Slashdot Mirror


Gene Found In Black Death Survivors Stops HIV

WindozeSux writes "According to research done by Dr. Stephen O'Brien, a mutated gene known as delta 32 found in Black Death survivor descendants, stops HIV in its tracks. In order to be immune both parents have to have the delta 32 gene. From the Article: 'In 1996, research showed that delta 32 prevents HIV from entering human cells and infecting the body. O'Brien thought this principle could be applied to the plague bacteria, which affects the body in a similar manner. To determine whether the Eyam plague survivors may have carried delta 32, O'Brien tested the DNA of their modern-day descendents...'"

49 of 477 comments (clear)

  1. It also gives a mighty hankerin' for... by gardyloo · · Score: 5, Funny

    ....brainnnzzzz.....

    1. Re:It also gives a mighty hankerin' for... by xaosflux · · Score: 3, Funny

      Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?

    2. Re:It also gives a mighty hankerin' for... by xaosflux · · Score: 5, Funny

      "I think so, Brain, but I find scratching just makes it worse."

  2. Cure for HIV. . . by kfg · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Black Death.

    Oh yeah, we're cookin' now!

    KFG

    1. Re:Cure for HIV. . . by Wisgary · · Score: 3, Informative

      RTFA, The Black Death isn't a cure, the gene that causes people to survive the Black Death also causes people to survive an HIV infection. (If both parents have the gene, if only one of them AIDS progression is slowed down.)

    2. Re:Cure for HIV. . . by Thalagyrt · · Score: 3, Informative
      I'm sure you're just trolling, but if not, read the article yet again, and read the whole thing this time.

      The cure isn't "RELEASE TEH PLAGUE." The interesting bit is a gene mutation regarding CCR5 that was found to stop HIV dead in its tracks, preventing it from binding to the white blood cells. The treatment that they're working on mimics this by binding to the CCR5 receptor in white blood cells, which would block HIV from binding. Tests were done on blood samples from people with this gene mutation, and the results were always negative. The people with the gene mutation are immune to HIV.

      --
      Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo!
    3. Re:Cure for HIV. . . by kfg · · Score: 4, Funny

      until. . .

      Bingo!

      By then the gene pool would have gone way down. . .

      You say that like it's a bad thing.

      Have you had a look at the gene pool recently? There's some scary ass shit walkin' around out there.

      KFG

    4. Re:Cure for HIV. . . by ceeam · · Score: 4, Funny

      Also, researchers found that being a geek drastically reduces your chances of getting HIV virus (and many other STD virii).

    5. Re:Cure for HIV. . . by gowen · · Score: 5, Funny

      But it drastically increases your chance of saying 'virii', even though 'virii' isn't a word.

      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    6. Re:Cure for HIV. . . by Dogtanian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is the natural progression of evolution tho, those who have this gene are a step above the rest of us in the evolutionary scale.

      I agree with the AC who also replied to this saying "There is no 'above' in the evolutionary scale. There is only the dead and the living (-and reproducing)."

      It might be beneficial against HIV, but what if it has side-effects?

      For example, the gene that helps defend against malaria (and is prevelant amongst many of African origin) is the same gene that causes sickle-cell anaemia. The benefit probably outweighs the problem, but it shouldn't be assumed that there is "better", "worse", "above" and so on.

      People tend to view these things in a very short-term manner, when evolution is a long-term game.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  3. The real question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... will it stop zombies?

  4. Probably as close as we'll get... by meatflower · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This kind of solution to "curing" HIV is probably as close as we'll ever get to solving the problem. It's not going to be a wonder drug, it will be simple natural selection. Black Death came and those with the mutation survived, they didn't find a cure. Hopefully with todays technologies not only those with the mutation can survive the global epidemic that is HIV, but science can bring the benefits of that mutation to all of us.

    1. Re:Probably as close as we'll get... by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, until HIV becomes an airborne virus, not catching it in the first place is a pretty good way for 99% of the population to survive the epidemic...

