Updated 11/07/02

Please use the menu below to jump to a topic:
go button


Early Hepatitis B Vaccines and the “Man-Made” Origin of HIV/AIDS

by Leonard G. Horowitz, D.M.D., M.A., M.P.H.

This article regards a matter of global urgency transcending better known AIDS threats. It describes a universal challenge posed by ever increasing numbers of plagues predicted to depopulate at least half of the world’s current human inhabitants within two generations. This documented science virtually proves, through the process of elimination and a review of the most updated evidence, the origin of HIV/AIDS as an iatrogenic (i.e., man-made) outcome of specific vaccination experiments.

Considered reflection on this AIDS science, along with the sociopolitical correlates and antecedents of this current catastrophe, reveals the likelihood that myriad other immune
dysfunctions, autoimmune diseases, and cancers, including leukemias, lymphomas, sarcomas, and other ailments linked to viral infections, have resulted from previously engineered microbes that have by accident or intent found their way from cancer virus laboratories into humanity’s bloodstream by way of the most trusted public health preventative—vaccinations.

If what you are about to read is true, and each point is precisely stated and meticulously documented, beyond extensive depopulation, humanity’s very survival may hinge on this recognition, its implications, and our considered response. Especially relevant, when reflecting on the following facts, is the wisdom addressed by the late World Health Organization (WHO) AIDS czar, Dr. Jonathan Mann, whose life ended tragically on Flight 111 enroute to a European AIDS conference. “More than a medical scientific problem,” Dr. Mann said, “AIDS is a sociopolitical imposition.”


AIDS is undoubtedly “man-made.” We can now assert this “very apparent iatrogenic origin,” versus the “theoretic iatrogenic origin” of HIV/AIDS because of the rapidly increasing, now substantial, scientific support for this conclusion. Currently, international scientific consensus among leading investigators in this field, many of whose works and words are excerpted below, holds that HIV/AIDS originated from one or more extraordinary man-made, not natural, events dating back to the early to mid-1970s. Especially implicated in initiating the AIDS pandemic, according to many scientists and scholars, was the hepatitis B vaccine as detailed in the following pages.

This may come as a surprise, or even quite a shock, to most people since the mainstream media and most respected medical journals have yet to herald the following knowledge. As a result most “authorities” still issue false and misleading claims such as: 1) “the HB vaccine theory of HIV/AIDS origination has been discussed, debated, and dismissed by an overwhelming majority of the HIV/AIDS research community;” 2) “People who claim that AIDS was man-made provide false information and hearsay;” 3) “It is sad that public attention and resources are diverted to attend to such unscientific dribble;” 4) “Man-made origin of AIDS vaccine proponents do severe damage to the public health community and vaccination efforts;” and 5) “Those that advance man-made theories of AIDS have financial motives,” as though there were no financial interests on the other side of the debate.

As a pro bono consultant contacted recently by Amnesty International (AI) members who desired to advance a resolution for the global organization to investigate this HB vaccine thesis, I was appalled by the amount of resistance and politicking performed by members of AI’s so-called “HIV/AIDS Task Force” which sought $1 billion of relief for human rights violations associated with HIV/AIDS from the U.S. Government. These funds, the Task Force reported, were urgently needed to buy drug–cocktails for persons with HIV/AIDS. Each of the five claims cited above were issued by members of this Task Force completely ignorant of the following science. 

With regard to the first offensive claim, as the sole author of “Polio, hepatitis B and AIDS: an integrative theory on a possible vaccine induced pandemic” published by Harcourt Publishers, Ltd. of London in the esteemed international journal of Medical Hypothesis,2 this well-focused thesis has never been “discussed, debated,” nor “dismissed” by any consensus in any official capacity. Although Black Americans have been polled regarding the origin of HIV/AIDS being man-made,3 there has never been a published polling of the scientific community in this regard, and certainly not one regarding the HB hypothesis advanced below.

HIV/AIDS Origin Misconceptions Versus Science

Opponents of iatrogenic (or “man-made”) theories of AIDS have routinely confused hearsay and sporadic media propaganda with hard science, such as that “discussed, debated” and not “dismissed” recently at the Royal Society of London’s inquiry into the origin of this pandemic. They exclusively focused on the theory that contaminated polio vaccines triggered the HIV/AIDS pandemic.4 These proceedings were published in 2001. Quotes relevant to reasoned consideration of this unique/yet-to-be-tested hepatitis B vaccine theory of HIV/AIDS follow. These statements were made by featured presenters, all recognized leaders in this multidisciplinary field discussing the polio vaccine theory of AIDS origination. The first of these quotes is especially relevant to
proposed investigations:

“There should be an investigation by an international committee mostly composed of non-medical people concerning how a rather obvious and plausible theory [of AIDS’s origin from contaminated vaccines] came to be scorned and restricted from publication for so long, especially when important consequences regarding mankind’s worst epidemic, and even more important consequences for other possibly even worse that may be following, hang in the balance. As a corollary it should be studied why the hypothesis had to be promoted mainly by outsiders to science and medicine. The ressures towards investigation (and non-investigation) that emanate from huge drug companies and their influence in slanting research in subtle ways should also be examined, as should the role of journals and peer review in potentially obstructing publications of controversial kinds.” W.D. Hamilton,5 quoted by Julian Cribb in “The origin of acquired immune deficiency syndrome: can science afford to ignore it?” Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B (2001) 356:935-938.

