tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post1780834537246405148..comments2024-01-04T04:11:55.717+02:00Comments on Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog: Romans and AIDS resistanceDienekeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-83620211746003139442008-09-06T05:18:00.000+03:002008-09-06T05:18:00.000+03:00Crimson Guard-Do you mean that Romans gave HIV/AID...Crimson Guard-Do you mean that Romans gave HIV/AIDS to the world?I thought AIDS came from eating African Monkey Meat-Did Romans eat African Monkey Meat?If they did I guess they get what they deserve.Personally I wouldn't want AIDS no matter what my ethnicity-I mean since when was it BETTER to be Scandinavian with AIDS?I wouldn't want it AIDS at all.I hope not to get AIDS since I'm not a drug addict or a homosexual.If you don't have it ,then it doesn't matter what your ethnic resistance is,now does it? How many Mediterraneans have AIDS compared to Northern Europeans?I would think the Mediterranean genes are more civilized-if you CAN get AIDS,then I think you would be more careful NOT to get it.miz RAND BLOWTONhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13306476695686165653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-82805156338118323272008-09-05T02:13:00.000+03:002008-09-05T02:13:00.000+03:00Romans, were normally very clean people as well.Romans, were normally very clean people as well.Crimson Guardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08259882884691575025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-48532063140436095372008-09-04T18:07:00.000+03:002008-09-04T18:07:00.000+03:00I agree, this article is shaky science, at best. ...I agree, this article is shaky science, at best. <BR/><BR/>You could use similar criteria to show that Roman armies created the distribution of eye color in Europe. (After all blue eyes reaches it's highest frequency in those areas where Rome never conquered. Yeah, a Roman virus must be responsible.)Kosmohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05156165962330239126noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-20624085409044059692008-09-04T15:56:00.000+03:002008-09-04T15:56:00.000+03:00I think it's just another lazy deduction with very...I think it's just another lazy deduction with very poor grounds. From the BBC version of this news item:<BR/><BR/><I>Countries at the fringe of the empire, such as Germany, and modern England, the rate is between 8% and 11.8%, while in countries never conquered by Rome, the rate is greater than this.</I><BR/><BR/>England was as much part of the Roman Empire as Greece and, in fact, more likely to have been affected by military presence and resettlement, yet its parameter is closer to "barbarian" Germany than to "Roman" Greece. <BR/><BR/>In general legions were sent to the borders, specially the northern border with the Germans and Picts and the eastern border with Persia/Parthia, where the threat was greater. I don't make much sense of Roman military having more impact in Greece than in England. The opposite may well be true instead. <BR/><BR/>As mentioned, there would be other demic flows, specially Mediterranean (and Atlantic) trade but this is probably not much different from older connections along the same maritime axis. <BR/><BR/>In any case, we do have an idea of how Europeans tend to cluster genetically and we know that there is no Roman nor Rome-related clustering of any sort. It is just another element of the regional diversity (in which the N/S axis seems quite relevant).<BR/><BR/>Anyhow, following with the Roman hypothesis, the BBC article says: <BR/><BR/><I>However, the researchers do not believe that the genetic difference is due to Roman soldiers or officials breeding within the local population - history suggests this was not particularly widespread, and that invading and occupying armies could have been drawn not just from Italy but from other parts of the empire.</I><BR/><BR/><I>Instead, they say that the Romans may have introduced a disease to which people with the CCR5-Delta32 variant were particularly susceptible. This tallies with some other theories of why some have the gene variant, and some do not. </I><BR/><BR/><I>Researchers at the University of Liverpool had suggested that the variant could have offered protection against pandemics such as the Black Death which swept Europe on a regular basis during and after the Roman era.</I><BR/><BR/>This is contradictory: if the alelle offered protection against the plague, then it should be more important in the Mediterranean (and not the other way around). But I guess that the authors may have meant the opposite: that it added susceptibility to the plague. In any case, the Medieval Black Death should have balanced things, as it affected all Europe massively (only Poland and the Northern Basque Country/Beárn were spared). <BR/><BR/>The article follows: <I>These, said the Liverpool researchers, were viral illnesses...