      AIDS so far is a social disease, which means certain behaviors minimize risk and certain behaviors maximize risk; unlike, say, the flu, which is both airborne, transmitted by contact, and through animals.

    2. Re:Probably as close as we'll get... by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It still doesn't invalidate the rest of my comment that AIDS is a predominantly social disease; even in areas with 30% infection, the changing of social norms would make the remaining 70% of the population effectively immune:

      1) Curtail sexual promiscuity
      2) Practice protected sex
      3) Encourage long term monogamy

      All three of those things will render AIDS a harmless disease for 99% of the uninfected population.

      A cure is necessary, of course, for the survival of the remaining infected population.

    3. Re:Probably as close as we'll get... by Muhammar · · Score: 5, Funny

      As you say - certain behaviors minimize the HIV risk and writing Slashdot tripe on Friday night is by far the most secure approach.

      --
      I doubt that we will ever figure out - and I suspect that even if we did figure out we couldn't do much about it
    4. Re:Probably as close as we'll get... by at_slashdot · · Score: 5, Funny

      "3) Encourage long term monogamy"

      Why is always the cure worse than the disease?

      --
      "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -- Prof. Dumbledore
    5. Re:Probably as close as we'll get... by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So 1950's...

      1. Sex is *not* primarily for producing children... you'll produce a sprog maybe a couple of times in your life. You'll normally have sex at least a few times more than that (well maybe your church won't let you, but most people will). Sex is *fun*. Enjoy it while you're young.
      2. There are plenty of healthy well adjusted people who are the children of unmarried parents. There are plenty of screwed up dickheads that are the children of married parents. Get with the late 20th century please at least... marriage is just a contract - if you really can't stay with someone without that then maybe you've not really found the right person. Marriage does *not* guarantee a lifelong relationship - there's a 50% divorce rate... fuelled by people like you who think that a bit of paper is a free pass to lifelong bliss - two people working hard at a relationship can do, and you don't need a contract for that.

    6. Re:Probably as close as we'll get... by alicenextdoor · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sex is absolutely not just about reproduction. It's perfectly possible to produce offspring without orgasm, and lots of species do. Pleasure in sex appears to function to promote closeness between partners, making that hypothetical long term marriage that much more likely. There's even a hypothesis that female orgasm is a by-product of the fact that men need orgasms to convince them to stick around and look after their mates, but I remain unconvinced. More research is required, and by God, I'm the woman to do it...

      --
      of course, biting monkeys is not to everyone's taste - Konrad Lorenz
    7. Re:Probably as close as we'll get... by game+kid · · Score: 5, Funny
      More research is required, and by God, I'm the woman to do it...

      *adds alicenextdoor to Friends list*

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
  5. One man's mutation by PIPBoy3000 · · Score: 4, Informative

    . . . is another's saving trait.

    This article is interesting on several levels. The fact that some people are completely immune to the disease isn't really remarkable. That's been known for quite some time. What's amazing is that this fairly basic gene (a way of bringing stuff into cells) is completely redundant. It makes me wonder how much of our cellular machinery is simply there in case another part fails.

    Don't worry. I don't think there's intelligent design behind it. Just cases of plagues that have swept through populations from time to time, causing these interesting redundancies to appear.

    1. Re:One man's mutation by PIPBoy3000 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ah, but something encouraged the development of multiple redundant pathways. I suspect that what happened is that a second pathway randomly developed many years ago (probably before modern humans). After that, something came along that killed everyone off who only had the single pathway. I'm speculating that it's a disease, but it could be aliens who had it out for single pathway humans - that's evolution for ya. After my imagined catastrophe, the survivors still had two pathways. This likely had an extra metabolic cost, but it was fairly miniscule.

      Human DNA has an awful lot of redundancies in it. I sometimes wonder how many protiens are expressed that just float around not doing much. Most bacteria have trim and efficient DNA. That keeps their energy expenditures low, letting them focus on important things like reproduction. Humans, on the other hand, have a surprising amount of extra stuff collected along the way. It turns out that being extremely efficient isn't a big survival trait for humans.

