New York City News • April 4, 1984 • Page 4
Letters
DRUGS AND AIDS
To The Editor:
It was enlightening to read in Gary Spokes' column (NYCNews,
Feb. 24, 1984) that the CDC's "hierarchical" presentation of the AIDS
"patient characteristics" has effectively concealed the fact that more
than one-third (36%) of the AIDS cases have been intravenous drug
users. Knowing this gives a quite different perspective on the possible
etiology of AIDS. Now drugs are very likely the key to the AIDS mystery.
Usually it is assumed that IV drug users get AIDS
because, by using a shared or dirty needle, they have been infected
with some kind of microbe. However, this is still an unproven
hypothesis. Alternatively, one might hypothesize that IV drug use
— as drug use — either causes AIDS directly or powerfully
increases the drug user's susceptibility to whatever else does cause
AIDS.
Along this line of reasoning, it may be noted that
many, perhaps most, drug abusers do not use IV drugs. All of the
so-called recreational drugs — including quaaludes, coke.
poppers, ethyl chloride, uppers. downers, etc. — very much count
as drugs.
From the published studies of homosexual men with
AIDS, it appears that the lifestyle of these men included heavy use of
many different recreational drugs. In these studies, from 96% to 100%
of the cases were reported as being users of the nitrite inhalants
(poppers). (It is unfortunate that these studies were done over two
years ago, and were inadequate even at the time. The CDC has failed
miserably to do the necessary epidemiological research that would give
us a comprehensive profile of the AIDS cases.)
If it is in fact true, as the early studies
indicated, that virtually all of the homosexual men with AIDS were also
heavy users of drugs, then we might add together the CDC's "patient
characteristics" as of Feb. 3, 1984, to show that at least 91% of the
AIDS patients may be drug users (Homosexual/Bisexual, 76%, plus
Intravenous Drug Users, 15%, equalling a total of 91%). Furthermore, it
is likely that some of those listed as Haitians (4%), Hemophiliacs
(1%), or "None Apparent/Unknown" (4%) are also drug users. Indeed, from
the information we have now, it is conceivable that all of the AIDS cases are drug users of one kind or another.
In the last two years, several of the leading
medical journals published lead editorials which reviewed the current
status of AIDS research and theories (New England Journal of Medicine,
Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, British Medical Journal). In all
three editorials, drugs were stressed as a likely causative factor,
possibly in conjunction with an infectious agent ("drugs plus bugs").
For example, David T. Durack (New England Journal of
Medicine) poses the crucial question of why the AID syndrome is
apparently new, since both viruses and homosexual behavior are at least
as old as history. He reasons as follows:
Some new factor may have distorted
the host-parasite relation. So-called "recreational" drugs are one
possibility. They are widely used in the large cities where most of
these cases have occurred, and the only patients in the series reported
in this issue who were not homosexual were drug users.... Perhaps one
of more of the recreational drugs is an immunosuppressive agent. The
leading candidates are the nitrites, which are now commonly inhaled to
intensify orgasm.... Let us postulate that the combined effects of
persistent viral infection plus an adjuvant drug cause
immunosuppression in some genetically predisposed men.
At this point, the evidence seems to be
contradictory as to whether or not there is a new, as-yet-unidentified
etiologic agent for AIDS. It does, however, seem highly probable that
drugs play a role — and perhaps a very major role — in
causing AIDS.
At the rate the CDC is proceeding, it will be
doomsday before we understand how AIDS is caused. In the meantime,
common sense dictates that gay men should avoid use of any and all
drugs — especially including poppers — as well as restrict
their sexual activities in an intelligent manner.
John Lauritsen
Manhattan