</I><BR/><BR/>The plague is not viral but bacterian (Y. pestis). What again suggests that either the journalist or the researchers are kind of confused. <BR/><BR/>In any case the tentive Roman explanation makes little sense on light of the overall European genetic structure. A neutral non-adaptative explanation seems very likely to explain the relatively minor regional differences in this alelle.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-67864712423958757922008-09-04T15:19:00.000+03:002008-09-04T15:19:00.000+03:00@mcgThis is true since the II century AD, before t...@mcg<BR/><BR/>This is true since the II century AD, before the legionaries were only italics, the first non italic legion was the IV Alaude, a legion enlisted by Caesar for the war in Gaul, in the Cisalpin Gaul. But we don't have to think only about the legionaries, a city lives of commerces and a colony doesn't have only legionaries, it was inhabited from civil people too, but you are right, the colonizers were too few numerous to cause a similar effect.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-17793170607450382042008-09-04T14:55:00.000+03:002008-09-04T14:55:00.000+03:00The Roman Empire was not spread by Romans, that is...The Roman Empire was not spread by Romans, that is a fallacy. The number of Romans was very small relative to the number of paid mercenaries who could become Roman citizens after 25 years service. Granted most of the leaders were Roman citizens, but the guys doing the fighting and intermingling with the locals were from all over western asia and africa. So, it would be surprising to me that "Romans" spread HIV? Possibly "African" mercenaries would be a better guess???McGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03459589185170647441noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-40662203426059738692008-09-04T13:23:00.000+03:002008-09-04T13:23:00.000+03:00Romans had "Malaria" in their homeland, in south l...Romans had "Malaria" in their homeland, in south latium until 1930, but there aren't rchaeological or historical evidence that they brought the mosquito (Zanzara Anopheles) in the rest of Europe. If it is true that there is a correlation among the decrement of CCR5-Delta32 in the places where Roman or Italic colonies were founded it can be for genetics mixture onlt, but I am a lot of sceptic that this has happened.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-64364304738903098372008-09-04T11:11:00.000+03:002008-09-04T11:11:00.000+03:00Are there still people who believe the HIV-fairyta...Are there still people who believe the HIV-fairytale?!<BR/><BR/>www.virusmyth.netUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06447299399346624453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-31724240754618208132008-09-04T03:29:00.000+03:002008-09-04T03:29:00.000+03:00Fact: Generally, only Europeans and western Asians...Fact: <I>Generally, only Europeans and western Asians carry the variant... More than 15% of people in some parts of northern Europe have CCR5-Delta32, compared with fewer than 4% of Greeks.</I><BR/><BR/>Speculation: <I>the invading Romans caused the loss of a genetic shield that makes some people resistant to infection by the Aids virus, HIV</I><BR/><BR/>Specially as we know this is not the only S/N differential within Europe. <BR/><BR/>Isn't much more logical that a founder effect caused the pre-existent gene to be multiplied by 3 in Northern Europe accidentally? There does not seem to be any evolutionary cause, any adaptative historical pressure acting. Nor does appear any visible "Roman" genetic component anywhere. Nor seems Greece any particularly good reference for Southern Europe overall...<BR/><BR/><I>Is the European spatial distribution of the HIV-1-resistant CCR5-Delta32 allele formed by a breakdown of the pathocenosis due to the historical Roman expansion?</I><BR/><BR/>Quite clearly not. It looks more like just a neutral founder effect.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-8128365619844530292008-09-04T01:38:00.000+03:002008-09-04T01:38:00.000+03:00Only thing that can make some remote sense is Mala...Only thing that can make some remote sense is Malaria. But Europeans with their Colonies during the Age of Exploration, like in Africa and the Americas would seem more likely.<BR/><BR/>There just too many places were Romans werent, and now epidemic proportions of AIDS/HIV, like say Russia.Crimson Guardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08259882884691575025noreply@blogger.com