Slashdot Mirror


Genetic HIV Resistance Deciphered

hexed_2050 writes "Researchers have pin-pointed the reason why some people have a greater immunity, or in some cases, total immunity to the HIV virus. They credit a genetic defect that can be traced back to Europeans in the middle ages."

64 comments

  1. Defect? by AtariAmarok · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm not sure I'd call such a mutation a "defect".

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
    1. Re:Defect? by St.+Arbirix · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How about sickle-cell anemia?
      It has its problems but it also makes you immune to Tse-Tse flies.

      Our sense of "art" or creativity is supposed to be the result of some mutation a long time ago. It lets us solve some truly incredible problems (esp. when compared to animals) but also opens us up to all sorts of bizarre mental disorders. Defect?

      --
      Direct away from face when opening.
    2. Re:Defect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about sickle-cell anemia?
      It has its problems but it also makes you immune to Tse-Tse flies.


      Actually, if you are heterozygous (sickle-cell from one parent, normal from other) it gives protection against malaria, not the Tse-Tse fly.

    3. Re:Defect? by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 1

      It has its problems but it also makes you immune to Tse-Tse flies.

      I thought it made people immune to malaria.

      The sufferers of the illness usually die young and yet the disease is not eliminated from the gene pool by natural selection. This is because carriers are relatively resistant to malaria. Carriers of the allele have an unsymptomatic condition called sickle cell trait. Since the gene is incompletely recessive, carriers have a few sickle red blood cells at all times, not enough to cause symptoms, but enough to give resistance to malaria. Because of this, heterozygotes have a higher fitness than either of the homozyogotes. This is known as heterozygote advantage.
    4. Re:Defect? by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm not sure I'd call such a mutation a "defect".

      It has been linked to a greater vulnerability to Hepatitis C, which there is still no vaccine for.

  2. **tinfoil** by torpor · · Score: 0

    this proves that HIV is a sub-plot of the NWO lords to reduce the worlds population!!! //////tinfoil..

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    1. Re:**tinfoil** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, given that the mutation gives Swedes and other Northern Europeans an advantage in combatting the HIV virus, I'd say it's the work of Hitler and his quest for an Aryan world!

  3. BBC documentary by lisaparratt · · Score: 1

    Funny, I remember the BBC running a documentary a couple of years ago where they covered the exact same reasons.

    1. Re:BBC documentary by davidyorke · · Score: 3, Informative

      I saw a show about this on PBS. It was something like two years ago.

      http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/case_plague/inde x. html

      Here's some other news. George Bush won the election ... against Al Gore.

  4. Well.. by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You scratch a living out of the mud and shit and you're going to end up immune to something..

    Kinda like people who work at hospitals, they usually never get sick enough to miss a day of work due to catching a little bit of everything while working.

    --
    Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    1. Re:Well.. by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1

      I had the exact opposite experience. I've usually found hospital workers to be among the most prone to catching anything out there.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    2. Re:Well.. by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

      Have you ever worked at a hospital?

      I did, in the kitchen. My mother works in Human Resources. She's only been out sick once, and that was for oral surgery.

      The people who worked in housekeeping, cleaning up the bio waste were the most healthy people, and the only person in the department to call in sick was the manager who had an office and didn't even empty his own trash bin.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
  5. Future evolution by Lonesome+Squash · · Score: 5, Interesting
    The number of people who die from AIDS is a very strong selection pressure. Unless the epidemic is halted medically, we can expect that it won't be many generations before these mutations are nearly universal. If they have lingered this long in the population, they can't be strongly deleterious.

    Eventually we will probably be like the chimpanzees, who have a pronounced lack of diversity in the genes for certain immune receptors as well as immunity to AIDS. Scientists view this as evidence that an AIDS-like plague swept through the Chimpanzee population in the not-too-distant past.

    The idea that AIDS will one day burn itself out of the population may not be much comfort to those who have it, nor to those who must grow up in a world where they must face that risk -- especially for those growing up in coutries with 40% infection rates. But I find it comforting, anyway.

    --
    Behold the riant ape! Beware, his crooked thumbs!
    1. Re:Future evolution by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 3, Insightful


      The number of people who die from AIDS is a very strong selection pressure. Unless the epidemic is halted medically, we can expect that it won't be many generations before these mutations are nearly universal.


      What is many generations in your sense? 10? 100?

      Seriously, you have some simple stuff about how selection works misconcepted.

      No selection when:
      o as long as one who dies on AIDS already has children
      o as long as one who has AIDS fathers or mothers a child
      o as long as one who is not ill and has not the gene gets a child

      A gene can only spread via selecion if all other individuals in a population suffer from not having the gene.

      Currently a minority suffers. Having the gene or not does not influence "breeding" and thus there is no selection happening.

      If at all teh selection is happening in reverse, the virus is adapting itslef to become less letal. Because while one human is dying the virus runs through 1000nds of generations.

      angel'o'sphere

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    2. Re:Future evolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The number of people who die from AIDS is a very strong selection pressure.

      Not really. Not enough people are exposed for it to do that.

      We're already stunting the process by detecting people who have the disease and effectively quarantining them.

      nor to those who must grow up in a world where they must face that risk

      Meh, it's a highly preventable disease in areas where most people live.

      for those growing up in coutries with 40% infection rates.

      Now in those places, you would be right.

    3. Re:Future evolution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      No selection when:
      o as long as one who dies on AIDS already has children
      o as long as one who has AIDS fathers or mothers a child
      o as long as one who is not ill and has not the gene gets a child


      You are wrong. Selection occurs whenever there is variation that leads to a survival advantage - no matter how small.

      HIV infected people will tend to have less children...

    4. Re:Future evolution by Raunch · · Score: 1

      What is many generations in your sense? 10? 100?

      Evolutionary subjectives (long, many, short...) are very similar to Geologic subjectives, in that they must be qualified. Given that he was most probably talking about 'not many generations' in an evolutionary sense. So, I'd say you are probably off by a factor of 10. Your question should have read: What is many generations in your sense? 100? 1000?

      --
      George II -- Spreading Freedom and American values, one bomb at a time.
  6. Carefull Now by WaZiX · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These genetics mutations are quite rare (1%) and the delta32 Mutation only protects strains of HIV that use CCR5 proteins to help them break into the cells, so yes a very few people are immune to most strains of HIV. And this is why doctors will prbably never allow people get tested for delta32 mutation.

    1. Re:Carefull Now by byron036 · · Score: 1
      And this is why doctors will prbably never allow people get tested for delta32 mutation.

      The article's opinion that knowledge of reduced susceptibility to HIV might make people take more risks is ridiculous. People take risks, and a person that would take a foolish risk because the misunderstand the data (like a test for delta32) will just find some other data to misinterpret.

      A good doctor will use this test as a valuable tool for examining patients with or at risk for HIV. A reasonable doctor will perform this test on every patient that can afford it because the test itself is not harmful.

      This argument suffers from a number of fallacies.

      Slippery Slope just because some might use delta32 as a license to have random sex doesn't mean that a significant portion will Appeal to Consequences if people know they are immune something scary bad will happen Unrepresentative Sample Hasty Generalization There have been no studies on the effect of delta32 test knowledge on any significant portion of society

      Throwing away a valid diagnostic tool just because it might be abused is IMO wrong.

  7. They will never be universal by PhysicsGenius · · Score: 0, Interesting
    First of all, there are 6 billion people on the planet but "only" a few million a year dying from aids. 1 billion is 1000 million, so we are looking at multiple centuries at least before all humans caught it, at present rates. That's a lot of generations.

    Second of all, study epidemiology. When a critical percentage of the population is immune to a disease, it stops spreading. This is because if most of the people you come in contact with are immune, you can't pass it on very well. When AIDS immunity reaches this percentage, the selection pressure will be very low.

    1. Re:They will never be universal by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1
      First of all, there are 6 billion people on the planet but "only" a few million a year dying from aids. Indeed. There are far more people killed in car accidents or by the flu, for that matter, than people dying of AIDS.

      Sure, AIDS is a significant public health issue, but it definitely need not eclipse other, more important issues.

  8. Let me guess... by skinfitz · · Score: 3, Funny


    Let me guess - the people with the "defect" are all christian nutt..er.. fundamentalists?

    Wonder how long it will be before one of the nutters latches on to this story.

    Wonder how long after that before research is done into the feasibility of using a retro virus to rewrite the DNA of HIV+ people to include the "immune" gene, thus curing them.

    Oh no wait - it's god that makes people infected because they are gay isn't it? Silly old science - how could it possibly be right. Lets burn all the books while we are at it.

    1. Re:Let me guess... by TychoCelchuuu · · Score: 1

      Slow down. Why would they be Christian? You would think good Christians WOULDN'T evolve defenses like this since they don't go around having unprotected sex with people who have AIDS.

      --
      Against stupidity the Gods themselves contend in vain.
    2. Re:Let me guess... by booch · · Score: 1

      What are the fundies going to do now that straight black women are the number one group contracting HIV in the US? OK, I suppose I know what the Southern fundies will do. Anyway, world-wide, straight Africans are the most affected. The whole gay-AIDS thing isn't even a valid data-point any more.

      --
      Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
    3. Re:Let me guess... by andreMA · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I'm not sure the parent is a troll. They're speculating that some group which happens to have this gene will cite this as "proof" that they are "God's chosen". After all, it couldn't have resulted from evolution, in their view.

      The insanity is not the poster, but the hypothetical group he cites. Given that we have fundie nutcases (as opposed to non-fundie ones; there are nutcases enough to go around) claiming that the tsunami was punishment from God, I don't think it's farfetched.

    4. Re:Let me guess... by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Then why does the Red Cross refuse your blood if you are gay?

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    5. Re:Let me guess... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      What some of the less nutty, but more moral people are left with is a totally different set of datapoints though. Homosexuality isn't an indicator- but immoral behavior such as multiple sexual partners and drug abuse is, so the smarter fundies will just use it to reduce that behavior.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    6. Re:Let me guess... by b-baggins · · Score: 1

      Continue to pray, I suppose, that HIV may some day actually be treated like an infectious disease rather than a civil rights issue.

      --
      You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
    7. Re:Let me guess... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Christian Fundamentalists have a much easier argument; if Christian sexual morality was universally followed, STDs cases would at most double -- and then drop to zero in roughly a generation.

      After all, with sex only within marriage and marriage only ending at death . . .

    8. Re:Let me guess... by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 1

      Only on Slashdot do we see attacks on Christian fundamentalism in an article about something that might lead to a cure of AIDS.

      I love this place...I guess. It's quite amusing. I'm not sure I'd like it to be.

      As a reasonable response, 1) any so-called Christian who thinks he's part of a "God-selected" group is completely ignorant of the fundamental doctrines of Christ coming for all people. For God so loved the world, not just parts of Northern Europe alone.... 2) anyone who claims AIDS is a "gay disease" is only one inch closer to sanity than those who claim it's a "US bioweapon against Africa." They're ignorant of the facts, and they're probably ignoring the inconvenient parts of the Bible, too. As an almost-fundamentalist Christian, I suggest you ignore the crazies.

      Silly old science - how could it possibly be right.

      I think you're quite right in implying that religion shouldn't be used in a job for science, like this. Please, let's start making that retrovirus and forget any complaints the nutters might have. It bothers me that people don't see the converse; that philosophical questions, like "why are we here" and "what is moral", are jobs for religion and that science will here fail in the same way.

    9. Re:Let me guess... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's one pretty fucking big "if".

      You may as well say that if nobody commited crimes there would be no police.

    10. Re:Let me guess... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1
      Let me guess - the people with the "defect" are all christian nutt..er.. fundamentalists?
      ... Oh no wait - it's god that makes people infected because they are gay isn't it?
      So, fundie nutsos will be the only one who can enjoy a good buttfuck and live???

      Boy, isn't life a bitch!!!!

    11. Re:Let me guess... by Monkelectric · · Score: 1
      but more moral people are left with is a totally different set of datapoints though. Homosexuality isn't an indicator- but immoral behavior such as multiple sexual partners and drug abuse is, so the smarter fundies will just use it to reduce that behavior.

      While this is true, "moral" is of course relative. A "moral" activity like going to church could easily expose you to infectious agents. When I was in college the *entire* CS department had to be tested for TB because some kid who came down with TB used our labs.

      And what about an indian who after a hard day of running a casino uses payote which is part of his beliefs? is that immoral? :)

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    12. Re:Let me guess... by skinfitz · · Score: 2

      Well IIRC it says in most flavours of the bible regarding entrance into "heaven" that only men "undefiled by women" may enter.

      Now I don't know about you, but I see a loophole there for gay men...

    13. Re:Let me guess... by o'reor · · Score: 1

      Actually, good Christians WOULDN'T evolve. At all. "Evilution", as they call it, is for perverted minds only.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.
    14. Re:Let me guess... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They also refuse your blood if you've recently traveled to certain countries. Other questions you must answer before donating are things involving accidental needle sticks, drug use, getting paid for sex, having sex with someone from certain countries since a certain date... so they're just trying to weed out potentially infected blood based on statistical evidence gathered over the years, and since "gay" is something they can discriminate upon because it's a simple yes/no question and they'd only be losing a small percentage of donors, they go with it. But the rest of the weed-out questions apply to *straight* people, too. Perhaps when they update their stats they'll remove the gay question.

    15. Re:Let me guess... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the hell do they know whether you are...?

    16. Re:Let me guess... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      And what about an indian who after a hard day of running a casino uses payote which is part of his beliefs? is that immoral? :)

      From the fundie point of view of God using Disease to Punish People for Bad Behavior- no, you don't use needles in peyote usage. :-)

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  9. what a disappointment! by phreakuencies · · Score: 3, Informative

    I was thinking in posting this story because the team of researchers were formed by 3 argentinians (I live there) and "study co-author Dr. Sunil K. Ahuja". This isn't mentioned anywhere in the article. In fact, an announcement was made in a local Hospital ("Garrahan") here and presented by different media as a discovery made by this groups of argentinians collaborating with Ahuja. I would really like this post updated with this important info. Links to the local story (in spanish): Clarin newspaper The names of the three argentinian investigators: "Andrea Mangano, Luisa Sen y Rosa Bologna".

    1. Re:what a disappointment! by juggledean · · Score: 1

      Actually the original article in Science is The Influence of CCL3L1 Gene-Containing Segmental Duplications on HIV-1/AIDS Susceptibility

      by Enrique Gonzalez, Hemant Kulkarni, Hector Bolivar, Andrea Mangano, Racquel Sanchez, Gabriel Catano, Robert J. Nibbs, Barry I. Freedman, Marlon P. Quinones, Michael J. Bamshad, Krishna K. Murthy, Brad H. Rovin, William Bradley, Robert A. Clark, Stephanie A. Anderson, Robert J. O'Connell, Brian K. Agan, Seema S. Ahuja, Rosa Bologna, Luisa Sen, Matthew J. Dolan and Sunil K. Ahuja

      It's a gene duplication, an extra amount of gene for a potent HIV-1-suppressive chemokine.

      There was a link in the Wired article.

    2. Re:what a disappointment! by phreakuencies · · Score: 1

      Oh... I missed that link... Well, the fault is on Wired then for not saying anything about the complete team.

  10. I did say "nearly universal" by Lonesome+Squash · · Score: 4, Informative
    This is a recessive mutation (ignoring partial immunity for a minute). The truly-immune percentage of the population will be the square of the gene frequency. Let's say that AIDS begins to recede when 36% of the population is immune. For 36% of the population to be immune, 60% of the genes will need to be the mutated variety. At that point only 16% of the population will be carrying two non-mutated genes. Okay, maybe I exaggerated the "not many generations" but the point stands.

    This is the opposite of the recessive extinction problem, where the percentages work against you (that's why deleterious recessives thrive so well when they are rare).

    --
    Behold the riant ape! Beware, his crooked thumbs!
  11. I am a vampire by JamesP · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I have no blood, your insensitive clod...

    Anyway, only old people have AIDS

    --
    how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
  12. It's just HIV, not HIV virus! by Ayanami_Rei_II · · Score: 3, Informative

    HIV = Human Immunodeficiency Virus
    PIN = Personal Identification Number

    There's no need to repeat the last word of the the acronym!

    1. Re:It's just HIV, not HIV virus! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "There's no need to repeat the last word of the the acronym!"

    2. Re:It's just HIV, not HIV virus! by IncarnadineConor · · Score: 1

      The ATM I use these days calls it my "Secret number" I guess PIN was too complicated for the proles.

    3. Re:It's just HIV, not HIV virus! by DreadPiratePizz · · Score: 1

      Really now, don't be so nit picky. I recall taking a test labeled the CAT, or California Achievment Test in elementary school. If you say "The CAT", people say "what?" But say the "CAT Test", people know what you're talking about. It's not a big deal.

      Furthermore, it sounds better in common speech. Let's talk about the HIV. Let's talk about the HIV virus. Let's talk about HIV. The first one, which fits with your preference, sounds icorrect in commoon speech. The last two, which are not correct under your thought, sound the most natural.

    4. Re:It's just HIV, not HIV virus! by Idarubicin · · Score: 1
      Let's talk about the HIV. Let's talk about the HIV virus. Let's talk about HIV.

      Actually, the last form is quite acceptable and sounds natural. The definite article isn't necessary for a virus. Disclaimer--I do research work in a hospital, though I do cancer biology, not HIV. My sense of what sounds normal may be different. :)

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    5. Re:It's just HIV, not HIV virus! by trixillion · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure.

      First off, the definite article is necessary for a virus. Else we would be talking about virus. Which I think we all can agree is wrong. Virusses are another matter entirely.

      Perhaps you are confused by the fact that HIV is a proper collective noun. Consider another proper collective noun - the Good Old Party. We can talk about the GOP. Or about Good Old parties. But we cannot talk about GOP. We cannot talk about Republican Party, either. So by the ggparent's peave, we should not be able to talk about HIV.

      Regardless, talking about HIV is quite acceptable and normal to normal people.

    6. Re:It's just HIV, not HIV virus! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The the that's all folks!

    7. Re:It's just HIV, not HIV virus! by forkazoo · · Score: 1

      Well, we do talk about Ebola. Granted, we usually talk about the Ebola virus. (using an article when we use the word virus). HIV is an odd case, because it doesn't have a common name that doesn't include the word virus as part of the name. So, when we use HIV in simplest form, it is HIV. When we use "ebola virus" in simplest form, it is just "ebola." So, there is a logical argument that it could be considered correct to say either "HIV" or "the HIV." Personally, I always talk about HIV, no article.

  13. Black plague by booch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    OK, how can you mention "genetic defect" and "Europeans in the middle ages" without mentioning the bubonic plague and Black Death? It's even in the article. Really, the first question I had when I read the Slashdot blurb was whether they're somehow related. Scientists first thought they might be related, but now think that it was probably something more like smallpox. Anyway, RTFA if this interests you.

    --
    Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
  14. PBS reported on this in 2001 by IASmaster · · Score: 1

    It seems kind of odd that this comes out as if it's recent news. Here is the link to a PBS transcript which details the findings of the gene which is mentioned in Wired.

    --
    There's no place like ~/
  15. Re:Defect?...of course! by clonan · · Score: 2, Informative

    It is a defect because it makes the immune cell less effective!

    That protein allows immune cells to lock onto each other and help to destroy disease.

    Since these cells lack this mechanism, they don't lock onto other immune cells as well and aren't as good at killing things. This affects EVERYTHING the cell does.

    So while the person is protected against AIDS, they are more suceptible to every single other illness and injury out there.

    It's a trade off...and therefore a defect.

  16. Sort of like genetic magnet-power defect. by AtariAmarok · · Score: 3, Funny
    "It's a trade off...and therefore a defect"

    Ah. like the rare genetic defect carried by Eric Lenscherr. His genes gave him remarkable powers over magnatism. The tradeoff? An overwhelming desire to control the world, which did not make him welcome at parties.

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
  17. Why do Blondes have more fun? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because they can!

  18. The Black Death may have been a virus by Evil+Pete · · Score: 1

    Sometime back I read an item which argued that there is some evidence that the Black Death was not caused by bubonic plague at all but rather by an aids like virus. After I RTFA (in the /. item) it didn't seem to point out this possibility. Have a read of the ABC (Australian) Science article and note the bit about a village in England in the time of the Death, it was sealed off and food was passed in from outside, after some years(?) it was given the all clear. To this day the population has a high count of genes implicated in immunity to AIDS. The obvious implication being that rather than a bacterium the Black Death was a human to human virus. Which of course is probably still out there since the Black Death came back time and time again over the decades.

    --
    Bitter and proud of it.
  19. great by Zork+the+Almighty · · Score: 1

    How long until this is patented and the people with the gene are prosecuted ?

    --

    In Soviet America the banks rob you!
  20. This is strange... by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1
    From the article:
    Now, it's like a glove where one size fits all," said Dr. Matthew Dolan, an AIDS specialist in the U.S. Air Force and co-author of a new AIDS genetics study in an online edition of the journal Science.
    This is strange...

    Why would the USAF need AIDS specialists????

    1. Re:This is strange... by PornMaster · · Score: 1

      Because someone needs to work with the USAF on how to handle a disease that inevitably people in the USAF get?

    2. Re:This is strange... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because, in case you haven't noticed, AIDS isn't just a disease that affects gay people. STDs are probably THE biggest public health problem in the military, and servicemembers are certainly not immune to it.

      Fact of the matter is, we have Airmen stationed all over the world, and in some areas where we are stationed, AIDS is a health concern. Even in prosperous countries (such as Japan, where I am stationed), servicemembers have been known to contract HIV.

      And, besides that, what about retired servicemembers? The number of older folks (let's say 50+) with AIDS has skyrocketed in recent years. Some of those folks are undoubtedly military retirees who retain their health benefits. These people are entitled to treatment and care for their condition.

      In other words: the military has AIDS specialists because the military has AIDS patients.

  21. Old news, VIRTUALLY IMMUNE is not IMMUNE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just wired talking about stuff thats been published in journels for ages. Anyway from what i've read these people are still capable of being hiv+ even with both copies of the gene.

  22. [OT Sig link] by Loki_1929 · · Score: 1

    "Oussama Bin Laden!
    the world needs you more than ever. Get your marbles together, and with a bit of imagination, you can cut the whole oil supply to the United States of America, and either bring those stupid yankees down on their knees, or make them adopt a much less ruinous way of life that is more respectful of the planet.
    Go, Oussama! Go sink those oil tankers plying the sea!
    Go sever that thin lifeline that keeps those stupid yankees alive!
    The planet will be eternally grateful once you bring those fuckers down. "


    Is this supposed to be some sort of a joke?

    --
    -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
    1. Re:[OT Sig link] by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      This is no joke, many people throughout the world would want the yankees out of commission.