“Faced with the terrible burden of AIDS, stories that HIV was introduced into Africa from the West by an accident such as OPV [oral polio vaccine] or intentionally by the USA Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) have gained widespread credence. . . . Nevertheless, because natural transmission repeatedly occurs, albeit on rare occasions, does not mean that contamination of a vaccine could not have been the route on another occasion. As with other infections, e.g., hepatitis B virus,natural and iatrogenic transmissions of retroviruses are not mutually exclusive.” Weiss, RA6

Despite studies that have advanced evidence suggesting an earlier than 1970 origin of HIV/AIDS,7-9 “[t]he fact that there were ten or so synchronous but distinguishable African epidemics is a definitive feature of AIDS for which the natural transfer theory [e.g., the “cut hunter transfer”] gives no convincing account. . . . To summarize these findings regarding the relatively large number of distinct group M subtypes: no set of likely natural conditions . . . will adequately simulate so many as ten distinguishable subtypes in a complex star-like configuration . . . . [T]he onus is upon the supporters of the natural [not iatrogenic] theory to account for the unexpectedly large number of HIV-1 subtypes. Exponential growth of the epidemic(s) is not by itself a satisfactory explanation (Hahn et al. 2000). . . . The likeliest source of the multiple subtypes and the synchronization of their conspicuous diversification is a punctuated origin [i.e., an iatrogenic event]. . . . [I]t is not far-fetched to imagine the ten or so clades deriving from a single animal (perhaps immunosuppressed and possessing a swarm of variants) [as might have been the case with chimpanzees used in the process of vaccine manufacture] or from a few animals that might have belonged to a single troop or might have been gang-caged together. The number of animals required is secondary to the extent of variation in the source at the time of the zoonotic [i.e., transfer of the virus between species] or iatrogenic event. The [vaccine] hypothesis makes a case for such a punctuated origin . . .” Myers G, et al. 10

“We conclude that SIV cannot become a zoonosis, but requires adaptive mutations to become HIV. Some modern event must have aided in the transition of SIV to HIV. Our research indicates that serial passage of partially adapted SIV between humans could produce the series of cumulative mutations sufficient for the emergence of epidemic HIV strains . . . We conclude that increased unsterile injecting in Africa during the period 1950-1970 provided the agent for SIV human infections to emerge as epidemic HIV in the modern era.” Drucker E, et al.11

I might interject at this point that this conclusion by Drucker et al, although seriously undermining natural evolution theorists, reflects a myopic arrogance unbecoming to their otherwise reasonable hypothesis. Their conclusion neglects the risks inherent in the hepatitis B vaccine manufacturing and testing process as detailed below consistent with the analyses of Myers et al.10 Obviously, all of the above authoritative statements contradict “common knowledge.” The consensus of scientists at this historic British AIDS origin conference favored additional investigations into possible iatrogenic sources of the HIVs.

The 1959 HIV Sequence Discovery

In the interest of facilitating progress on this issue, much publicity has been given to the notion that HIV was discovered in a 1959 blood sample from Leopoldville, Zaire;9 and that scientific consensus holds 1931 as the approximate date of HIV origination.7 These superstitions have led to common, yet false, declarations that HIV/AIDS originated well before the polio vaccination era and the Special Virus Cancer Program (SVCP) that much evidence below links to the “punctuated origin” of AIDS.

For the record, according to the authors of the 1959 discovery, they never found, nor alleged to have found, HIV, or anything like a full virus. According to these authors, even “attempts to amplify HIV-1 fragments of >300 base pairs (bp) were unsuccessful, . . . However, after numerous attempts, four shorter sequences were obtained” that only represented small portions of two of the six genes of the complete AIDS virus.9

This is why Gao et al, referred to the 1959 sequences as “the oldest trace of the AIDS pandemic . . . although the precise timing and circumstance of early events in the SIVcpz/HIV-1 zoonosis remain obscure.”22 [Editor’s note for the lay reader, “SIVcpz” is short for “simian immunodeficiency virus from the chimpanzee.” This is know to be the closest viral relative to the human AIDS virus, HIV-1.]

Unfortunately, regarding the 1959 sequences, Zhu et al., left much room for misinterpretation if not wild speculation by stating that given the “‘starburst phylogeny,’ HIV-1 was probably introduced into humans shortly before that time frame, about a decade or two earlier than previously estimated. . . .” 10 (Emphasis added.) They speculated the zoonosis might have occurred “considerably earlier than the late 1940s.” Obviously, this account is irrelevant to “the extraordinary synchrony in the 1970s of ten or more distinguishable epidemics” discovered by Myers et al. 10 Therefore, this later group of researchers concluded that, with the exception of the 1959 sequences suggesting viral ancestry, “Clinical, serological and molecular retrospective studies have all failed to produce any evidence of AIDS or HIV prior to the 1970s.” 10 (Emphasis added.) As Myers et al., had initially advanced, the early to mid-1970s “Big Bang” origin of HIV/AIDS is further supported by most recent scientific evidence.10

As if repeating false assumptions would alter historic and scientific facts, many contemporary investigators, like those representing AI’s HIV/AIDS Task Force, continue to imply the SIV to HIV zoonosis occurred on or before 1959. Many natural evolution theory evangelists continue to cite the now disproven “cut hunter” theory to explain the origin of the pandemic.8,22 Reflecting on Zhu et al’s position, however, they simply concluded that the major-group viruses that dominate the global AIDS pandemic at present shared a common ancestor in the 1940s or the early 1950s. However, given confounding factors, including the likelihood of viral gene recombination during the manufacture and testing of the HB vaccine, like Korber et al.’s speculation discussed in the next section, the 1959 “isolate” may hold little, if any, relevance in determining the origin of HIV/AIDS. 10

Suffice it to say, no one has ever found a virus predating the SVCP and the late 1970s.11 At best they found fragments of what may have been the complete virus, but more likely pieces of a progenitor virus they called “a common ancestor” that dated back to “the 1940s or the early 1950s.” These and other portions of this “common ancestor” may have existed for centuries if not millennia. Again, this evidence is rrelevant when considering the 1970s “punctuated [iatrogenic] event” recently determined to be undisputable scientific fact.

More importantly, as Zhu and Ho et al., concluded, “the role of large-scale vaccination campaigns, perhaps with multiple uses of non-sterilized needles, should be carefully examined, . . .” as contributing to the sudden emergence of HIV/AIDS in North America and Africa simultaneously during the late 1970s.9,11

The 1931 AIDS Origin Assumption and Viral Recombination

Regarding the 1931 estimated date of HIV’s origin advanced by Korber et al.7 (i.e., “somewhere between 1910 and 1950”), a critical examination of these authors’ methods reveals problems. Largely speculative due to their use of a confounding-factor-liable computer model, Korber and colleagues noted their limitations. They stated their finding(s) regarding the 1931 genetic projection, that precludes various vaccine-induced pandemic theories, might be wrong if viral recombination(s) had occurred. They most certainly did in the evolutionary process of SIV to HIV according to most cientists.10,13 Yet, despite these facts, iatrogenic theory opponents who have secured a gross burden of proof” advantage in the AIDS origin debate,20 repeatedly reference this group’s work, along with the frequently misrepresented work of Zhu, et al.9 concerning the 1959 sequence discovery.22

Again, the “punctuated origin” of HIV/AIDS determined by Myers et al., can only explain the nearly simultaneous emergence of ten separate, though related, AIDS epidemics in Africa during the early 1970s, that were well established by 1976.10

Lending further credence to the theory that early hepatitis B vaccine trials provided the “punctuated event,” Korber et al wrote of anticipated errors in their 1931 determination using linear or recombinant evolutionary models due to “unnatural” or iatrogenic events inciting viral recombination. They wrote , “If there was a concentration of such recombinants during just one period of sampling, the effect on the timing estimate would be unpredictable.” 7

Thus, if the “punctuated origin event” advanced by Myers et al,10 had been the passage of HB virus from polio vaccinated humans to chimpanzees then back to humans, with the additional risk of recombination from pooling hundreds of infected serum samples prior to additional viral recombinant transfers via the HB vaccines given to human subjects in New York City and sub-Saharan Africa, then this might best explain the origin of HIV/AIDS and render Korber et al’s 1931 projection inconsequential. As detailed in the next section, this is precisely the thesis advanced by Horowitz.2,13

In summary, the determinations reached by Korber et al.,7 and Ho et al.,9 of possible dates for the origin of HIV-1, 1931 and 1959 respectively, have been adequately clarified elsewhere.10 “The authors themselves acknowledge, the super-computer-based study cannot tell whether this hypothetical 1930 virus was in humans or animals and so do not show when zoonosis occurred.” 7,10

Myers et al. further qualified: “If PIV [primate immunodeficiency virus] was in humans in the first half of the 20th century, it may be estimated, given the assumptions of the look-back analysis, that the ancestral HIV-1 group M virus arose at 1930 plus or minus 20 years.” Conversely, if PIV was not in humans in the first half of the 20th century, then the Korber et al analysis holds little, if any, value in-so-far-as determining a date or origin of the HIVs and AIDS. 7,10

The Earliest Hepatitis B Vaccines and The Origin of AIDS

If early polio vaccines had not triggered the origin of HIV/AIDS as scientific consensus now holds,6 then some other, chimpanzee-related, “iatrogenic event” must be available to explain the staggering array of deadly recombinants that were proven by Myers et al to have arisen virtually simultaneously during the early to mid-1970s.10,21 In this regard, even more neglected, and perhaps more relevant than the OPV theory of AIDS, is the hepatitis B (HB) vaccine hypothesis.2,13,23

According to scientific records,2 African chimpanzees were used in the manufacture of the HB vaccines during the early 1970s. Additional documents prove that human HB viruses cultured in vivo in chimpanzees were returned to humans whose infected blood serum was then pooled to develop four different strains of experimental HB vaccine pilot tested between 1970 and 1975 in New York City and central Africa. This HB vaccine theory of HIV zoonosis proposes that endogenous, or more likely exogenous, progenitor viruses were activated24 when serially transmitted from humans to chimpanzees, then back to humans. Subsequently, pooled blood serum containing HB surface antigen and/or live virions, a milieu ripe for viral recombination, was used to develop the four suspected vaccines administered to New York’s gay population and simultaneously to sub-Saharan Africans. Besides the phylogenetic evidence cited above, epidemiological evidence also supports this HB vaccine theory of HIV/AIDS origination.

Figure 1 is derived from Higginson and Muir’s report on cancer studies conducted by the International Agency for Research in Cancer (IARC) in collaboration with the National Cancer Institute (NCI).25 Figure 2 derives from this data superimposed on a map of HIV-1 seroprevalence in Africa reported by the U.S. Department of Commerce in a publication discussing desirable depopulation associated with HIV/AIDS.26 Additional evidence here was supplied in the chronology of the early hepatitis B vaccine trials compiled by Goodfield. 27 The two maps, juxaposed, show a striking correlation between hepatitis B vaccine and liver cancer experiments conducted in Africa during the early 1970s, and the countries in central and southern Africa with the high est HIV-1 seroprevalence rates by 1994. The black squares indicate areas participating in the HB cancer virus research and vaccine trials.

It should also be noted that Mozambique has one of the highest rates of HIV-2, which was allegedly discovered by Essex et al.,28 in Senegalese female prostitutes years after the African hepatitis B vaccination pilot studies began. Due to their state-authorized employment and high risk for infection, Senegalese female prostitutes were required to receive hepatitis B vaccinations for relicensure. That Essex et al. found SIVagm, a documented vaccine contaminant, in the blood of these human subject, is additionally compelling evidence in support of the HB vaccine AIDS origination theory.29

In brief, a well documented, theoretically viable, and generally neglected evolutionary route of SIVagm to HIV-1 zoonosis sequentially involves: 1) Polio vaccine recipients worldwide, including gay men in New York, and Blacks in Central Africa, were exposed to simian viruses including SV40, SFR (Simian Foamy Retroviruses containing reverse transcriptase), SIVagm, and perhaps others from the mid-1950s, through at least the 1960s;2,4 2) Between 1965 and 1970, researchers in NYC “isolated” and then inoculated the MS-2 strain of HB virus into the above cited New York and African HB vaccine study “volunteers.”2,30 3) Human derived HB viruses, and potentially activated retroviral sequences, were then transferred to chimpanzees, then back again to humans in NYC and central Africa during the development and testing of four genetically altered subtypes of the pre-1975 experimental HB vaccine.32,33 HIV-1 progenitor contamination, recombination, and/or transmission risks were likely increased during this process by: a) human incubation for more than a decade of polio vaccine contaminants and recombinants including SV40, SFR, and possibly SIVagm; b) the pooling of infected blood serum donated by hundreds of gay American and Black African polio vaccine recipients who had subsequently received injections with chimpanzee cultured strains of HB virus; c) the biohazardous laboratory conditions and viral containment problems reported by the HB vaccine investigators and their affiliates; and finally 5) The four pooled serum-derived HB vaccines that were administered to thousands of test subjects by 1975, primarily gay males in NYC and central African Blacks. This series of events provides the best explanation for an early to mid-1970s “punctuated origin event” most precisely fitting the etiological determinations of the HIV-1/AIDS pandemic.10

Again, it should be noted that the African “volunteers” inhabited a geographic area consistent with the highest rates of HIV-1 seroprevalence. Among the nations where rates are highest, HB studies were conducted in: Senegal, Cote d’Ivoire, Uganda, Kenya, Swaziland, and the northeastern part of South Africa. According to circumstantial evidence, eastern Zaire bordering the West Nile region of northwest Uganda also hosted such trials.2,25-27

Historic Precedence for the HB Vaccine Hypothesis

There is historic precedence for this precise HB thesis. According to Beale, the risk of HB viruses contaminating human blood serum and subsequent vaccinations was determined as early as 1942. Then, more than 62 deaths and 28,500 cases resulted from serum HB contaminated yellow fever vaccines.31

According to Hilleman, early yellow fever vaccines also delivered leukemic retroviruses to human populations due to caged animal and laboratory contaminations and concomitant vaccine transmissions.13

Dr. Hilleman additionally reinforced this “punctuated origin” thesis by describing the risks he encountered by importing contaminated African sub-human primates for vaccine research and development at the Merck pharmaceutical company. Between the late 1950s through the 1970s, Dr. Hilleman told Harvard medical historian Edward Shorter in 1987, “I brought African greens in. I didn’t know we were importing AIDS virus at the time.”13

Given these statements of fact, it is reasonable to suggest, as stated above, the earliest HB vaccine pilot studies may have activated an endogenous or exogenous HIV-related retroviral gene in one or more of the primates,24 fulfilling the “starburst phylogeny” antecedents advanced by Myers et al.10 

During the Royal Society’s symposium on the origin of AIDS, Hooper’s 1950s OPV/AIDS hypothesis was largely rebuked because he failed to establish the use of chimpanzees by the Wistar Institute in the production of the suspected OPV.18 Moreover, this vaccine was not given selectively to New York’s gay male population. Curiously, Merck’s early 1970s hepatitis B vaccine trials that did involve gay men in NYC, and Blacks in central Africa, partially prepared in Litton Bionetics (LB) exported/Merck imported African chimpanzees, ironically went without mention.

“Burden of Proof” and the Origin of AIDS

The most vocal opponent of the OPV and HB vaccine theories of HIV/AIDS origination is Dr. John Moore, affiliated with Rockefeller University’s Aaron Diamond Research Center in New York.

As reported in Medical Hypothesis, following a presentation advancing the HB vaccine theory of HIV/AIDS at the XI International Conference on AIDS, in 1996, Dr. Moore flippantly rebuked this thesis in the Canadian press. A few years later, he did the same regarding the Edward Hooper’s book, The River, which he alleged was historically inaccurate, potentially damaging to the public’s trust in western medicine, and harmful to his colleagues “efforts to make AIDS vaccines for use in Africa.”2

When this author personally contacted Dr . Moore in an effort to begin scientific discourse following his Canadian press interview, Moore refused any formal discussion. Responding later to prodding, he wrote me from the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center saying, “I explicity denied you an interview when you requested one. . . . I said to you that I had ‘no interest’ in your . . . grotesque theories . . . For the record, I know what your views are, and I reject them. Indeed, I dismiss them as uninteresting, incorrect and downright stupid.” In the Vancouver Sun, Moore was further quoted as saying, “HIV is transmitted from monkeys to humans. I don’t think there’s any doubt about that. It’s hard scientific reality.” In fact, according to scientific consensus, the defining zoonosis for the origin of HIV occurred between chimpanzees and humans, not monkeys.2

It should be noted that Dr. Moore’s institutional benefactors include the Rockefeller family which, along with the Rockefeller Foundation and its institutional affiliate—the Sloan-Kettering Memorial Cancer Center in New York—has heavily invested in

viral cancer research, vaccine developments, propaganda programs, population control efforts, and the Merck pharmaceutical company in particular. Thus, Moore’s bias is strongly suggested.2,13,14

Worse yet, history shows that soon after Dr. Gallo’s alleged “discovery” of the AIDS virus in 1984, Dr. Moore co-directed the only official effort to examine Merck’s HB vaccine for “fear of possible AIDS transmission.”23 His principle co-investigator was Dr. B.J. Poiesz at the State University of New York. Dr. Poiesz, their paper noted, had worked closely with Dr. Gallo in isolating the “type-C” cancer virus associated with lymphomas during the mid to late-1970s. Their group of researchers included “anonymous CDC authors” who, for unspecified reasons, omitted the centrally important New York City and African HB vaccine recipients from their analysis. Adding insult to this injury, the team’s conclusions were entirely inconsistent with earlier epidemiological
determinations and serological measures.13

Reinforcing the observance of such political bias and tainted science in this field of inquiry is the conclusion reached by several featured speakers at the Royal Society’s meeting in London. They addressed the “burden of proof” required of iatrogenic versus natural AIDS origin theorists. 10, 19, 20 These experts protested the unfair unscientific advantage that has been historically given to outspoken natural evolution theorists, such as Dr. Moore, who have been curiously exempt from having to substantiate their obviously flawed claims and hypotheses. Ironically, despite this, their unproven misguided theories remain widely accepted as supposed fact.10, 19,20 

The only remedy such deception is updated knowledge regarding the advanced genetic analyses that have seriously undermined arguments for isolated viral leaps that cannot adequately explain the source of AIDS and the “sunburst phylogeny” of HIV’s earliest African strains.10 In the wake of the Royal Society’s symposium, theories that now appear tenuous, if not ludicrous, include isolated parenteral (i.e., skin piercing) injuries (e.g., the “cut hunter theory”), nutritional exposures, population movements, and climatic variations that are alleged to have led to isolated zoonotic events followed years later, evolutionarily, by the spreading plague. Alternatively, many participants at the conference concluded that the transfer of SIV to human beings was probably connected with unprecedented medical activity in Africa in the 20th century.”21

Bionetics Evidence to be Reconciled

What continues inadequately reported in the scientific literature, perhaps because researchers remain unaware, or because most investigators would certainly feel threatened by such disconcerting revelations, was that the precise scenario advanced by Myers et al.,10 to best account for the sunburst phylogeny and “punctuated origin” event was repeatedly engineered and studied during the Litton Bionetics (LB) administered SVCP, at precisely the time (1969-1974) required to produce the “Big Bang,” as Myers originally called it. At this same time, LB’s study of HB viral co-infections with viruses currently linked to HIV-related immune suppression and AIDS symptomatology was ongoing, as you will read below. This information comes directly from their contract titled, “Investigations of Viral Carcinogenesis in Primates” (NIH Grant Number 71-2025 beginning February 12, 1962). This team, officiated by NCI “Project Officer” Dr. Robert Gallo, the subsequent discoverer of HTLV-1,2 (leukemia viruses) and HIV-1 (the AIDS virus) almost 15 years later, stated:

“During the past year [1970] macaques were inoculated at birth or in utero with the Mason-Pfizer monkey mammary virus, Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), Herpesvirus saimiri, and Marek’s disease virus. EB virus was given with immunostimulation and immunosuppression (ALS, prednisone, imuran). Australian antigen [HB virus] was given to newborn African green monkeys.”