  6. This could be fantastic news by saskboy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As I understand it, Plauge is a bateria that can be treated these days. And a little bit of vaccine trivia for you:
    Cow pox infection survivors didn't get Small pox, so that's how the innoculation for mankind's only "eliminated" disease began to be put under control.

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
    1. Re:This could be fantastic news by Quirk · · Score: 5, Informative
      Vacca is latin for cow. The milkmaidens who had contracted cow pox were found to be more immune to small pox. The first 'vaccine' amounted to guesstimating the number and severity of scratches to hatch onto someone's arm then scabs from cowpox were rubbed into the wounds.This took place in England.

      Initially few took up the practise. Interesting many clergymen dennounced the vaccine practise as sin. The clergy believed smallpox was god's design and all, even the children, who died of smallpox were decreed by god to so die. What finally turned the tide some years later was the adoption of the vaccine practise by a high ranking member of the British aristocracy. She (her name and title don't immediately come to mind) had her children vaccinated. The strong british caste system was momentum enough to swing favour toward vaccination.

      --
      "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
      Cohen
    2. Re:This could be fantastic news by Coward,+Anonymous · · Score: 4, Informative

      What finally turned the tide some years later was the adoption of the vaccine practise by a high ranking member of the British aristocracy. She (her name and title don't immediately come to mind) had her children vaccinated.

      It was the Princess of Wales (though she wasn't the first, she was the person who made it popular). See the Variolation section of this page for more information. This form of vaccination had been practiced in Asia for a couple thousand years before making it to the West.

  7. quite interesting by swschrad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    of such discoveries is medicine made. now, the difficult part is going to be getting the experiments to prove it into the public eye, infecting "32" blood with HIV in vitro, and then taking that research into the luddite chambers of policymakers.

    we'll have fun galore when that happens. a true righteous moral civil war.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  8. So... by DeadPrez · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So what's stopping me from having science insert that gene into my offspring?

    1. Re:So... by mrchaotica · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nothing but cost, [lack of] technology, and religious fundamentalists, I think.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  9. It's a shame that the topic has no relevance.. by apoKalypse · · Score: 3, Informative

    to the website. The website is about researching into the gene CCR5 related to its ability to prevent infection from the Black Death, based on the research in 1996 that showed it was able to block out HIV infection.

  10. One problem by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 4, Informative

    Plague doesn't cause the mutation, it SELECTS the mutation.

    i.e. if you don't have the mutation, plague won't give it to you. It just won't kill you even if you don't get treated if you have the mutation.

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  11. Things like this put an interesting spin on... by zappepcs · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Things like this put an interesting spin on science in general. Trying not to be off topic here, but if we are to reach anything like a utopian state (think Star Trek here) then we, as a race, have to overcome quite a few thresholds. The number of people on the planet is one, the fact that modern medicine is allowing more mutations to survive, including weak mutations (read that as mutations that weaken the population over time rather than insert survival traits like immunity to AIDS).

    The things that we are doing through science for money is going to become a wall that will stop us in the future, or can. Right now, it is unknown if our vegetable and foodstuffs are actually as valuable to the human body as they are supposed to be. I'm not talking about hamburgers, but raw vegetables. Pesticides and genetic modifications of crops is changing how they are used by the body.

    Its not improbable that scientists could insert the immunity genes via foodstuffs in the near future, rather like making us all part of a super race... or rather the benefactors of the genetic makeup of superhumans. This process, in the course of history, has always wiped much of the world clean of the weaker specimens, leaving those with the stronger mutations to live on. That in turn drags down the rest of the population as genetic weakness is passed on.

    This is a reasonable idea, just give the good genes to everyone.... but morally, that is the wrong thing to do. It will turn out that only those with an extra $150k will get the therapy... no insurance will cover it, 3rd world citizens can't buy it, and its not so different than what some of Hitler's folks were attempting to do (at least in some respects) ...

    So, will it be superhumans or ginormous global conglomerates that run the future earth?

