for the purposes of laymen who have filled responses here lets get a go, a single virus, the mutation capabilities not withstanding cannot lead to a bludgeon immune deficiency breakdown.

Lets leave that there, Kenya commissioned a devil worship report whose contents are yet to be made public in total and Ndingi mwana a' nzeki is privy to the findings that authoritatively established that HIV/aids is a creation of the US.

Sample this an increase in condoms in Uganda led to an equal increase in HIV'AIDS CASES... this is my submission, condoms are just a commercial investment and so are ARV'S.

Condoms first came to prevent unwanted pregnancies...that era went STD'S came and without any improvement on the condom we were told it would help us prevent contraction.

Then came Aids and wghat are we being told?

Wangari Maathai is right.

Never say never. Con... (Below threshold)
Godfrey Dande:

Never say never. Consider the case of the indians who have been herded into reserves to creat space for those who can. What if some multinational wanted africa for a golf resort. What if as it has been proved by the colonial debaclce, you dont herd africans into a reserve and occupy their land. We come out raving mad and fight like bulldogs. However we are superstitious and inherit wives. So HIDAV would seem a perfect exterminator for the vermint. For whoever called Dr. Maathai a silly woman, this woman might have been formulating national policy before philogeny even considered driving trucks.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy