Sticking a Needle into Science: The Case of Polio Vaccines and the Origin of AIDS

Social Studies of Science

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 245-276

  Martin, Brian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84992784998     PISSN: 03063127     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/030631296026002003     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. One possible reason for this is that most sociologists of science, whether positivist or relativist, basically support science as it exists: see Sal Restivo, ‘Modern Science as a Social Problem’, Social Problems, Vol. 35 (June 1988), 206–25, at 207–08.
2. Brian Martin, ‘The Scientific Straightjacket: The Power Structure of Science and the Suppression of Environmental Scholarship’, Ecologist, Vol. 11 (January-February 1981), 33–43
3. Richard Routley and Val Plumwood, ‘The “Fight for the Forests” Affair’, in Martin, CM. Ann Baker, Clyde Manwell and Cedric Pugh (eds), Intellectual Suppression: Australian Case Histories, Analysis and Responses (Sydney: Angus & Robertson, 1986), 70–73. Richard Sylvan's previous name was Richard Routley.
4. M.D. Grmek, History of AIDS: Emergence and Origin of a Modern Pandemic (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990)
5. D.B. Hrdy, ‘Cultural Practices Contributing to the Transmission of Human Immunodeficiency Virus in Africa’, Reviews of Infectious Diseases, Vol. 9 (1987), 1109–19
6. A. Karpas, ‘Origin and Spread of AIDS’, Nature, Vol. 348 (13 December 1990), 578.
7. An accessible discussion of these theories, including ones involving polio vaccines, is given by Jared Diamond, ‘The Mysterious Origin of AIDS’, Natural History (September 1992), 24–29.
8. K. Shah and N. Nathanson, ‘Human Exposure to SV40: Review and Comment’, American Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 103 (1976), 1–12.
9. Louis Pascal, What Happens When Science Goes Bad: The Corruption of Science and the Origin of AIDS: A Study in Spontaneous Generation, Science and Technology Analysis Working Paper No. 9 (Wollongong: Department of Science and Technology Studies, University of Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia, December 1991).
10. A detailed treatment is given by Steven Epstein, Impure Science: AIDS, Activism, and the Politics of Knowledge (unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1993). There are a large number of unorthodox theories concerning AIDS.
11. A useful survey is given by Robert Lederer, ‘Origin and Spread of AIDS: Is the West Responsible?’, CovertAction Information Bulletin, Vol. 28 (1987), 43–54, and Vol. 29 (1988), 52–65.
12. Steve Epstein has pointed out to me (personal communication, 11 December 1993) an aspect of my own partisanship, namely not mentioning theories of AIDS originating from other vaccines such as smallpox and malaria.
13. The work and experiences of Lecatsas and Alexander could have provided an alternative entry point into the controversy. The main differences are that they were established professionals in the field and that their treatments of the theory are much briefer. Their first published discussion of the theory was in one paragraph out of a six-paragraph letter to the editor: G. Lecatsas and J.J. Alexander, ‘Safe Testing of Poliovirus Vaccine and the Origin of HIV Infection in Man’, South African Medical Journal, Vol. 76 (21 October 1989), 451.
14. An excellent discussion, with examples, is given by David F. Horrobin, ‘The Philosophical Basis of Peer Review and the Suppression of Innovation’, Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 263 (9 March 1990), 1438–41.
15. More generally, see Roy Wallis (ed.), On the Margins of Science: The Social Construction of Rejected Knowledge, Sociological Review Monograph No. 27 (Keele, Staffs: University of Keele, 1979).
16. On particularism versus universalism in science, see Stephen Cole, Making Science: Between Nature and Society (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992).
17. Rogier van Bakel, ‘The Wrong Stuff, Wired, Vol. 2 (September 1994), 108–13, 155
18. Stanley Young, ‘The End: Countdown to the Millenium’, in Ted Schultz (ed.), The Fringes of Reason: A Whole Earth Catalog (New York: Harmony Books, 1989), 8–21.
19. In the science studies literature, the most useful warrant for this review is Paul Feyerabend's epistemological anarchism: see Feyerabend, Science in a Free Society (London: New Left Books, 1978).
20. Julian Cribb, ‘Was This Science's Biggest Blunder?’, Weekend Australian (25–26 April 1992), Review, 1–2.
21. Personal communication, 18 January 1994. See also Julian Cribb, ‘Research Fails to Nail AIDS Virus’, Australian (22 December 1993), 16.
22. Raanon Gillon, ‘A Startling 19,000-word Thesis on the Origin of AIDS: Should the JME Have Published It?’, Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 18 (1992), 3–4.
23. Nexus, Vol. 2. No. 6 (January-February 1992), 49. Nexus is published from PO Box 30, Mapleton, Queensland 4560, Australia (and lists offices in the USA, UK and The Netherlands).
24. Tom Curtis, ‘The Origin of AIDS’, Rolling Stone, No. 626 (19 March 1992), 54–61,106,108. Despite its publication date, this issue was distributed at the end of February.
25. Their paper was eventually published as a letter: Blaine F. Elswood and Raphael B. Strieker, ‘Polio Vaccines and the Origin of AIDS’, Research in Virology, Vol. 114 (1993), 175–77.
26. The full version was published as Elswood and Strieker, ‘Polio Vaccines and the Origin of AIDS’, Medical Hypotheses, Vol. 42 (1994), 347–54
27. Science's treatment began with Jon Cohen, ‘Debate on AIDS Origin: Rolling Stone Weighs in’, Science, Vol. 255 (20 March 1992), 1505.
28. Curtis commented on this article: Tom Curtis, letter, Science, Vol. 256 (29 May 1992), 1260
29. stimulating Hilary Koprowski, letter, Science, Vol. 257 (21 August 1992), 1024–27. Science did not publish Curtis's reply to Koprowski.
30. Andrew Tyler, ‘Monkey Business’, The Independent Magazine (London, 19 September 1992), 24–29.
31. Brian Martin, ‘Peer Review and the Origin of AIDS: A Case Study in Rejected Ideas’, BioScience, Vol. 43 (October 1993), 642–627
32. see also Martin, ‘Polio Vaccines and the Origin of AIDS: The Career of a Threatening Idea’, Townsend Letter for Doctors, No. 126 (January 1994), 97–100. The Townsend Letter is published from 911 Tyler Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368–6541, USA.
33. C. Basilico, C. Buck, R. Desrosiers, D. Ho, F. Lilly and E. Wimmer, Report from the AIDS/Poliovirus Advisory Committee (unpublished typescript, 18 September 1992); copies available from me.
34. ‘Panel Nixes Congo Trials as AIDS Source’, Science, Vol. 258 (30 October 1992), 738
35. Tom Curtis, letter, Science, Vol. 259 (1 January 1993), 14.
36. Brian Martin, correspondence, Nature, Vol. 363 (20 May 1993), 202.
37. ‘ “Origin of AIDS” Update’, Rolling Stone, No. 671 (9 December 1993), 39.
38. Henk Hanssen, ‘Hebben Artsen AIDS Veroorzaakt?’, Paranorma (Haarlem, The Netherlands, 11–18 November 1993), 42–44. I also informed this journalist about other sources of information.
39. See Peter Korn, ‘The New AIDS Mystery’, Redbook (New York, July 1994), 80–83, 106, 108.
40. Steve Connor, ‘World's First Aids Case Was False’, The Independent (London, 24 March 1995), 1
41. Gerald Corbitt, Andrew S. Bailey and George Williams, ‘HIV Infection in Manchester, 1959’, Lancet, Vol. 336 (7 July 1990), 51.
42. The published technical account is Tuofo Zhu and David D. Ho, ‘Was HIV Present in 1959?’, Nature, Vol. 374 (6 April 1995), 503–04.
43. Steve Connor, ‘Rethink Begins into How the Virus Originated’, The Independent (London, 24 March 1995), 3.
44. ‘Hypothesis on the Origin of AIDS’, Green Synthesis, No. 35 (March 1992), 13–14.
45. Leon Festinger, Henry W. Riecken and Stanley Schachter, When Prophecy Fails: A Social and Psychological Study of a Modern Group that Predicted the Destruction of the World (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1956).
46. H.M. Collins, ‘Researching Spoonbending: Concepts and Practice of Participatory Fieldwork’, in Colin Bell and Helen Roberts (eds), Social Researching: Politics, Problems, Practice (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984), 54–69. I have drawn on Collins' article in my accounts for both the usual conceptualization and participant comprehension, and I thank him for emphatically drawing my attention to his work.
47. H.M. Collins and T.J. Pinch, Frames of Meaning: The Social Construction of Extraordinary Science (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1982).
48. The most well-known account of this sort is James D. Watson, The Double Helix: A Personal Account of the Discovery of the Structure of DNA (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1968).
49. Another excellent account of science on the inside, jointly written by a journalist and a scientist, is Lydia Dotto and Harold Schiff, The Ozone War (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1978).
50. When I was a scientist and an active participant in the debate over nuclear power, I wrote some analyses: B. Martin, Nuclear Knights (Canberra: Rupert Public Interest Movement, 1980)
51. Martin, ‘The Naked Experts’, Ecologist, Vol. 12 (July/August 1982), 149–57.
52. Whether such studies are considered to be social science is another question. In technology studies, an excellent insider analysis is Lous L. Bucciarelli, Designing Engineers (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1994).
53. William Foote Whyte (ed.), Participatory Action Research (Newbury Park, CA. Sage, 1991).
54. Stephen Kemmis and Robin McTaggart (eds), The Action Research Planner (Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University, 3rd edn, 1988). I thank Chris Fox for pointing me to this literature.
55. See, for example, F.E. Emery and E. Thorsrud, Democracy at Work (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 1976)
56. Trevor Williams, Learning to Manage our Futures: The Participative Redesign of Societies in Turbulent Transition (New York: Wiley, 1982).
57. See especially Alain Touraine, The Voice and the Eye: An Analysis of Social Movements (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981).
58. For a perceptive analysis of the relations between social analysts and social movements, see C.A. Rootes, ‘Theory of Social Movements: Theory for Social Movements?’, Philosophy and Social Action, Vol. 16, No. 4 (October-December 1990), 5–17.
59. David J. Hess, Science and Technology in a Multicultural World: The Cultural Politics of Facts and Artifacts (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995), Chapter 8;
60. Robert A. Rubinstein, ‘Reflections on Action Anthropology: Some Developmental Dynamics of an Anthropological Tradition’, Human Organization, Vol. 45, No. 3 (Fall 1986), 270–79.1 thank David Hess for referring me to this literature.
61. Sharon Beder, Toxic Fish and Sewer Surfing: How Deceit and Collusion Are Destroying our Great Beaches (Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 1989).
62. She became more open about her partisanship — as in this book — after completing her research. See also Beder, ‘Sewerage Treatment and the Engineering Establishment’, in B. Martin (ed.), Confronting the Experts (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1996), in press;
63. Beder, ‘Controversy and Closure: Sydney's Beaches in Crisis’, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 21 (1991), 223–56.
64. Gabriele Bammer and B. Martin, ‘Repetition Strain Injury in Australia: Medical Knowledge, Social Movement, and De Facto Partisanship’, Social Problems, Vol. 39 (1992), 219–37.
65. Pam Scott, Evelleen Richards and B. Martin, ‘Captives of Controversy: The Myth of the Neutral Social Researcher in Contemporary Scientific Controversies’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, Vol. 15, No. 4 (Autumn 1990), 474–94.
66. For discussion, see Malcolm Ashmore, ‘Ending Up On the Wrong Side: Must the Two Forms of Radicalism Always Be at War?’, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 26, No. 2 (May 1996), 305–22, this issue;
67. H.M. Collins, ‘Captives and Victims: Comment on Scott, Richards, and Martin’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, Vol. 16, No. 2 (Spring 1991), 249–51
68. Collins, ‘In Praise of Futile Gestures: How Scientific is the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge?’, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 26, No. 2 (May 1996), 229–44, this issue
69. Martin, Richards and Scott, ‘Who's a Captive? Who's a Victim? Response to Collin's Method Talk’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, Vol. 16, No. 2 (Spring 1991), 252–55.
70. David J. Hess, Science in the New Age: The Paranormal, Its Defenders and Debunkers, and American Cuture (Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 1993).
71. Hess makes the important point that there may be multiple ‘sides’ to any debate and that a whole range of attempts at ‘capture’ may occur. The idea of ‘capture’ has obvious affinities with that of ‘enrolment’ used in actor-network studies of science-technology-society (see, for example, Bruno Latour, Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society [Milton Keynes, Bucks.: Open University Press, 1987]); in these terms, ‘capture’ refers to the specific enrolment of the analyst.
72. See also Dick Pels' theory of ‘third positions’: Pels, ‘The Politics of Symmetry’, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 26, No. 2 (May 1996), 277–304, this issue. I thank Malcolm Ashmore for making this connection.
73. Shifting the arena from public debate to the courts is the aim of what have been dubbed ‘strategic lawsuits against public participation’ or SLAPPs: see Penelope Canan and George W. Pring, ‘Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation’, Social Problems, Vol. 35, No. 5 (December 1988), 506–19
74. David Bloor, Knowledge and Social Imagery (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1976), 5.
75. Ian I. Mitroff, The Subjective Side of Science: A Philosophical Inquiry into the Psychology of the Apollo Moon Scientists (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1974).