Might this quoted knowledge have impacted Dr. Gallo’s earliest declaration that the origin of HIV-1 came from “African greens” (i.e., SIVagm), and/or Dr. Hilleman’s confession that he brought the AIDS virus into North America in African greens?

Furthermore, it is well known that HIV-2 sources from macaque monkeys from this same time period.8 Might this specific multiply-infected simian colony be the source of the original SIV to HIV zoonosis? There is much evidence to suggest this, and it is certainly worthy of an official inquiry.

It is also curious that EBV was of major interest to the LB team of researchers.

It is also well known that EBV is a potent co-carcinogen with HIV-1 and deadly co-factor in the development of AIDS.

This 1971 report by Landon, Ting and Gallo et al., referenced the use of “colony-born” primates observed for seroconversion to “EB positive” immune suppressive status predisposing the animals for retroviral infections and cancers. To summarize this work, conducted almost a decade before Dr. Gallo “discovered” the first leukemia retrovirus (HTLV-I), and later HIV-1, his Bionetics coworkers disclosed that their:

“[B]reeding and holding colonies were surveyed for antibody to EBV. All breeders were positive and their offspring contain maternal antibody for several months. . . . [Moreover,] An RNA-dependent DNA polymerase, [the primary AIDS-linked enzyme] similar to that associated with RNA tumor viruses, was detected in human leukemic cells but not in normal cells stimulated by phytohemagglutinin. The enzyme was isolated, purified and concentrated 200-fold, making possible its further characterization and study in relation to the leukemic process in man.”33

This document, and statement alone, considering its date, should be adequate impetus for an independent investigation into the SVCP with regard to the origin of AIDS.

Reflecting on the specific scenario advanced by Myers and co-workers regarding the phylogenetic, recombinant, and immunosuppressive correlates and antecedents of the “starburst” that reflects at least ten simultaneous HIV/AIDS African outbreaks, the Bionetics investigators stated the significance and “proposed course” of their vaccine research involving chimpanzees. They wrote:

“Significance to Biomedical Research and to the [Special Virus Cancer] Program of the [National Cancer] Institute: Inasmuch as tests for the biological activity of candidate human [cancer] viruses will not be tested in the human species, it is imperative that another system be developed for these determinations and, subsequently for the evaluation of vaccines or other measures of control. The close phylogenetic relationship of the lower primates [i.e., chimpanzees] to man justifies utilization of these animals for these purposes. Further study of altered transfer RNA and polymerase enzymes would determine their significance in neoplastic change and provide a basis for selection of therapeutic agents.

“Proposed Course: Continuation with increased emphasis on monitoring and intensive care of inoculated animals to determine if active infection occurs, effects of infection, and degree of immunosuppression when used. Further studies of human neoplasms at a molecular level will continue.”33

Inasmuch as humans were not being directly infected with “candidate viruses” during this program according to the contract summary, live viral vaccines derived from retroviruses similar to the HIVs were being prepared and tested in primate populations that apparently included humans as well as chimpanzees. This at the precise time that the Australian antigen—the HB highly infectious and easily transmissible cancer virus—and related HB vaccines were being injected into both chimpanzees and humans in New York and Sub-Saharan Africa by LB collaborators.33

At the XI International Conference on AIDS in 1996, when questioned regarding his involvement in these Bionetics studies, Dr. Gallo angrily replied to this author, “Quite frankly, I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.”13 If the HB vaccine theory might be the focus of a reputable independent inquiry, such as the one urged by Cribb,19 and now AI members, Dr. Gallo might be obliged to formally discuss his contract with Bionetics wherein the “Australian antigen was given to newborn African green monkeys” in the context of testing “a swarm of [candidate viral and retroviral] variants.” If he still contends this HB vaccine/origin of AIDS theory has no merit, as he argued forcefully at that time, then perhaps he would be willing to publish an alternative account reflecting more recent scientific revelations.

Huebner et al, referred to in Bionetics’s SVCP contract (NIH-71-2025), might also be persuaded to divulge valuable insights regarding this HB vaccine/origin of AIDS thesis.34 At that time, 1969, Dr. Robert Huebner was also a leader in this field on the esteemed National Academy of Sciences–National Research Council (NAS–NRC), that is, at precisely the time the Congressional Appropriations Committee heard  testimony concerning the technical expertise available through the NAS–NRC for the U.S. Army’s development of AIDS-like viruses. At that time these viruses were referred to by military personnel in the Congressional Record as “synthetic biological agents.” However, the scientific community referred to them as “type-C” RNA tumor viruses. Huebner was exquisitely aware of these developments and various retroviral species that were routinely being generated using crude early methods of recombination in SVCP labs. Again, these viruses were descriptively and functionally identical to HIV-1.2,3,13,14 According to the Bionetics contract summary report from 1972, Dr. Huebner’s group isolated and tested a cat/human hybrid oncornavirus, RD-114, from a human sarcoma by 1971. Sarcomas, associated with leukemias and lymphomas in AIDS patients were, at that time, unheard of in gay men. Later, in 1981, HB virus and vaccine expert, Dr. Don Francis, relayed his opinion as to the source of the first GRID (AIDS) cases in New York, “It’s a combination of feline leukemia and hepatitis B,” he told his mentor Max Essex at Harvard.35

The following SVCP contract excerpt34 discusses the testing of effective treatments for HIV/AIDS-like infections at that early date:

“The effects of 11 rifamycin derivaties on viral reverse transcriptase and on DNA polymerases from human normal and leukemic blood lymphocytes were evaluated. Compound 143-483, 3-formyl rifamycin SV: octyl oxime showed the greatest potency and inhibited all DNA polymerases from both viral and cellular origins.”

Might this be a cure for HIV/AIDS? Unless further investigations into this matter are conducted, we may never know.

Reflecting on these revelations in-so-far-as the myriad viral recombinants potentially contaminating LB’s labs and caged animals, and the determinations of Myers et al,10 a most appropriate question is, “Why only ten forms of HIV/AIDS broke out during the early1970s?” It would seem likely that many of the SIVs originated from these investigations as well as other pandemics such as herpes that exploded during the mid to late 1970s along with immune suppressive disorders associated with EBV infections and related cancers. Obviously, it would be helpful to investigate the possibility of other plagues that may have derived from vaccine contaminations and transmissions during the SVCP.

Many researchers, in fact, issued forewarnings about the grave risks posed by recombinant cancer virology.13 Others cited similar risks from public health’s “sacred cow” vaccinations.31 It is sobering to reflect on this knowledge in the wake of the Royal Society’s publications and official evaluations.19

Considering The Genocidal Theory of AIDS

The 1998 report of Zhu et al.9 was well timed to help promote co-author Edward Hooper’s book, The River, which substantially reinforced a previously advanced OPV theory of AIDS’s origin,12 and gave only superficial consideration to possible hepatitis B vaccine contaminations as the zoonotic vector for transferring/transforming SIVcpz into the human AIDS virus by 1976.4 Hooper referenced Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola—Nature, Accident or Intentional? among the texts that explore the genocidal theory of AIDS which he credited for his background on the hepatitis B theory.13 He cautioned against blanket acceptance of the intentional theory of HIV/AIDS, which is consistent with the proposed AI investigation of the SVCP, but he did not rule out the possibility that HIV was released intentionally.4

As Weiss stated, theories involving the CIA in the origin of AIDS have gained wide acceptance.6 Investigations by Horowitz et al.2,3,13 focused on the CIA and the 1969 appropriations hearings in which the NAS–NRC was credited as the source of technical expertise for the U.S. Army’s development of AIDS-like viruses. At that time, biological weapons were of great interest to Nelson Rockefeller’s protégé, and Nixon administration National Seurity Advisor (NSA), Dr. Henry Kissinger. According to his biographer, and two previous CIA directors—William Colby and Richard Helms—Kissinger oversaw the CIA’s top secret biological weapons program called MK:NAOMI. Soon after becoming NSA, he ordered a review of such weapons capabilities.13-15

Furthermore, in the early 1970s, in keeping with U.S. Government and global industrialists’ initiatives reflecting Rockefeller-directed Population Council urgings for Third World depopulation, Kissinger requested and received National Special Security Memorandum 200 articulating the urgency of dramatically reducing African populations.16 At that time Kissinger and associates were leading advisors to the Merck pharmaceutical company whose president, George W. Merck, was America’s biological weapons industry director, as he had been since World War II.17

According to Hooper, the genocidal hypothesis of HIV/AIDS should be “taken with a grain of salt.”4 It is clear, however, that compelling evidence exits, albeit circumstantial, that U.S. Government officials, including Henry Kissinger, may have had something to do with the initial HIV/AIDS outbreak. At the precise time corresponding to the earliest transmissions of HIV/AIDS, Kissinger directed a national security cryptocracy that included corporate affiliates at the biological weapons contractor /vaccine maker Merck, as well as the traditional weapons contractor Litton Industries. Litton’s president, Roy Ash, also served in the Nixon administration overseeing American industry. Litton’s medical subsidiary, Bionetics, as detailed above, largely directed the NCI’s SVCP, administered America’s premier biological weapons testing center at Fort Detrick, Maryland, and supplied the chimpanzees, monkeys, monkey viruses, primate cell lines, and other resources for cancer research, biological weapons development, and
vaccine manufacture.

Thus, Kissinger certainly maintained the means, through his official channels at Merck, Litton Bionetics, and the CIA, as well as the motive, to deploy AIDS-like viruses by 1974 in Merck’s HB vaccine. What is unconscionable to most people, Kissinger, a staunch advocate of African depopulation, would have considered it convenient that the emergence of HIV/AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa coincided synchronously with the massive depopulation policy institutionalized with primary funding from the Rockefeller Foundation and the Merck Fund.2,3,13,14

Most recently, Kissinger’s direction of foreign genocidal operations has been heralded by even mainstream periodicals.36 In light of these revelations, it is stunning that Kissinger wrote his own genocide indemnification policy on behalf of the United States Government in Foreign Affairs published by the Council on Foreign Relations in 2001.37

The Challenge Before Us

“There is a crisis of public faith in science and scientists,” stated Dr. Julian Cribb, referring to the contentious manner in which origin of HIV/AIDS research and debate has been conducted thus far. “What I have described is . . . a systematic endeavour to suppress public discussion and scientific inquiry into this important [vaccine] hypothesis and to discredit its proponents over more than 12 years.”

He summarized before the esteemed Royal Society gathering. “Unless scientists are prepared to go into this issue objectively and transparently, it will damage the standing of science in the eyes of the community.” 19

Determining the origin of HIV/AIDS is vital for the following reasons according to Cribb: 1) to prevent similar calamities in the future; 2) to discover remedial methods and materials that might evolve from such knowledge; 3) to improve safety standards in viral laboratories and vaccine production facilities based on the knowledge of the pandemic’s origin; and 4) to restore faith and trust in this area of science and medicine. 19

Furthermore, Cribb argued, “If AIDS is iatrogenic, through an honest mistake, science may be forgiven. But if it seeks to bury the idea, first, it will fail and second, it will destroy public trust.” To the extent that the HB vaccine theory of AIDS is officially neglected, as Hamilton foretold: “This hypothesis is certainly not going to go away.”19

But if the HB vaccine theory on the origin of AIDS, as current science overwhelmingly supports and the “process of elimination” has virtually proven, is ultimately accepted, then Cribb’s forgivable “honest mistake” conjecture might need to be reexamined against more unnerving possibilities.

At the time of this writing, the U.S. Homeland Security Act passed the Senate virtually unanimously. Mysteriously incorporated in its text was a vaccine injury indemnity clause that freed drug companies from liabilities associated with specific vaccine ingredients, such as HIV precursors in the HB vaccines. With this gross violation of U.S. constitutional, civil, and human rights, hundreds of thousands of Americans have been forced to care, without compensation, for vaccine injured family members. If the U.S. Government is able to get away with this most blatant breach of public faith, what is it capable of doing covertly? Clearly, this current vaccine policy is a form of institutionalized genocide—defined as “the mass enslaving (pharmaceutically and otherwise) and killing of people for economics, politics, and/or ideology?”

So long as the above scientific facts and AIDS issues remain unaddressed by medicine’s mainstream, the implications are that AIDS science and vaccination policies, and likely all of science, has evolved in a vacuum devoid of ethics to serve political, economic, and/or ideological motives. Thus, by strict definition, genocide and iatrogenesis have much. So much so that regardless of whether HIV/AIDS originated by accident or intentionally, with this data, there is sufficient justification to coin a new most appropriate term—“iatrogenocide.”

Further research to test this hypothesis should include: retrospective epidemiological studies of homosexual populations in New York reported to have received the earliest HB vaccines; serological studies of any stored blood and/or serum from these early HB vaccine study subjects; likewise for the chimpanzees used in the preliminary trials and/or vaccine manufacture; and genetic analyses of viral components in samples of the vaccine lots used during these earliest HB vaccine trials (if still available).

About the Author

Leonard G. Horowitz, D.M.D., M.A., M.P.H., is an internationally known authority in the overlapping fields of public health, behavioral science, emerging diseases, and bioterrorism. He received his doctorate in medical dentistry from Tufts University School of Dental Medicine in 1977, was awarded a post-doctoral fellowship in behavioral science at the University of Rochester, earned a Master of Public Health degree from Harvard University, and another Master of Arts degree in health education from Beacon College, all before joining the research faculty at Harvard. Dr. Horowitz is best known for his national bestselling book, Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola—Nature, Accident or Intentional? (Tetrahedron Press, 1998; 1-888-508-4787)

which recently resulted in the United Stated General Accounting Office investigating the man-made origin of AIDS theory. (See: http://www.healingcelebrations.com/gao.htm) Dr. Horowitz’s brilliant work in the field of vaccination risk awareness has prompted at least three Third World nations to change their vaccination policies. His recent stunning testimony before the United States Congress’ Government Reform Committee, literally brought the hearing to a halt. (See: http://www.healingcelebrations.com) Dr. Horowitz questioned government health officials regarding a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) secreted report showing a definitive link between the mercury ingredient (i.e., thimerosal), common to most vaccinations, and the skyrocketing rates of autism and behavioral disorders affecting our children and the future our nation.

Incredibly, Dr. Horowitz alerted the FBI, in writing and in person, one week before the first anthrax mailing was announced in the press, that a “major anthrax fright” was in the process of unfolding that demanded the FBI’s urgent attention. Needless to say they did not heed Dr. Horowitz’s prophetic warning.

Moreover, three months before the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, Dr. Horowitz released his thirteenth book, prophetically titled Death in the Air: Globalism, Terrorism and Toxic Warfare. The book focuses on the West Nile Virus as an act of bioterroism, and considers what and who is really behind this and other recent outbreaks. Dr. Horowitz argues that his disclosures expose the roots of global terrorism, along with the individuals and organizations at the heart of what he calls “the petrochemical–pharmaceutical cartel.” He believes this “multi-national corporate beast” is in the process of committing global genocide, profiting from engineered frights, and at the same time, most efficiently culling targeted populations considered excessive.

Very recently, you may have heard that Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called for an investigation into the links between the recent West Nile Virus outbreaks and bioterrrorism. Dr. Horowitz is the principle pioneer and investigator of this theory. 

Dr. Horowitz’s contact information, books, audiotapes, and video programs are available through www.tetrahedron.org, or by calling 1-888-508-4787.



(1) Heinrich J. Origin of AIDS Virus. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office, GAO-02-809R; available from http:// www.gao.gov/main.html. See also:Tetrahedron Publishing Group press release, “U.S. GAO Commits Scientific Fraud In AIDS Inquiry: Congressional Investigators Conceal and Lie Says Expert,” available from healingcelebrations.com.

(2) Horowitz LG. Polio, hepatitis B and AIDS: an integrative theory on a possible vaccine induced pandemic. Med Hypoth 2001;56(5):677-686.

(3) Horowitz LG, Strecker R, Cantwell SR, Vid, D, and Grossman G. The Mysterious Origin of HIV: Reviewing the Natural, Iatrogenic and Genocidal Theories of AIDS. XI International Conference on AIDS, July 10, 1996, Vancouver, BC. Canada. See full text of abstract and presented paper Here

(4) Hooper E. The River. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1999.

(5) Hamilton, WD., quoted by Julian Cribb in “The origin of acquired immune deficiency syndrome: can science afford to ignore it?” Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 2001;356:935-938.

(6) Weiss, RA, Natural and iatrogenic factors in human immunodeficiency virus transmission. Phil. Trans. R. Roc. Lond. B 2001;356,947-953.

(7) Yusim K, Peeters M. Pybus OG and Korber B, et al. Using human immunodeficiency virus type 1 sequences to infer historical features of the acquired immune deficiency syndrome epidemic and human immunodeficiency virus evolution. Phil. Trans. R. Roc. Lond. B 2001;356,855-866.

(8) Sharp PM, Bailes E, Chaudhuri RR and Hahn BH, et al. The origins of acquired immune deficiency syndrome viruses: where and when? Phil. Trans. R. Roc. Lond. B 2001;356,867-876.

(9) Zhu T, Korber BT, Nahmias AJ, Hooper E, Sharp PM and Ho DD. An African HIV-1 sequence from 1959 and implications for the origin of the epidemic. Nature 1998;391(Feb. 5):594-597.

(10) Burr T, Hyman JM and Myers G. The origin of acquired immune deficiency syndrome: Darwinian or Lamarchkian? Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B (2001) 356:877-887; For early research regarding the “Big Bang” theory of HIV, see also: Myers G, Macinnnes K and Myers L. “Phogenetic moments in the AIDS epidemic.” Chapter 12 in S.S. Morse, ed., Emerging Viruses (Oxford, Eng.: Oxford University Press, 1993).

(11) Marx PA, Alcabes PG and Drucker E.11 “Serial human passage of simian immunodeficiency virus by unsterile injections and the emergence of epidemic human immunodeficiency virus in Africa” Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B (2001) 356:911-920.

(12) Elswood B and Stricker R. Polio vaccine and the origin of AIDS. Med Hypoth 1994;42,347-354.

(13) Horowitz LG and Martin WJ. Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola—Nature, Accident or Intentional? Sandpoint, ID: Tetrahedron Publishing Group, 1998. Note: the Hilleman revelations concerning leukemia virus tainted yellow fever vaccines discussed on page 485 derive from a sequestered recorded interview conducted in 1986 by Edward
Shorter for a Merck funded documentary, “The Health Century.”

(14) Horowitz LG. Death in the Air: Globalism, Terrorism and Toxic Warfare. Sandpoint, ID. Tetrahedron Publishing Group, 2001.

(15) Isaacson W. Kissinger. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1992, p. 205.

(16) National Security Agency. National Special Security Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests. The White House: December 10, 1974 (Declassified July 3, 1989.).

(17) Covert NM. Cutting Edge: A history of Fort Detrick, Maryland 1943-1993. Fort Detrick , Maryland: U.S. Army Garrison, Public Affairs Office, 1993, pp. 17, 20, 39.

(18) Plotkin SA. Untruths and consequences: the false hypothesis linking CHAT type 1 polio vaccination to the origin of human immunodeficiency virus. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol. Sci. 2001 Jun 29:356(1410):815-823.

(19) Cribb J. The origin of acquired immune deficiency syndrome: can science afford to ignore it? Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 2001;356:935-938.

(20) Martin B. The burden of proof and the origin of acquired immune deficiency syndrome. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 2001;356:939-938.

(21) Bliss M. Origin of AIDS (letter). The Lancet 2001;357 (January 6):73-74.

(22) Gao F, Bailes E, Shaw GM, Sharp PM and Hahn BH et al. Origin of HIV-1 in the chimpanzee Pan troglodytes troglodytes. Nature 1999 (Feb. 4);397:436-440. See also: Horowitz LG. Response to Zhu et al. 1959 Origin of AIDS. Unpublished letter to the editor of Nature. Available for review Here ; See also: Horowitz L. Analysis of Gao F and Bailes E study. Unpublished report available for review Here

(23) Poiesz B, Tomar R, Lehr B and Moore J. (along with anonymous CDC authors). Hepatitis B vaccine: Evidence confirming lack of AIDS transmission. MMWR 1984;33;49:685-687.

(24) Marriott SJ, Lee TH, Slagle B and Butel JS. Activation of the HTLV-1 long terminal repeat by the hepatitis B virus X protein. Virology 1996, 224;1:206-213.

(25) Higginson J and Muir CS. Epidemiologic program of the International Agency for Research in Cancer (IARC) In: The National Cancer Program and International Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute Monograph 1974 (40:65).

(26) Jamison E and Hobbs F. World Population Profile: 1994, With a Special Chapter Focusing on HIV/AIDS (WP/94) by Peter O. Way and Karen A. Stanecki). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC, 1994.

(27) Goodfield J. Quest for the Killers. Basel; Stuttgart: Birkhauser, 1985, p. 94.

(28) Kanki PJ, Barin S, Essex M. et al. New human T-lymphotropic retrovirus (HTLV-IV) related to simian T-lymphotropicvirus Type III (STLV-IIIagm). Science 1986;232:238-43.

(29) Schultz TF. Origin of AIDS (letter). The Lancet 1992;339:867.

(30) Krugman S. Viral hepatitis type B: Prospects for active immunization. In: International Symposium on Viral Hepatitis, Milan, Dec. 1974. Develop. biol. Standard. Vol. 30, Munich: S. Karger Basel, 1975, pp. VI; 363-367; relevant general discussion can be found on pp.375-379; See also: Krugman S, Giles JP, Hammond J. Hepatitis virus: effect of health on the infectivity and antigenicity of the MS-1 and MS-2 strains. J Infectious Disease. 1970;122:432-6; Krugman S, Giles JP, Hammond J. Viral hepatitis, type B (MS-2 strain): Studies on active immunization. JAMA 1971;217:41-5; Krugman S, Giles JP. Viral hepatitis, type B (MS-2 strain); further observations on natural history and prevention. New England Journal of Medicine 1973;288:755-60; and Krugman S, Overby LR, Mushahwar IK, Ling C-M, Forsner GG and Deinhardt F. Viral hepatitis, type B: Studies on natural history and prevention reexamined. New England Journal of Medicine 1979;200:101-6.

(31) Beale J. Origin of AIDS (letter). The Lancet 2001;357 (January 6):73.

(32) Purcell RH. Current understanding of hepatitis B virus infection and its implications for immunoprophylaxis. In: Antiviral Mechanisms: Perspectives in Virology IX. The Gustav Stern Symposium. New York: Academic Press, 1975, pp. 49-76.

(33) NCI staff. The Special Virus Cancer Program: Progress Report #8 [and #9]. Office of the Associate Scientific Director for Viral Oncology (OASDVO). J. B. Moloney, Ed., Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1971 [and 1972]. Note: This is a very hard publication to find. Few library data bases have it listed, including the NCI Library at Fort Detrick. It is available through the Davis Library, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Government Documents Department Depository, Reference # HE 20.3152:V81. The Litton “support services” contracts that included primate supplies are found on pp. 187-88 and 326-327 of the reports. Litton’s list of mutant viruses, including retroviruses, and other experimental infectious agents including AuAg is found on pp. 279-280 and 284 of Project Report #8, of 1971; for additional documentation on hepatitis and herpes experimentation in Uganda before 1971 see: Higginson J and Muir CS. Epidemiologic program of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). In: The National Cancer Program and International Cancer Research, National Cancer
Institute Monograph, 1974; 40:65.

(34) Rabin H, Kinard R. Gruber J and Pearson G. Bionetics Research Laboratories, Inc. (NIH 71-2025) Investigations of viral carcinogenesis in primates. Here reference is made to “Drs. McAllister, Gardiner, and Huebner” having “isolated” the cat-human hybrid oncornavirus, RD-114, “from a human sarcoma” as early as 1971. See reprinted contract summary in Horowitz, Op cit. 1998, p. 429.

(35) Shilts R. The Band Played On. New York: Penguin Books, 1987, p. 107.

(36) Hitchens C. The Case Against Henry Kissinger. Harper’s Magazine, February and March, 2001.

(37) Kissinger HA. The pitfalls of universal jurisdiction. Foreign Affairs. July/August 2001. Preview available from through http://www.foreignaffaris.org.