    1. Re:Things like this put an interesting spin on... by shmlco · · Score: 4, Interesting
      "The number of people on the planet is one..."

      You should pick another boogeyman. Birth rates are declining worldwide. Over a third of all countries now have birth rates below replacement levels. Places like Japan, Italy, Germany, and Spain are expected to have population levels 30% lower than they are now by 2050.

      The big factor is cities. Over 50% of the world's population now lives in a city. On a farm, more kids meant more helping hands. In a city those helping hands aren't needed, and in fact pull down prosperity levels. As such, people choose not to have them.

      As China and India become more prosperous, they too will join the club.

      In short, the "Population Bomb" was a dud.

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    2. Re:Things like this put an interesting spin on... by Mashdar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have thought about the possibility of a uptopian society for a while, and have come to the following conclusion:

      There are two ways to eliminate poverty and allow all members of a society to function cooperatively as a whole. You can either drastically alter human nature to the point where no one desires personal gain through another's loss (unless the overall gain for the society is positive, in which case it is justified). The second option is to remove all possibility for any individual to harm another for personal gain. And the only way to achieve that is to remove all possibility for variance of status and wealth. And the only way to do that is to create infinite supply of all comodities or remove the need/desire for any coporeal comodity. So either stop being human, or make it so everyone has everything they could ever need or want.

      While who lives and who dies may effect the strength of the society as a whole, don't pretend that life would be swell if all the weak dissappeard. The nature of things is that a weak group exists in any society, as there will always be some group which is inferior in some aspect (event simply the social caste they were born into, which may have nothing to do with their characteristics, they may just be getting screwed). Those people will always be put down and manipulated by the others. Poverty is not something that can be fixed, it is a reality of a society in which individuals work for their own self interest. Even in communist states, on and individual level everyone was just trying to get by. If there was a way to get everyone to really work as a whole for the good of society, and to always keep the good of the whole in mind, then the true Marxist ideal would be reached. But that cannot happen in this world with humans being what they are.

  12. Jeez... by fm6 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nobody seems to have noticed that TFA is just a summary of a TV show. And one that doesn't seem to have that much to say about Delta 32 either. Anyway, judging from Google, Delta 32 is old news.

  13. Re:Old news by geraint-nz · · Score: 5, Informative

    yes it's very old news, found this at http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi76.htm -

    The August 7, 1998, German daily, Die Welt, contained an article by Susanne Horst
    "Zehn Prozent der Europaeer sind vor Aids geschuetzt", summarizing the genetic findings of the national cancer center in Chicago as presented by molecular biologist Stephen J. O'Brien.

    Human Gene Mutation CCR-5-delta-32

    There is apparently a human gene mutation, "Mutation CCR-5-delta-32", which makes its holders nearly immune to AIDS, since this gene has no receptor for AIDS-similar viruses.

    Whoever has inherited this gene from BOTH parents is fairly immune to AIDS. Whoever has inherited this gene from only ONE parent also has a good deal of immunity. (The immunity is not perfect in either case, since rare strains of AIDS can use the receptor CXCR 4).

  14. Plague and religion by DigiShaman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Religion goes back as far as human history has been documented. Being that the basic tenants of religion build on each other, I often wonder if promiscuity is shunned in almost all of oldest civilizations because it comes from an implicit form of survival. In other words, if you have just one faithfull partner, your chances of survival are much MUCH greater in times of a massive STD pandemic.

    Take Africa and Asia for example where AIDs runs rampent. If this trend continues, only the religiously faithfull and monogamous will survive to carry on their genes and culture. In the mean time, I think we are seeing a deadly transition taking place.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
    1. Re:Plague and religion by whizistic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If we are speaking of old civilizations...then it seems pertinent to discuss the Romans...who were permiscuous as all hell...and were pretty damn successful. The religious aspect is bunk!

    2. Re:Plague and religion by Warshadow · · Score: 3, Informative

      >Monogomamy is an evolutionary dead end (humans are the only animals that seem to practice it).

      This is untrue. While it is somewhat of a rarity on the grand scale of things other species practice monogamy.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monogamy

    3. Re: Plague and religion by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > Religion goes back as far as human history has been documented. Being that the basic tenants of religion build on each other, I often wonder if promiscuity is shunned in almost all of oldest civilizations because it comes from an implicit form of survival.

      Given that some of the oldest known religions practiced temple prostitution, I think your otherwise interesting speculation may be based on a false premise.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    4. Re:Plague and religion by Bogtha · · Score: 4, Informative

      Take Africa and Asia for example where AIDs runs rampent. If this trend continues, only the religiously faithfull and monogamous will survive to carry on their genes and culture.

      Not when the Vatican and religious leaders have been telling them that not only do condoms not prevent HIV infection, but are laced with HIV themselves:

      The Catholic Church is telling people in countries stricken by Aids not to use condoms because they have tiny holes in them through which HIV can pass - potentially exposing thousands of people to risk.

      The church is making the claims across four continents despite a widespread scientific consensus that condoms are impermeable to HIV.

      Sex and the Holy City includes a Catholic nun advising her HIV-infected choirmaster against using condoms with his wife because "the virus can pass through".

      In Lwak, near Lake Victoria, the director of an Aids testing centre says he cannot distribute condoms because of church opposition. Gordon Wambi told the programme: "Some priests have even been saying that condoms are laced with HIV/Aids."

      Still think religion in Africa helps fight HIV?

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
  15. Best by ari_j · · Score: 3, Funny

    Best comment ever. Why can't there be like one comment that is allowed to be modded up to +6 every year or so?

  16. Gene links by br00tus · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The CCR5 gene (which includes the CC5's with the delta 32 mutation) is on chromosome #3. You can look over the DNA code (nucleotides, codons etc.) and get more information on a number of sites:

    UCSC Genome browser - has the whole gene, but you can zoom in on segments if you want.

    NIH - this has links or links to links of everything you'd want to know.

  17. Re:May I be the first... by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They've even started banning shows that birds are appearing in, for fear of infecting the general population.

    Idiots.

    I feel like beating the editors with repeatedly with a cluebat. All the birds have *bird* flu. Not human flu. Humans are not birds. We do not have feathers, and cannot fly. Neither are we parrots. Which are also birds. Even dead parrots.

    If/When the virus:

    (a) jumps the species gap (which there's evidence it has done already a few times),
    and (here's the kicker...) (b) the mutation can not only survive, but transfer to other human hosts (this hasn't happened yet) then there will be an issue.

    Then it won't be bird flu any more. It'll be human flu.

    Caveat to (b) - it may lose virulence in the tranfer, and end up just like all the other flu outbreaks that the press don't like to talk about because they're not scary enough, like 1967.

    Oh, and (c) we know *just* a little bit more more about disease prevention than we did in 1918...

  18. but was it designed, and why?? by Quadraginta · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You mention a very, very interesting fact, which blew me away when I learned it about our genetics. What is it with (1) all this pointless intron DNA, and (2) all this God-damned splicing? Why don't the prokaryotes do that stuff? This is, as you say, weird.

    So is it an accident? Given that there've been only about 10^5 generations of homo sapiens, whereas bacteria do that every 2-3 years, and they've been around billions of years -- is it just that we've not evolved as far as they? Will our DNA be a lot tighter in 30,000,000 AD (assuming we survive at all)?

    Or is there some reason designed in by...(audience holds breath)...no, not God for, uh, Christ's sake...but by natural selection that gives us an advantage with all this DNA swapping?

    Have I not heard the thought that it might be because a bacteria's big problem is a hostile environment and his lack of ability to manipulate it other than eating it, whereas one of our big problems (before modern medicine) was fighting off viral attackers? And, if that's the case, this screwball shuffling around of the DNA, plus "hiding" the real genes amongst acres of useless, identical-looking trash are clever techniques for making us much more elusive targets for viruses.

    Joe Virus successfully invades the pathetic human cell, sneaking past the killer white cells, snipping the wire and snaking under the membrane while the guard dogs howl....he makes it! Cleverly picks the lock on the super-secure citadel of the nucleus, gets out his dynamite, blows the doors off the chromatid fiber, and, chortling, inserts his DNA sequence into the host DNA.

    But alas for Joe, 90% of the DNA is never used, and so Joe has a 90% chance of having inserted himself into a string of rubbish that will never be transcribed. Poor bastard, waiting and waiting...

    Now to get back on topic, I've also heard that one caution people have about gene therapy (such as slipping in a gene that protects against HIV) is that if there are these ancient unexpressed viruses lying about in our DNA, what might we do if we muck around with it by slipping in some new genes? Might we accidentally "turn on" a virus dormant since the next to last Ice Age? If it's just a Neanderthal version of a head cold, big deal -- but what if it's something far worse than AIDS itself? As fatal as AIDS, say, but with a 60 day mean survival time and the ability to be spread through the air? Brrr.

    1. Re:but was it designed, and why?? by Grym · · Score: 5, Informative

      ...is it just that we've not evolved as far as they? Will our DNA be a lot tighter in 30,000,000 AD (assuming we survive at all)?

      While much of your post is generally on the fringes of what we know, I can say with general certainty that the answers to these questions is "No" and "No."

      For the first question, one shouldn't leap to the conclusion that the number of generations equates to evolutionary success. The two aren't necessarily related. Remember, evolution is essentially about the filling of available biological niches. The niches that humans and bacteria fill are vastly different. In light of this, calling one type of successful species "more evolved" than vastly different, yet also successful, species really carries little meaning. Perhaps a better way of putting it is this: Evolution is not forward-looking. There is no beginning, middle, or end to the evolutionary path of a species. Any species present today (simply by virtue of the fact that it has survived) is just as "evolved" as any other.

      For the second question, I seriously doubt our genome will (naturally) become smaller over time. Unlike bacteria, finding the extra nutrient sources to accommodate the amount of unused DNA or non-useful protein products doesn't appear to be a selective pressure. I'd suspect that this is because such an inefficiency is relatively minor for a large multi-cellular omnivore such as us and wasn't an evolutionary driving force in the past nor will be in the future.

      Lastly, I'm suspicious to call the DNA whose function remains unknown "junk DNA" as others do. Who's to say that it doesn't serve a purpose simply because we lack a theory for one? To do so reeks of scientific arrogance.

      -Grym

  19. I think what's more interesting by Melllvar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    is how this mutation got into the general population in the first place.

    The current operating theory, as I understand it, is that it originated (uhhh ... mutated?) somewhere in southern Finland, made it's way across the Baltic Sea to Sweden, and from there fanned out across Europe and West Asia during the period of Viking expansion -- from about the 8th-10th centuries.

    The mutation is found in native populations as far away as Cyprus and North Africa; but the closer you get to Scandinavia, the more prevalent it becomes. So, really, the Vikings were doing the rest of Europe a public service while they were casually burning it into the ground.

    Plunder. The gift that keeps on giving

  20. This is news? by Mahkno · · Score: 4, Informative

    PBS ran a documentary on this a few years ago. http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/case_plague/index. html

  21. Not Quite Immunity, and Not Quite Proven... by Traser · · Score: 3, Informative

    Information about the CCR5-\Delta-32 and possible links with selection events occuring with respect to the plague have been known for several years, but there is no concensus on the issue.

    What has /not/ been seen (and if there is a paper reference that claims to do so, I would very much like to see it), is evidence that yersinia pestis and HIV actually use the same receptor, and thus the selection event even makes any sense. Given that yersinia pestis is a bacteria (albeit one with a large plasmid), and HIV a virus, this seems, at a perfunctory first thought, unlikely. However, it could be true.

    The article seems to imply that this deletion is only evident in the people of Eyam...as you can imagine, this is not the case. It is evident in different levels amongst ethnic groups worldwide. See Stephens et al, "Dating the Origin of the CCR5-Delta32 AIDS-resistance allele by the coalesence of haplotypes", American Journal of Human Genetics, 62: 1507-1515,1998.

    Eyeballing the data, it looks like the further you get from Europe, the less likely to have high levels of the allele.
    Which is odd, if the black plague is at fault. There are several theoreis as to the origin of yersinia pestis, the most common being a transfer from marmot populations in Mongolia/Inner Mongolia (they are still a resevoir of the disease...but then so are ground squirrels in California), and another hypothesis being of a sub-saharan African origin. The answer, I suspect, will never be perfectly resolved ( I blame the marmots..), but it is in precisely these orginating areas (potentially), that the humans have the lowest levels of he mutation.

    There was an excellent article (whose reference I cannot currently find, I apologize), that used a population dynamics approach, and concluded that the current levels of the deletion are too high to have been caused entirely by the black death selection event - that event is too recent for such a high allelic frequency. However, a longer history of influenza (which is a /virus/), and has been with humanity for 1000s of years, could have selected for such a deletion. The catastrophic nature of the event was never has high as that of yersinia pestis, but it was recurrent throughtout generations.

    The history and biology of yersinia pestis, and HIV/AIDS are fascinating. I suggest that one does some reading on the history of governmental ineptitude and institutional discrimination surrounding both. Black Plague, San Fransisco, 1905. AIDS, San Fransisco, 1980.

    --
    Insanity is contagious. - Yossarian
  22. Re:Interesting... by marianne1017 · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...but probably not true. This has been soundly refuted (in my judgement) by a 2003 paper published at Berkeley. See reference below. CCR5-delta32 (the allele) does protect against HIV, but it's unlikely it's the result of the genetic mutations of plague survivors. More likely can be traced back to smallpox survivors from 700 years ago. Check out the ref, it's online. HIV has many strains, not just two. HIV is rapidly mutating. If you're into this topic, check out the many papers at www.cdc.gov. Marianne reference: Proc Natl Acad Sci 2003 December 9; 100(25): 15276-15279 Published online 2003 November 25. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2435085100. c2003 National Academy of Sciences "Evaluating plague and smallpox as historical selective pressures for the CCR5-[Delta]32 HIV resistance allele", by Alison P. Galvani* and Montgomery Slatkin, Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720 *To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: agalvani@nature.berkeley.edu. Edited by Robert May, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom Received August 8, 2003; Accepted October 3, 2003. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcg i?artid=299980

  23. Re:OLD NEWS by jpowers · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That was my first thought, for a change the AC was useful and I'd give him points if I could. I think it was an episode of Nova or something, they found an isolated community in Britain where half of the town had survived a plague outbreak, and had then not seen a lot of migration since, so they could test the descendants of the survivors.

    They tested the people whose ancestors had lived, and it turned out that you could have three situations: If you did not have this mutated gene, you would die. If you had inherited it from one parent, you would get very sick, but survive. If you had inherited it from both parents you wouldn't get the black plague at all.

    They talked about how the plague spread, and the areas where it had hit most often over the past couple thousand years (there's evidence of it sweeping through Europe in the dark ages) had the highest incidence of this delta-32 gene, and so would have a higher percentage of the population immune to it. They estimated that up to 14% of Europeans had this gene and if they were right, that same number would also be completely uninfectable by HIV. They didn't speculate as to what would happen to the people who were partially immune to the plague, but we hear of people who are infected with HIV and 10-15 years later haven't developed AIDS symptoms.

    I brought the documentary to the attention of the HIV researchers at my office, and they said there wasn't an easy method of introducing that gene into people affected by this. I know people who work at Genzyme, they use genetic samples to grow new skin cells for burn victims and new cartilage for knee surgeries. It's not completely out of the realm of possibility that they could figure out a way to grow some white blood cells to match the patient, but with that delta 32 gene introduced. It's unlikely that they'll work it out sooner than 10-20 years from now, though, so it's science fiction until then.

    --

    -jpowers